Shared Custody. Do fathers matter in a divorce?

lol

Max, if the divorce is inevitable, it is important that even eight year olds have wishes that get recognized if not fulfilled. While I agree that divorce maybe too easy to accomplish, children need to have their input at least considered.

Its no fault of 'feminism' that divorce is rising. You did not divorce over feminism. You divorced because your wife no longer felt like your marriage was working at least for herself. She fell out of love. Its no one's fault. Andnow you need to deal with that and how it impacts your children. Now is not the time for fighting and keeping things from being finalized because being in flux without a settling point isn't good for kids.

Children should not be considered a cause of, or a prize in, or the reason to stop divorce proceedings. They are party to, not property of your marriage and divorce.

Actually thats a pretty nasty cut!

Max - no one is like oralliar. Least of all Izzy. There's no explaining or defending it. Just apologize and get it over with.

This thread has been good for bunch of reasons. Its been informative and civil and we've worked at putting differences behind us.

What is to be gained by these personal vendettas?

I take each thread as it comes. When I agree with Oralloy I will say so, when I disagree with him I will state my objection to his point of view as forcefully as appropriate. Same with Izzy, when I agree with him I will say so, when we disagree I will make my case. With either of them I can make my case on the issue at hand without attacking anyone personally.

I don't see the need for these personal attacks. I think that applies to both Oralloy and Izzy.

What a load of old bollocks. You get about as personal as it's possible to be, don't think anyone's buying your passive aggressive schtick.

Great insights, thanks. From the link I posted earlier and some other reading I've been doing, it seems like:
- 90% of cases don't go to litigation.
- Of those that do, there is a maternal preference especially with older judges.
- The progress in father's rights and joint custody has pretty much followed the progress in women's rights, going from an automatic assumption that the mother is best in the 50's, progressing to more joint custody arrangements in the 70's and 80's and to legal assumptions of equality in many states in the 00's.
- There is a group of organizations, medical, psychiatric, women's rights that strongly favor single custody. Some of these say the child is more stable in one household with a stable environment, some say the parents use the children to fight against each other (parent alienation syndrome), some say domestic abusers use the courts to keep continued access to their abused partners. I've actually read a lot about the last item and it is a pretty ugly tactic. The reality facing a woman running from a domestic violence situation is that she may find herself destitute trying to defend against a vindictive ex taking her to court and with no means to defend herself. This link concerns a regular, long time A2K contributor: http://www.gofundme.com/Her-Safe-Place

My take is that the world seems to be moving pretty quickly towards equality in parenting in cases of no fault divorce. I personally think the advancement in equal rights for women has driven the advancement in father's rights. Generation X judges and legislatures (<50 years old) have grown up believing in more equal rights and it shows up more in the courts and legislatures but old beliefs die hard.

As for "what is best for the children", I believe that is important but I also think that is not the sole consideration. Parents count too. If in order for the children to gain 1% more stability a father or mother must lose all contact then I disagree. Of course you can argue that the kids don't deserve to give up anything because it isn't their fault, but that is true of just about every bad thing that happens to a family. If the kids can give a little for a better outcome for the whole family, we need to consider that option and I think that is why some of these groups pushing for sole custody are losing ground.

There is a larger group of medical and psychiatric organizations that strongly favor joint custody in most cases. Obviously in cases of domestic violence, single custody should (and generally would) be considered best (for the both child and the victim of violence).

Fathers and mothers should be considered equals in the vast majority of cases.



http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2002/03/custody.aspx

Whatever anyone says about you (and maybe some things you said that are disagreeable) --- I do applaude that you kept your daughter out of the divorce discussions - that it appears you put aside anything you have against your former wife for the sake of your daughter.

If anything you appear you be a thoughtful parent and caring father. I do wish you, your ex-wife and most of all your daughter the best during a hard time. And hope you continue to work together for your daughter.

Thank you Linkat.

I'm not Finn.


Many people choose their attorney because they want a "bulldog" lawyer. I don't find that approach to be the most productive, or advantageous, for my clients. I tend to take a more flexible approach; I try to be civil, but aggressive when appropriate.


He sounds like he has a good approach to me.


We have those as well, here in AZ.

Some have worked harder than others.

I don't know the history of the squabbles between the participants in this thread, but it's clear from this threat -- and this thread alone -- that max is not stooping to personal invective, but others are.

This little tale has nothing to do with what happened in my marriage (maybe you based this on your own personal experience). Clearly your crystal ball isn't working very well.

I don't know why you think it is appropriate to make things up about other people's life story when you have no way of knowing what really happened.

I hope it doesn't bother you I called you Finn. You are both conservatives that I enjoy talking to, maybe that is why I confused you with him.

Not a bit.

I give you a kids perspective here. When my daughter was young, her best friend was in a joint custody situation. It was pure hell for the girl. 3 days with the mother, 4 days with the father - then 4 days with mom, 3 days with dad and so on. On one side she had a regular day-t0-day routine: got up at the same time, had food at the same time and went to bed at the same time. With the other parent it was "whatever you want honey". Junk food, TV until midnight etc. etc. Parents started bickering because of this and then when one parent had a new partner, all bets were off.

The new partner resented the kid, especially when weekend plans were made. It became so obvious that the child wanted to remain with the other parent only, but due to court regulations it was impossible at that time. While the girl was with one parent, her school was close by; with the other parent she had to get up 1 hour earlier to make it in time. Sometimes she forgot her school books at the parent who was not on her schedule that day, she forgot her gym clothes, laundry wasn't done at one house, and so on and so on. It really was terrible for the kid and by the time she was 14 year old and could choose with whom she wanted to live, the kid choose one parent over the other to have a regular life almost all kids crave.

This is exactly why I've always advocated (if friends asked) for the situation where the kid stays in the house, and the parents move in and out. Much easier on the kid/s. I've seen it happen in a few real-life situations and it had the best outcome of any shared custody situation I've witnessed. It's not easy on the parents financially or socially, but it sure makes them think about what they're doing.

This example shows what happens when parents act immaturely. Of course there are anecdotes for any side... but the obvious fact is that it is much better for the kids when parents behave decently.

The research (according the the APA and other sources) shows that kids with a joint custody situation are far more likely to be happy with the arrangement, more likely to be connected to both parents and less likely to be caught in the middle of conflict. This is what I want for my daughter, her mother and I.

My connection to my daughter is very important to me and to her. I want my daughter to be connected to both her mother and I. A joint custody situation seems like the obvious best thing rather than having the two of us fight it out.

My ex-wife's lawyer seemed to have a political agenda against joint custody. Honestly that bothered me a bit, especially when I was trying very hard to put my daughter first while recognizing that maintaining a relationship with our daughter is very important for both her mom and I.

Sorry tico, but I have been in the other threads and at the least max as been as outrageous as Izzy has ever been. oralliar is a a class by himself.

There goes the nastiness. This is what I got from you: your wife wanted a divorce and you didn't, and custody for your child was an issue.

Save the snark for someone else.