Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe in equal share custody. No such thing.

How so? Court-appointed split of calendar year or intervals of time shared. Seems pretty simple to implement. Also gives both parents a chance to see their children.

I don’t think it’s in the best interests of the kids.

Trust me, it is.

I grew up in a situation where it was not equally shared and I never felt at home while visiting the parent with less time. I always felt like a visitor.

Anonymous wrote:The USA isn't a a shining beacon of a sensible legislation or fiscal responsibility. Their good days are an ancient history, literally.

FTFY

I have family in Italy and yes, the women stay home and don't work. But with sky-high unemployment, neither do many men. Telling women to get a job is absurd, when men who want to work cannot find a job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe in equal share custody. No such thing.

How so? Court-appointed split of calendar year or intervals of time shared. Seems pretty simple to implement. Also gives both parents a chance to see their children.

I don’t think it’s in the best interests of the kids.

Divorce is not usually in the best interests of the child.

I disagree with that.
As the pp above stated is depends on the case.

That said this law was clearly written by and for wealthy men. I’m ambivalent, but I will
Say Italy isn’t exactly a shining beacon of sensible, effective legislation, and decision making.

Exactly. I'm French. Most of Europe has a much better social safety net than in the US, and better healthcare. However it is still steeped in patriarchy (MeToo hasn't made much headway there) and the Catholic Church.
I am quite suspicious of this supposed egalitarian law when Italy is still very much misogynistic.

What dumb mom agrees to servant-like duty and keeps kids all week and DH only takes kids every other weekend and 1 month in summer! No way I would ever do this! Martyrdom is not for me!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. And I'm female. I believe children would benefit if fathers shared more child rearing. You're not a father if you have the kids one weekend a month.

Ideally, yes.

In reality? Not every man is a good father. There needs to be flexibility. My sister is divorced. Her husband, while a nice man, is not capable of being a 50% parent. He just is not. His idea of spending time with his son is going to a park and spending the entire time on his phone while the kid runs around or sits around, bored. And he's clueless on so many things about childrearing and what's appropriate or not appropriate for children. And will always be. That's just who he is. It would hurt the child if he was forced to spend 50% of his time with his father and would probably make their relationship more difficult.

And I say the same for some mothers too. There has to be a system that allows courts to award majority custody to one parent over the other because that's the best for the child.

Moms can be lousy parents and still award custody. Its all very subjective and its easy for a judge or evaluator to be bias and for a parent to encourage the kids to be negative the other parent to gain custody. Most men are good fathers if given the chance. It should be an automatic 50/50 in less there is evidence of abuse or neglect toward the kids. Often, the house is set up in a way that works for the couple and Dad is blamed for not doing more when it may be for other reasons. If a Dad is given a chance, he may step up. If a parent doesn't have a 50% or just every other weekend its very hard to maintain a relationship and that parent status so of course they become the fun parent as you cannot parent much for 4 days a month, especially when the other parent is looking for anything to criticize about.

My husband's ex was a lousy parent. Kids are all pretty screwed up. My husband went to court many times over visitation and it was a joke as the judge would just tell mom to allow visitation, she'd say ok, then refuse it and repeat. Eventually he gave up as it was too costly to have an attorney full-time and fly back and forth each time visits were refused and the unused plane tickets. Both parents need to be held accountable, not just Dad's for child support.

I agree that women can also be bad parents, but that's not what this is about- the 50% rule is not a progressive law recognizing men as parents. It's about child support and alimony laws that heavily favor the higher earning spouse, in most cases the husband.

My husband didn't have a high income and paid an insane amount of child support, alimony and extras and she gets a portion of the retirement. She refused to allow him to pay for anything directly and only wanted cash (which he refused as there was no documentation and she'd lie even when there was proof that she didn't receive the child support) so I don't think its such a bad thing to split kids expenses or have Dad pay directly. Kids should know Dad is paying. Lots of mom's I know pretend that the child support is their money and if Dad will not pay every other expense they claim they are deadbeats. Child support should also be tied to visitation if the mother refuses visitation for no good reason. Lots of changes need to be made.

