Red flag if a guy doesn’t see kids often?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“It might just mean his kids are well adjusted with mom and are very busy doing after school activities and that he doesn’t want to uproot their lives”

OP says that he doesn’t have time to see his kids. You can have a custody schedule that honors the kids needs to stay at the other parent’s home and still see your kids multiple times per week. Take them to and from practice, attending sporting and school events, taking them to dinner, doing homework with them, etc. This guy doesn’t want to put in the effort. He’s a deadbeat dad.

A deadbeat dad literally mean a dad who doesn’t pay child support. You gave no idea whether he is or isn’t paying child support.

Personally, I don’t think it’s beneficial to kids to have their dad pick them up from sports practice when they live with their mom. It’s confusing and anxiety inducing to bounce around from parent to parent, not knowing which one will be there. I think it’s kinder to take a step back and I say this as a child of divorce. I’m glad I only saw my dad in the summers. It made my life easier. He wasn’t a deadbeat at all. He was someone who respected my stability.

It made your life easier because your mom didn't want him involved. Lets be real. Seeing him a few weeks in the summer isn't a relationship and stability would have been both parents equally involved.

I think her parents did the right thing. It is more stable for the kid. I would love that setup.

You love the set up as it would benefit you. That's pathetic.

It benefits the kids. Stability and routine is better.

Not Think that scenario would benefit me because I would have even less time than I already do.

I do get child support so I don’t know if you were thinking there would be some financial benefit because with equal earners that’s not the case.

I nest so I don’t inconvenience the kids. I am doing most of the parenting.

50/50 Custody is BS and terrible for kids. It puts the parents first and not the kids.

There would be no personal benefit of me having the kids most of the time: it would benefit the kids immensely.

50-50 custody has Stability and routine too … the talk of “bouncing around” is as if the kids don’t know what’s going to happen next … like a schedule is whimsical or something. Maybe some situations happen like this if parents aren’t consistent.

I have done it that way. It sucks. One main house is best for the kids. Nesting now and doing more than 50% of parenting. The 50/50 two houses was not as stable at all.

Of corse its sable. If you don’t think so, you give up the kids and be the every other weekend parent.

No. It is not. It is better for the kids to be in one place. I have done both. You haven't. And there is no such thing is 50/50 parenting. One parent always does more. I am that one. 50/50 only benefits parents financially. It is horrible for kids.

Sorry this is your situation, but this isn’t mine at all. We share parenting responsibilities equally and we have 50/50 split because we both want to be around our kids and enjoy them — what a concept! Neither one of us pays the other support of any kind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“It might just mean his kids are well adjusted with mom and are very busy doing after school activities and that he doesn’t want to uproot their lives”

OP says that he doesn’t have time to see his kids. You can have a custody schedule that honors the kids needs to stay at the other parent’s home and still see your kids multiple times per week. Take them to and from practice, attending sporting and school events, taking them to dinner, doing homework with them, etc. This guy doesn’t want to put in the effort. He’s a deadbeat dad.

A deadbeat dad literally mean a dad who doesn’t pay child support. You gave no idea whether he is or isn’t paying child support.

Personally, I don’t think it’s beneficial to kids to have their dad pick them up from sports practice when they live with their mom. It’s confusing and anxiety inducing to bounce around from parent to parent, not knowing which one will be there. I think it’s kinder to take a step back and I say this as a child of divorce. I’m glad I only saw my dad in the summers. It made my life easier. He wasn’t a deadbeat at all. He was someone who respected my stability.

It made your life easier because your mom didn't want him involved. Lets be real. Seeing him a few weeks in the summer isn't a relationship and stability would have been both parents equally involved.

I think her parents did the right thing. It is more stable for the kid. I would love that setup.

You love the set up as it would benefit you. That's pathetic.

It benefits the kids. Stability and routine is better.

Not Think that scenario would benefit me because I would have even less time than I already do.

I do get child support so I don’t know if you were thinking there would be some financial benefit because with equal earners that’s not the case.

I nest so I don’t inconvenience the kids. I am doing most of the parenting.

50/50 Custody is BS and terrible for kids. It puts the parents first and not the kids.

There would be no personal benefit of me having the kids most of the time: it would benefit the kids immensely.

50-50 custody has Stability and routine too … the talk of “bouncing around” is as if the kids don’t know what’s going to happen next … like a schedule is whimsical or something. Maybe some situations happen like this if parents aren’t consistent.

