If you divorce when kids are teens

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
All I'm saying is that it's important that parents work TOGETHER in the best interest of the CHILD and leave whatever anger or resentment they have toward each other out of it. And the best interest is always 50/50 (unless there is some sort of actual physical abuse happening).

How is your co-parenting relationship with your ex now? Did things improve?

Thanks for asking. Yes, things did improve greatly. We are now in a place where we are working as a united front on most issues and call each other with info regarding behavior, concerns, and school. Our daughter is a junior and this is a big year with SAT Prep and college plans. We are working well together to support her and address stress and behavior issues so as to best help her through it all.

Remember that this all started with her seeking sole custody and as you can imagine, I would not stand for that. The temporary custody was initially 1 night a week and every other weekend (EOW). I did this so as not to make waves and because my daughter kind of wanted it (she was about 11 at the time).

Even during this time my ex and I were able to have civil discussions regarding her education, extra curricular activities, medical needs, and schedule despite the fact that we were engaged in a bitter and angry battle. There were problems, struggles, and disagreements along the way which I will share if you're interested but my goal was always to be civil in the interest of being good co-parents.

My further hope was that it would allow my ex and I to be friends of sorts and get to a place where we leave the past in the past and move forward as a family in this new form where we each have our own lives and can come together for things like graduations, meaningful occasions, birthdays, weddings, grandchildren, etc. I guess time will tell because the jury's still out on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Funny that you think it is in the child's best interest to have to live in a different house each week --- or live out of a suitcase shifting back and forth every 2-3 days. Who would want to live like a nomad? It would be incredibly disruptive. Your child could have a lot more stability living primarily in one home. The other parent (who has secondary custody/time) can still have a positive relationship with the child.

From my observations, the dad fights for 50/50 custody to avoid paying child support. It is always about the money....and usually means the child will pay the price in stress....if the kid has to shuffle back and forth constantly.

The parents are the ones who gave up on the marriage...why should the kid be inconvenienced and stressed and have to live out of a suitcase b/c the parents couldn't get their act together?

Agreed. Perhaps not in every case, but insisting on 50/50 even if mom actually does way more than 50 percent of parenting is a common strategy to avoid paying child support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
All I'm saying is that it's important that parents work TOGETHER in the best interest of the CHILD and leave whatever anger or resentment they have toward each other out of it. And the best interest is always 50/50 (unless there is some sort of actual physical abuse happening).

How is your co-parenting relationship with your ex now? Did things improve?

Thanks for asking. Yes, things did improve greatly. We are now in a place where we are working as a united front on most issues and call each other with info regarding behavior, concerns, and school. Our daughter is a junior and this is a big year with SAT Prep and college plans. We are working well together to support her and address stress and behavior issues so as to best help her through it all.

Remember that this all started with her seeking sole custody and as you can imagine, I would not stand for that. The temporary custody was initially 1 night a week and every other weekend (EOW). I did this so as not to make waves and because my daughter kind of wanted it (she was about 11 at the time).

Even during this time my ex and I were able to have civil discussions regarding her education, extra curricular activities, medical needs, and schedule despite the fact that we were engaged in a bitter and angry battle. There were problems, struggles, and disagreements along the way which I will share if you're interested but my goal was always to be civil in the interest of being good co-parents.

My further hope was that it would allow my ex and I to be friends of sorts and get to a place where we leave the past in the past and move forward as a family in this new form where we each have our own lives and can come together for things like graduations, meaningful occasions, birthdays, weddings, grandchildren, etc. I guess time will tell because the jury's still out on that.

I would guess--and would hope--that neither your ex or your child will put your cheating in the past. You sound horrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would guess--and would hope--that neither your ex or your child will put your cheating in the past. You sound horrible.

Wow. As I mentioned above, I didn't have an affair. I'm curious why you think I sound so horrible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny that you think it is in the child's best interest to have to live in a different house each week --- or live out of a suitcase shifting back and forth every 2-3 days. Who would want to live like a nomad? It would be incredibly disruptive. Your child could have a lot more stability living primarily in one home. The other parent (who has secondary custody/time) can still have a positive relationship with the child.

