Why does a woman take her kids and leave?

[Itsallpointless]

Just that really. I'm thinking back over a past relationship. His wife had left with their DC, renting a property while he stayed in the marital home.

There's no way I'd have left the marital home, I'm thinking it must've been very bad for her to do that? There were lots of questions never answered, he was very secretive and, in the end, very deceitful.

But why should it always be expected the man that leaves if it's not working out? If the both have same earning potential and they both want full involvement with the children and there's no abuse, surely whoever decides to end the relationship should be the one to go?

Because ideally it's best for the children to remain living in the existing home for emotional and practical reasons (close to school, friends existing hobbies/clubs etc). It's usually the woman who has the major responsibility of caring for the children, so she is the one to remain in the matrimonial home.

she said she'd move out with the kids because she could claim benefits to help with rent

She could have claimed benefits as she had split up with husband. Not the point, just saying.

She earned a good salary, by all accounts had an army of friends/support, he had zero. Wasn't close to his family, and only a couple of friends. The mutual friends appeared to have taken her side.

I think there must've been some kind of abuse. I found him very difficult, but mostly controlling.I would say this to him, but he would flatly deny. We (thankfully) never lived together.

The relationship is over (I finished it) and he is with someone else. I am questioning everything because I fear his 'difficult' personality was my fault.

I agree with everyone who says staying in the marital home is best for the kids, generally.

If DH and I ever split up (not on the cards as far as I know!) I wouldn't want to stay in our house. I love it but it's an old building with a big garden, both requiring quite a lot of maintenance. I wouldn't want to have the responsibility of keeping on top of it all myself. Also it's quite rural, and it would be easier to live in a town if I didn't have anyone to share all the driving with. If he wanted to stay in the property and was able to buy me out, I'd be fine with that.

So I don't think it's always a case of abuse.

However, I wouldn't expect to move out until I had a new place sorted. If a woman just packs their bags and leaves with the kids, then yes that's a red flag.

@rumblingtumtum

This happened in the situation of a close friend of mine. But the situation was, she had an affair and decided to end the marriage. He moved out of the marital home for a few weeks to give her space obviously. He then decided why should he move out when she had the affair, so he moved back and slept in the sofa. So then she said she'd move out with the kids because she could claim benefits to help with rent. So she moved out into a much nicer rented house claiming all the benefits she can for a single parent, yet HE has the kids way more than half the week as she now wants the social life of a single person (the guy she left for cheated on her ironically ) . She's since begged the ex to give their marriage another go but he's moved on.

So it's not always abuse. Why should the man leave it's not always their choice ?

If he'd had the affair then fair enough but it was her who did that .

Infidelity is abuse, though.

I’m sure there can be genuinely reasonable explanations for some people but as you’ve described him as secretive and unanswered questions I would guess that the real reason doesn’t reflect well on him.
My ex had an odd story about an ex of his leaving him out of the blue and him getting into debt trying to pay the rent. I then had to do a secret move while he was at work due to his abuse so I now think it was probably something similar with her and I guess he tells a similar story about how awful I was.

@TypingoftheDead but the question was why do women leave with the kids... fair enough having an affair is abuse.. in my friends example she had the affair AND took the kids... so guess that's double whammy at the dad then?!

@MadinMarch also as I explained , it's not always the case.. she had the affair and took the kids but since the split he has the kids 3 or 4 nights a week overnight and also collects them from school every day but 1. So to assume that men don't always want to be involved as much as possible is wrong.

I

I know of a couple of cases without kids where the couples decided to split and he bought her share of the house and a reasonable price as the men were happy to stay in the existing home and avoid change where the women wanted a fresh start in a new place.

Both of these there was no abuse and the split was mutual and all parties seemed genuinely happy with the outcome. There was a thirds couple as well but in addition to the above criteria it was an inherited family home and he wouldn’t have moved out but was happy to buy her out and she was happy with this. With no kids I think it would have been unreasonable of her not to and since it was a very short marriage with no kids I don’t think it would have been reasonable of her to expect a large settlement.

I left mine because I wanted to have control over what happened.

The house had never been a particularly happy place and needed a lot of work doing, and I didn’t want to be left with having to pay for it on the very limited wage I was earning at the time.

I also didn’t want to discuss it with him. We left when he was away for a couple of days. He’d been controlling everything for years and I wanted to get the children out without any more anger.

Knowing him, or rather experiencing being with him, I would say he wouldn't leave, dug his heels in, and just wouldn't go. By all accounts (from what I've gathered by events etc) she was a decent woman, certainly no infidelity.

I tried to finish the relationship many many times, he pursued me relentlessly, and like a sucker, I gave in. I think this is probably what he did to her, so she had no choice.

