Many men fear being taken to the cleaners in divorce. Some so much so,

[tinktronik]

I don't have man hate and didn't paint any good fathers with any brush. I've been in a long marriage with a lovely man, why would I. It's the other way around, and I am sick of the woman hate here. Don't twist my message into whatever you feel like arguing against. I was raised by a divorced mother in a place full of many many other divorced mothers who all lived in poverty and rarely saw a father. I don't care what you've seen, that's not all of it or most of it. It would be different if it was discussed on a case by case basis but if you read through this thread it's all about how fathers get screwed and the single mothers break up the family for no reason except they feel like it and live in luxury, presented like it's the usual thing. It's retarded.

 

It is very common though. There are tons and tons and tons and tons of fathers that pay their CS every month and see their kids 26 days a year while getting hassled. I don't have hard figures at the moment but I would imagine there are far more fathers making their CS payments than not. This does not so much change with payscale of parents, a poor mom and dad still interchange money through CS, it's just at different levels. Why do you feel it is necessary to protect the single moms your referring to from fathers simply wanting to see their kids and have some tiny quality of life? And what does equitable amount of time spent between both parents have to do with whether mom is low income or high?

[SummersEve]

It is very common though. There are tons and tons and tons and tons of fathers that pay their CS every month and see their kids 26 days a year while getting hassled. I don't have hard figures at the moment but I would imagine there are far more fathers making their CS payments than not. This does not so much change with payscale of parents, a poor mom and dad still interchange money through CS, it's just at different levels. Why do you feel it is necessary to protect the single moms your referring to from fathers simply wanting to see their kids and have some tiny quality of life? And what does equitable amount of time spent between both parents have to do with whether mom is low income or high?

 

As I said, that is NOT what I said. Why do people so often take whatever you say and turn it into to some dumbed down extreme position that nobody in their right mind would take?

[tinktronik]

I have lived it, from the CHILD'S point of view. You live that before you start spewing your bs. You are the one who hasn't got a clue. It's not all about you and what you want.

 

You sound like as a child your mother made sure to let you know your dad was a deadbeat and that it was HIS fault you lived however you lived.

 

I'll tll you I grew up in a single parent home and I sure would have rather been able to see my Dad and his family and know him that to have gotten a paycheck every month.

[Ballerfamily]

I have lived it, from the CHILD'S point of view. You live that before you start spewing your bs. You are the one who hasn't got a clue. It's not all about you and what you want.

 

 

I didnt read the last part of your message, so I erased it.

 

I'm really sorry you and your mother went through this. Your dad was a douche. I'm NOT.

 

I and many others are talking about, broken, messed up, cheating, narcissitc , I'm not in love with you anymore, type women. The kind that use the courts and their kids as pawns, and the courts don't give a rip. I love my kids, so don't put that on me. I lived my life for my kids and Ex, and ended up with nothing. Not even a pot to piss in. I have to live every day in fear of what she might do next. I guarantee my boys will both live with me as soon as as they can.

[tinktronik]

As I said, that is NOT what I said. Why do people so often take whatever you say and turn it into to some dumbed down extreme position that nobody in their right mind would take?

 

Because this IS what the thread is about. If you're here going on about some other type of issue just to be defensive, what's the point? I have to refer to your posts as having some connectivity to the topic.

[SummersEve]

You sound like as a child your mother made sure to let you know your dad was a deadbeat and that it was HIS fault you lived however you lived.

 

I'll tll you I grew up in a single parent home and I sure would have rather been able to see my Dad and his family and know him that to have gotten a paycheck every month.

 

Not at all. I said fathers are extremely important. Again, you are turning my posts into something from your own mind. I do not even recognize this.

[Memphis Raines]

That's my point here, what's best for child and parent don't often match up and when people talk like they do they are missing something important, imo.

 

ok, so lets pose this scenario, which happens more times than not, and see what you think is best for the child.

 

Mother cheats

Father stays home with the kids on the weekends when mommy does this

Mother decides she'd rather be free so she can have sex with whoever she wants without sneaking around

Mother files for divorce

 

what is "best" for the children in a scenario like this? To be in a home with a stable parent that knows the meaning of family and responsibility? Or to take away the stable parent, making them an occasional parent, and giving custody to someone selfish and unscrupulous?

