joint custody for my infant son

[Anonymous]

The baby is already in daycare and is apparently not breastfeeding.

Given those two things, I think the poster has a genuine concern. What is the justification for not having a more equitable distribution of time?

I think the posters here would like to have it both ways: complain about the dads who do not pull their weight, but simultaneously assume that mothers have superior rights as parents. Which is it?

[Anonymous]

That the baby is already in daycare actually works AGAINST the baby being away from his mother anymore than necessary. What's the hurry to do overnights? What's the purpose of doing an overnight, how would it benefit the baby right now?

This is not about superior rights. I'm a PP who does NOT want to have it both ways. I just don't think parental involvement with infants and toddlers has to mean equal parenting and perfect 50-50. Equitable distribution is often more for the parent than the child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are many, many ways a father can be very involved without being aggressive toward the child's mother. Maybe if OP weren't acting aggressive he wouldnt' come off as aggressive. Suing a new mother for joint custody is unconscionable. It's saying, 'I don't give a damn about my baby's mother, just about me and my rights.' Nice attitude.

If you read OP's post more carefully, he states toward the end that he is reluctant to take the mother to court and is skeptical of the lawyer's advice because they make their living with lawsuits. That's why he's checking for advice from moms here. Furthermore, for all we know, he has a lawyer because the mother engaged one first. Look at the countless threads on DCUM by newly pregnant women who are urged by posters to get a lawyer right away to ensure child support.

I have great sympathy for the mother, but she has had a baby with a man she's not living with. I don't understand why her time with the baby is automatically more valuable than the father's. (If she were exclusively breastfeeding, I could see otherwise.) When my child was three months old, my DH was equally bonded with him and was equally capable of taking care of him in every way.

Negotiating expectations about time and caregiving doesn't have to be antagonistic, and it shouldn't be, for the sake of all involved. It would be more constructive to give OP more ideas for win/win proposals he can make to the mother.

[Anonymous]

17:59 Actually, OP is looking for advice from dads. No one said the mother's time is automatically more valuable than the father's, she's been letting him see the baby every other day. Tons of married mothers are reluctant to let their DH take the baby out alone, so this is a common transition to parenthood issue.

I think the win/win is to take it slow, continue visiting the baby at the mother's, and avoid using attorneys at all costs. For all we know the mother is in addition to hormonal surges is sleep deprived. This is no time to start negotiation. Give it time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are many, many ways a father can be very involved without being aggressive toward the child's mother. Maybe if OP weren't acting aggressive he wouldnt' come off as aggressive. Suing a new mother for joint custody is unconscionable. It's saying, 'I don't give a damn about my baby's mother, just about me and my rights.' Nice attitude.

If you read OP's post more carefully, he states toward the end that he is reluctant to take the mother to court and is skeptical of the lawyer's advice because they make their living with lawsuits. That's why he's checking for advice from moms here. Furthermore, for all we know, he has a lawyer because the mother engaged one first. Look at the countless threads on DCUM by newly pregnant women who are urged by posters to get a lawyer right away to ensure child support.

I have great sympathy for the mother, but she has had a baby with a man she's not living with. I don't understand why her time with the baby is automatically more valuable than the father's. (If she were exclusively breastfeeding, I could see otherwise.) When my child was three months old, my DH was equally bonded with him and was equally capable of taking care of him in every way.

Negotiating expectations about time and caregiving doesn't have to be antagonistic, and it shouldn't be, for the sake of all involved. It would be more constructive to give OP more ideas for win/win proposals he can make to the mother.

OP is talking to a lawyer about suing the mother of his new baby for joint custody and he is pretending he is not the bad guy -- it's the mean old lawyer who wants him to sue. He's the softy who is here asking for advice from people he doesn't even know. Right. Then what is he doing there? We ARE giving him constructive ideas -- don't be such a jerk towards the baby's mother. It matters to his baby.

[Anonymous]

OP is talking about HIS equal rights, when he does not have EQUAL rights, the law is presumptive joint custody with visitation based on the best interest of the child. DC law does not stipulate equal access. (That would be folly.) If this were me, I'd relocate. OP, you are playing with fire if you push this one.

How is she restricting your access, by the way?
Is she sleep deprived?

Give her some space.

[Anonymous]

OP here now, regretting coming to this forum. Having re-read all replies, I'm sensing that all PPs have been mothers, and only 13:39 has actually been involved in a similar situation.

Some of responses to this are shocking to be honest-

7:42 and 8:08's suggestions that we should consider living together and/or marriage. Seriously? How would an unloving relationship benefit anyone? (most of all our son?) Great if it works for some folks, but I aim to live honestly. A child can easily adapt to two families - especially if parents are honest and open with him from the start. That's my goal. And suggesting the mom should move away with him?!? Wow.

11:53 - I've done a lot of reading on early childhood development. I think the "tender years" paradigm has been largely debunked. Can you point me toward some recent literature that suggests that infants can't spend daytime hours outside of one home? Are we ruining him by sending him to daycare? Why is daycare even legal if a child should be required to be in one home with the mother all the time? This is absurd! I don't think a married couple would think twice about dropping their infant off for the day with the grandparents or a trusted friend.

