Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex had one bedroom apartment, and judge preferred to see kids in their own home with separate bedrooms. I was a SAHM too, so I offered more stability.

That's ridiculous and not a reason to keep the kids from their other parent.

So kids should sleep on the couch? the floor? Be for real. That's ridiculous. Ex can get a bigger apartment if he cares about his kids.

Kids can have the bedroom, air mattresses or what ever. He may not have money after the divorce, child support, alimony and extras but to get a small crummy apartment. You can offer your place and leave if you prefer that. You don’t offer more stability. You took all the money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex had one bedroom apartment, and judge preferred to see kids in their own home with separate bedrooms. I was a SAHM too, so I offered more stability.

That's ridiculous and not a reason to keep the kids from their other parent.

So kids should sleep on the couch? the floor? Be for real. That's ridiculous. Ex can get a bigger apartment if he cares about his kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ex had one bedroom apartment, and judge preferred to see kids in their own home with separate bedrooms. I was a SAHM too, so I offered more stability.

That's ridiculous and not a reason to keep the kids from their other parent.

And what if the kid is unhappy with those living conditions? Would it still be ridiculous?

Kids can be unhappy with a lot of aspects of their lives. My teenage son lives in a small bedroom in a twin bed and not much space for friends to visit. He wishes he had a bigger room. Should a court take away custody for this setup?

That is not the same as him sleeping on a pullout couch and having no privacy or personal space 50% of the time

Anonymous wrote:I basically let him significantly underpay in child support for more time with me, 65/35, which looks close enough for him to tell friends 50/50 and save face. Settled in mediation.

Yep. This is the only thing I’ve seen that works.

The bitterest custody fights are in states where the custodial support is based on the percentage of parenting time. California is one such state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The forensic evaluator said my ex was “too selfish to effectively parent long term” and recommended custody to me, visitation to him.

So that’s what happened.

Did you go to a trial? Did the court appoint the evaluator? Did you have a GAL? I am in a custody battle and my tweens do not want to live with him. He has a lawyer. He filed. I am going to see a free clinic lawyer. We are still in same house. It’s horrible.

NP This is horrible. Hopefully his lawyer will let him know that kids decide at a certain age and he will give you primary custody. He can have ample visitation. 50 50 is not good for most kids, even if it is the presumption (back story is that 50 50 was a legislative push by men’s rights orgs with a motive to avoid child support)

This is not true. Most kids do best when they see both parents regularly and frequently. (yes, there are exceptions, in particular situations,of course). And child support can be ordered in 50/50 if the income disparities qualify.

This is absolutely true, but you seem to have misread what I wrote. I didn’t say no access to both parents. Regular access is fine, but making a kid divide their lives 50/50 is not ideal. This 50/50 push was driven by avoidance of child support which is a fairly strict calculation in most states, driven by custody time. 50 50 sounds fair on paper but it is not ideal for kids. Having one secure home base is best, with regular access by the non custodial parent.

That isn’t ideal at all and you are very controlling. Seeing your kid for an hour or two under the other parent’s supervision is not parenting. If you think this is imoortant let the other parent have custody and you visit. You want full custody for the child support. It’s about your income not the kids.

DP, but you clearly have some personal stake - PP didn't say anything about supervised visitation. You are projecting.

Read the post. They want full custody for child support claiming the other parent wants to pay less when the real issue is they are looking for more money. They also say regular access - that means an hour or two or few hours at a time semi-supervised. That's no better than a grandparent or uncle, not a father. Not ok.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The forensic evaluator said my ex was “too selfish to effectively parent long term” and recommended custody to me, visitation to him.

So that’s what happened.

Did you go to a trial? Did the court appoint the evaluator? Did you have a GAL? I am in a custody battle and my tweens do not want to live with him. He has a lawyer. He filed. I am going to see a free clinic lawyer. We are still in same house. It’s horrible.

NP This is horrible. Hopefully his lawyer will let him know that kids decide at a certain age and he will give you primary custody. He can have ample visitation. 50 50 is not good for most kids, even if it is the presumption (back story is that 50 50 was a legislative push by men’s rights orgs with a motive to avoid child support)

This is not true. Most kids do best when they see both parents regularly and frequently. (yes, there are exceptions, in particular situations,of course). And child support can be ordered in 50/50 if the income disparities qualify.

This is absolutely true, but you seem to have misread what I wrote. I didn’t say no access to both parents. Regular access is fine, but making a kid divide their lives 50/50 is not ideal. This 50/50 push was driven by avoidance of child support which is a fairly strict calculation in most states, driven by custody time. 50 50 sounds fair on paper but it is not ideal for kids. Having one secure home base is best, with regular access by the non custodial parent.

That isn’t ideal at all and you are very controlling. Seeing your kid for an hour or two under the other parent’s supervision is not parenting. If you think this is imoortant let the other parent have custody and you visit. You want full custody for the child support. It’s about your income not the kids.

DP, but you clearly have some personal stake - PP didn't say anything about supervised visitation. You are projecting.

