Custody

[MK219]

I wasn't sure if this was an"Ask a Cop" question, "Various Topic" , or "Family Matters"?

The question or topic is this; The wife and I was talking about child custody trends. Her friend is going through a custody battle(personally I hate that term) with her EX. He is gettinng full custody.
I have physical custody of my oldest daughter from my first marriage(or nightmare <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> ), but joint custodial custody. Basicly, She lives with me. The ex and I must agree on anything that affects her,i.e. her schooling,health,etc. But being the nice guy that I am we alternate weeks.
So do you think the courts are now being less bias?
Do you believe that the courts are no longer assuming mom is the better parent, just because she's mom or is it still mom gets custody and dad gets vistitations.
Curious on your veiws and opinions.

[Mitzi]

I believe the courts look at the whole picture now. I think they are less biased. I remember a time when the Mothers ALWAYS got full custody, child support and the Dad's got to see the kids if the Mothers allowed it.
I think the courts realize that there were TWO parents invoved and just because a Mother was a mother, that didn't necessarily mean she was a GOOD parent. And the same stood for Dad's. I have 2 male neighbors, one with joint custody, one with full time custody. And they are both wonderful parents.
The one that got full custody was able to prove his wife an unfit mothr. And he has raised those kids so beautifully by himself.
The other one is considering going for full custody because he just found out his ex-wife has her boyfriend living there and he does not think this is a good example for his daughters.
I think it's great that they courts finally got around to realizing that Dad's are parents too and should have the same rights as Mothers.

[kateykakes]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Mitzi:
<strong> The other one is considering going for full custody because he just found out his ex-wife has her boyfriend living there and he does not think this is a good example for his daughters.
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I would think there's got to be more to the situation than that. Suppose the woman doesn't want to remarry because of a bad experience? That doesn't mean she's setting a bad example. What factors are involved? How long has she been with the bf? Isn't she entitled to have a life and have someone in her life?

I've made mention a few times of a man I was seeing who is younger than me. We dated on and off for 1.5-2 yrs., but I never introduced him to my children. I had many reasons why I didn't, with the biggest being that I knew the relationship would always stay the way it was and not go any further (my choice), and I was very comfortable with that. No need to have my children meet someone who will not be in our lives down the road. It was a hard enough decision leaving their father and having to start our lives all over again. I'm just thankful they are very close with their father and have a very good relationship.

What I do in my life has a direct reflection on my children lives. The last thing I want to do is hurt them in any way. Some things are meant be kept private.

[nitram]

I think the courts have changed. They look at "evidence" and investigate allegations more often. The court uses the medators and 730 evaluations almost all the time when visitation/custody are the issues. I see alot more dads getting 50/50 or physical custody. There are still some judges out there that are old fashion and just place the kids with mom. But more and more dads are willing to fight. They want more then just 2 weekends a month.

And living with ones b/f or g/f is never an issue, unless you can prove b/f or g/f are harming the children in some way (mentally/or phsically). The court likes to see people getting on with their life. (At least in California)

[shorty]

I definately think that the courts are being more open minded now, which is good. Some women aren't responsible enough to take care of their children, just as some men aren't. I think that each case should be viewed on a case by case basis.
About 5 years ago, a friend I grew up with left his ex because she had gotten into drugs (crack) and refused any help or to quit. They had a son. My friend had to battle the courts for about a year to get full custody. (Why it took so long to figure out: Drug addict parent= bad, hard working, good father = good, I don't know). It took along time to finally get custody of his son. He had to hire PI's to follow her and to watch her when she had the child to make sure she didn't harm him when she was high. One day, she just up and left the child (2 at the time) at home alone when she went to buy her drugs. The PI called my friend, who called the police. THey all went to the house and with a police escort, my friend went into the house and got his son. A report was made. It took this for the courts to grant full custody to him. He was the first father in our state to receive full custody (keep in mind, this wasn't long ago). Sad huh? But now I see it a lot more often, maybe the courts finally woke up. :rolleyes:

[txinvestigator1]

KAtey,

Your post is interesting, it is a contradiction. I don't mean that in a bad way, just that these contradictions are real in our lives.

