50/50 is terrible for kids! Why does this nonsense persist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is awful/ I think it should be 70/30. Not 50/50. It (50/50) is the worst for everyone…parents and kids.

You think it's healthy to only see one parent a few times a month? That's not healthy nor is a relationship.

30% is not a few times a month. The kid should have one a primary home 70% of the time. Other parent could see them more but skews one place 70% of the time.

Not fair me ex did ZERO parenting for 6 years and then got 50/50. It is messed up.

I cannot imagine he did nothing. You could always take the 30% if you think one home is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is awful/ I think it should be 70/30. Not 50/50. It (50/50) is the worst for everyone…parents and kids.

You think it's healthy to only see one parent a few times a month? That's not healthy nor is a relationship.

Yes, if the once/month parent is shitty.

What if the one who gets custody is the bad one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree it is awful/ I think it should be 70/30. Not 50/50. It (50/50) is the worst for everyone…parents and kids.

You think it's healthy to only see one parent a few times a month? That's not healthy nor is a relationship.

30% is not a few times a month. The kid should have one a primary home 70% of the time. Other parent could see them more but skews one place 70% of the time.

Not fair me ex did ZERO parenting for 6 years and then got 50/50. It is messed up.

I cannot imagine he did nothing. You could always take the 30% if you think one home is important.

Yes, he did nothing. Zero. He came home and watched TV. I could not leave the house. I also worked the entire time. I was bleeding once and woke him to help me and he yelled at me. He never woke up to help me with kids. Ever. The one time, he yelled at me. I waited until elementary school to divorce. He could not take care of little kids.

[Anonymous]

Just because you made a baby doesn’t mean you’re a good parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think it’s better for a kid to have nothing more than a trivial relationship with one parent?

Better than having trivial lives with no real home.

Smart people find a way to create a home. Complainers just complain, like you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think it’s better for a kid to have nothing more than a trivial relationship with one parent?

Better than having trivial lives with no real home.

Why wouldn’t they have 2 real homes?
My parents were divorced when I was a kid and we spent every other weekend with dad. Maybe it would have been the case anyway, but we were never close, he always felt like more like an uncle figure, and I didn’t know my father’s relatives very well. I think keeping the bond with both parents is so important, and 50-50 is probably the easiest way to achieve that. But if you don’t like it, why don’t you give up much of your parenting time so that your kids’ primary residence, their “real home” is with your ex?

Op here. I am not divorced. I see this with selfish parents around me. My kids are grown and grew up with two parents.

We do 50/50. DS brings his school backpack with him to school everyday and it lands on the bedroom floor of which of his two homes he's at every other week/weekend.

We also live about 15 houses away from each other (this has been in the last year, before that ex-h was about a 10min drive away).

DS has expressed over and over that he wants to see us both equally and wants the every other week/weekend schedule. He does not want to cut down on time with either of us.

He has his own clothes, computers, books, belongings at each house. He doesn't have to shuttle anything around with him. Also, DS is in fact growing up with two parents, Karen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

Not a good alternative. Why should one person do all the work of parenting during the school year and the other one has all the fun of time off with the kids?

So you think my ex was actively parenting the kids when we were married? I love that for you. No, he didn't even want full weekends and CERTAINLY didn't want Friday after school to Sunday mornings ('because then i lose friday night and saturday night!!') and finally agreed on Saturday at 5pm to Sunday to 5pm. After five or six Saturday nights of pizza for dinner they asked him to cook dinner. No. Then they'd read or play with whatever toy they brought before bed. Awake Sunday by 7am, and I finally told them they couldn't call me unless it was an emergency until 9am because it was my only morning to sleep late. So they'd call me at 9:02. Their father would sleep until noon or 1pm. Then he'd return them at 3pm. And get annoyed with me for not being home to receive them. "Where are you? I'll bring them to you." They didn't shower there, they didn't get their hair brushed, got crap food, and their father didn't want them there. Zero interest. Happy to pay child support and have me do all the work.

Ugh, my friend’s exH hired a sitter when it was his weekend so he could date on Saturday night

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think it’s better for a kid to have nothing more than a trivial relationship with one parent?

Better than having trivial lives with no real home.

Why wouldn’t they have 2 real homes?
My parents were divorced when I was a kid and we spent every other weekend with dad. Maybe it would have been the case anyway, but we were never close, he always felt like more like an uncle figure, and I didn’t know my father’s relatives very well. I think keeping the bond with both parents is so important, and 50-50 is probably the easiest way to achieve that. But if you don’t like it, why don’t you give up much of your parenting time so that your kids’ primary residence, their “real home” is with your ex?

