low-paid mum being coerced into 50/50 custody

[SillyFinch]

so... my vulnerable younger sister (eating disorder and very low self esteem) is facing divorce. Her husband is driving the split and we're not quite sure whether he has been having an affair or not. Seems 'matter of fact' about it all. She is devastated. He wants 50/50 custody, which I believe would remove child support (for two kids) from her end. She is a teaching assistant and earns a very low wage. He is on approx £60,000. He is hoping that once the equity of the estate is split, he will be done, financially, in terms of supporting her. She can't possibly survive on her wage (£1200 take-home a month), a job that she took on to work around childcare. She is doing most of the childcare and always has done. For the sons' early years, he actively wanted her to be an at-home mother, and so she gave up her career. There's also a reasonable suspicion of coercive control from him too. He is really pushing the 50/50 custody split. Should she go for full custody? Should she view herself as a housewife rather than a ft worker?

I agree. I don't think 50/50 works very well at all in practice, for the reasons you outline - principally that kids need one permanent home, anything else is unsettling. Plus the reality is that one parent (99.999999% of times the mother) tends to become the default carer who has to pay for everything anyway.

So what happens when the chickens turn 18 in a few years???
She should focus on trying to rebuild her self and career not push for full custody just so she can be supported by her ex husband.

And yet the whole premise of this post is over the OP’s sister going for full custody as she cannot afford to support herself without maintenance.

Give him full custody and enjoy being fun disney mum every other weekend and one night in the week.
Then she can get a full time job.

Hiya, have you done 50/50 with your kids? How did it go for you?
I did it for 7 years until her mum abandoned my daughter a year ago, no concerns of her being unsettled throughout the whole time.
Your reality is WAY different than mine! :)

this is a bit weird - people normally want full custody or don't want full custody ... not whats the best option for the money?

I think she should go for more than 50% custody. Partly because people who coercively control their spouses don’t seek joint custody because they are great parents who simply want to spend time with their children. They are not great parents at all. Great parents love their children more than they dislike their estranged spouse. They do it to maintain that control over their former spouse.

Also, at 11 and 15, both children are way past the age where they should be being shipped from pillar to post every week. They’ve both said they want to live with their mum. They are both old enough to make that choice for themselves. That should be the end of that conversation.

Having said that, they’re also at the age where being a housewife is no longer an option for your sister now that she’s getting divorced. She may well be entitled to a larger share of assets to reflect her giving up her career to allow him to pursue his while she did the childcare, but she can’t rely long term on any financial contributions from him to keep a roof over her head. This is the time she needs to get herself back into the job market so that when maintenance does stop in a few short years, she’s not left wondering how she’s going to pay the rent on her TA salary.

My stepsons mum gave him up, so I would beg to differ.

Mums shouldn’t be the auto-parent in this day and age. It puts too low an expectation on men to raise the children they also created, and is a sexist archaic view.

Surely then she may also be able to claim maintenance for herself and then child maintenance. If she is working she will also get UC and child benefit. Make it clear during the proceedings that he is to pay for childcare and xyz.

It will also be up to her to enforce rules which it sounds like she will need family support with.

I haven't done 50/50 as it wouldn't have worked for my kids. I have an amicable agreement with my ex in which I do everything for the kids (as I did when we were married) and he pays a decent whack of child support.

I also work full-time.

I'm sorry to hear about your ex-partner abandoning your child, but your situation isn't common. Nor is mine, for that matter - most single mums I know either get no child support or very little, and are struggling to raise their kids on their own. A number of those have so-called '50/50' arrangements.

There seem to be a lot of men on this thread...

Or just women who don’t believe that women should claim ownership over shared children.

I also work full time and to add to the fun I home educate too...! Sucker for punishment eh :)

We split everything down the line, school drop offs, clothes, toys etc etc.

I get no financial support at all, from the egg donor or the government. We love our children so if we as parents have to go without so the child can benefit, then so be it..

Have a little think why?

She’s admitted she hasn’t so can’t really comment can she?

Why? Why is a child’s mum any better than the child’s dad?

He is hoping that once the equity of the estate is split, he will be done, financially, in terms of supporting her.

Well yes, of course he won't have to financially support her after divorce. Why would he? She needs to support herself.

There will be a divorce settlement and then that's it. Her future finances are solely down to her.

As a child of divorce being dragged about from home to home having to split your life is never in the best interest of the child. Thats why its virtually never done, its near impossible to have a 50/50 split that doesn't negatively impact a child.

Would you want to be passed back and forth between two homes, families (step parents and siblings), their different sets of rules etc... every 3 to four days? What about school, friendships, your belonging, groups, the vibe of the environment and just the right to ever relax and feel at home in your own bedroom.

As for 'a relationship' with the other parent, thats up to the CHILD not the adult. I can safely say I did NOT want to live with my dad or be moved around and thats what the court agreed with, it was MY choice.

My father did get visitation which he fought for because he thought it would get him out of paying (not that he ever did pay anyway) and then he never showed up to it. Parents that view custody as a way to 'not pay' are never doing it in the interest of 'whats best for the kids'.

The idea that all kids have perfect parents that they love 50/50 and that they benefit from both being equally in their life is a fantasy land. Millions of us have had shitty, deadbeat, abusive parents that we where far better off without.

Even if both parents are loving and kind the kid doesn't benefit from being dragged up, they a better off in one home and just seeing the other and parent that care for the kid over themselves wouldn't insist on fighting over them just to suit what they 'want' to be seen as.

You're drip feeding information (abusive husband) etc

She will only get CM for a short time, and her 11 year old will not need childcare for long (I dont know how long dc need it, but once in senior school they dont as far as I remember)

So she needs to plan what she is going to do with her life without STBEx now, not later

The accusation of 'coercive control' is a serious one and IMO shouldn't be thrown around so easily. If there OP's sister believes that her husband is guilty of it, she should go to the police.
Otherwise her best argument for fighting 50/50 is surely the children's preferences.
If I were her I'd start job hunting straightaway as she will need a better paid job regardless of the outcome.

She’s asking just that. She needs to work full time (she has no excuse not to)

you don’t know him or her so you can’t comment on why he wants his kids 50:50 - you know. He might actually love them?

Parents that view custody as a way to 'not pay' are never doing it in the interest of 'whats best for the kids'.

and also the

"I'll keep the kids so he has to pay me" ones as well

You don’t have to be a man to disagree with men being expected to pay for their ex to choose to stay in a low paid part time job when their dc are old enough to be at secondary school.

Women are capable of being mothers and working enough to support themselves and 50% of their children’s costs at the same time.

Surely at 11, and certainly at 15, the kids will be able to choose. Also at those ages surely she can increase her working hours, or will be able to do so in the near future

It's not ownership - it's continuity of care for the children. OP's sister is primary carer already, and sacrificed her career for this. She now works PT. The best thing for the children would be to to continue the status quo as closely as possible after the divorce, and hopefully the OP's sister will find her self-esteem increases once the bloke who kicks doors down has left.