On the one hand, you feel the mom should be able to get on with her life.

On the other hand, you would not expose your kids to this, mostly because you don't want to run the risk of loss for your kids again.

I wish more people thought this way. I would also like to add that sexual abuse of girls runs at MUCH higher rates when the adult male in the home is not the childrens father.

See, I believe we forget in society that once we have children, we have a God-given responsibility to those children.. Your prirorities must change. Only the welfare of the children are important.

I know I am in the minority on this, and that saddens me.

I would never divorce my wife unless one of the three A's were present...Abuse, Addiction, Adultry. And divorce would only be a Last resort to protect my daughter, not me.

I would not remarry. It is too confusing and heart wrenching on kids. I don't even think I would date.

But I am off-topic. I think the courts are looking more at what is Best for the kids, not just what is NOT dangerous. I see this in my line of work more and more.

[kateykakes]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by txinvestigator1:
<strong>KAtey,

Your post is interesting, it is a contradiction. I don't mean that in a bad way, just that these contradictions are real in our lives.

On the one hand, you feel the mom should be able to get on with her life.

On the other hand, you would not expose your kids to this, mostly because you don't want to run the risk of loss for your kids again.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Tx,

One day I hope to settle down again, but I have too many other issues at hand I'm dealing with right now, most importantly, my health. I'm sure that whomever I meet and KNOW will be a part of my life, will be introduced into my children's lives as well. I just don't see the point in having my children meet different men that I choose to date if it's not going anywhere.

My parent's divorced when I was young, and both of my parent's eventually remarried. My dad is still married to the same woman, and my step-father died a number of years ago. Neither one of my parents brought different partners/dates/whatever around me or my brothers. I'm glad they didn't. It shows how much we meant to them.

But I do think the custodial parent should go on with their lives and be happy and content. There shouldn't be any reason why they can't date and eventually fall in love and possibly remarry.

<small>[ 10-13-2002, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: kateykakes ]</small>

[jellybean40]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by kateykakes:

But I do think the custodial parent should go on with thier lives and be happy and content. There shouldn't be any reason why they can't date and eventually fall in love and possibly remarry.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">i think your whole post was great, and the idea of not having every *date* meet your kids is a good one. i totally agree that the parents deserve to go on with their lives. to let yourself never fall in love again because you have kids, could be leaving your life unfulfilled... (i'm saying *you* as in ANYone). i would think a parent that's happy, and in love in a good relationship, would be just as great a parent.

i mean, kids could live at home til they're 30! somewhere in there ya gotta have a date! the kids deserve a happy, fulfilled parent.

<small>[ 10-13-2002, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: jellybean40 ]</small>

[MK219]

In my situation things just fell in my favor.
After the EX and I seperated I tried to settle things without a lawyer. She wouldn't cooperate and sign anything so after a year or so I retained a lawyer,( my girlfriend now wife insisted). During this time,and since the seperation I was giving her the 25% required by Mass law in child suport. I always made sure I saw my daughter every other weekend and two nights a week. This went on untill one August she (the EX) lost her job, had her car repoed, and was kicked out of her house. She went to live witha guy she worked with (25-30 years older then her <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> ) I knew the guy because we also formerly worked together. I refused for my daughter to be living in that situation. The EX only choice was to let our daugter live with me and my gf. A year later we went to court for the divorce. I showed up ith my lawyer, an agreement, proof of prior support, and wearing a kick A** suit. She showed up with her boyfriend( not the old man) in in sweats :rolleyes: She was only making $70 aweek and didn;t have a stable home yet. So the judge pulled a no-brainer and awarded me custody :) And she had to pay me $12 a week.
She got to see our daugter one afternoon and one nigt a week plus every other weekend. Once our daughter started Kindergarten I decided to make it every other week friday to friday.
My ex has grown up alot since we separated, she is now remarried and has a son .
I think the fact that I took responiblity from the start. Paid support when it was not ordered, and was always there for my baby, the judge had to make the choice she did. To be honest I was nervous. A female judge! I thought she would of defintely gave her custody.