[SummersEve]

ok, so lets pose this scenario, which happens more times than not, and see what you think is best for the child.

 

Mother cheats

Father stays home with the kids on the weekends when mommy does this

Mother decides she'd rather be free so she can have sex with whoever she wants without sneaking around

Mother files for divorce

 

what is "best" for the children in a scenario like this? To be in a home with a stable parent that knows the meaning of family and responsibility? Or to take away the stable parent, making them an occasional parent, and giving custody to someone selfish and unscrupulous?

 

The problem is, with statements like that, this is a woman-bashing thread. It's not based on any reality at all, just misogyny. Change it to race and see how sickening it is. It's a shame some can't see it as it is. I am not going to respond to your post about how "most divorces are caused because women cheat." Yuck.

[Ballerfamily]

The problem is, with statements like that, this is a woman-bashing thread. It's not based on any reality at all, just misogyny. Change it to race and see how sickening it is. It's a shame some can't see it as it is. I am not going to respond to your post about how "most divorces are caused because women cheat." Yuck.

 

Each and every man on this thread have been used by EX and have been cheated on, me numerous times.

 

You need to go to a thread that will support your position from a child who didn't know all the details, or at least shouldn't have. This is about certain types of spouses. OMG

[tinktronik]

I didnt read the last part of your message, so I erased it.

 

I'm really sorry you and your mother went through this. Your dad was a douche. I'm NOT.

 

I and many others are talking about, broken, messed up, cheating, narcissitc , I'm not in love with you anymore, type women. The kind that use the courts and their kids as pawns, and the courts don't give a rip. I love my kids, so don't put that on me. I lived my life for my kids and Ex, and ended up with nothing. Not even a pot to piss in. I have to live every day in fear of what she might do next. I guarantee my boys will both live with me as soon as as they can.

 

Thank you. This is my point. Summers Eve you are going on about how the thread is attacking to women. I am a woman and don't find it so. You claim to be doing this from a point that you feel it's not what always happens, so the thread is invalid. My point is that it does happen, and a lot.

 

I understand that you think fathers are important, but I do not see how that equates that it is acceptable for fathers to see their children at a minimum amount of time and that knowing their fathers minimally is okay as long as they have the same house, friends, school ect is in place... You can't have a situation with both parents involved maximally and the kind of continuum you are touting. Maybe you've never been divorced and don't realize that?

[SummersEve]

 

I understand that you think fathers are important, but I do not see how that equates that it is acceptable for fathers to see their children at a minimum amount of time and that knowing their fathers minimally is okay as long as they have the same house, friends, school ect is in place... You can't have a situation with both parents involved maximally and the kind of continuum you are touting. Maybe you've never been divorced and don't realize that?

 

When it is presented as what USUALLY happens, that is not accurate, it doesn't matter what the thread is about it still should state the truth.

 

I am saying, quite simply, that the child's needs should come first, not either parents. Whatever that takes. I am not "touting" that it is acceptable for fathers to be only included minimally. Nowhere did I say that, nor would I. Again, you are not responding the the words that I actually posted.

[tinktronik]

When it is presented as what USUALLY happens, that is not accurate, it doesn't matter what the thread is about it still should state the truth.

 

I am saying, quite simply, that the child's needs should come first, not either parents. Whatever that takes.

 

Well, different states and different people have radically opposed views as to what this is. IMO it's interaction with both parents; enough interaction to have a strong connection to both parents spending an equitable amount of time with both.

 

Are you saying or are you not saying that you think a single home and the trappings that go with it is the more important? That seemed to be what you were saying earlier in this thread.

 

I equate the view that the house and car and friends and soccer is more important than an equitable amount of time spent with dad to be the same as saying that the stuff is more important than a dad. That's MY equation.

 

Do you have a clear view on what you believe is best for kids other than stating let's work in the child's interest not what dad wants?

[Memphis Raines]

The problem is, with statements like that, this is a woman-bashing thread. It's not based on any reality at all, just misogyny. Change it to race and see how sickening it is. It's a shame some can't see it as it is. I am not going to respond to your post about how "most divorces are caused because women cheat." Yuck.

