Ex-husband wants 50/50 split of care of baby

[Kate896]

My husband and I have recently split. We have a 7 month old baby. He is currently in my care the majority of the time and my husband has him overnight 1 night per week.

I have asked for him to pay child maintenance but he has refused based on the fact that he wants care of a baby split 50/50.

He proposed that I go back to work full time and he looks after baby most of the time and I pay him child maintenance which of course I do not want. He said as a minimum he wants him 50/50.

What can I do? I know he is entitled to the care split equally but surely for a baby this young it's in the baby's best interests to be with his mother most of the time? How do I get him to pay child maintenance? I am on maternity for another 3 months.
Is it a case of going through the courts if we do not agree?

I can’t get my head round this thread, on any thread where a woman complains about her lazy ass husband, the posts are all tell him he should he doing fifty fifty, nappies, night feeds everything

A woman comes on and says he won’t pay maintenance, wants the baby fifty fifty and says I should get a job. The responses? Tell him you should be doing it all.

Madness, 😂

@Bluntness100

I can’t get my head round this thread, on any thread where a woman complains about her lazy ass husband, the posts are all tell him he should he doing fifty fifty, nappies, night feeds everything

A woman comes on and says he won’t pay maintenance, wants the baby fifty fifty and says I should get a job. The responses? Tell him you should be doing it all.

Madness, 😂

Welcome to peak Mumsnet!

I had to double check this thread was on Legal, not AIBU. Blimey.

I’m a social worker working within the family courts. I rarely see orders made for 50/50 even for older children, as it is generally understood that 50/50 time, i.e. not having one primary home base, only really works well for children where there is a good, consistent co-parenting relationship with good communication, which is often not the case by the time things end up in court.

For a seven month old baby I’d say it was unheard of. Certainly I’ve not seen any outcome similar, in over four years doing this job.

Children are developing their primary attachments in the first 18 months of their life, they need a primary carer, they need stability. As others have suggested on this thread, regular time with other parent is a good thing but better little and often than large chunks of time in one go.

And as others have said, it’s parental responsibility not rights. The court are only interested in the rights, and welfare, of the child.

Hopefully as OP is sensibly talking about building up to possible shared care, they won’t need a court to resolve this and can sort out a plan in mediation, the important thing is for both parents to put aside their own feelings and focus on what is right for their child, and if they can both do this it will hopefully be sorted.

And unless there is an undisclosed back story the court absolutely will give the father equal rights as the mother. Which includes custody.

Possibly shouldn’t be posting advice on legal, this is no reflection of how the courts actually approach matters. The words parental rights and custody are never used in the UK family courts, for starters.

You really need to get sound legal advice asap. Find a good family lawyer.
This page gives an outline.
Gingerbread also has pages of information.

@Garriet If the father is self-employed and can be flexible so he can look after the child during the day but the mother works outside the home so would need to arrange care during the day, would the father have a good chance of claiming primary custody?

[quote madisonbridges]@Garriet If the father is self-employed and can be flexible so he can look after the child during the day but the mother works outside the home so would need to arrange care during the day, would the father have a good chance of claiming primary custody?[/quote]
You’d hope in that situation and with no welfare concerns, the parents would come to an arrangement between themselves for shared care (not custody, this is old terminology).

But if the mother, regardless, wants primary care(?), would the courts look favourably on the father? It's interesting that you mention welfare concerns. Would you be concerned about welfare concerns over the mother and the father, or just the father? Although I guess you do checks on them both.

@madisonbridges

But if the mother, regardless, wants primary care(?), would the courts look favourably on the father? It's interesting that you mention welfare concerns. Would you be concerned about welfare concerns over the mother and the father, or just the father? Although I guess you do checks on them both.

If it got as far as court and there were no welfare concerns about either parent, I’d expect the court to make an order in line with the best interests of the child, which as a starting point would consider - at seven months - the need for stability and a primary carer, taking into account who had been primary carer to that point, and also looking at the availability of each parent to provide that ongoing care. I’d expect to see an outcome that the child if possible remains mostly with the person who had been their primary carer prior (which is usually but not always mum), and setting out a pattern of time they should spend with their other parent which would take into account their age and stage, and also the family circumstances. However it would probably also be made clear that the parents would be expected to keep this under review as the child gets older and their needs change.

It’s always better not to end up in court unless you have to, though.

@Garriet

I had to double check this thread was on Legal, not AIBU. Blimey.

I’m a social worker working within the family courts. I rarely see orders made for 50/50 even for older children, as it is generally understood that 50/50 time, i.e. not having one primary home base, only really works well for children where there is a good, consistent co-parenting relationship with good communication, which is often not the case by the time things end up in court.

For a seven month old baby I’d say it was unheard of. Certainly I’ve not seen any outcome similar, in over four years doing this job.

Children are developing their primary attachments in the first 18 months of their life, they need a primary carer, they need stability. As others have suggested on this thread, regular time with other parent is a good thing but better little and often than large chunks of time in one go.

And as others have said, it’s parental responsibility not rights. The court are only interested in the rights, and welfare, of the child.

Hopefully as OP is sensibly talking about building up to possible shared care, they won’t need a court to resolve this and can sort out a plan in mediation, the important thing is for both parents to put aside their own feelings and focus on what is right for their child, and if they can both do this it will hopefully be sorted.