For me it was because I was already the primary parent.
HOWEVER, I did not have the kids on a custody clock. Although the settlement agreement was very specific about the clock, I let it slide quite often based on the circumstances. My flexibility on the matter was very mollifying for ex and made co-parenting much less stressful for the entire family.
I believe it is important for the kids to have strong relationships with both sides of the family so was happy to enable quality time, especially on holidays.

When I was in college, my first beau was a child of divorced parents. He would pop over to his father's house whenever he felt like seeing him. I thought that was so cool. His mother didn't chide about the father's drinking (but she did about his extramarital excursions), but my boyfriend witnessed his father downing several martinis every time he visited and this was formative for his teetotalling attitude towards alcohol.
So moms, don't push it. Let the kids will form their own opinions.

I basically let him significantly underpay in child support for more time with me, 65/35, which looks close enough for him to tell friends 50/50 and save face. Settled in mediation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband has been psychologically, verbally and financially abusive to me and the kids. He looks very good on paper and has the money. The kids will only be free of him when they are financially independent themselves. I may never reach that point. What matters is that the kids and I are a team, and we love each other and defend each other. One kid is out of the house already. The other is in high school. We've made it this far, we can make it a few more years.

And when he grows old, there won't be anyone to look after him. He has no friends. His siblings won't miss him. And I certainly won't bear that burden, after everything he's done to me.

Get a job and move out. Simple.

Not that simple. I am on a spouse visa and not allowed to work. He's been holding out on the employment-based green card for years, probably on purpose. It's been years since I've worked and my job prospects are terrible.

Then file for full custody, move back to your country and figure it out. He cannot hold out on the green card. Get an attorney and file. Stop relying on him to handle your business and be a grown up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who were able to get more than half custody, assuming the other spouse wanted half, what did it take?

If there was emotional abuse towards the child and both physical and emotional towards the mother how and what did you document?

My friend did speak to a few attorneys but they said that emotional abuse towards children is hard to prove and has to be horrendous to really matter much in family court.

Your friend is right. The best results I’ve seen is when people don’t fight it out using lawyers, they agree to 50 50 but guess what? Many men don’t really want it, so kids end up back primarily with mom anyway

Yes, this is what I observed as well. On paper the agreement is 50/50 and it starts out that way but slowly over the first year it shifts to something closer to 80/20 and most of the time with mom. One friend's ex eventually dropped the full every other weekend and would just come every other Saturday to whatever game her son had and then he would take him out for a bit and bring him back before bedtime.

Yep. As soon as daddy gets a girlfriend, he drops the kids like hot rocks.

Seen it over and over and over and over again.

I have seen too when things start out 50/50 and evolve into a 80/20 or something. But in fairness to the dads, it’s not because “daddy got a girlfriend” but rather because the kids are growing up and need a single home. In the cases i have seen, it’s because of the best interests of the child (or perceived best interests by all concerned).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It took physical abuse of our child by ex that was witnessed in pubic, reported by me and prosecuted by the DA. The reported and documented abuse of me did not matter fyi and emotional abuse isn’t even worth discussing.

OP If you don’t mind my asking, how significant was the physical abuse instance that you reference. My friend also described to the lawyer instances towards the child that could be considered borderline problematic, but the lawyer said that they might not move the needle much.

Very significant. Ex was arrested and charged with felony assault.

Ex now has unsupervised visitation. Is still verbally abusive at times. Has slapped child hard enough to leave a handprint.

Your friend is wasting her time and money arguing emotional abuse for >50% custody.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband has been psychologically, verbally and financially abusive to me and the kids. He looks very good on paper and has the money. The kids will only be free of him when they are financially independent themselves. I may never reach that point. What matters is that the kids and I are a team, and we love each other and defend each other. One kid is out of the house already. The other is in high school. We've made it this far, we can make it a few more years.

And when he grows old, there won't be anyone to look after him. He has no friends. His siblings won't miss him. And I certainly won't bear that burden, after everything he's done to me.

Get a job and move out. Simple.

Not that simple. I am on a spouse visa and not allowed to work. He's been holding out on the employment-based green card for years, probably on purpose. It's been years since I've worked and my job prospects are terrible.

Then, move back to your home country. You are wasting your time with him if he will not get you a green card.

My spouse was involuntarily committed for suicidal threats. Didn’t divorce then but lawyer said that combined with endangering our kids could likely result in my having full custody, especially if I got a restraining order

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband has been psychologically, verbally and financially abusive to me and the kids. He looks very good on paper and has the money. The kids will only be free of him when they are financially independent themselves. I may never reach that point. What matters is that the kids and I are a team, and we love each other and defend each other. One kid is out of the house already. The other is in high school. We've made it this far, we can make it a few more years.

And when he grows old, there won't be anyone to look after him. He has no friends. His siblings won't miss him. And I certainly won't bear that burden, after everything he's done to me.

Get a job and move out. Simple.

Not that simple. I am on a spouse visa and not allowed to work. He's been holding out on the employment-based green card for years, probably on purpose. It's been years since I've worked and my job prospects are terrible.