Op here. I am not divorced. I see this with selfish parents around me. My kids are grown and grew up with two parents.

We do 50/50. DS brings his school backpack with him to school everyday and it lands on the bedroom floor of which of his two homes he's at every other week/weekend.

We also live about 15 houses away from each other (this has been in the last year, before that ex-h was about a 10min drive away).

DS has expressed over and over that he wants to see us both equally and wants the every other week/weekend schedule. He does not want to cut down on time with either of us.

He has his own clothes, computers, books, belongings at each house. He doesn't have to shuttle anything around with him. Also, DS is in fact growing up with two parents, Karen.

Call me Karen all you like.

Your situation is fairly livable, I agree. Being so physically close makes a big difference.

But don't kid yourself: children are heartbroken when parents divorce.

If you can work out a divorce this "well" why not just stay married?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think it’s better for a kid to have nothing more than a trivial relationship with one parent?

Better than having trivial lives with no real home.

Why wouldn’t they have 2 real homes?
My parents were divorced when I was a kid and we spent every other weekend with dad. Maybe it would have been the case anyway, but we were never close, he always felt like more like an uncle figure, and I didn’t know my father’s relatives very well. I think keeping the bond with both parents is so important, and 50-50 is probably the easiest way to achieve that. But if you don’t like it, why don’t you give up much of your parenting time so that your kids’ primary residence, their “real home” is with your ex?

Op here. I am not divorced. I see this with selfish parents around me. My kids are grown and grew up with two parents.

We do 50/50. DS brings his school backpack with him to school everyday and it lands on the bedroom floor of which of his two homes he's at every other week/weekend.

We also live about 15 houses away from each other (this has been in the last year, before that ex-h was about a 10min drive away).

DS has expressed over and over that he wants to see us both equally and wants the every other week/weekend schedule. He does not want to cut down on time with either of us.

He has his own clothes, computers, books, belongings at each house. He doesn't have to shuttle anything around with him. Also, DS is in fact growing up with two parents, Karen.

Call me Karen all you like.

Your situation is fairly livable, I agree. Being so physically close makes a big difference.

But don't kid yourself: children are heartbroken when parents divorce.

If you can work out a divorce this "well" why not just stay married?

I'm not PP, but similar story-my dc also wants to see us both equally and is very happy with our 2-2-5-5 schedule. They don't 'schlep' anything other than their school backpack. We also live close by and due to pickups/dropoffs we both see dc almost all days.

No one in our house was happy when we were married. Now, dc is happy, I'm happy and ex seems happy. We are thriving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think it’s better for a kid to have nothing more than a trivial relationship with one parent?

Better than having trivial lives with no real home.

Why wouldn’t they have 2 real homes?
My parents were divorced when I was a kid and we spent every other weekend with dad. Maybe it would have been the case anyway, but we were never close, he always felt like more like an uncle figure, and I didn’t know my father’s relatives very well. I think keeping the bond with both parents is so important, and 50-50 is probably the easiest way to achieve that. But if you don’t like it, why don’t you give up much of your parenting time so that your kids’ primary residence, their “real home” is with your ex?

Op here. I am not divorced. I see this with selfish parents around me. My kids are grown and grew up with two parents.

We do 50/50. DS brings his school backpack with him to school everyday and it lands on the bedroom floor of which of his two homes he's at every other week/weekend.

We also live about 15 houses away from each other (this has been in the last year, before that ex-h was about a 10min drive away).

DS has expressed over and over that he wants to see us both equally and wants the every other week/weekend schedule. He does not want to cut down on time with either of us.

He has his own clothes, computers, books, belongings at each house. He doesn't have to shuttle anything around with him. Also, DS is in fact growing up with two parents, Karen.

Call me Karen all you like.

Your situation is fairly livable, I agree. Being so physically close makes a big difference.

But don't kid yourself: children are heartbroken when parents divorce.

If you can work out a divorce this "well" why not just stay married?

Not all children are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think it’s better for a kid to have nothing more than a trivial relationship with one parent?

Better than having trivial lives with no real home.