 

race, gender whatever. switch the roles around if you like where its the man thats cheating, I don't care.

 

The principle is the same. What is best for the child? to be with the stable parent that knows what responsibility is, or be given to the custody of a selfish, unscrupulous, and irresponsible parent?

 

you aren't going to respond to my question because you know that the best thing for the child is to be with the mother, I suspect.

 

and if that is the case, if the mother is the selfish, unscrupulous, and irresponsible one, is it in the best interest of the child to be with the mother, or the father. Why or why not?

[Memphis Raines]

Thank you. This is my point. Summers Eve you are going on about how the thread is attacking to women. I am a woman and don't find it so.

 

exactly. we are talking about a specific kind of woman, not all women. just like alot of men are cheating dogs, not all of them.

 

I think the topic hits a nerve for a reason, just like it hits a nerve with me who has to be a weekend dad because of the kind of woman we are discussing here, not all women.

[tinktronik]

When it is presented as what USUALLY happens, that is not accurate, it doesn't matter what the thread is about it still should state the truth.

 

I am saying, quite simply, that the child's needs should come first, not either parents. Whatever that takes. I am not "touting" that it is acceptable for fathers to be only included minimally. Nowhere did I say that, nor would I. Again, you are not responding the the words that I actually posted.

 

I did not say "touting fathers minimally involved". I said "touting a continuum." As in continuum of care.

[Memphis Raines]

When it is presented as what USUALLY happens, that is not accurate.

 

when it comes to the mother being awarded custody, that IS USUALLY what happens.

 

I posed a scenario that if the woman wasn't responsible or thinking about her child, why should the father become the weekend dad?

[Ballerfamily]

When it is presented as what USUALLY happens, that is not accurate, it doesn't matter what the thread is about it still should state the truth.

 

I am saying, quite simply, that the child's needs should come first, not either parents. Whatever that takes. I am not "touting" that it is acceptable for fathers to be only included minimally. Nowhere did I say that, nor would I. Again, you are not responding the the words that I actually posted.

 

 

Sigh......the whole point is yes, that would be great, and exactly what most good dad's would want. The system is F---------ed up.

 

Get it.......... It doesn't matter whats best for the kids. The court system is geared for the douche bag spouses who don't give a rip about the kids. They should do on case by case. THEY DO NOT. THEY DON'T CARE. ITS A BUSINESS. The deadbeat dad thing is so overused, its ridicilious. Eventually, alot throw up their hands and give up. Any woman with a good lawyer and some money can totally abuse the system. Men just give up. Since I pay my CS, they can garnish right from my paycheck. Good, I'm glad. I owe it. The ones that owe thousands, they dont even try to find. BECAUSE THEY DON'T CARE, AND ITS TO MUCH WORK. I get threatened with contempt with one missed payment, no matter the circumstances. Because I have a B-------- ex who is trying to make me pay for exposing her and her cheating ways. I can't believe I even waste my time responding.

 

and on top of it all, I may get my kid 26 times, if she feels like it and it doesn't interfere with her plans. THATS WHAT IS BEST FOR KIDS. Lord help us all

Edited March 31, 2011 by Ballerfamily

[tinktronik]

when it comes to the mother being awarded custody, that IS USUALLY what happens.

 

I posed a scenario that if the woman wasn't responsible or thinking about her child, why should the father become the weekend dad?

 

I think the thread is actually about what can really get screwed up in a divorce, and the reasons not to do it.

 

This is the biggest, child custody issues. It's set from a man's perspective because these are issues faced most typically by men.

[SummersEve]

race, gender whatever. switch the roles around if you like where its the man thats cheating, I don't care.

 

The principle is the same. What is best for the child? to be with the stable parent that knows what responsibility is, or be given to the custody of a selfish, unscrupulous, and irresponsible parent?

 

you aren't going to respond to my question because you know that the best thing for the child is to be with the mother, I suspect.