From my observations, the dad fights for 50/50 custody to avoid paying child support. It is always about the money....and usually means the child will pay the price in stress....if the kid has to shuffle back and forth constantly.

The parents are the ones who gave up on the marriage...why should the kid be inconvenienced and stressed and have to live out of a suitcase b/c the parents couldn't get their act together?

Agreed. Perhaps not in every case, but insisting on 50/50 even if mom actually does way more than 50 percent of parenting is a common strategy to avoid paying child support.

How a family functions in a marriage vs. divorce is very different. If Dad is working a lot for the income to maintain their lifestyle and Mom does the parenting it doesn't mean Dad cannot or will not. I know I do a huge amount in our home as I don't work. It doesn't mean my husband couldn't or wouldn't but its how we set things up so he can spend more time with the kids when he isn't working. So, no he doesn't do doctor and other appointments in less I cannot BUT he would if needed. No, he doesn't buy clothing, but he would if needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess--and would hope--that neither your ex or your child will put your cheating in the past. You sound horrible.

Wow. As I mentioned above, I didn't have an affair. I'm curious why you think I sound so horrible?

I am a different poster and agree you sound awful. 50/50 is always crap for the kid. Your posts are all about you , and not paying child support seems to be your main goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess--and would hope--that neither your ex or your child will put your cheating in the past. You sound horrible.

Wow. As I mentioned above, I didn't have an affair. I'm curious why you think I sound so horrible?

I am a different poster and agree you sound awful. 50/50 is always crap for the kid. Your posts are all about you , and not paying child support seems to be your main goal.

Well I guess I just don't understand where you get that from my posts. We're all entitled to our opinions but I wonder if yours is somehow based on or influenced by personal experience. It doesn't matter because I'll just end it all with this:

My personal belief is that 50/50 is always in the best interest of the child. I'm sure you could find credentialed people to provide supporting or contradicting evidence. But I strongly believe that the best people to parent a child are the parents, and TOGETHER, even if they are divorced. So they should work to put aside their differences and do just that.

Sure, there are many men who do all they can to manipulate custody with the primary goal to pay the least support possible. But guess what? There are MANY women who do exactly the same in order to get the most money they can. To think otherwise is blind naiveté.

I have never denied my daughter anything she has asked for, even when it has been a financial stretch for me. I am an active dad who participates in her life and is assistant coach/chaperone to her main extra curricular activity. I cook her meals, make her lunches, and often do her laundry when she is busy (her laundry is one of her chores). I stay home for three days from work and take care of her when she's sick because she comes first. I make sure we connect and I ask her casual questions about her life to make sure she is ok, and that she knows I am always here for her to listen without judgement (something you might try).

You might also find it interesting that when she calls me in tears because her mother has had yet ANOTHER over reaction or emotional meltdown over some small thing and is screaming at her calling her a b*tch, I do ALL I can to let her know she is loved, calm her down, and encourage her to work it out with mom. I also offer my ex whatever I can to help her deal with the situations better; whether that means standing firm and not allowing our daughter to escape to my place, or having her come over to allow steam to blow off for them both. I have never EVER said one negative or disparaging word about her mom to her or within earshot.

And just so you know, my personal opinion is that my ex is a nut job who has emotional meltdowns when someone sneezes. She's effing pathetic.

But a child is equal parts each parent and to belittle or disparage the other parent in front of the child (even a teen) is to insult part of the child, so I don't do that. I wish the same courtesy had been extended to me.

So in the end, maybe you should consider there are divorced dads out there who make parenting their number one priority and want to have 50/50 because they know these years are crucial in building a foundation for a relationship that will last a lifetime and is one of the most important relationships EITHER the dad or the child will have.

There are many stereotypes in divorce as there are in life, and no person is all good or all bad. So the best thing for the child is to spend equal time with both parents and hopefully everyone will do their best to be their best, and everyone will learn a new relationship with each other; dad and child, mom and child, mom and dad.

I can say from seeing other situations around me that making this situation work is far better for the child than many intact families I see that are horrible ground hog's days of muted misery for everyone involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parents should switch between houses and let the kids stay in the family home.

I 100% agree. An apartment should be kept for thr parents and the kids stay in the family home. The only people who win in a divorce are the parents. The ends end up losing everything.

Additionally, I'm like the PP father. If I were in a divorce I'd bankrupt myself into an oblivion if that's what it takes to get 50/50.

I'd also never initiate a divorce when my kids are teens. What a great way to completely mindfu%k your kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess--and would hope--that neither your ex or your child will put your cheating in the past. You sound horrible.

Wow. As I mentioned above, I didn't have an affair. I'm curious why you think I sound so horrible?

I am a different poster and agree you sound awful. 50/50 is always crap for the kid. Your posts are all about you , and not paying child support seems to be your main goal.

Sounds like you are the other poster are damaged goods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess--and would hope--that neither your ex or your child will put your cheating in the past. You sound horrible.

Wow. As I mentioned above, I didn't have an affair. I'm curious why you think I sound so horrible?

I am a different poster and agree you sound awful. 50/50 is always crap for the kid. Your posts are all about you , and not paying child support seems to be your main goal.

Well I guess I just don't understand where you get that from my posts. We're all entitled to our opinions but I wonder if yours is somehow based on or influenced by personal experience. It doesn't matter because I'll just end it all with this:

My personal belief is that 50/50 is always in the best interest of the child. I'm sure you could find credentialed people to provide supporting or contradicting evidence. But I strongly believe that the best people to parent a child are the parents, and TOGETHER, even if they are divorced. So they should work to put aside their differences and do just that.

Sure, there are many men who do all they can to manipulate custody with the primary goal to pay the least support possible. But guess what? There are MANY women who do exactly the same in order to get the most money they can. To think otherwise is blind naiveté.

I have never denied my daughter anything she has asked for, even when it has been a financial stretch for me. I am an active dad who participates in her life and is assistant coach/chaperone to her main extra curricular activity. I cook her meals, make her lunches, and often do her laundry when she is busy (her laundry is one of her chores). I stay home for three days from work and take care of her when she's sick because she comes first. I make sure we connect and I ask her casual questions about her life to make sure she is ok, and that she knows I am always here for her to listen without judgement (something you might try).

You might also find it interesting that when she calls me in tears because her mother has had yet ANOTHER over reaction or emotional meltdown over some small thing and is screaming at her calling her a b*tch, I do ALL I can to let her know she is loved, calm her down, and encourage her to work it out with mom. I also offer my ex whatever I can to help her deal with the situations better; whether that means standing firm and not allowing our daughter to escape to my place, or having her come over to allow steam to blow off for them both. I have never EVER said one negative or disparaging word about her mom to her or within earshot.

And just so you know, my personal opinion is that my ex is a nut job who has emotional meltdowns when someone sneezes. She's effing pathetic.

But a child is equal parts each parent and to belittle or disparage the other parent in front of the child (even a teen) is to insult part of the child, so I don't do that. I wish the same courtesy had been extended to me.

So in the end, maybe you should consider there are divorced dads out there who make parenting their number one priority and want to have 50/50 because they know these years are crucial in building a foundation for a relationship that will last a lifetime and is one of the most important relationships EITHER the dad or the child will have.

There are many stereotypes in divorce as there are in life, and no person is all good or all bad. So the best thing for the child is to spend equal time with both parents and hopefully everyone will do their best to be their best, and everyone will learn a new relationship with each other; dad and child, mom and child, mom and dad.

I can say from seeing other situations around me that making this situation work is far better for the child than many intact families I see that are horrible ground hog's days of muted misery for everyone involved.

I think you sound thoughtful, reasonable, and like a good dad. Unfortunately, there is an anti-male/father bias on this forum. Perspectives here are often not at all what I experience in real life, where I know many involved fathers who would do anything for their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents should switch between houses and let the kids stay in the family home.

