No romantic partner overnights with kids

[Anonymous]

In addition to the child predator issue, it also depends on the values you are teaching your kids. It is a very important clause if you are raising your children with "no premarital sex" values. If you don't mind your kids sleeping around before marriage, then it doesn't matter as much because then you aren't coming across as hypocritical to your teens. They will do what you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In addition to the child predator issue, it also depends on the values you are teaching your kids. It is a very important clause if you are raising your children with "no premarital sex" values. If you don't mind your kids sleeping around before marriage, then it doesn't matter as much because then you aren't coming across as hypocritical to your teens. They will do what you do.

Still, not sure if you can impose your morality on someone unrelated to you anymore. My ex became religious and would probably want to put some of his ideas into the divorce agreement... but my lawyer said no way. Moreover, she put a language for the ex not to disparage my life choices. My house, my rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It protects children from predators. How many children are abused by mom's boyfriend? So very many.

actually, so very few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have one of these clauses -- have to be dating for a year before having a romantic partner overnight with kids -- and frankly I don't remember giving it much thought at the time. My lawyer put it in there, so I figured it was standard. I'm very glad to have it, as my ex has asked for my permission to "break" the clause for multiple women that he has been seeing. I'm glad my kids are not exposed to that mess. And I'm fine waiting the year. Seems reasonable to me.

As others have said, how can something like this be enforced? I think most people agree that exposing children to a revolving door of unknown romantic partners is not a good idea.

On the other hand, when does the "one year" clock begin ticking?

Let's say parent knows someone for several years as a friend/frequent acquaintance. Maybe the person already knows you and your kids from other activities like school, sports, church, etc. You start out with a couple of casual dinners or drinks here or there. It then happens on a more regular basis. Friend begins visiting your house and hanging out, having dinner with all of you or doing activities together.

So when does the one-year dating rule take effect in a situation like this? When does "romantic partner" officially occur? Is it the first date? First kiss? First sexual encounter? Who is going to police this? Can the ex demand some sort of proof?

I can't even imagine a judge trying to muddle through this crap.


You are right -- I don't think it's enforceable. And frankly, I would never call my lawyer if my ex violated it -- it's just not worth the time or money. But as I said, I'm glad to have it because my ex (to date) has followed it.

[Anonymous]

I don't think this gets to the root of the potential issue: the revolving door of romantic partners in the child's life. I don't care if mom is sneaking her booty call in/out while the child is asleep. I actually don't really care if every month, the kids are going to get ice cream or play mini golf with a new boyfriend.

My concern would be the serial monogamy: that Bill all but lives with mom for a year (but technically sleeps at his own place), and then it's Steve the next year, and Harry the third year. That's what creates instability for the kids, and the "no sleepover" rule doesn't address that.

But there is really no good way to prevent that, besides staying married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In addition to the child predator issue, it also depends on the values you are teaching your kids. It is a very important clause if you are raising your children with "no premarital sex" values. If you don't mind your kids sleeping around before marriage, then it doesn't matter as much because then you aren't coming across as hypocritical to your teens. They will do what you do.

Still, not sure if you can impose your morality on someone unrelated to you anymore. My ex became religious and would probably want to put some of his ideas into the divorce agreement... but my lawyer said no way. Moreover, she put a language for the ex not to disparage my life choices. My house, my rules.

The anti-disparagement thing is also really hard to enforce.

[Anonymous]

What if they sleep on the couch? Who says they have to be in the same bed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What if they sleep on the couch? Who says they have to be in the same bed?

Exactly. Or what if you have a platonic relationship with someone? Maybe they can't drive home for some reason (weather's bad, couple of glasses of wine...) and you don't want them out on the road. When other parent hears they've stayed overnight, will they go running to a lawyer and take it to court?

[Anonymous]

Politically incorrect fact: #1 person in the world most likely to sexually abuse a kid is the man banging the kid's mom who is not the bio father

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think this gets to the root of the potential issue: the revolving door of romantic partners in the child's life. I don't care if mom is sneaking her booty call in/out while the child is asleep. I actually don't really care if every month, the kids are going to get ice cream or play mini golf with a new boyfriend.

My concern would be the serial monogamy: that Bill all but lives with mom for a year (but technically sleeps at his own place), and then it's Steve the next year, and Harry the third year. That's what creates instability for the kids, and the "no sleepover" rule doesn't address that.

But there is really no good way to prevent that, besides staying married.

