Ex wants 50:50

[StressedMamma1]

Ex and I broke up during pregnancy, cheating on his side. Our little one is almost 2 and ex sees him regularly, is a good father, pays maintenence etc.

Currently, ex has him EOW, Friday-Monday. He now wants to do 50:50. He has moved in with a woman and they have just had a baby. So he is settled and can offer DS a stable environment.

He lives in Glasgow, I live near Perth, so just over an hour away from one another.

DS is settled in nursery 4 days a week. Does anyone know if 50:50 would be likely in this case if he went via the courts? Which he has threatened to do.

EDIT: DS does have a speech delay and is on the waiting list for speech and language therapy, so he wouldn't be able to verbally tell me if he was struggling with it all.

I don't personally think that 'good opportunities' (ie being rich and being able to afford private school) mean that someone is a good parent. It is highly likely that this 2 year old child has a greater bond with his mother at this point. Children should not be ripped away from their mothers when they are babies. 2 is still a baby. There is even research to show that this kind of upheaval can be damaging for a child under 3. Money helps but it's no substitute for everything else.

This man has already got one woman pregnant whilst he had a newborn. Cheats tend to repeat their behaviour. The likelihood is that he will cheat again at some point, causing more disruption to the OP's son and his home if he was living there. The best indication of future behaviour is past behaviour.

Thank you, that is reassuring. He does have his extended family relationships here, he is very close with his two older cousins, spends a lot of time with them and his gran and auntie and uncle and wider family. I hope you're right in what the court will give weight to. I'm happy to extend contact whether that be ex taking him out for tea once a week here in Perth, dropping him off afterwards on top of EOW. But I really don't feel like 50:50 is in a 2 year olds best interests, certainly not between cities.

Ex has money, can afford private school

If ex has money and can afford a private school, then if he was actually concerned about the needs of his child more than his own selfish wants then he'd be willing to stump up the cost regardless of how much the child is living with either of you.

It’s not in the interest of a 2 year old to live between 2 cities and spend extended periods in the car, and it might be helpful for you to highlight that that is especially relevant for a child with speech difficulties, as they can’t communicate their wishes or talk through any feelings that such large changes such as a change in living arrangements and a new sibling can bring.

I would say no.
I think the Scottish family law system is much more conservative with a small c than in England in terms of keeping the status quo in place and increasing contact gradually.
First of all, your DS’s main residency is with you and there is not a good argument to change it. Secondly, your ex already has Fri to Mon EOW and it is in your DS’s interests to also have a full weekend with you.
Thirdly, Perth to Glasgow is not a viable commute on a daily basis to get DS to nursery.

Where you do have some flexibility is around holiday contact and this could be increased if your ex wishes. Just say no to 50/50. It won’t work when DS is at school and would be very difficult with him at nursery and it is in his best interests to stay where he is and possibly build up holiday contact so he can stay half the school holidays with his dad.
My ex took me to court in Scotland and did not get anything like what he wanted. But be aware the court will expect you to try mediation and so you do need to be clear that you can say no to something you don’t think is in DS’s best interests there too.

That’s often part of marriage, that people don’t particularly highlight at the wedding. Your child is only 2 years old, he received this large inheritance in 2020, and you “broke up” whilst pregnant. So yes, he would have hopefully gotten the major comeuppance of losing half of that large inheritance to you. And split any other assets. Inheritance would not necessarily be included in divorces, as a non-matrimonial asset, but if you can make the case that the other assets won’t allow for both of you to have an equal standard of living (and obviously they didn’t if you can’t buy a house in Glasgow like his) then the inheritance would be considered.

I’m not saying any of this to be cruel. It’s a horrible system. And often times, even it doesn’t work. But yes, the reason that the advice on Mumsnet when a woman finds her husband is cheating is “get your ducks in a row” is because the financial settlement from the divorce will affect the rest of your life and your children’s lives, and will probably be the only comeuppance your ex will receive. Without that, it’s true - there’s absolutely no comeuppance. And I’m so sorry, because I imagine you’re hurting incredibly, and it feels like the bastard just rode off into the bloody sunset. It needs a female Batman. Batlady. Something.

No he will have 2 stable bases….

Oh i know. I'm kicking myself for not marrying him then taking him to the cleaners. If only I had been a member of MN when all of this was going on during my pregnancy and posted for advice back then, things would be a whole lot different!

Again, how does school work? How do activities work? You’ve completely ignored the reasons I’ve highlighted as to why this isn’t ideal FOR THE CHILD.

I have been in this situation and it is the worst. The most common set up with separated families of most of the people I know is based with mum, one midweek night at dad's plus EOW. I understand with the distance that's not really viable but I would urge you to offer him just enough to keep him from launching into battle against you. Split the holidays - I've had to and have now accepted it. How about the weekend he doesn't have him he has him Sunday till Tuesday the following week? So it equals 4 nights a fortnight - that is a common split. Would you consider this? Or if he's happy to drive, one midweek night per week would work. I'd avoid battle if I could.