While I know that not all women are great parents and some out earn their ex-DH and some abuse the system-- the law in Italy is not progressive because the gender gap is not progressive. Attempts to curtail the exes receive will overwhelmingly favor men *and* with high unemployment and the wage gap, working ex wives will earn less, even if they have exactly the same job as their DH. Did you read the short biography of the law's mastermind? This is not about parenting or custody, it's about maintaining the status quo.
If Italy cared about parenting- they would set up a society that favors women parenting and working before they pulled the rug on alimony and child support.

And exactly what would that entail?

Sally Sue comes into the office at 9 and leaves by 2 to be home before school end?

Sally Sue can take off 1.5 years and come back with the same salary 'because that's what the child needs'?

Sally can telework with a crying baby year-round? Focus - what's that?

I mean really...what do you want?

DP, but American society is set up to enable working moms by having abundant child care options, grocery stores with hours that extend beyond the work day, cafeterias in schools, large refrigerators that allow for meal planning and storage, and large washers and driers for clothes that mean you don't have to run them continuously all day every day to xo the family's laundry. Just a few items, but there are many more. Italy and in fact most European countries have low labor market participation by women because they don't have these things. So before sounding like a complete a hole and assuming italian women want 1.5 years of paid leave and other ludicrous demands, try to learn the root causes of the low employment of women in Europe. Ironically, the large "employment protection" packages that European workers receive is one of the reasons they have substantially fewer career women than America, where the labor market is more agile, and child care centers are abundant.

None of those things are impossible for Europeans to implement or demand. Some I don't even think are an obstacle because they have them already.

Abundant child care options? WTF childcare centers exist everywhere and 60% of American 'caregivers' are operating illegally - immigrants who come and care for the kid, at-home daycare centers at someone's house who isn't licensed, or grampa and grandma.

Grocery story hours that extend beyond 5PM? Who's fault is that? Tell the workers to stop taking siestas during lunch hour and maybe get the companies to realize - wow there's money and actually being open.

Large refrigerators? Really? So refrigerator size in NYC and major US cities actually do get smaller, just as they do in European cities. If you live in the middle of the countryside and don't have a giant refrigerator I don't know what to tell you. (And I've lived in 3 EU countries - my fridge brand was Samsung because the owners in imported quality goods).

Laundry? I mean this sounds like a priorities problem. You own the rooms in your house, no? Install a damned heavy load W/D.

I agree that Europe's current maternity leave policies have instituted a class of women who take leave for a year, come back for 3 months, get pregnant again, and once again leave. Around baby #3 they just don't come back. It's the case across Europe, though Germany and Italy have highlighted this issue.

The average for Europe is 43% of women in the workforce. The average for the U.S. 60% of women in the workforce.

https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-the-workforce-europe/#footnote18_3qzxb4h

https://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/qf-laborforce-10.htm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. And I'm female. I believe children would benefit if fathers shared more child rearing. You're not a father if you have the kids one weekend a month.

Ideally, yes.

In reality? Not every man is a good father. There needs to be flexibility. My sister is divorced. Her husband, while a nice man, is not capable of being a 50% parent. He just is not. His idea of spending time with his son is going to a park and spending the entire time on his phone while the kid runs around or sits around, bored. And he's clueless on so many things about childrearing and what's appropriate or not appropriate for children. And will always be. That's just who he is. It would hurt the child if he was forced to spend 50% of his time with his father and would probably make their relationship more difficult.

And I say the same for some mothers too. There has to be a system that allows courts to award majority custody to one parent over the other because that's the best for the child.

Moms can be lousy parents and still award custody. Its all very subjective and its easy for a judge or evaluator to be bias and for a parent to encourage the kids to be negative the other parent to gain custody. Most men are good fathers if given the chance. It should be an automatic 50/50 in less there is evidence of abuse or neglect toward the kids. Often, the house is set up in a way that works for the couple and Dad is blamed for not doing more when it may be for other reasons. If a Dad is given a chance, he may step up. If a parent doesn't have a 50% or just every other weekend its very hard to maintain a relationship and that parent status so of course they become the fun parent as you cannot parent much for 4 days a month, especially when the other parent is looking for anything to criticize about.