I suspect most 50/50 is not court ordered.

@Bluntness100

I can’t get my head round this thread, on any thread where a woman complains about her lazy ass husband, the posts are all tell him he should he doing fifty fifty, nappies, night feeds everything

A woman comes on and says he won’t pay maintenance, wants the baby fifty fifty and says I should get a job. The responses? Tell him you should be doing it all.

Madness, 😂

equal parenting under the same roof in a relationship and being pissed off it is not happening is not involving enormous physical and mental upheaval to a baby or young child that 50/50 care entails.

It’s always better not to end up in court unless you have to, though.
Amen to that.

Still, the system does seem weighted. As most children are breastfed and women take maternity leave whilst the father works, it would seem in the first few months the primary caregiver will practically always be the women. So even if at say 1 year the father, who has been in the child's life consistently and is a good father, and with whom the child is comfortable and familiar, says they can prove that they can care for the child at home during the day, the court would rather the child stayed with the mother and be sent off to unknown childminders or nursery staff for long hours every day. I don't see how that's in the best interest of the child. But maybe I'm biased because I loved my mum but I also had a smashing dad. Both of their influences have been equally important in my life so I am not predisposed to think the mother is solely the best.

@madisonbridges

It’s always better not to end up in court unless you have to, though. Amen to that.

Still, the system does seem weighted. As most children are breastfed and women take maternity leave whilst the father works, it would seem in the first few months the primary caregiver will practically always be the women. So even if at say 1 year the father, who has been in the child's life consistently and is a good father, and with whom the child is comfortable and familiar, says they can prove that they can care for the child at home during the day, the court would rather the child stayed with the mother and be sent off to unknown childminders or nursery staff for long hours every day. I don't see how that's in the best interest of the child. But maybe I'm biased because I loved my mum but I also had a smashing dad. Both of their influences have been equally important in my life so I am not predisposed to think the mother is solely the best.

I think if mum was intending to go to work and dad could look after the child during the day, I don’t see why the court wouldn’t support that or indeed expect the parents to be sensible enough to make the arrangements themselves!

@DebbieHarrysCheekbones I also suspect most 50/50 arrangements don’t go to court, because it’s so much easier to sustain such an arrangement with happy kids if you can co-parent amicably.

@Garriet

I had to double check this thread was on Legal, not AIBU. Blimey.

I’m a social worker working within the family courts. I rarely see orders made for 50/50 even for older children, as it is generally understood that 50/50 time, i.e. not having one primary home base, only really works well for children where there is a good, consistent co-parenting relationship with good communication, which is often not the case by the time things end up in court.

For a seven month old baby I’d say it was unheard of. Certainly I’ve not seen any outcome similar, in over four years doing this job.

Children are developing their primary attachments in the first 18 months of their life, they need a primary carer, they need stability. As others have suggested on this thread, regular time with other parent is a good thing but better little and often than large chunks of time in one go.

And as others have said, it’s parental responsibility not rights. The court are only interested in the rights, and welfare, of the child.

Hopefully as OP is sensibly talking about building up to possible shared care, they won’t need a court to resolve this and can sort out a plan in mediation, the important thing is for both parents to put aside their own feelings and focus on what is right for their child, and if they can both do this it will hopefully be sorted.

Thank you for interjecting with a refreshingly realistic perspective on how the courts look at this situations.

It's astonishing to me how many people focus on parents ''rights'' and wants as opposed to what a child needs stating courts will order 50/50 as a default. Children should of course have both parents in their lives ( save where safety issues exist) but the structure of this cannot, and must not, come at the expense of a child's developmental needs.

Hi I hope your outcome was good for you and your young baby, I’m in a similar situation my partner had limited contact and since we broke up he wants 50 50 (power and control I feel as doesn’t match what he gave!) my baby is 4 months I’m worried as she’s so young and been with me day and night since birth with me providing 90 percent of care

@Cally30 How are you getting on? My daughter is in a very similar position to you and her Ex is also all about power and control!
Are you going down the legal route?

Hi I’m sorry to hear your daughter is going through that I’m not sure if I’m posting directly to you, (hopefully) it was the most stressful thing I’d experienced the thought of being away from baby for that amount of time, I think it pushed me to try and work on the relationship and so now we have that situation and have resolved some issues I think I was so scared I thought ok let’s try and sort things out so we are doing better and baby is staying at his few times a month and is seeing baby at my house as well as me more so was so stressed and can understand the horrible feelings and thoughts I got loads of advice and I think with such a young baby I read the arguments in court should be that a baby that young is more shorter and frequent visits are good for the baby to maintain a bond and shouldn’t be away from main carer long periods of time for attachment reasons and well being of baby proving lack of input will help too ie texts, that was going to go on that as my argument in court (as he was going to fight 50 despite being at full time work) with his parents caring while he’s at work. He lives far so is another thing so I would argue your daughters baby is best with main carer and shorter more frequent visits are best with non resident parent, that will prevent 50 if the non resident has not had a hands on role meaning daily and frequent… I hope that helps you and your daughter it’s just so hard when it’s a power thing and support wasn’t there so even more frustrating to have to deal with and very stressful