Under Scots law, you cannot get divorced unless the child arrangements are agreed. So this man could stall the divorce simply by not agreeing to get divorced until he got 50/50. And the man could also stall by not agreeing to the financial settlement as that also needs to be agreed. Now maybe this man has millions in inheritance but it’s not a given that the OP would actually see any of it or be able to divorce him without extensively fighting about the child arrangements and financial settlement through court.

I don’t know Scottish law but is it the case that the parent who moves away needs to facilitate the travel to the parent who hasn’t moved?

There isn’t anything you have said that makes me think he shouldn’t be an equal parent to his child or why he shouldn’t have him for 50% of the time. It will be good for your child to see so much of both parents.

Realistically you may need to make an arrangement that will change once school kicks in and perhaps one of you will have more term time and less of the holidays. 50% doesn’t need to be one week with one parent and one with another. It could be your child can have a nursery near both of your houses to do set days at each one.

What about suggesting 2 weekends out of 3 rather than EOW and half of holidays? Before your DS starts school perhaps he could he collect on Thursday from nursery. But once at school back to Fridays?

I wasn’t replying to the rest, I was replying to the bit about the stable bases. Hence mentioning only the stable bases

By nursery do you mean daycare ie full time 8-6 or similar?

if XP doesn’t work, could he collect DS from nursery let’s say Thu lunchtime (better traffic) and return him to you Sat evening (also better traffic) every week? You would save 1.5d of nursery fees, each get a weekend day with DS and travel would be at less busy times.

Or he picks DS up from you Sunday morning and drops him at nursery Tue lunchtime, similar positives?

There is no such thing as two stable bases for a 2 year old.

Presumably, if the child has a speech delay then he is in nursery for his educational needs, where he will be able to interact with peers.

Yes, nursery/daycare however it's 9 - 4 generally as opposed to the full day.

And yes, nursery work with him on his speech; SLT gave me and them advice on activities to develop his speech and communication and nursery implement these strategies, so yes it is for his educational needs as well as for general personal and social development.

I feel like I've spent all day on MN - in fact I have, I'm unwell and stuck at home today. But thank you for all the advice given so far, much of which has put my mind at ease somewhat.

I think the days are gone where nurseries are 'baby sitters'. They cost a lot of money and people expect bang for their buck, as we should. I have a child who is probably autistic and she started nursery at 2.5, incredibly anxious of other people and she was overly fixated on numbers, letters and shapes. The nursery has done wonders for her and has helped her to be much more confident, to interact with people she doesn't know and also to branch out her interests.

Ignore 50:50 for now.
At some point that would be the goal, how realistic a goal varies from family to family. My sister divorced her abusive husband when her daughter was 3. He barely saw her for 6 months then only saw her whilst at his mum's. His input grew over years and by the time she started secondary school it was 50:50. They live in the same town.

Right now every other week works but realistically this will change. The real question is what is a reasonable pace of change that's right for everyone primarily the child in the middle? If it's currently every other weekend could dad take a day in the week? Maybe pick up from nursery on the Tuesday he has him Wednesday and drops off either at nursery on the Thursday for you to collect or at yours on the Wednesday after you have finished work? I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a parent to demonstrate the ability to manage day to day life not just "weekend parent" life before moving towards 50:50 some time later on.

I'm so sorry, it must be a nightmare. It is so unfair the way certain men behave horribly and then think they should be rewarded for it (and other people think the same evidently!)

Your son is 2, not 8 for example. He's still a baby and at this age it's important for a child to have one primary carer to avoid the child growing up with attachment disorders.

I honestly think that some people like to deliberately argumentative on these threads. They pretend to know what is going to happen. They don't.

@Dollenganger333 I agree, I was actually stalked by a poster (that got banned, name changed and then got banned again) because she was arguing about my worry about 50/50.

It was so bizarre.

What your XH @StressedMamma1 is doing is agressive and a hostile move. No doubt about it. Wonder if he is happy?
2 is ridiculously young.

Focus on medical care
Early years care
Nursery setting
Social setting
Any family nearby (FWIW I have none)
Activities you do together

You will be fine.
Do not budge. Offer more maybe vaguely when he is older.
The set up sounds very reasonable as it is.

He says court is because I'm "dictating contact" and he's "not standing for it anymore". I've cancelled a couple of EOW contacts since Jan - once because DS had scarlet fever, another time slapped cheek and I also wouldn't let ex take DS on a last minute 2 week holiday last month. A few days would've been fine, but it was last minute and DS already had a medical appointment booked in for that time which we had waited 3 months on. So I said no to the holiday. That's when he kicked off.

He'll be happy as larry, if she's giving him a peaceful life then he's happy as a pig in shit. I however didn't give him a 'peaceful' life, hence the cheating.

He sounds very unreasonable. Does he want his newborn to catch Scarlett fever? I certainly can't imagine he does. And the 2 week holiday is also massively unreasonable.