It all worked out well, she gets along with her stepfather. i trust the guy 100% And she calls my wife mom :)

[kateykakes]

MK,

Glad everything worked out ok. :)

[MK219]

kk I agree with you. I dated alittle before I met my wife. It was difficult to know when the right time to introduce my daughter to her.

[kateykakes]

Since the subject of dating came up in the topic, how was your daughter when you first introduced her to your (now) wife? If that's too personal, I apologize.

[MK219]

she was 14 months old. She can not remember when her mom and i were together, only that my wife and I was always together. She has seen pics of my first wedding, and was the flower girl in my second.

The first time the ex found out about my gf(wife) was when she took my daughter to McD's and was seen by my ex's sister. She regocnized her niece said hi, then ran back to tell her sister. It was a fun day :rolleyes:

[shorty]

I'm glad it worked out for you MK, you sound like a great daddy. Doesn't it melt your heart when your little one looks in your eyes and says "I love you"? Of course, I wouldn't know, that is the ONE thing that mine won't say! LOL

My son is famous for this: when someone asks him who I am, instead of saying "mommy", he says... MINE!

[kateykakes]

One more question on the subject, MK...

Is your daughter close with her natural mother today?

[kateykakes]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Mortal Knight:
<strong> And she had to pay me $12 a week.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Geez, talk about getting off easy.

[Bill R]

But I do think the custodial parent should go on with their lives and be happy and content. There shouldn't be any reason why they can't date and eventually fall in love and possibly remarry.

KK, I agree. I think the proper time to introduce the kids is when you are certain the relationship is something lasting, like when you're engaged. I don't agree that it is OK for a parent to be shacking up in front of their kids though. I certainly would not like to set that example to my kids. I realize the courts and probably most people see things differently though.

[kateykakes]

Bill,

Although I would like to remarry again someday, it's taken a long time to even feel like this again. I swore I would NEVER remarry, but would consider living with someone.

To use the term "shacking-up" is a little harsh, I think. There may be all sorts of reasons why a couple may live together, but don't marry. To use that term sounds ugly. JMO.

[Blonde Heat]

Katey, It does not sound ugly at all and i am in fact going to do just that when i get the nerve to trust again. I am going to be the user and going to find a relationship that requires no commitment and just mutual sex. And lots of it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

[jellybean40]

Hey Blonde, i'm with you! when you find that guy, let me know if he has a brother :D

[kateykakes]

To me, there's a difference between "shacking-up" and living with someone, and apparently a different meaning that how others view the term. But anyway...

[jellybean40]

To me, "shacking up" is the old fashioned term for living together. Times have changed, and it's more acceptable now than it was 50 years ago for two unmarried people to live together and not get married. I understand some may still not agree with it. Like Katey said, there are reasons that some of us have for not wanting to get married.

Hey, women who went to bars used to be called "bar flys" too. But now we're actually allowed to go to clubs and party and not be a slut! :D

[Quiet1]

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by txinvestigator1:
I would not remarry. It is too confusing and heart wrenching on kids. I don't even think I would date.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That is exactly what I did. Been divorced over 13 years, and only dated one person for about a 6 month period. That was it. No other dating, no other men. I felt too much responsibility toward my son to allow myself any freedoms and luxuries (twisted, I know, but that's how I felt).

But I have to tell you, tx, 13 years and no dating...well, let's just say it's REALLY hard to go out and try to find someone after being "out of it" for so long now. My son will be off to college in a less than 2 years, and I'm looking at a lot of loneliness ahead.

So, I'd have to agree with KK. Make sure to remember that along with being a responsible parent, you will also one day be the responsible parent of an adult child(ren) and will have to face it completely on your own if you don't take the time to find another meaningful relationship.

[MK219]

<small>[ 10-18-2002, 09:48 PM: Message edited by: Mortal Knight ]</small>