As I say, I found him a very difficult know all/always right/contrary personality.

I did it because after 5 years of asking him to treat me with respect he just would not.
He got up on the cross when i left of course.

I am questioning everything because I fear his 'difficult' personality was my fault.

Someone else's difficult personality is not your fault!

Women are socialised to be 'nice' and also to take the blame for men's appalling actions.

Man - "You made me hit you. You wound me up"

Man - "If you didn't look so sexy I wouldn't keep groping you when you asked me to stop"

Strange question. I would imagine it is because the man doesn’t want to leave and doesn’t do most of the primary care. So what other choice do you have if you want to end the relationship? A friend of mine is going through precisely this. It’s not particularly dramatic, just that the guy doesn’t believe he should have to leave the house. So she did, with the kids.

Because he wouldn't leave - he said why should he when he wasn't the one that wanted to end things. so I took control of my life and left with barely anything.

We’ve actually worked through things now, but when I was seriously planning to end the marriage it would have been because he absolutely refused to leave as he said I was the one who had decided the marriage should end - in spite of the DC staying with me.

I think you’ve answered your own question! He was disagreeable and controlling. Men like that don’t agree to separate amicably. He wouldn’t have been pleasant to live with especially once separated so she needed to leave because he obviously wouldn’t.

Well done on recognising early on that it wasn’t a good relationship.

@rumblingtumtum
@MadinMarch also as I explained , it's not always the case.. she had the affair and took the kids but since the split he has the kids 3 or 4 nights a week overnight and also collects them from school every day but 1. So to assume that men don't always want to be involved as much as possible is wrong.
I wasn't actually assuming anything. That's why I said 'usually' as in 'mostly, but not always'

I left 2.5 years ago due to EA , the beginnings of FA and a discovered porn addiction which had ruined our relationship . I chose to leave because his business was at our home and he would not have been able to continue without it ( not a business you can simply move to another building) Also the kids adore the home and the lifestyle it gives them , so I wanted to keep that in their lives ( we have them 60/40) .
Also we hadn’t long moved an hour away from my family , so I wanted to return ‘home ‘ and set up a new life.
We are not yet divorced and half the money is still tied up in the property and is mine. As soon as I know he can afford it and we won’t lose the property / business, I will divorce/ settle .
I’ve been ludicrously fair to him , some would say stupid - but I do everything with my children’s lives in mind.
Had the property/ business been closer To support and family , I would have stayed somewhere on the land , but when EA is involved you just don’t want to be around that person anymore .
In my experience it can be really hard for a woman to leave the home - even in self protection- as people will always assume things and generally feel that the man has been ‘left’ . There is very little understanding around EA - I have even lost some very close friends who decided to support ‘ the one left behind’.

But why should it always be expected the man that leaves if it's not working out? If the both have same earning potential and they both want full involvement with the children and there's no abuse, surely whoever decides to end the relationship should be the one to go?

If both sides are reasonable, kids + main carer (can be dad but usually mum) should stay in the family home (although it may need to be sold later). If I left on my own without DS, DH would have to go from providing 10% of his care to 100%, so he'd quickly be packing his bags and begging me to come back.

I think there are two main reasons why a woman leaves taking the kids with her:
(i) The man just won't accept the relationship has broken down and refuses to leave or discuss separation or selling the house. In the end, the woman just walks out once she's got something organised because it's easier than trying to talk about it sensibly. She takes the kids because she's always been the main carer and doesn't trust her husband to protect them at a time when he's feeling bitter and resentful that she's managed to 'escape' him (although beneficial contact arrangements may be worked out later).
(i) Abuse or coercive control.

Why should the man just walkout and allow the female to have the house?

When you see the solicitor the first they say is to stay in the house as legally half is his.

Children adapt to new homes alot easier than given credit for. The house should always be split 50/50 to be fair to both parties with access 50/50 as well. Make it about the children.

Why should one parent benefit more than the other?

Why should the man just walkout and allow the female to have the house?

Because she might just leave the kids with him full-time if he's not careful . For my DH, that would be a huge incentive to leave himself (he loves his well-paying job and couldn't balance the stressful long hours he does with caring for our son).

Though I agree with you completely on house being sold so both sides can buy a home. But I'm thinking about the initial arrangements until that can happen...

I agree that is BOTH sides are earning very similar, and BOTH will contribute very similar in regards to parenting, why shouldn't it be all split 50/50?

However, if my husband had an affair, and that was the cause of my DC home environment instability, then he would definitely be given his marching orders, and I think he should leave.

It can be money too, you can't get support for mortgages but you can with rent. I chose to move away because I met someone elsewhere (my kids are adults so wasn't a factor)