You still seem oddly bitter about what the ex did to you. None of that matters. Your kids matter now. Assuming that what you're saying is true (doubtful) and that you're exhausted all legal avenues to have her move back, then yes, you move to be near your kids. They didn't ask for any of this. I would certainly move to be near my kids. |
Post them. I'm a lawyer, I'll tell you what they really say. |
Not all men are bad. Why does mom get a free pass for her behavior? It’s ok she cheated? She was not mother of the year and kids are pretty messed up now as adults. |
It's not her kids. It's her husband's kids. By the way, she hates the kids' guts and is only angry they cost her husband money. Not that he ruined his relationship with them and was a crap dad. |
MOM'S BEHAVIOR HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE KIDS. YOUR HUSBAND SCREWED UP HIS KIDS. IT IS HIS FAULT. HIS FAULT. |
oh brother, so this isn't even relevant any more. Also, I'm assuming their dad's absence had a lot to do with that. I have very strong doubts that he did everything he could to raise his kids. |
He didn't. He gave up on them and made no attempt to move to be closer to them, ever. |
You are not or you’d know nothing happens to moms |
Why is it his responsibility to move to follow her? It was her responsibility to not cheat and stay in the area and allow visits as ordered. Dads absence as a stable parent probably had a lot to do with it as dad would have been a stronger parent. Mom did the absolute minimum and regularly offered to take the kids including when one was going down the wrong path. Even if he moved, what good would that do if she refused contact. How would he pay child support? Kids would lose out on health insurance. She’d lose out on her life long portion of his pension. |
I absolutely am, that's how I know you're full of crap. Dads who want time with their kids, get it. And any divorce lawyer in the US will tell you that. |
It's his responsibility as a dad to put his kids first. He didn't. You keep talking about what the mom would miss out on, like potentially reduced child support when he got a new job, or her share of his pension. Why would anyone care what happens to her? It's about the kids. He should have done whatever it took to get his time with them, which would have been awarded to him if he had. Including adjusted child support on his new income that he had to take to maintain the relationship. But he wasn't willing to do what it took, and now he has to accept that he screwed up his kids for life. He's a pathetic loser and so are you for defending him. |
You cannot force someone to move back. It's easy for you to say you'd move when you easily have that ability. Not everyone has that luxury. Why do you give a woman a free pass and just arbitrarily decide a man doesn't want or love his kids and no matter what someone says mom is always right? And, yet, when the kids are screwed up and the mom raised them, it's the dad's fault? |
Judges can and do. But of course, you don't know that because you didn't try. |
Actually she didn't put her kids first She cheated on Dad, moved them cross country and refused visits. That's on her. What happens to her impacts the kids so anyone decent would care. You simply cannot walk away from military life and no judge is going to reduce the child support because he walked away from his career even if it is for the right reasons. Be real. He wasn't going to get an equal job. Why is it up to him to always do the right thing, which he did? What about Mom? Why does she get a free pass on all this? Moms can greatly hurt their kids and aren't always good parents. Your ex may be a terrible person but lots of good dad's around. And, his other kids are thriving and doing well and he's a very involved Dad, so you really think he changed that much? Doubtful given when he was married he did all those things for the first set of kids. |
It's not giving mom a "free pass" to be a minimally competent dad. Which he refused to do. So he's a pathetic loser, even if she is too. |