Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, huuuuge red flag. Someone gave up their kids? They are a pos. End of story.

Usually it’s not that they “gave them up,” but that their ex-partner basically stole custody.

Not possible. If they don’t have them they didn’t do the barest minimum to fight for them.

After a divorce, with child support, alimony, divorce costs, often men get stuck with the bulk of the expenses and they simply cannot afford the court battle.

Every family court is more than equipped to do this with pro se litigants. The default rules heavily favor fair splits so it’s very hard for a mom to successfully avoid giving a willing dad his time.

You really think a Dad will win pro se against an attorney and mom who makes up stories about how bad the dad is? And, what if mom moved the kids cross country - that is still filing fees, plane tickets, hotel. And, what about people who cannot travel freely like active duty?

Anonymous wrote:In the two cases I know, there's pretty extreme mental illness and behavior that shows the non-custodial parent does not prioritize kids' well being.

Anonymous wrote:What is their explanation for the fill custody situation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a case where the ex-wife remarried a very wealthy man and basically used legal firepower to start draining the ex-husband’s monetary resources. The ex-husband was basically left with two options: (1) spend down everything on lawyers and still eventually lose your kids or (2) keep what you got and see kids on holidays, but otherwise ex-wife gets full custody.

I know another case where the ex-wife’s father was crazy rich (9-figure net worth) and it was basically the same situation - we will outspend you until you have nothing and you’ll still lose the kids.

This happens way more often then you realize, particularly in UMC and wealthier circles.

Unfortunately this also happened to a friend of mine. The legal system is the best we have but is by no means perfect. He really misses his kid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, huuuuge red flag. Someone gave up their kids? They are a pos. End of story.

How dare you! I gave up custody or the kid would be dead. So happened that few year later ex is dead. Can imagine having to live with a knowledge that this could happen to my child if I dare to fight.
OP, not enough info. Ignore the 'red flag' comments. I had to live without my child and it fear. You don't fight with an idiot. He turned into an idiot. Maybe sick in the head and nobody knew it was coming.

Anonymous wrote:I know a case where the ex-wife remarried a very wealthy man and basically used legal firepower to start draining the ex-husband’s monetary resources. The ex-husband was basically left with two options: (1) spend down everything on lawyers and still eventually lose your kids or (2) keep what you got and see kids on holidays, but otherwise ex-wife gets full custody.

I know another case where the ex-wife’s father was crazy rich (9-figure net worth) and it was basically the same situation - we will outspend you until you have nothing and you’ll still lose the kids.

This happens way more often then you realize, particularly in UMC and wealthier circles.

Anonymous wrote:Would you like this because more time with your SO, or would it be a red flag?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, huuuuge red flag. Someone gave up their kids? They are a pos. End of story.

Usually it’s not that they “gave them up,” but that their ex-partner basically stole custody.

Not possible. If they don’t have them they didn’t do the barest minimum to fight for them.

After a divorce, with child support, alimony, divorce costs, often men get stuck with the bulk of the expenses and they simply cannot afford the court battle.

Every family court is more than equipped to do this with pro se litigants. The default rules heavily favor fair splits so it’s very hard for a mom to successfully avoid giving a willing dad his time.

You really think a Dad will win pro se against an attorney and mom who makes up stories about how bad the dad is? And, what if mom moved the kids cross country - that is still filing fees, plane tickets, hotel. And, what about people who cannot travel freely like active duty?

A parent who is active duty will get consideration when they’re no longer active duty. This is excuse is so dumb.

You were talking to a second wife his husband lied to her about why he doesn’t have custody. She has bought into his lies so deep.

None of her posts are factual because they were all based on the lie that he told her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, huuuuge red flag. Someone gave up their kids? They are a pos. End of story.

Usually it’s not that they “gave them up,” but that their ex-partner basically stole custody.

Not possible. If they don’t have them they didn’t do the barest minimum to fight for them.

After a divorce, with child support, alimony, divorce costs, often men get stuck with the bulk of the expenses and they simply cannot afford the court battle.

