Child Custody Long Term Relationship

  • View author's info posted on Jun 07, 2006 19:40


    I missed out on a lot of my children's lives, (and they, their mother's), due to custody battles, filed against me. I have a couple pieces of advice now... "The one who files FIRST, wins"! and "Flush your money, before you give it to a lawyer who won't play it your way"! Forced to look at the brihgt side... for the most part, my kids remember me as the 'fun' parent.
    Never in my wildest dreams, did I think the picket fence would turn black.

    Available only
    to logged in members

  • 8Comments

  • View author's info posted on Apr 20, 2006 03:00


    GrapesOfGoodHope write:
    cutiepie01 write:
    I feel that the court does not always make the best decisions and once the decision is made, its difficult to get it changed. Even if you can prove the custodial parent is unfit. Its a sad situation that one person has the final word as to who's care the child would be best in.

    sharp1 write:
    Altruisticman write:
    Angyson write:
    If men and women are equal under the law now, why do judges award custody of children to the mothers 90% of the time?

    So are you suggesting that it is better to teach your child to break the law?

    Why would you be less interested in custody of a daughter?

    By the way your stats are wrong, but men who share your sentiment about girls would be the primary reason for a higher rate of Mothers getting custody.

    Courts don't award custody based solely on the gender of the parent. They actually investigate to see which parent has the childs best interest at heart, and is most capable of fostering a nurturing relationship between the child and the other parent.

    His stats are not wrong, you have to remember he doesn't live in the US. It is changing though. It was the mid-80's when the first case in the Prov. of Alberta occurred awarding full custody to the Father. Usually they go to the Mother, unless it can be proven that she is unfit. This can be difficult to prove sometimes. But many parents are opting for 50/50 custody now. This is so much better for the kids.
    It's too bad more people can not work together.



    All good arguements, but I think it is the saddest of all that the 2 people who created the child can't be loving and caring enough to agree between themselves what would be best for their child, instead of abusing it by fighting over it.
    I believe custody court cases arise because one of the parents is so completely egoistic that (s)he starts the battle for the sole purpose of hurting the spouse or to profit financially. Then it is the duty of the other parent to enter into the battle so as to protect the child's interests.
    So often, the parents become the children: fighting over a "toy" and then a 3rd party has to determine an unknown child's future. Very sad indeed for those poor kids, because even after a messy court case the battle between its parents usually continues for the rest of that child's life ...

    I agree with all of you including Angy, thank's to Sharp reminding me that he is speaking with reference to canadian law, of which I have no first hand knowlege.

    To angy, I say that girls need their father as much as, if not more than boys. Father's are supposed to set the standard by which all men in their lives are to be measured. Girls who don't have good relationships with their fathers tend to look for love in the wrong places. On the flip side boys need there Mother's to teach them how to interact with females. Boy who don't have healthy relationships with their Mothers tend to be the wrong places where the afore mentioned girls look for love.

    Sharp it was refreshing to hear a story like yours. Congratulations! I wish that my ex-wife could acknowlege the fact that I'm a good man and a great father.

    Cutie, the only thing that we disagree about is whether or not jury's should decide. I feel that jury's would make the same mistakes as judges, due to the fact that they would have to follow the judges criteria in addition to settling on a unanimous decision. Jury's often dead lock which would lengthen an already lengthy process. Furthermore, the law has started taking more precautions to prevent making inaccurate assessments. For instance they appoint what is called a guardian ad litem- an attory whose fees are paid by both parents equally to represent the childs interest. The Guardian does home visits with the child at both parents home, in addition to visiting the childs school. The Guardian may interview anyone that has contact with the child/children in question. Besides appointing a Guardian Ad Litem
    some states are adopting a shared parenting agreement which is structured with terms that both parents agree upoon, which leaves nothing for the parents to fight about.

    FYI, to all who don't realize that in the US men prodominently won Custody prior to the 1960's.
  • View author's info posted on Apr 16, 2006 05:06


    thomas1546 write:
    I must say, I have been surprised by so much of the anger that seems to appear in the forum--this topic and others on this site. I think people think this internet blogging is real life. That said, I am astounded at Angyson, his views, and the sibliminal suggestion that his picture in front of a bank vault and his body in a speedo might somehow raise his views about children and childrearing to the level of something other than narcisisstic trash.

    The most enlightened comments on this issue came from Bombshelldiva, a substantially younger individual;, but someone with far more maturity and sensitivity to the human condition and it's most vulnerable ones than the other opinions addressing this topic. many of us older (and supposedly wiser) --the kids. much more maturity attitude

    Hi Thomas. Are you saying that all the views here other than bombshell are angry and 'trash'? I disagree. My comments are not coming from anger but rather presenting angy with different view and potentially give him 'food for thought', which is exactly what the forums are for - sharing opinions.

    Angy's pics have nothing to do with anything being discussed here. It is strictly based on the position he states in his topic.