My husband's ex was a lousy parent. Kids are all pretty screwed up. My husband went to court many times over visitation and it was a joke as the judge would just tell mom to allow visitation, she'd say ok, then refuse it and repeat. Eventually he gave up as it was too costly to have an attorney full-time and fly back and forth each time visits were refused and the unused plane tickets. Both parents need to be held accountable, not just Dad's for child support.

I agree that women can also be bad parents, but that's not what this is about- the 50% rule is not a progressive law recognizing men as parents. It's about child support and alimony laws that heavily favor the higher earning spouse, in most cases the husband.

My husband didn't have a high income and paid an insane amount of child support, alimony and extras and she gets a portion of the retirement. She refused to allow him to pay for anything directly and only wanted cash (which he refused as there was no documentation and she'd lie even when there was proof that she didn't receive the child support) so I don't think its such a bad thing to split kids expenses or have Dad pay directly. Kids should know Dad is paying. Lots of mom's I know pretend that the child support is their money and if Dad will not pay every other expense they claim they are deadbeats. Child support should also be tied to visitation if the mother refuses visitation for no good reason. Lots of changes need to be made.

While I know that not all women are great parents and some out earn their ex-DH and some abuse the system-- the law in Italy is not progressive because the gender gap is not progressive. Attempts to curtail the exes receive will overwhelmingly favor men *and* with high unemployment and the wage gap, working ex wives will earn less, even if they have exactly the same job as their DH. Did you read the short biography of the law's mastermind? This is not about parenting or custody, it's about maintaining the status quo.
If Italy cared about parenting- they would set up a society that favors women parenting and working before they pulled the rug on alimony and child support.

And exactly what would that entail?

Sally Sue comes into the office at 9 and leaves by 2 to be home before school end?

Sally Sue can take off 1.5 years and come back with the same salary 'because that's what the child needs'?

Sally can telework with a crying baby year-round? Focus - what's that?

I mean really...what do you want?

DP, but American society is set up to enable working moms by having abundant child care options, grocery stores with hours that extend beyond the work day, cafeterias in schools, large refrigerators that allow for meal planning and storage, and large washers and driers for clothes that mean you don't have to run them continuously all day every day to xo the family's laundry. Just a few items, but there are many more. Italy and in fact most European countries have low labor market participation by women because they don't have these things. So before sounding like a complete a hole and assuming italian women want 1.5 years of paid leave and other ludicrous demands, try to learn the root causes of the low employment of women in Europe. Ironically, the large "employment protection" packages that European workers receive is one of the reasons they have substantially fewer career women than America, where the labor market is more agile, and child care centers are abundant.

This is absolutely the right thing to do. Many countries have punitive legislation which overwhelmingly affects the father and prevent them to support another family. Divorce should not be a career.
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/26/world/europe/in-italy-economy-and-law-leave-many-single-fathers-broke-and-homeless.html
This seems to be from before: "Children must be supported until they become financially independent (25% of the annual income per one child is generally considered an average support amount)."

That was total insanity which probably was the dominant factor behind Italy's 1.3 fertility rate. Single mothers with one child and father unable to have another go at building a family.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. And I'm female. I believe children would benefit if fathers shared more child rearing. You're not a father if you have the kids one weekend a month.

Ideally, yes.

In reality? Not every man is a good father. There needs to be flexibility. My sister is divorced. Her husband, while a nice man, is not capable of being a 50% parent. He just is not. His idea of spending time with his son is going to a park and spending the entire time on his phone while the kid runs around or sits around, bored. And he's clueless on so many things about childrearing and what's appropriate or not appropriate for children. And will always be. That's just who he is. It would hurt the child if he was forced to spend 50% of his time with his father and would probably make their relationship more difficult.

And I say the same for some mothers too. There has to be a system that allows courts to award majority custody to one parent over the other because that's the best for the child.