 

and if that is the case, if the mother is the selfish, unscrupulous, and irresponsible one, is it in the best interest of the child to be with the mother, or the father. Why or why not?[/QUOTe

_____________________________________________

 

See, this is just it... Why would I say every child should be with the mother? Seriously, would anybody say that? Can you please stop trying to pigeonhole me as your big enemy when you are the one who made an offensive statement in your last post? There is a huge difference between not wanting to hear your woman hating and my being a man hater. Sigh. If I have to answer a question with such an obvious answer, I think the child should go to the better parent. But that might not be who that parent thinks is the best parent.

 

What I have found with divorce, is outside of some truly very unfair deals- BOTH ways- usually both parties in the couple screwed it up and they both get screwed in the divorce. Here's a question for you- why do you so rarely hear anyone say what THEY did wrong? That would be so refreshing.

 

I really, truly, do feel terrible for anyone who gets badly screwed over in life, in divorce or otherwise. BUT, I also feel that number of victims is considerably smaller than the number who would report themselves as that. 100% of all divorced people cannot be the victim.

 

And, in all cases, when it comes between EITHER parent getting a fair shake and the child getting the best, child wins. Please do not twist this to say I think parents don't matter. Also, no, I do not think a thread should exist for the purpose of making untrue claims that it's all one way OR the other about who in general has it worse. All threads should strive to be accurate or else why bother. Ranting has its place I suppose but better to go for deeper understanding or something like that.

[Memphis Raines]

and on top of it all, I may get my kid 26 times, if she feels like it and it doesn't interfere with her plans. THATS WHAT IS BEST FOR KIDS. Lord help us all

 

well this is where any misstep by her can cost her custody. if a mother interferes with your court decree or custody agreement, she could lose custody.

 

I had to go to court because my x-wife tried to tell me one weekend that the kids are not coming to see me because she has plans to do something with them.

 

so in 2 weeks I had her in court. judge admonished her and said if it happens again she will not like the consequences.

 

although the judge didn't detail the consequences, my lawyer said, "if she does it again, the kids are yours. that is what what he meant"

 

in her admonishment the judge cited the classes both her and I had to take as part of a "chldren first" program and let her know she didn't learn anything from them apparently.

 

This is the ONLY time it even appears that a father is given some rights. Although this same judge wouldn't award custody to me, and away from a mother that cheated, left me at home with them on the weekends, and even moved in an "X" felon into the house with my kids(because he is reformed and as long as he isn't harming the kids, its A-ok:rolleyes:)

 

funny how living with a felon is not grounds for giving the father custody, but a couple weekends of denied visitation could be:confused:

[tinktronik]

well this is where any misstep by her can cost her custody. if a mother interferes with your court decree or custody agreement, she could lose custody.

 

I had to go to court because my x-wife tried to tell me one weekend that the kids are not coming to see me because she has plans to do something with them.

 

so in 2 weeks I had her in court. judge admonished her and said if it happens again she will not like the consequences.

 

although the judge didn't detail the consequences, my lawyer said, "if she does it again, the kids are yours. that is what what he meant"

 

in her admonishment the judge cited the classes both her and I had to take as part of a "chldren first" program and let her know she didn't learn anything from them apparently.

 

This is the ONLY time it even appears that a father is given some rights. Although this same judge wouldn't award custody to me, and away from a mother that cheated, left me at home with them on the weekends, and even moved in an "X" felon into the house with my kids(because he is reformed and as long as he isn't harming the kids, its A-ok:rolleyes:)

 

funny how living with a felon is not grounds for giving the father custody, but a couple weekends of denied visitation could be:confused:

 

Your courts are sounding a lot better than mine. I get "well it's hard to be a custodial parent " shmutz when my ex screws with my visitation. He's even left them with his mother while he's away for months on end instead of turning them over to me, their legal parent. I just get well, they are in a safe place. :confused: Jesus, he can give our kids away to people with no legal standing to have them and as long as they are "safe" that's okay? Got to be kidding me? Right? Right? No, apparently not. The court system is so different even from one county to another in the way they run things that it's just bizarre. What average Joe or Jill could possibly navigate the system as it is?