I have done it that way. It sucks. One main house is best for the kids. Nesting now and doing more than 50% of parenting. The 50/50 two houses was not as stable at all.

Of corse its sable. If you don’t think so, you give up the kids and be the every other weekend parent.

No. It is not. It is better for the kids to be in one place. I have done both. You haven't. And there is no such thing is 50/50 parenting. One parent always does more. I am that one. 50/50 only benefits parents financially. It is horrible for kids.

I was a kid with "primary parent" and "parent I hardly ever got to see" and I thought that was horrible for me.

Well wake up. That was probably how the marriage was as well as the divorced coparenting.

Do you even have kids yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“It might just mean his kids are well adjusted with mom and are very busy doing after school activities and that he doesn’t want to uproot their lives”

OP says that he doesn’t have time to see his kids. You can have a custody schedule that honors the kids needs to stay at the other parent’s home and still see your kids multiple times per week. Take them to and from practice, attending sporting and school events, taking them to dinner, doing homework with them, etc. This guy doesn’t want to put in the effort. He’s a deadbeat dad.

A deadbeat dad literally mean a dad who doesn’t pay child support. You gave no idea whether he is or isn’t paying child support.

Personally, I don’t think it’s beneficial to kids to have their dad pick them up from sports practice when they live with their mom. It’s confusing and anxiety inducing to bounce around from parent to parent, not knowing which one will be there. I think it’s kinder to take a step back and I say this as a child of divorce. I’m glad I only saw my dad in the summers. It made my life easier. He wasn’t a deadbeat at all. He was someone who respected my stability.

It made your life easier because your mom didn't want him involved. Lets be real. Seeing him a few weeks in the summer isn't a relationship and stability would have been both parents equally involved.

I think her parents did the right thing. It is more stable for the kid. I would love that setup.

You love the set up as it would benefit you. That's pathetic.

It benefits the kids. Stability and routine is better.

Not Think that scenario would benefit me because I would have even less time than I already do.

I do get child support so I don’t know if you were thinking there would be some financial benefit because with equal earners that’s not the case.

I nest so I don’t inconvenience the kids. I am doing most of the parenting.

50/50 Custody is BS and terrible for kids. It puts the parents first and not the kids.

There would be no personal benefit of me having the kids most of the time: it would benefit the kids immensely.

50-50 custody has Stability and routine too … the talk of “bouncing around” is as if the kids don’t know what’s going to happen next … like a schedule is whimsical or something. Maybe some situations happen like this if parents aren’t consistent.

I have done it that way. It sucks. One main house is best for the kids. Nesting now and doing more than 50% of parenting. The 50/50 two houses was not as stable at all.

Of corse its sable. If you don’t think so, you give up the kids and be the every other weekend parent.

No. It is not. It is better for the kids to be in one place. I have done both. You haven't. And there is no such thing is 50/50 parenting. One parent always does more. I am that one. 50/50 only benefits parents financially. It is horrible for kids.

I was a kid with "primary parent" and "parent I hardly ever got to see" and I thought that was horrible for me.

Did you read? I am bird nesting...but still doing the primary parenting (kids stay in one house; parents change but I am doing 70% although we have 50/50 custody technically). I have done it both ways. Kids see both parents. They agree one house for them is just easier. They don't care which of us is there but I am the one there most of the time.

I do not get child support regardless.

My parents were married. I never saw my dad. It was fine. I much preferred having a stable house than having to deal with an absent parent half the time if my parents ever divorced. 50-50 then wasn't a thing thank god. If we were truly 50-50 now, they would be getting an absent parent half the time and the constant logistics coordination being pure hell. We did that. No one liked it.

I have to nest because of the 50-50 nonsense. I would rather be the only person in the house and have them 70% of the time because I am doing most of the parenting anyway. But because of 50-50 bs, and don't want to go return to switching houses, I have to do this stupid work around to get stability for the kids.

You haven't experienced the logistical difficulty of two households. It is hard on both parents and kids.

Have them go live with dad and you can see them occasionally for a few hours. You are really selfish and hurting your kids.

Maybe if you had a better relationship with your dad you would have picked a better husband assuming you blame him for the divorce and your kids would have both their parents.

Lol.

Unsure if you’re 8 yo or totally ally above and ignorant to real life and raising / parenting kids.