Moms can be lousy parents and still award custody. Its all very subjective and its easy for a judge or evaluator to be bias and for a parent to encourage the kids to be negative the other parent to gain custody. Most men are good fathers if given the chance. It should be an automatic 50/50 in less there is evidence of abuse or neglect toward the kids. Often, the house is set up in a way that works for the couple and Dad is blamed for not doing more when it may be for other reasons. If a Dad is given a chance, he may step up. If a parent doesn't have a 50% or just every other weekend its very hard to maintain a relationship and that parent status so of course they become the fun parent as you cannot parent much for 4 days a month, especially when the other parent is looking for anything to criticize about.

My husband's ex was a lousy parent. Kids are all pretty screwed up. My husband went to court many times over visitation and it was a joke as the judge would just tell mom to allow visitation, she'd say ok, then refuse it and repeat. Eventually he gave up as it was too costly to have an attorney full-time and fly back and forth each time visits were refused and the unused plane tickets. Both parents need to be held accountable, not just Dad's for child support.

I agree that women can also be bad parents, but that's not what this is about- the 50% rule is not a progressive law recognizing men as parents. It's about child support and alimony laws that heavily favor the higher earning spouse, in most cases the husband.

My husband didn't have a high income and paid an insane amount of child support, alimony and extras and she gets a portion of the retirement. She refused to allow him to pay for anything directly and only wanted cash (which he refused as there was no documentation and she'd lie even when there was proof that she didn't receive the child support) so I don't think its such a bad thing to split kids expenses or have Dad pay directly. Kids should know Dad is paying. Lots of mom's I know pretend that the child support is their money and if Dad will not pay every other expense they claim they are deadbeats. Child support should also be tied to visitation if the mother refuses visitation for no good reason. Lots of changes need to be made.

While I know that not all women are great parents and some out earn their ex-DH and some abuse the system-- the law in Italy is not progressive because the gender gap is not progressive. Attempts to curtail the exes receive will overwhelmingly favor men *and* with high unemployment and the wage gap, working ex wives will earn less, even if they have exactly the same job as their DH. Did you read the short biography of the law's mastermind? This is not about parenting or custody, it's about maintaining the status quo.
If Italy cared about parenting- they would set up a society that favors women parenting and working before they pulled the rug on alimony and child support.

And exactly what would that entail?

Sally Sue comes into the office at 9 and leaves by 2 to be home before school end?

Sally Sue can take off 1.5 years and come back with the same salary 'because that's what the child needs'?

Sally can telework with a crying baby year-round? Focus - what's that?

I mean really...what do you want?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. And I'm female. I believe children would benefit if fathers shared more child rearing. You're not a father if you have the kids one weekend a month.

Ideally, yes.

In reality? Not every man is a good father. There needs to be flexibility. My sister is divorced. Her husband, while a nice man, is not capable of being a 50% parent. He just is not. His idea of spending time with his son is going to a park and spending the entire time on his phone while the kid runs around or sits around, bored. And he's clueless on so many things about childrearing and what's appropriate or not appropriate for children. And will always be. That's just who he is. It would hurt the child if he was forced to spend 50% of his time with his father and would probably make their relationship more difficult.

And I say the same for some mothers too. There has to be a system that allows courts to award majority custody to one parent over the other because that's the best for the child.

Moms can be lousy parents and still award custody. Its all very subjective and its easy for a judge or evaluator to be bias and for a parent to encourage the kids to be negative the other parent to gain custody. Most men are good fathers if given the chance. It should be an automatic 50/50 in less there is evidence of abuse or neglect toward the kids. Often, the house is set up in a way that works for the couple and Dad is blamed for not doing more when it may be for other reasons. If a Dad is given a chance, he may step up. If a parent doesn't have a 50% or just every other weekend its very hard to maintain a relationship and that parent status so of course they become the fun parent as you cannot parent much for 4 days a month, especially when the other parent is looking for anything to criticize about.

My husband's ex was a lousy parent. Kids are all pretty screwed up. My husband went to court many times over visitation and it was a joke as the judge would just tell mom to allow visitation, she'd say ok, then refuse it and repeat. Eventually he gave up as it was too costly to have an attorney full-time and fly back and forth each time visits were refused and the unused plane tickets. Both parents need to be held accountable, not just Dad's for child support.

I agree that women can also be bad parents, but that's not what this is about- the 50% rule is not a progressive law recognizing men as parents. It's about child support and alimony laws that heavily favor the higher earning spouse, in most cases the husband.