17:45 - I don't think our son gets the idea of two parents in two homes, just as I don't think he "gets" the ideas of "parents" or "home" period. You should see the way he loves to get a warm bottle or a clean diaper from anyone, anywhere. He certainly knows who his mom and I are, and probably whoever feeds him at daycare, but for the most part as long as his basic needs are met, he's super content - a really easy-going little fella. I think babies are a lot more resilient and adaptable than you're giving them credit for. "Normal" is not an absolute, but relative to him, which is why it's important that he feels comfortable in my world AS WELL as his mother's world. We need to get there eventually, we just disagree on how early. I think waiting until he's walking and talking is unnecessary and will be harder for him than starting earlier. Thanks for the opinions on this though.

Thanks to 8:25, 13:39 and 13:51 for some more thoughtful, empathetic responses. I can't believe there's such a general sentiment that wanting to be an equal parent to my son is all about me and not about him. Granted, I gave you all only a very limited insight into our total situation which gave rise to a lot of wrong assumptions. His mother and I have been through a lot already and agree on many things. (And don't worry, moms, she's not the wilting violent you may assume her to be in need of protection. She got a lawyer before I did.) It was my mistake for asking the anonymous masses to weigh in on a sensitive issue absent a lot of context.

13:39 - I appreciate the marathon analogy. This is tough, emotional stuff for everyone.

[Anonymous]

OP,

I've watched several children struggle with the back and forth of two homes even though it was all they ever knew. That argument seems highly self-serving. Your son does not need to be comfortable in your world right now. You need that, not him. Get your motives straight!

As for literature on age appropriate schedules, as opposed to the tender years doctirne, isn't that common sense? I met with a child psychiatrist who said the consensus is that most children do better with one home base until age nine or so.
Also read Mary Ann Mason and the Sandcastles book on age appropriate visitation.
http://www.amazon.com/Helping-Your-Kids-Divorce-Sandcastles/dp/0679778012
Age appropriate visitation is NOT the same as the tender years doctrine. Which as you know had the child exclusively with the mother until age six.
Yes, you did not provide context and we responded based on what you shared. So, you got a lawyer after she did. That does change things for me. Still, my advice to both of you is figure it our between the two of you. The lawyers are a waste of money.

[Anonymous]

OP,
Here's another article about age appropriate visitation.
http://life.familyeducation.com/divorce/visitation/45566.html

[Anonymous]

OP, you are clearly not interested in the intense responses you received from the mothers here. Why? Does it not matter to you that your actions will have that same effect times 100 on your child's mother -- the person he will love more than anyone else in the world? It's sad you can't say, 'wow, i didnt' realize that' instead of, 'wow, you're not seeing it my way.'

[Anonymous]

All I have to say is being in the same situation, I really sympathize with this mother. It's amazing how unmarried dad's don't understand how stressful having a newborn is, and how much the mother needs support not demands. Through your actions you really are pushing her away. This is the time to cater to both mother and baby, visitation demands should be held off on for awhile. This baby is only 6 weeks! I'm not negating that you should be involved, but it seems like the mom has been very cooperative in allowing you free access to her home. Anything more at this early stage is kind of selfish and uncaring.

[Anonymous]

PP here. What bothers me most is the idea of "equal parent." Where does that come from? NO state has equal access laws. None, none, none. OP, if you do not reassess your ideas about co-parenting, and become more sensitive to your son's mother and flexible about the notion of parenting under these circumstances, you are going to make life miserable for everyone, including yourself, and you are going to run up legal fees and you are going to run the risk of raising your son in a high conflict situation. You clearly have not researched this as much as you seem to think you have. No one mentioned the tender years doctrine, and no parent who drops their infant off with a friend or relative now and then is facing that friend or relative asserting "equal parent" claims.

I am sure you will carve out a loving relationship with your son, but there is no rush to have him feel comfortable in your world. Good grief! He's got years for that to happen. And I also KNOW that children are not as resilient as you think. I watched my son go through anticipatory anxiety about the back and forth for FIVE YEARS. I've lived this life. You are new at it. Open your mind to other ways besides yours of doing this. Equal parent? Who is clamoring for that? Your son? No. You.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think PPs are being a little harsh on OP, who just wants to be an equally involve parent. I think there is real value in the baby being with dad in his own home. It's important for dad's bonding to feel like a father and not a visitor or helper to the mother.

OP, I can totally see why your child's mother doesn't want DC away from her for a whole day on the weekend if she's away from him now during the weekdays. It's a tough adjustment for any mother, so while the situation is new, I'd try to be compassionate about her sense of losing time with the baby every day. That said, is there any way your job would allow you to be the caregiver some of the time during the week in lieu of daycare? This would address both of your concerns. Are you able to claim FMLA consideration to maybe adjust your schedule to four days a week for a while or four days in the office and makeup work time on weekends or evenings so that you could be with your baby more during the week? Try to think creatively about solutions that will benefit you both.

This. I feel for OP for wanting to spend more time with his own son. But to the extent you can, OP, do try to continue the visits at the mom's house while the baby is still so young.

I also don't think the baby will understand two homes until closer to two years old, if that's a big worry. My brother divorced when their kid was about 18 months old, and their son doesn't know anything different than having two homes. One thing they've done is have the same bedroom furniture in each house, etc., including same mattress, which made for an easier sleep transition between the two homes.

[Anonymous]

If mom is so sleep deprived and stressed, wouldn't she welcome an overnight? And if the baby doesn't know "home" why does it matter if he's at Papa's house for awhile so long as Papa can meet his needs? Why can't Papa get supplies the baby will need and Mom go there sometimes? Pops, you sound reasonable to me

[Anonymous]

OP, I think many of the single moms just want a guy cutting a check once a month and then to be left alone.