Why wouldn’t they have 2 real homes?
My parents were divorced when I was a kid and we spent every other weekend with dad. Maybe it would have been the case anyway, but we were never close, he always felt like more like an uncle figure, and I didn’t know my father’s relatives very well. I think keeping the bond with both parents is so important, and 50-50 is probably the easiest way to achieve that. But if you don’t like it, why don’t you give up much of your parenting time so that your kids’ primary residence, their “real home” is with your ex?

Op here. I am not divorced. I see this with selfish parents around me. My kids are grown and grew up with two parents.

We do 50/50. DS brings his school backpack with him to school everyday and it lands on the bedroom floor of which of his two homes he's at every other week/weekend.

We also live about 15 houses away from each other (this has been in the last year, before that ex-h was about a 10min drive away).

DS has expressed over and over that he wants to see us both equally and wants the every other week/weekend schedule. He does not want to cut down on time with either of us.

He has his own clothes, computers, books, belongings at each house. He doesn't have to shuttle anything around with him. Also, DS is in fact growing up with two parents, Karen.

Call me Karen all you like.

Your situation is fairly livable, I agree. Being so physically close makes a big difference.

But don't kid yourself: children are heartbroken when parents divorce.

If you can work out a divorce this "well" why not just stay married?

I'm not PP, but similar story-my dc also wants to see us both equally and is very happy with our 2-2-5-5 schedule. They don't 'schlep' anything other than their school backpack. We also live close by and due to pickups/dropoffs we both see dc almost all days.

No one in our house was happy when we were married. Now, dc is happy, I'm happy and ex seems happy. We are thriving.

I hope this is true for you; certainly it is for some. But in my experience, there is tremendous pressure for the children of divorce to adhere to the party line that the divorce is “better” for “everyone” and to be “mature” about the situation. So for every “resilient” child who is “thriving” post-divorce, there are a lot more who are keeping their own counsel and saying what is tacitly demanded of them, because they now must navigate a challenging and much less stable situation.

[Anonymous]

So I am married but DH lives in another state and only sees the kids every other weekend or around 4-6 days a month on average. We were on the verge of divorcing when I realized that nothing about our lives would change so may as well stay married legally. It’s crazy that someone just doesn’t care about seeing their kids but I guess there are other parents out there like him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

100% this. My ex spent 6 figures during my divorce in a failed attempt to not pay the usual (and very low!) state required child support but also really, to save face with the one or two friends who would still *barely* speak to them after what they did to my family. Didn't work out for the ex. So, we all MUST be punished. Including elementary aged children. How dare they love the other parent!

In the ex's mind, I guess my children MUST be punished and now their AP is fully in charge of the denigration campaign.

Oh, that's not allowed? Ok, word to the wise, bad people negotiate custody agreements knowing they'll violate them on the way to their car. In the absence of overt child abuse there is absolutely nothing you can do. Thank me later, after you save $20k in legal fees trying to enforce your very excellent and virtually worthless custody agreement in court.

I made sure my children see my ex enough, pursuant to their therapist's best practices and guidelines, but little enough that my ex can't screw up the kids' lives with school sports friends etc., in an ever more desperate effort to control me and make the kids into dependent babies with zero lives or friends of their own.

Yeah, I sound angry because I am. No child should be used as a pawn or a vanity item in an adult's "midlife crisis" narcissistic death spiral.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP what is the alternative?

One home during the week and school year.

Other home during some weekends and summer.

50 -50 is for the guilty parents. If the parents cared at all about the kids they wouldn't put them through 50-50.

I'm a teacher, I see a lot of families.

What you propose, uprooting the child and going somewhere new for the summer is one of the worst arrangements. I can't imagine someone thinking it's better than 50/50.

The kids I see who have 50/50 generally do quite well.

All the respect for teachers but 50/50 doesn't work with an emotionally abusive or mentally ill other parent. Its wrong to push this on people in abusive families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The reality is that divorce is terrible for kids under any circumstance. Custody arrangements are just shuffling the deck chairs. While divorce is sadly necessary in some cases, these debates are mostly about allowing divorced parents, or those contemplating divorce, to convince themselves that because some options are better or worse, that necessarily one of them is "good." And to allow them to blame the particulars of a "bad" custody arrangement for all problems, rather than acknowledging that most of the problems that arise come from the divorce itself, not the implementation details.

This is very well put. I went through a divorce far beyond the norm in terms of badness, and the kids are going to pay for the rest of their lives. Not because of my behavior, but who cares. They will pay forever and there is no way to pretend otherwise.