My husband didn't have a high income and paid an insane amount of child support, alimony and extras and she gets a portion of the retirement. She refused to allow him to pay for anything directly and only wanted cash (which he refused as there was no documentation and she'd lie even when there was proof that she didn't receive the child support) so I don't think its such a bad thing to split kids expenses or have Dad pay directly. Kids should know Dad is paying. Lots of mom's I know pretend that the child support is their money and if Dad will not pay every other expense they claim they are deadbeats. Child support should also be tied to visitation if the mother refuses visitation for no good reason. Lots of changes need to be made.

While I know that not all women are great parents and some out earn their ex-DH and some abuse the system-- the law in Italy is not progressive because the gender gap is not progressive. Attempts to curtail the exes receive will overwhelmingly favor men *and* with high unemployment and the wage gap, working ex wives will earn less, even if they have exactly the same job as their DH. Did you read the short biography of the law's mastermind? This is not about parenting or custody, it's about maintaining the status quo.
If Italy cared about parenting- they would set up a society that favors women parenting and working before they pulled the rug on alimony and child support.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. And I'm female. I believe children would benefit if fathers shared more child rearing. You're not a father if you have the kids one weekend a month.

Ideally, yes.

In reality? Not every man is a good father. There needs to be flexibility. My sister is divorced. Her husband, while a nice man, is not capable of being a 50% parent. He just is not. His idea of spending time with his son is going to a park and spending the entire time on his phone while the kid runs around or sits around, bored. And he's clueless on so many things about childrearing and what's appropriate or not appropriate for children. And will always be. That's just who he is. It would hurt the child if he was forced to spend 50% of his time with his father and would probably make their relationship more difficult.

And I say the same for some mothers too. There has to be a system that allows courts to award majority custody to one parent over the other because that's the best for the child.

Moms can be lousy parents and still award custody. Its all very subjective and its easy for a judge or evaluator to be bias and for a parent to encourage the kids to be negative the other parent to gain custody. Most men are good fathers if given the chance. It should be an automatic 50/50 in less there is evidence of abuse or neglect toward the kids. Often, the house is set up in a way that works for the couple and Dad is blamed for not doing more when it may be for other reasons. If a Dad is given a chance, he may step up. If a parent doesn't have a 50% or just every other weekend its very hard to maintain a relationship and that parent status so of course they become the fun parent as you cannot parent much for 4 days a month, especially when the other parent is looking for anything to criticize about.

My husband's ex was a lousy parent. Kids are all pretty screwed up. My husband went to court many times over visitation and it was a joke as the judge would just tell mom to allow visitation, she'd say ok, then refuse it and repeat. Eventually he gave up as it was too costly to have an attorney full-time and fly back and forth each time visits were refused and the unused plane tickets. Both parents need to be held accountable, not just Dad's for child support.

I agree that women can also be bad parents, but that's not what this is about- the 50% rule is not a progressive law recognizing men as parents. It's about child support and alimony laws that heavily favor the higher earning spouse, in most cases the husband.

My husband didn't have a high income and paid an insane amount of child support, alimony and extras and she gets a portion of the retirement. She refused to allow him to pay for anything directly and only wanted cash (which he refused as there was no documentation and she'd lie even when there was proof that she didn't receive the child support) so I don't think its such a bad thing to split kids expenses or have Dad pay directly. Kids should know Dad is paying. Lots of mom's I know pretend that the child support is their money and if Dad will not pay every other expense they claim they are deadbeats. Child support should also be tied to visitation if the mother refuses visitation for no good reason. Lots of changes need to be made.

