Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It protects children from predators. How many children are abused by mom's boyfriend? So very many.

This happened to some relatives. Obviously devastating for the entire family. I'm not sure if a clause is the right way to go about it but this is a lawyer question. The underlying concern/basis for it isn't necessarily wrong. There are people who purposefully target parents with younger children to prey on them. :/

Anonymous wrote:It protects children from predators. How many children are abused by mom's boyfriend? So very many.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if they sleep on the couch? Who says they have to be in the same bed?

Exactly. Or what if you have a platonic relationship with someone? Maybe they can't drive home for some reason (weather's bad, couple of glasses of wine...) and you don't want them out on the road. When other parent hears they've stayed overnight, will they go running to a lawyer and take it to court?

Why would you have these people in your house late at night? I had a violin tutor who had a spare bedroom and still did lessons in the living room just because it sounds bad to do "lessons in the bedroom". I have a hard time believing the single parent is giving their kids the attention they deserve with all these "nightly visitors". If the other parent has some days of custody I really have to wonder why the dating parent can't do their "night visitor" visits when they don't have kids. Really gives me the impression the dating parent is putting themselves before their kids.

My ex initially wanted a clause that said no opposite sex visitors allowed to stay the night (yes that vague). We'd been separated for almost 2 years at that point and 3 men had spent the night at my house in that time, all in the guest bedroom, all just friends. One was the godfather of one of my kids and was visiting from another country with his wife. One was escaping his powerless house after the derecho with his cats in tow. The other was an old friend who was in town and stayed with me for 1 night. I have full physical custody so I don't have away from my kids nights.

I ended up relenting to a more tailored clause that said no overnights with romantic partners of less than 6 mo. In the end, I didn't introduce my kids to my now fiance until we had been together over a year. My ex on the other hand married a women he had known for only 2 months and introduced to the kids only days before marrying her.

Anonymous wrote:What if they sleep on the couch? Who says they have to be in the same bed?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if they sleep on the couch? Who says they have to be in the same bed?

Exactly. Or what if you have a platonic relationship with someone? Maybe they can't drive home for some reason (weather's bad, couple of glasses of wine...) and you don't want them out on the road. When other parent hears they've stayed overnight, will they go running to a lawyer and take it to court?

Why would you have these people in your house late at night? I had a violin tutor who had a spare bedroom and still did lessons in the living room just because it sounds bad to do "lessons in the bedroom". I have a hard time believing the single parent is giving their kids the attention they deserve with all these "nightly visitors". If the other parent has some days of custody I really have to wonder why the dating parent can't do their "night visitor" visits when they don't have kids. Really gives me the impression the dating parent is putting themselves before their kids.

Anonymous wrote:Do you know how gross and traumatic it is as a child to be exposed to your parent's "romantic partner" overnights (ie loud sex noises) so close to an upsetting event like a divorce, death of a parent? Mature parents can wait a year after the divorce before subjecting their kids to that. I assume you don't have 100% custody, so you can get your "overnights" on the nights you don't have the kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you know how gross and traumatic it is as a child to be exposed to your parent's "romantic partner" overnights (ie loud sex noises) so close to an upsetting event like a divorce, death of a parent? Mature parents can wait a year after the divorce before subjecting their kids to that. I assume you don't have 100% custody, so you can get your "overnights" on the nights you don't have the kids.

You are assuming a lot here. What if the romantic partner is now your fiance and you want to go on a trip with the kids? The language is broad and you'd be violating an order in that case. Also you assume an overnight means sex. It can also mean sharing a beach house with both fams and not sharing bedrooms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you know how gross and traumatic it is as a child to be exposed to your parent's "romantic partner" overnights (ie loud sex noises) so close to an upsetting event like a divorce, death of a parent? Mature parents can wait a year after the divorce before subjecting their kids to that. I assume you don't have 100% custody, so you can get your "overnights" on the nights you don't have the kids.

You are assuming a lot here. What if the romantic partner is now your fiance and you want to go on a trip with the kids? The language is broad and you'd be violating an order in that case. Also you assume an overnight means sex. It can also mean sharing a beach house with both fams and not sharing bedrooms.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have one of these clauses -- have to be dating for a year before having a romantic partner overnight with kids -- and frankly I don't remember giving it much thought at the time. My lawyer put it in there, so I figured it was standard. I'm very glad to have it, as my ex has asked for my permission to "break" the clause for multiple women that he has been seeing. I'm glad my kids are not exposed to that mess. And I'm fine waiting the year. Seems reasonable to me.

As others have said, how can something like this be enforced? I think most people agree that exposing children to a revolving door of unknown romantic partners is not a good idea.

On the other hand, when does the "one year" clock begin ticking?

Let's say parent knows someone for several years as a friend/frequent acquaintance. Maybe the person already knows you and your kids from other activities like school, sports, church, etc. You start out with a couple of casual dinners or drinks here or there. It then happens on a more regular basis. Friend begins visiting your house and hanging out, having dinner with all of you or doing activities together.

So when does the one-year dating rule take effect in a situation like this? When does "romantic partner" officially occur? Is it the first date? First kiss? First sexual encounter? Who is going to police this? Can the ex demand some sort of proof?

I can't even imagine a judge trying to muddle through this crap.

It starts when the new couple decides to not see anybody else

I bet its easier to enforce than you'd think because the kids don't want mom or dad being taken over by a random third party and will rat them out, esp if the 3rd party isn't very nice to them

That criteria may work in a dreamland fairy tale but it's not realistic for normal adults who have a basic understanding of the law. Bolded is another unrealistic attitude. I guess you don't have much dating experience as an adult.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Politically incorrect fact: #1 person in the world most likely to sexually abuse a kid is the man banging the kid's mom who is not the bio father

Right. But it’s not like Chester the Molester comes over to bang Amber one night, on his way to the bathroom, stumbles into little Billy’s room. A fair amount of grooming takes place first. So Amber’s long term boyfriend, Chad, who doesn’t spend the night because of “morals” is more likely to assault Billy than Chester the booty call who has limited or no contact with the child.

“No overnight romantic interests” doesn’t protect Billy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are your thoughts about the morality clause in some divorce decrees that say no romantic partners can stay overnight when you have the kids? Assuming it's very vague with no times (what is an overnight?) or defining language about future marriages (as in, if you get married only then can you have the kids overnight with a 'romantic partner'.)

And does it mess up the ability to travel with the dating partner? Like say you want to go skiiing and stay in house all together with both sets of kids? Assuming this is a LTR.

My question for you - why are you negotiating a divorce decree now when you are already planning your ski trips with your affair partner and her kids? You sound kind of slimy.

Anonymous wrote:Do you know how gross and traumatic it is as a child to be exposed to your parent's "romantic partner" overnights (ie loud sex noises) so close to an upsetting event like a divorce, death of a parent? Mature parents can wait a year after the divorce before subjecting their kids to that. I assume you don't have 100% custody, so you can get your "overnights" on the nights you don't have the kids.

Anonymous wrote:What are your thoughts about the morality clause in some divorce decrees that say no romantic partners can stay overnight when you have the kids? Assuming it's very vague with no times (what is an overnight?) or defining language about future marriages (as in, if you get married only then can you have the kids overnight with a 'romantic partner'.)

And does it mess up the ability to travel with the dating partner? Like say you want to go skiiing and stay in house all together with both sets of kids? Assuming this is a LTR.

Anonymous wrote:It protects children from predators. How many children are abused by mom's boyfriend? So very many.