I 100% agree. An apartment should be kept for thr parents and the kids stay in the family home. The only people who win in a divorce are the parents. The ends end up losing everything.

Additionally, I'm like the PP father. If I were in a divorce I'd bankrupt myself into an oblivion if that's what it takes to get 50/50.

I'd also never initiate a divorce when my kids are teens. What a great way to completely mindfu%k your kids.

And, whose going to pay for all this - keeping the house and apartments for each parent - most can barely afford to keep the house let alone two additional households.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would guess--and would hope--that neither your ex or your child will put your cheating in the past. You sound horrible.

Wow. As I mentioned above, I didn't have an affair. I'm curious why you think I sound so horrible?

I am a different poster and agree you sound awful. 50/50 is always crap for the kid. Your posts are all about you , and not paying child support seems to be your main goal.

Well I guess I just don't understand where you get that from my posts. We're all entitled to our opinions but I wonder if yours is somehow based on or influenced by personal experience. It doesn't matter because I'll just end it all with this:

My personal belief is that 50/50 is always in the best interest of the child. I'm sure you could find credentialed people to provide supporting or contradicting evidence. But I strongly believe that the best people to parent a child are the parents, and TOGETHER, even if they are divorced. So they should work to put aside their differences and do just that.

Sure, there are many men who do all they can to manipulate custody with the primary goal to pay the least support possible. But guess what? There are MANY women who do exactly the same in order to get the most money they can. To think otherwise is blind naiveté.

I have never denied my daughter anything she has asked for, even when it has been a financial stretch for me. I am an active dad who participates in her life and is assistant coach/chaperone to her main extra curricular activity. I cook her meals, make her lunches, and often do her laundry when she is busy (her laundry is one of her chores). I stay home for three days from work and take care of her when she's sick because she comes first. I make sure we connect and I ask her casual questions about her life to make sure she is ok, and that she knows I am always here for her to listen without judgement (something you might try).

You might also find it interesting that when she calls me in tears because her mother has had yet ANOTHER over reaction or emotional meltdown over some small thing and is screaming at her calling her a b*tch, I do ALL I can to let her know she is loved, calm her down, and encourage her to work it out with mom. I also offer my ex whatever I can to help her deal with the situations better; whether that means standing firm and not allowing our daughter to escape to my place, or having her come over to allow steam to blow off for them both. I have never EVER said one negative or disparaging word about her mom to her or within earshot.

And just so you know, my personal opinion is that my ex is a nut job who has emotional meltdowns when someone sneezes. She's effing pathetic.

But a child is equal parts each parent and to belittle or disparage the other parent in front of the child (even a teen) is to insult part of the child, so I don't do that. I wish the same courtesy had been extended to me.

So in the end, maybe you should consider there are divorced dads out there who make parenting their number one priority and want to have 50/50 because they know these years are crucial in building a foundation for a relationship that will last a lifetime and is one of the most important relationships EITHER the dad or the child will have.

There are many stereotypes in divorce as there are in life, and no person is all good or all bad. So the best thing for the child is to spend equal time with both parents and hopefully everyone will do their best to be their best, and everyone will learn a new relationship with each other; dad and child, mom and child, mom and dad.

I can say from seeing other situations around me that making this situation work is far better for the child than many intact families I see that are horrible ground hog's days of muted misery for everyone involved.

You sound like an excellent dad. I agree with everything you say here.

The posters who say "50/50 is all about you" and insist full custody for one parent is "better for the kids" are projecting -- their desire for full custody is all about them, not about the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Funny that you think it is in the child's best interest to have to live in a different house each week --- or live out of a suitcase shifting back and forth every 2-3 days. Who would want to live like a nomad? It would be incredibly disruptive. Your child could have a lot more stability living primarily in one home. The other parent (who has secondary custody/time) can still have a positive relationship with the child.

From my observations, the dad fights for 50/50 custody to avoid paying child support. It is always about the money....and usually means the child will pay the price in stress....if the kid has to shuffle back and forth constantly.

The parents are the ones who gave up on the marriage...why should the kid be inconvenienced and stressed and have to live out of a suitcase b/c the parents couldn't get their act together?

Agreed. Perhaps not in every case, but insisting on 50/50 even if mom actually does way more than 50 percent of parenting is a common strategy to avoid paying child support.

Moms commonly try to get more than 50/50 custody because they want to milk the dad for child support (which will not be spent on the kids) and also they want to use the kids to spite him. The ones who do this are garbage human beings.

If mom is doing more than 50/50, she should be happy that he wants 50/50 -- this will mean a reduction in her workload, right? Oh wait, she'll get less money, though, and that's unthinkable to her.

[Anonymous]

You can be an involved parent -- one to regularly sees and talks to your children, one who shows up for their events/coaches the team/throws the bday parties, makes them dinner, etc. etc. WITHOUT demanding that the children sleep at your house exactly 50% of the time.

You seem to be setting up a false choice between one parent getting the kids all the time (with dad getting nothing) vs. kids having to shuttle between two homes every few days or every week.

Thankfully, there are judges who consider what it would be like for kids not to have a primary home. For those who do not see 50/50 custody as ideal, it's not about castigating the father as inferior. It's not about trying turn the child against the other parent. It's not about the $$. It's about putting yourself in the position of the child and imagining how it would be month after month after month to live a few days in one house and then a few days in another house and then back to the first house and then back to the other house and on and on.

I could see it working better if the parents two homes were a block away -- at least then, the kid would have the same neighborhood, the same bus, the same bus stop (for getting off at the right point), the same friends, the same familiarity. And the kid could easily go back to the other house to get X, Y, or Z. It still would be difficult to remember where you left your trumpet or your earbuds or your winter coat.

It isn't necessarily "fair" for one parent to have the kids 75% of the time, but it's not about being fair to the parents. It's about making life livable for the kids. I know I would not enjoy living in two different households and switching every week. It would make me feel like my life has gotten harder just b/c my parents decided they don't want to be married anymore. There is no way this is ideal for the kids.

There are ways to create close relationships without having the kids commuting 50/50 to each parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can be an involved parent -- one to regularly sees and talks to your children, one who shows up for their events/coaches the team/throws the bday parties, makes them dinner, etc. etc. WITHOUT demanding that the children sleep at your house exactly 50% of the time.

You seem to be setting up a false choice between one parent getting the kids all the time (with dad getting nothing) vs. kids having to shuttle between two homes every few days or every week.

Thankfully, there are judges who consider what it would be like for kids not to have a primary home. For those who do not see 50/50 custody as ideal, it's not about castigating the father as inferior. It's not about trying turn the child against the other parent. It's not about the $$. It's about putting yourself in the position of the child and imagining how it would be month after month after month to live a few days in one house and then a few days in another house and then back to the first house and then back to the other house and on and on.

I could see it working better if the parents two homes were a block away -- at least then, the kid would have the same neighborhood, the same bus, the same bus stop (for getting off at the right point), the same friends, the same familiarity. And the kid could easily go back to the other house to get X, Y, or Z. It still would be difficult to remember where you left your trumpet or your earbuds or your winter coat.

It isn't necessarily "fair" for one parent to have the kids 75% of the time, but it's not about being fair to the parents. It's about making life livable for the kids. I know I would not enjoy living in two different households and switching every week. It would make me feel like my life has gotten harder just b/c my parents decided they don't want to be married anymore. There is no way this is ideal for the kids.

There are ways to create close relationships without having the kids commuting 50/50 to each parent.

If you think kids should not switch homes and only live with one parent, you should make the sacrifice to not having your kids sleep at your home. You cannot have the same relationship with a child you see once a week and every other weekend vs. actively parenting. Kids also do not feel a part of that parent's life and at some point, through time, that bond is lost with the lack of relationship.

Worst case, kids have two sets of everything. Not that big of a deal - two trumpets, two sets of ear phones and spare coats so if they are left its no big deal.