I would have been fine with Dad paying directly. If he actually paid and was held responsible for not doing so. He was responsible for a few direct expenses and couldn’t follow through:
— 1/2 of daycare meals. A few times a year, he would not pay it on time and two things would happen: 1) a late fee was added to the overall account which was in my name and 2) I had to provide a bagged breakfast and lunch for DC although Dad got credit towards less CS for providing those meals.
— flexible spending account to cover copays since medical insurance for DC came out of my paycheck. He’d regularly drain it to buy prescription sports goggles for himself but not tell me until I was at the ER with DC. Finally, one year, he just forgot to set it up at open enrollment. Guess who covers all health expenses now although he still gets credit against his CS for $350 in FSA.
— 1/2 of school supplies and uniforms. He bought the wrong stuff routinely, would refuse to exchange it or give me the receipts to exchange it. I ended up replacing it to satisfy the school’s requirements. So technically, he spent the money, but DC couldn’t benefit from the items and again, I had to take funds from other things to cover his responsibility.

Now imagine that all his financial responsibility to DC was paid directly. Who do you think would end up covering all of it when he “forgot?

All of things you quoted are incidentals that vary week-to-week or even day-to-day. Why didn't you just set it up so that he pays 75%/85%/100% of school tuition, you pay 25%/15%/0% and all incidentals related to every day things while the child is in your care? Including uniforms, daily school meals, supplies etc.

School fees are due at the beginning of term or year and they can be set up as direct withdrawals. No conversations on 'did you do this'.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. And I'm female. I believe children would benefit if fathers shared more child rearing. You're not a father if you have the kids one weekend a month.

Ideally, yes.

In reality? Not every man is a good father. There needs to be flexibility. My sister is divorced. Her husband, while a nice man, is not capable of being a 50% parent. He just is not. His idea of spending time with his son is going to a park and spending the entire time on his phone while the kid runs around or sits around, bored. And he's clueless on so many things about childrearing and what's appropriate or not appropriate for children. And will always be. That's just who he is. It would hurt the child if he was forced to spend 50% of his time with his father and would probably make their relationship more difficult.

And I say the same for some mothers too. There has to be a system that allows courts to award majority custody to one parent over the other because that's the best for the child.

Moms can be lousy parents and still award custody. Its all very subjective and its easy for a judge or evaluator to be bias and for a parent to encourage the kids to be negative the other parent to gain custody. Most men are good fathers if given the chance. It should be an automatic 50/50 in less there is evidence of abuse or neglect toward the kids. Often, the house is set up in a way that works for the couple and Dad is blamed for not doing more when it may be for other reasons. If a Dad is given a chance, he may step up. If a parent doesn't have a 50% or just every other weekend its very hard to maintain a relationship and that parent status so of course they become the fun parent as you cannot parent much for 4 days a month, especially when the other parent is looking for anything to criticize about.

My husband's ex was a lousy parent. Kids are all pretty screwed up. My husband went to court many times over visitation and it was a joke as the judge would just tell mom to allow visitation, she'd say ok, then refuse it and repeat. Eventually he gave up as it was too costly to have an attorney full-time and fly back and forth each time visits were refused and the unused plane tickets. Both parents need to be held accountable, not just Dad's for child support.

I agree that women can also be bad parents, but that's not what this is about- the 50% rule is not a progressive law recognizing men as parents. It's about child support and alimony laws that heavily favor the higher earning spouse, in most cases the husband.

My husband didn't have a high income and paid an insane amount of child support, alimony and extras and she gets a portion of the retirement. She refused to allow him to pay for anything directly and only wanted cash (which he refused as there was no documentation and she'd lie even when there was proof that she didn't receive the child support) so I don't think its such a bad thing to split kids expenses or have Dad pay directly. Kids should know Dad is paying. Lots of mom's I know pretend that the child support is their money and if Dad will not pay every other expense they claim they are deadbeats. Child support should also be tied to visitation if the mother refuses visitation for no good reason. Lots of changes need to be made.

I would have been fine with Dad paying directly. If he actually paid and was held responsible for not doing so. He was responsible for a few direct expenses and couldn’t follow through:
— 1/2 of daycare meals. A few times a year, he would not pay it on time and two things would happen: 1) a late fee was added to the overall account which was in my name and 2) I had to provide a bagged breakfast and lunch for DC although Dad got credit towards less CS for providing those meals.
— flexible spending account to cover copays since medical insurance for DC came out of my paycheck. He’d regularly drain it to buy prescription sports goggles for himself but not tell me until I was at the ER with DC. Finally, one year, he just forgot to set it up at open enrollment. Guess who covers all health expenses now although he still gets credit against his CS for $350 in FSA.
— 1/2 of school supplies and uniforms. He bought the wrong stuff routinely, would refuse to exchange it or give me the receipts to exchange it. I ended up replacing it to satisfy the school’s requirements. So technically, he spent the money, but DC couldn’t benefit from the items and again, I had to take funds from other things to cover his responsibility.