    All that said, what are your thoughts on angy's position on child custody?
  • View author's info posted on Apr 15, 2006 03:43


    Angyson write:
    Look. You don't seem to understand my point of view. There are only so many children to go around. Better that the females are raised by a female. What do I know about raising girls? But I know an awful lot about raising boys. Am I to leave my ex with no children? After all, she gave birth to them.

    I'm really lol, angy. "There's only so many children to go around"? What the heck does that mean?! lol

    Child custody isn't about what the parents want. It's about what's best for the child/ren.

    If you are really involved in Child Custody cases, then surely you notice the feelings of children who are split up. If you don't, then go do a follow up visit to those kids after a few months. Most kids want to be with their sibling(s).

    You certainly ar not alone on not knowing how to raise a child - again, regardless of gender. I would know no more about raising a daughter (if I'd had one) than I knew about raising my son. Yes, there are awkard times between parent/child of opposite sex during the puberty years. For me, one moment that stands out is when my son, then about 11-12, wants to wear his boxers on gym day. Not a good idea for a guy, right? That's what I say, to which he responds, "why"? So there I am, scratching my head trying to figure out how to tell him so he gets it but isn't embarrassed. I decide I have to answer it like a man might. My mouth opens and out comes, "well you just don't want your balls flapping around!" we both cracked up, but he got it and went and put on his whitie tighties. You deal with those moments.

    Otherwise, you're really just trying to raise a good person. The core qualities of a good person are the same regardless of gender.

    Ever heard the saying, "Daddy's little girl, Mommie's boy"? It's more true than you would know. That little girl is going to melt your heart and you will not want to have her with you any less than you will your son.
  • View author's info posted on Apr 13, 2006 10:01


    That's a cop out....I think.
  • View author's info posted on Apr 12, 2006 15:34


    That's a pretty lame and screwed up statement that Angyson has made, "She can keep the daughters". Your child is your child regardless if it is a male or female.....glad you don't have children because its attitudes like that, that has the world all screwed up. I know you want sons as a reflection of you but we would have more women who appreciate themselves and knows their worth if we didn't have attitudes like that. You are supposed to protect your daughters from assholes and school them on men, not deny them.
  • View author's info posted on Apr 08, 2006 22:59


    Well, I live in Colorado where fathers are more favored by judges than any other state. The judge agreed upon a 50/50 split over our 2 year old daughter and newborn son, but at the last minute my ex told the judge he did not want them. The judge informed my ex that he would never get them, based on that one remark. So now I have full custody of my two kiddos. But I think it is a shame that in a state where fathers are more equal to mothers than most states, this one father simply did not want his kids. There are so many dads out there who would be awesome at raising their children as single fathers, but do not get the chance for shared custody because of the way most judges tend to rule. It does not seem fair. I think in most places you would be right, but here in Colorado a lot more fathers are raising their children. While I regret that my ex is not helping to raise our children, it is better that I know the truth from the beginning - that he just does not want them. Funny about that, too. We haev a son that is the only male to carry on the family name, who will inherit evrthing from his grandparents, and he wants no influence on who this child turns out to be. So many fathers only wish for the chance that my ex threw away on a whim. I wish the fathers who deserve to help raise their children were given the same chance that my worthless ex had. I think that whatever is best for the children should be what happens, but it so rarely happens like that. Why would you not want to help raise a daughter if you had one?
  • View author's info posted on Apr 08, 2006 15:28


    Angyson write:
    If men and women are equal under the law now, why do judges award custody of children to the mothers 90% of the time?
    I have no children, but if I had a son and the mother was living on the other side of the country, there is no way he would be living with her, no matter what a judge says. It's not his son. She can keep the daughters.

    I do agree that the mother usually obtains primary physical custody of the children, although this is changing. Granted, not at some rapid pace, but I believe the system does try to do what they - and the divorcing parents - feel is right at the time. I know several men who have primary physical custody of the children. Typically in divorce with children, there is also joint legal custody which includes a clause that the primary custodian cannot leave the state without the other parent's consent, so your scenario of the mother being across the country isn't likely unless you bought into it.

    Are you really serious that you would take your son and she can keep the daughters? It is clear you're not a parent or you would know the gender of your children doesn't matter. They are all yours. You may think you would love your son more than your daughter(s), but you won't. You will love them all.

    Splitting up the kids (as though you're splitting up the furniture) is rarely the right thing to do. It's bad enough they only see one of their parents part-time, you would have siblings not grow up together and know each other?
  • View author's info posted on Apr 06, 2006 01:31


    Angyson write:
    If men and women are equal under the law now, why do judges award custody of children to the mothers 90% of the time?
    I have no children, but if I had a son and the mother was living on the other side of the country, there is no way he would be living with her, no matter what a judge says. It's not his son. She can keep the daughters.

    So are you suggesting that it is better to teach your child to break the law?

    Why would you be less interested in custody of a daughter?

    By the way your stats are wrong, but men who share your sentiment about girls would be the primary reason for a higher rate of Mothers getting custody.

    Courts don't award custody based solely on the gender of the parent. They actually investigate to see which parent has the childs best interest at heart, and is most capable of fostering a nurturing relationship between the child and the other parent.
Follow - Email me when people comment