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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

It means it wont' kill the kid to go somewhere for the summer--to see their parent!!
? My kid goes to sleepaway camp for 7 weeks every summer and absolutely loves it.

What does that have to to with custody?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

? My kid goes to sleepaway camp for 7 weeks every summer and absolutely loves it.

What does that have to to with custody?

It means it wont' kill the kid to go somewhere for the summer--to see their parent!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

? My kid goes to sleepaway camp for 7 weeks every summer and absolutely loves it.

What does that have to to with custody?

Bc it’s not true that “uprooting you kid for the summer” is necessarily bad.

[Anonymous]

DH moved a plane ride away, it’s his problem the kid doesn’t want to travel there & miss stuff to see him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

? My kid goes to sleepaway camp for 7 weeks every summer and absolutely loves it.

What does that have to to with custody?

It means it wont' kill the kid to go somewhere for the summer--to see their parent!!

So, first of all, we aren't measuring custody arrangement by whether they will kill the child. That's absurd. In this case, we're measuring them based on how they compare to 50/50 which, in almost all cases, doesn't kill the child either. (Note: if you actually have an ex who might be homicidal, neither of these plans are a good idea).

But to say that because some kids, probably in a narrow age band that excludes all infants, toddlers and preschoolers, and many if not most early elementary schoolers and teens, do fine with going to camp for the summer, an environment that is designed to help kids make new friends and connections, and doesn't impose a parent-child relationship on them, that a young child suddenly separated from their primary caregiver or teenager isolated away from their friends is going to feel the same way.

Plus, any NT kid who has the temperament to do well with 7 weeks of sleep away camp would also do fine with 50/50. Plus that same kid would lose out because you don't get to do sleep away camp if your only time with your non-primary parent is summer they probably are going to keep you with them.

[Anonymous]

It's not new nonsense. I'm 48 and my divorced parents had 50/50 custody of me.

AMA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

? My kid goes to sleepaway camp for 7 weeks every summer and absolutely loves it.

What does that have to to with custody?

It means it wont' kill the kid to go somewhere for the summer--to see their parent!!

So, first of all, we aren't measuring custody arrangement by whether they will kill the child. That's absurd. In this case, we're measuring them based on how they compare to 50/50 which, in almost all cases, doesn't kill the child either. (Note: if you actually have an ex who might be homicidal, neither of these plans are a good idea).

But to say that because some kids, probably in a narrow age band that excludes all infants, toddlers and preschoolers, and many if not most early elementary schoolers and teens, do fine with going to camp for the summer, an environment that is designed to help kids make new friends and connections, and doesn't impose a parent-child relationship on them, that a young child suddenly separated from their primary caregiver or teenager isolated away from their friends is going to feel the same way.

Plus, any NT kid who has the temperament to do well with 7 weeks of sleep away camp would also do fine with 50/50. Plus that same kid would lose out because you don't get to do sleep away camp if your only time with your non-primary parent is summer they probably are going to keep you with them.

What is your point? There are a few dad haters who think no dad is a good dad and men cannot raise kids. In fact, no one is good enough but them. Sleep away camp is different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

? My kid goes to sleepaway camp for 7 weeks every summer and absolutely loves it.

What does that have to to with custody?

It means it wont' kill the kid to go somewhere for the summer--to see their parent!!

So, first of all, we aren't measuring custody arrangement by whether they will kill the child. That's absurd. In this case, we're measuring them based on how they compare to 50/50 which, in almost all cases, doesn't kill the child either. (Note: if you actually have an ex who might be homicidal, neither of these plans are a good idea).

But to say that because some kids, probably in a narrow age band that excludes all infants, toddlers and preschoolers, and many if not most early elementary schoolers and teens, do fine with going to camp for the summer, an environment that is designed to help kids make new friends and connections, and doesn't impose a parent-child relationship on them, that a young child suddenly separated from their primary caregiver or teenager isolated away from their friends is going to feel the same way.

Plus, any NT kid who has the temperament to do well with 7 weeks of sleep away camp would also do fine with 50/50. Plus that same kid would lose out because you don't get to do sleep away camp if your only time with your non-primary parent is summer they probably are going to keep you with them.

What is your point? There are a few dad haters who think no dad is a good dad and men cannot raise kids. In fact, no one is good enough but them. Sleep away camp is different.

My point is that the kids I know who have 50/50 do better than the kids I know who spend the school year with one parent and the summer with another. I'm pretty sure advocating for 50/50 as one good option many kids doesn't make me a "dad hater". It happens that 50/50 doesn't work for my family, because of my kids' particular dad's particular issues, but I see it work all the time for other families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The pendulum has swung way too far. 50/50 makes kids into chattel who have to shuffle their lives between multiple homes.

Why do judges do this to kids? Does ANY kid like this arrangement?

So is divorce

[Anonymous]

Meh I've known people for whom it worked well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do 50-50 and we as parents shuffle Around

This is the only way to do it. The parents who make the decision to break up the family should be the ones doing the shuffling around.

I think only married people advocate for this. I am married, but if I ever got divorced, no way would I agree to this. The best part of being divorced would be not having to deal with your ex’s stuff and their mess - taking turns in the same house means that there’s still a million reasons to fight, with no clean break. It’s the worst of both worlds; all the hassles of living together with none of the benefits. If you can make this work; you should just stay married.

100 Agree. Shuffling parents doesn’t work. I couldn’t think of anything worse for both myself, my ex and my kids.

How about parents each have half a duplex? Kids float between the two sides.

I know a couple like this. They're not sexually compatible but are really good friends and co-parents.

[Anonymous]

Op it’s nice that you are worried about some kids that you know, hopefully you can be a positive involvement in their lives. But you are wrong to think you know better for them. Teens will complain about missing out on sports and friends. But they are not going to the Olympics. Evidence shows not having a father in your life on a consistent basis is far more detrimental to long term interpersonal health than missing cross country meets. You heart may be in the right place but your brain is not.
https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2002/03/custody

[Anonymous]

As a teacher I've seen all sorts of arrangements . . .

Barely able to speak to one another and court mandated time is strictly adhered to.

Exes who get along well and will attend events together with their kid.

Exes sharing a duplex and eating dinner together most nights.

I think it's a continuum and as long as you have two healthy people who can treat each other cordially, whatever arrangement works best for you will be fine. I'm not divorced but we have a second home. The kids have decorated their rooms there and we keep a smaller but complete wardrobe for them there, books, etc. Sometimes one of us will go there alone or with one or both kids. Sometimes they'll bring friends along. They know that both of their parents love spending time with them and that sometimes they have to miss things going on at home because we want to be away that weekend. I don't see how this would be much different than a cordial co-parenting situation. You can feel at home in more than one place. Family life shouldn't revolve around whatever the kids want to be doing at all times, but should include thoughtful family time.

[Anonymous]

The kids should get to stay in the primary home, the home they grew up in. I agree with OP that 50/50 sucks for kids. All of you that do it can convince yourself your kids are fine with it, but they’re not. They don’t have options though so they have to go along with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The kids should get to stay in the primary home, the home they grew up in. I agree with OP that 50/50 sucks for kids. All of you that do it can convince yourself your kids are fine with it, but they’re not. They don’t have options though so they have to go along with it.

I'll take the word of my actual kids about their own actual feelings, versus the ramblings of you, Internet stranger. But thanks anyways.