Now imagine that all his financial responsibility to DC was paid directly. Who do you think would end up covering all of it when he “forgot?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a great idea. And I'm female. I believe children would benefit if fathers shared more child rearing. You're not a father if you have the kids one weekend a month.

Ideally, yes.

In reality? Not every man is a good father. There needs to be flexibility. My sister is divorced. Her husband, while a nice man, is not capable of being a 50% parent. He just is not. His idea of spending time with his son is going to a park and spending the entire time on his phone while the kid runs around or sits around, bored. And he's clueless on so many things about childrearing and what's appropriate or not appropriate for children. And will always be. That's just who he is. It would hurt the child if he was forced to spend 50% of his time with his father and would probably make their relationship more difficult.

And I say the same for some mothers too. There has to be a system that allows courts to award majority custody to one parent over the other because that's the best for the child.

Moms can be lousy parents and still award custody. Its all very subjective and its easy for a judge or evaluator to be bias and for a parent to encourage the kids to be negative the other parent to gain custody. Most men are good fathers if given the chance. It should be an automatic 50/50 in less there is evidence of abuse or neglect toward the kids. Often, the house is set up in a way that works for the couple and Dad is blamed for not doing more when it may be for other reasons. If a Dad is given a chance, he may step up. If a parent doesn't have a 50% or just every other weekend its very hard to maintain a relationship and that parent status so of course they become the fun parent as you cannot parent much for 4 days a month, especially when the other parent is looking for anything to criticize about.

My husband's ex was a lousy parent. Kids are all pretty screwed up. My husband went to court many times over visitation and it was a joke as the judge would just tell mom to allow visitation, she'd say ok, then refuse it and repeat. Eventually he gave up as it was too costly to have an attorney full-time and fly back and forth each time visits were refused and the unused plane tickets. Both parents need to be held accountable, not just Dad's for child support.

I agree that women can also be bad parents, but that's not what this is about- the 50% rule is not a progressive law recognizing men as parents. It's about child support and alimony laws that heavily favor the higher earning spouse, in most cases the husband.

My husband didn't have a high income and paid an insane amount of child support, alimony and extras and she gets a portion of the retirement. She refused to allow him to pay for anything directly and only wanted cash (which he refused as there was no documentation and she'd lie even when there was proof that she didn't receive the child support) so I don't think its such a bad thing to split kids expenses or have Dad pay directly. Kids should know Dad is paying. Lots of mom's I know pretend that the child support is their money and if Dad will not pay every other expense they claim they are deadbeats. Child support should also be tied to visitation if the mother refuses visitation for no good reason. Lots of changes need to be made.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP- That was my childhood. I had to fun weekend dad and my mom did all of the work. Guess who I am close with as an adult? I am quite sure my dad was perfectly happy with that arrangement. It was way better than my friends who were constantly going back and forth every few days between mom and dad. They hated it.

I am curious, who are you closest with? You now realize how much your mom worked to raise you and you appreciate how fun your dad was. Aren't you close with both of them?

I’d like to know to. It’s unlcear as to which parent the pp prefers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe in equal share custody. No such thing.

How so? Court-appointed split of calendar year or intervals of time shared. Seems pretty simple to implement. Also gives both parents a chance to see their children.

I don’t think it’s in the best interests of the kids.

+1

Children belong with their mother. Period.

XH's can be responsible fathers by paying on time. That's all that's needed from them.

. Holy shit! Please tell me you don’t actually believe this. I know plenty of men who are better parents than their wives. The male hatred in our society is out of control.

Men are absolutely f*cking useles. Every one of them. That's what I believe.

It is such a shame that your uterus wasn't barren, but now instead your ugly awful gene's have reproduced. All I hope is that your kids are not as repugnant as yourself.

GFY, sellout.