Every family court is more than equipped to do this with pro se litigants. The default rules heavily favor fair splits so it’s very hard for a mom to successfully avoid giving a willing dad his time.

You really think a Dad will win pro se against an attorney and mom who makes up stories about how bad the dad is? And, what if mom moved the kids cross country - that is still filing fees, plane tickets, hotel. And, what about people who cannot travel freely like active duty?

A parent who is active duty will get consideration when they’re no longer active duty. This is excuse is so dumb.

Absolutely not true. Been there, done that. And, even with a court order, if mom refuses visits very few courts/judges will enforce it. Been there/done that too. There are always excuses of why from mom. Kids have activities, friends, separation anxiety, or pull the abuse card even though there is no evidence or the only true documented allegations are against mom.

So you think that a mother who has experienced abuse, and has concerns about her children being alone with her abuser, who may have also abused the kids but wasn't caught, is "pulling the abuse card"?

And in the context of this question of whether someone is a good potential partner, you think a man who has abused a previous partner is a good choice?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If someone has full custody, I assume it’s because they are vindictive & froze their ex out.

They can't do that. Only a judge can do that. It's extremely unusual for one parent to be given sole physical and legal custody. It means there's something very wrong with the other parent.

Its not extremely unusual.

Yes. It is extremely unusual.

Also to all the PPs claiming the exDW -- it's always the woman, isn't it -- withholds court mandated visitation so the father has to 'drain his bank account' to see his kids -- that's BS. The courts will judge the parent who withholds kids harshly and they could likely lose custody for doing that.

Nice try men, but no.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, huuuuge red flag. Someone gave up their kids? They are a pos. End of story.

Usually it’s not that they “gave them up,” but that their ex-partner basically stole custody.

Not possible. If they don’t have them they didn’t do the barest minimum to fight for them.

After a divorce, with child support, alimony, divorce costs, often men get stuck with the bulk of the expenses and they simply cannot afford the court battle.

Every family court is more than equipped to do this with pro se litigants. The default rules heavily favor fair splits so it’s very hard for a mom to successfully avoid giving a willing dad his time.

You really think a Dad will win pro se against an attorney and mom who makes up stories about how bad the dad is? And, what if mom moved the kids cross country - that is still filing fees, plane tickets, hotel. And, what about people who cannot travel freely like active duty?

A parent who is active duty will get consideration when they’re no longer active duty. This is excuse is so dumb.

Absolutely not true. Been there, done that. And, even with a court order, if mom refuses visits very few courts/judges will enforce it. Been there/done that too. There are always excuses of why from mom. Kids have activities, friends, separation anxiety, or pull the abuse card even though there is no evidence or the only true documented allegations are against mom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, huuuuge red flag. Someone gave up their kids? They are a pos. End of story.

Usually it’s not that they “gave them up,” but that their ex-partner basically stole custody.

Not possible. If they don’t have them they didn’t do the barest minimum to fight for them.

After a divorce, with child support, alimony, divorce costs, often men get stuck with the bulk of the expenses and they simply cannot afford the court battle.

Every family court is more than equipped to do this with pro se litigants. The default rules heavily favor fair splits so it’s very hard for a mom to successfully avoid giving a willing dad his time.

You really think a Dad will win pro se against an attorney and mom who makes up stories about how bad the dad is? And, what if mom moved the kids cross country - that is still filing fees, plane tickets, hotel. And, what about people who cannot travel freely like active duty?

A parent who is active duty will get consideration when they’re no longer active duty. This is excuse is so dumb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If someone has full custody, I assume it’s because they are vindictive & froze their ex out.

They can't do that. Only a judge can do that. It's extremely unusual for one parent to be given sole physical and legal custody. It means there's something very wrong with the other parent.

Its not extremely unusual.

Yes. It is extremely unusual.

Also to all the PPs claiming the exDW -- it's always the woman, isn't it -- withholds court mandated visitation so the father has to 'drain his bank account' to see his kids -- that's BS. The courts will judge the parent who withholds kids harshly and they could likely lose custody for doing that.

Nice try men, but no.