Reply to Red flag if a guy doesn’t see kids often?

Forum Index » Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)

Reply to "Red flag if a guy doesn’t see kids often?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]“It might just mean his kids are well adjusted with mom and are very busy doing after school activities and that he doesn’t want to uproot their lives”

OP says that he doesn’t have time to see his kids. You can have a custody schedule that honors the kids needs to stay at the other parent’s home and still see your kids multiple times per week. Take them to and from practice, attending sporting and school events, taking them to dinner, doing homework with them, etc.  This guy doesn’t want to put in the effort. He’s a deadbeat dad. [/quote]

A deadbeat dad literally mean a dad who doesn’t pay child support. You gave no idea whether he is or isn’t paying child support.

Personally, I don’t think it’s beneficial to kids to have their dad pick them up from sports practice when they live with their mom. It’s confusing and anxiety inducing to bounce around from parent to parent, not knowing which one will be there. I think it’s kinder to take a step back and I say this as a child of divorce. I’m glad I only saw my dad in the summers. It made my life easier. He wasn’t a deadbeat at all. He was someone who respected my stability.[/quote]

It made your life easier because your mom didn't want him involved.  Lets be real.  Seeing him a few weeks in the summer isn't a relationship and stability would have been both parents equally involved.[/quote]

I think her parents did the right thing. It is more stable for the kid. I would love that setup. [/quote]

You love the set up as it would benefit you.  That's pathetic.[/quote]

It benefits the kids. Stability and routine is better.

Not Think that scenario would benefit me because I would have even less time than I already do.

I do get child support so I don’t know if you were thinking there would be some financial benefit because with equal earners that’s not the case.

I nest so I don’t inconvenience the kids. I am doing most of the parenting.

50/50 Custody is BS and terrible for kids. It puts the parents first and not the kids.

There would be no personal benefit of me having the kids most of the time: it would benefit the kids immensely. [/quote]

50-50 custody has Stability and routine too … the talk of “bouncing around” is as if the kids don’t know what’s going to happen next … like a schedule is whimsical or something.    Maybe some situations happen like this if parents aren’t consistent. [/quote]

I have done it that way. It sucks. One main house is best for the kids. Nesting now and doing more than 50% of parenting. The 50/50 two houses was not as stable at all. [/quote]

Of corse its sable.  If you don’t think so, you give up the kids and be the every other weekend parent.  [/quote]

No. It is not. It is better for the kids to be in one place. I have done both. You haven't. And there is no such thing is 50/50 parenting. One parent always does more. I am that one. 50/50 only benefits parents financially. It is horrible for kids.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics