Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

do you htink its a BAD thing that fathers 4 Justice has been disbanded or not

191 replies

cod · 20/01/2006 10:53

Message withdrawn

OP posts:
nooka · 26/01/2006 23:41

This looks (from reading in the cold light of day - well night really I guess, looking at the time) a very odd argument in a lot of ways. (Ignoring the original premise of the thread about f4j, that is). A lot of opinions have been written as facts, and a few facts have been dismissed as opinions. So the way our legal system is based does go on precedent. That's just how it is, it has nothing to do with fairness or anything else - you can look at all sort of other areas of legal decision making in England and see the same thing happening. It's just how our legal system works. So edam and MOM, I don't see how you can state that this is not so. You might have opinions about why you think this is good, but that is a completely different matter. Evidence is that children who grow up with contact with both their parents do better than those that don't. This is not to say anything about individual cases, but on balance research has found that this is so. Mom you make some very sweeping statements that joint custody is very bad - on what evidence is this based? My understanding is that joint custody has had a good track record, and I am interested in where your opinion comes from (I wouldn't be able to quote anything myself, and I am not having a dig, just interested).

I have recently separated from my dh and we have two fairly small children (5 and 6). We have a joint custody arrangement. It is not ideal, but it seems to work, and the children have adjusted fairly well. We have made sure we live within walking distance of each other, and on the bus route to the children's school. We work out the best way to manage cover for each other when needed. We have joint after school arrangements. It is a stable arrangement which just involves having two houses (a fact which pleases the children at present). It avoids all fights about money, because we are individually responsible for the children's care. To me this has been a grown up way to work things out. The children are not possessions to squabble about. I am not so precious to believe that I am more important to the children than their father. We are both very important to them. At different times in their lives we have both been the primary care givers, and over the last two years dh has been mostly the SAHD. This frightened me hugely when dh said he wanted to seperate, as I thought I would lose the children. However the legal advice I recieved was that as the mother I shouldn't even worry about the possibility of not being granted custody. Well that is reassuring, but frankly very unfair. How can we possibly encourage our husbands, let alone our sons to be good and loving parents if this is not recognised or valued?

monkeytrousers · 27/01/2006 08:13

sigh...we're not penalizing men, Lazycow, that's just the way society is set up! (it's like a radio 4 forum!)

monkeytrousers · 27/01/2006 08:21

That is a good point Nooka, but you have achieved this by you and your partner working together for the good of your children. Let me say this once more, F4J have NO interest in working WITH women to reach an agreement in their children's interest - OTHER men's groups do however and it's them that deserve the headlines, along with other campaigning WOMAN'S groups. The media is the one most at fault here, and US for being satisfied with the crap they shovel at us in the tabloids every day.

Caligula · 27/01/2006 09:02

Nooka, sounds like you've got the best arrangement for your circumstances, but I have to re-iterate what MT says - F4J is not interested in having reasonable arrangements with women, it's interested in controlling them.

And all this stuff about some men are good blah blah - yes of course they are, no-one is saying they are not, but F4J do not represent such men. They represent the ones who shouldn't be let near anyone's children, in the main.

This outdated idea that women are usually the best carers and children usually love their mothers more than anyone else - well, it's outdated that we bear them and breastfeed them as well, isn't it.

7777777 · 27/01/2006 12:33

perhaps you should read "im so mad i can barely type" on other sujects. good insight as to why mothers stop contact with the fathers or feel they have to/should do

paolosgirl · 27/01/2006 16:47

Equally it is fantastic that nooka and many others like her have managed to avoid that. Again - each on their own merit. WHile F4J may not be everyone's cup of tea, they have raised the issue of fatherhood in the media, and got us all talking about the legal position of fathers v. mothers in this country following separation/divorce - not a bad thing.

Not all men are b*stards, you know. I'm married to a lovely one, and I'm raising a fantastic son. Equallu not all women are loving, warm beings who give their children a stable, safe environment.

monkeytrousers · 27/01/2006 17:56

"fathers v. mothers"? I think it's very damaging to describe the situation in those terms. Not that that's directed at you PG, as you say, THATS the perspective that's been raised in the media by F4J and that's what is given prominence time and time again. It's very sad.

Caligula · 27/01/2006 18:48

Absolutely MT. Fathers v mothers is a bloody awful state of affairs. And yes, they've got everyone talking about bitch harpy mothers, and no-one is talking about dead-beat dads anymore. The mysogyny agenda triumphs.

7777777 · 27/01/2006 19:03

to all the happily married mummies with the perfect hubbies, i hope you never split up and your lovely hubbies turn into awful exes who dont pay maintenance, muck their kids about and basically act in a very selfish manner

nooka · 27/01/2006 21:46

By the time I added my comments I had thought that the topic had rather moved away from F4J. I must admit I don't know very much about them beyond the theatrics. I just think that the whole area of deciding on "what to do with the children" in the case of a breakup is very difficult. Of course if the guy (or the woman for that matter) walks out and is not interested then it is a very different issue, and I do absolutely believe that both parents should pay for their children, and look after them (whether they have custody or not) regardless of how they relate to each other. I just can't stand the "because I am a woman I am better" line. If you share parenting (and that doesn't necessarily mean staying at home - once my dh walked out of his job I didn't really have much option but to work) then it is not fair to then be considered unimportant to your children. I wasn't trying to say that I had a good arrangement by the way! I would love to have dh home again and the children I am sure would rather live in one home with both of their parents.

7777777 · 27/01/2006 21:52

on the good side of all this i have a very good friend who split with her hubby when their daughter was 8months old, they have been sharing her care since then, 1week with each parent and its worked very well . hes a lovely man and a brill dad but its shame theyre not all like that

paolosgirl · 27/01/2006 22:29

Where on earth are you getting the idea that my husband is perfect?!!!

Meanoldmummy · 27/01/2006 23:12

"they've got everyone talking about bitch harpy mothers, and no-one is talking about dead-beat dads anymore. The mysogyny agenda triumphs."

Nuff said. But it's bloody sad to see so many women - mothers - actively collaborating with it.

nooka · 27/01/2006 23:40

But why should it be just "bitch harpy mothers" vs "dead-beat dads" anyway? In most cases it is two people who started out with the best of intentions, who intended to stay together and be a family, but where things went worng. Portraying either "side" in those sort of terms isn't exactly helpful to anyone. Especially not children who often get caught in the cross fire.

7777777 · 28/01/2006 00:10

read my post again for 7.03pm it ties in with your message

Caligula · 28/01/2006 09:56

Nooka, why should it be men vs women?

Because F4J have made it so - that's what we're all complaining about!

I think we're probably on the same side here...

New posts on this thread. Refresh page