On the contrary, the no sleep over rule would make Bob and John eff off because they're not getting any you know what, but Mike who is actually interested in a family might stick around

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have one of these clauses -- have to be dating for a year before having a romantic partner overnight with kids -- and frankly I don't remember giving it much thought at the time. My lawyer put it in there, so I figured it was standard. I'm very glad to have it, as my ex has asked for my permission to "break" the clause for multiple women that he has been seeing. I'm glad my kids are not exposed to that mess. And I'm fine waiting the year. Seems reasonable to me.

As others have said, how can something like this be enforced? I think most people agree that exposing children to a revolving door of unknown romantic partners is not a good idea.

On the other hand, when does the "one year" clock begin ticking?

Let's say parent knows someone for several years as a friend/frequent acquaintance. Maybe the person already knows you and your kids from other activities like school, sports, church, etc. You start out with a couple of casual dinners or drinks here or there. It then happens on a more regular basis. Friend begins visiting your house and hanging out, having dinner with all of you or doing activities together.

So when does the one-year dating rule take effect in a situation like this? When does "romantic partner" officially occur? Is it the first date? First kiss? First sexual encounter? Who is going to police this? Can the ex demand some sort of proof?

I can't even imagine a judge trying to muddle through this crap.

It starts when the new couple decides to not see anybody else

I bet its easier to enforce than you'd think because the kids don't want mom or dad being taken over by a random third party and will rat them out, esp if the 3rd party isn't very nice to them

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if they sleep on the couch? Who says they have to be in the same bed?

Exactly. Or what if you have a platonic relationship with someone? Maybe they can't drive home for some reason (weather's bad, couple of glasses of wine...) and you don't want them out on the road. When other parent hears they've stayed overnight, will they go running to a lawyer and take it to court?

Why would you have these people in your house late at night? I had a violin tutor who had a spare bedroom and still did lessons in the living room just because it sounds bad to do "lessons in the bedroom". I have a hard time believing the single parent is giving their kids the attention they deserve with all these "nightly visitors". If the other parent has some days of custody I really have to wonder why the dating parent can't do their "night visitor" visits when they don't have kids. Really gives me the impression the dating parent is putting themselves before their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Politically incorrect fact: #1 person in the world most likely to sexually abuse a kid is the man banging the kid's mom who is not the bio father

Right. But it’s not like Chester the Molester comes over to bang Amber one night, on his way to the bathroom, stumbles into little Billy’s room. A fair amount of grooming takes place first. So Amber’s long term boyfriend, Chad, who doesn’t spend the night because of “morals” is more likely to assault Billy than Chester the booty call who has limited or no contact with the child.

“No overnight romantic interests” doesn’t protect Billy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have one of these clauses -- have to be dating for a year before having a romantic partner overnight with kids -- and frankly I don't remember giving it much thought at the time. My lawyer put it in there, so I figured it was standard. I'm very glad to have it, as my ex has asked for my permission to "break" the clause for multiple women that he has been seeing. I'm glad my kids are not exposed to that mess. And I'm fine waiting the year. Seems reasonable to me.

As others have said, how can something like this be enforced? I think most people agree that exposing children to a revolving door of unknown romantic partners is not a good idea.

On the other hand, when does the "one year" clock begin ticking?

Let's say parent knows someone for several years as a friend/frequent acquaintance. Maybe the person already knows you and your kids from other activities like school, sports, church, etc. You start out with a couple of casual dinners or drinks here or there. It then happens on a more regular basis. Friend begins visiting your house and hanging out, having dinner with all of you or doing activities together.

So when does the one-year dating rule take effect in a situation like this? When does "romantic partner" officially occur? Is it the first date? First kiss? First sexual encounter? Who is going to police this? Can the ex demand some sort of proof?

I can't even imagine a judge trying to muddle through this crap.

It starts when the new couple decides to not see anybody else

I bet its easier to enforce than you'd think because the kids don't want mom or dad being taken over by a random third party and will rat them out, esp if the 3rd party isn't very nice to them

That criteria may work in a dreamland fairy tale but it's not realistic for normal adults who have a basic understanding of the law. Bolded is another unrealistic attitude. I guess you don't have much dating experience as an adult.

[Anonymous]

Do you know how gross and traumatic it is as a child to be exposed to your parent's "romantic partner" overnights (ie loud sex noises) so close to an upsetting event like a divorce, death of a parent? Mature parents can wait a year after the divorce before subjecting their kids to that. I assume you don't have 100% custody, so you can get your "overnights" on the nights you don't have the kids.