[Ballerfamily]

What is person called that has no emphany for a hurting man/woman, who just went through the hell of divorce??? and all they can do is belittle and twist and hurl insults at a poor guy who asked a question??? I am so tired I could scream of people like this

 

PS and she talks of her wonderful MM and marriage. Why you on here???? Sounds like you have the answers, education, and great life. Your a survivor, Some day we will join you ..,Till then, leave us alone, OK:)

[SummersEve]

What is person called that has no emphany for a hurting man/woman, who just went through the hell of divorce??? and all they can do is belittle and twist and hurl insults at a poor guy who asked a question??? I am so tired I could scream of people like this

 

PS and she talks of her wonderful MM and marriage. Why you on here???? Sounds like you have the answers, education, and great life. Your a survivor, Some day we will join you ..,Till then, leave us alone, OK:)

 

Me? Did I not just say I feel terrible for anybody who... Belittle? Twist? Hurl insults? Etc.? Answers, education? MM?

 

WTF are you talking about?

[Memphis Raines]

See, this is just it... Why would I say every child should be with the mother? Seriously, would anybody say that? Can you please stop trying to pigeonhole me as your big enemy when you are the one who made an offensive statement in your last post?

 

it was a scenario. and yes, mothers ARE USUALLY the ones that get custody, and most of the time their lifestyle isn't taken into account.

 

I believe that most mothers that get custody are good mothers and aren't of the unscrupulous types to which we are referring.

 

but even when they are unscrupulous, the father AND the child gets the shaft.

 

 

There is a huge difference between not wanting to hear your woman hating and my being a man hater.

 

I'm sorry, where is there an indication that I'm a woman hater. Please highlight.

 

 

Sigh. If I have to answer a question with such an obvious answer, I think the child should go to the better parent.

 

Ok, there you go. That wasn't so hard now was it.

 

My point after you answered this is that the courts don't care who is the better parent. They don't care if the parent, whether male or female, has an unscrupulous lifestyle that can be detrimental to the kid. But sorry, it just so happens that the mother is who end up with custody more times than not. And for the most part, that would be ok. But there are SOME situations where the child doesn't need to be around a mother of the type we are discussing. the courts don't care

 

 

What I have found with divorce, is outside of some truly very unfair deals- BOTH ways- usually both parties in the couple screwed it up and they both get screwed in the divorce.

 

only way they both get screwed in the divorce is if the children are taken away from both of them.

 

 

Here's a question for you- why do you so rarely hear anyone say what THEY did wrong? That would be so refreshing.

 

sigh, if you want to switch the argument, fine:rolleyes:

 

are you wanting me so say that, for example, being complacent in a marriage is equal in caliber to someone that doesn't know the meaning of family responsibility or goes out and cheats?

 

ok. lets say, without assigning gender here, that parent 1 became complacent in the marriage, therefore parent 2 uses that as an excuse to go out and get sex outside the marriage.

 

but parent 2 decides they don't want to be married, not wanting to work on the marriage for the sake of the family, so they can go out and live the single life. and parent 2 just happens to get custody. why does the parent that may have had a role in the state of the marriage get to become the weekend parent over the one that wants to go out a F everything that moves?

 

 

I really, truly, do feel terrible for anyone who gets badly screwed over in life, in divorce or otherwise. BUT, I also feel that number of victims is considerably smaller than the number who would report themselves as that. 100% of all divorced people cannot be the victim.

 

ok, lets throw infidelity out. Let say that 2 people grew apart. The fault lies with both.

 

Parent 1 wants to work on the marriage, wants to keep their spouse because they love them, and is thinking of the kids and keeping them in an intact home. Parent 2 doesn't want to. They just don't want to be married any longer for whatever reason and don't want to try to fix things. Which parent is the better parent for the kids, parent 1 that thinks the family deserved the effort, or parent 2 that just wants to be free?

Edited March 31, 2011 by Memphis Raines

[Ballerfamily]

Me? Did I not just say I feel terrible for anybody who... Belittle? Twist? Hurl insults? Etc.? Answers, education? MM?

 

WTF are you talking about?

 

Wow. You win. Can I pay you alimony also?? I would advise some IC to deal with the whatever issue you have. OK I'm gone. Bye