Message from discussion Responsibility for half...
From: x7...@ll.mit.edu ( Rick LaFave)
Subject: Re: Responsibility for half...
Keywords: shared custody
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 93 14:13:56 GMT
In article <1993Feb24.154050.6...@serval.net.wsu.edu>
j...@crow.csrv.uidaho.edu (Jan Lambert) writes:
>surely it has been my experience (and the experiences of xxfoxx
>close friends of mine) that "s hared custody" is not in the best
>interests of the child.
Did you ask dad what he thought was in the childrens best interest,
or are you willing to take on such difficult decisions without
troubling him. Gosh... You must be a STRONG/SELF ASSURED woman.
> Such "shared" children are treated as
...as if they have two parents that count? Ooops I'm jumping the gun
here, pls continue...
>property, things, prizes in the game of "gotcha" between two
>people who cannot, for one reason or another, tolerate the
>sight of each other in the first place.
You are so right... I guess the only thing to do is let him
have sole custody so the children aren't tormented by that
nasty 'shared' thing anymore.
You did say that shared isn't in the kids best interest didn't you?
And the best interests of the kids should always come first right?
Then since he wont shove off, maybe you should consider
doing so. Unless of course you consider them as <more> your kids than
> "Shared" children I
>have had experience with are subjected to abuses such as
>administration of foods the child is allergic to (causing
>the child to be severely ill while in the custody of the
>other parent), arbitrary changing of bedtimes, denial of
>activities the other parent has given active support to the
>child's participation in, and refusal to return the child
>to the other parent when the time arrives to do so. The child
>is forced to go to the other parent whether he/she wants to or
>not, and proof xxfxx of child abuse by a medical doctor has
>been ignored by the courts on the grounds that the child
>cannot "tell" what is happening to him or her.
allergic foods, accident maybe, poor communication maybe, no, no, wait...
It must be Evil Dad! Yeah thats the ticket!
arbitrary bedtime - Gosh, someone else (maybe even other women (oh
m'gosh)) have different parenting styles than you. And you haven't even
approved it or been consulted about it?! The injustice of it all!
You better write your congresscritter.
different activities - Ya'know its just like those Evil Dads to expose
their kids to different stuff.... Next thing ya'know your daughter
may be fixing the car. Ewwww Ickkk.
>I am strongly against shared custody for the above-stated
>reasons, and have more reasons if anyone cares to ask.
>As for the mother (usually the CP) having to bear half the
>cost of child raising, it has also been my experience (both in
>the case of raising my own son, and the cases of my single-mother
>friends who are raising children) that a greater percentage of
>OUR income goes into raising the child than does the father's.
Well if you work part time, and only get $2.50 an hour, I suppose
any financial contribution you make WOULD be a high percentage, so
what? Oh I suppose we could give you more money so your percentage goes
down, but.... Oh wait... I see.... the need.... for ALIMONY.....
Step right up little lady, spin the wheel... See what he owes you
for sweeping, for doing dishes, for laundry, see what he owes you
for depriving of what you coulda been if only.... if only.... (if only
you'ld married a rocket scientist instead of a shoe salesman (oops brief
side trip to the Bundy abode)). Hey and how can we even put a dollar
amount on the pain and suffering of child-birth? Oh the life, the career
you woulda had if that slob hadn't married you. And hes gonna pay alright,
he owed you big time from the moment he laid eyes on you! Yes... Yes...
Step right up and spin the wheel! A myriad of possibilities just waiting
for a need to be demonstrated!
>However, we have preferred this inequity to having to hassle
>with said fathers' presence in our lives. In an oft-quoted
>truism of the '70's "if you take their money, you have to take
>their shit, too."
BTW just the other day I heard that oft-quoted truism 'women are attracted
by the size of the bulge in your pants... no no no stupid, not in front,
the left rear...' Yuck, yuck, yucyucyuc. Oooh and lets not forget
'Ya know why brides smile when they walk down the isle?' Hardy har harhar.
> We preferred to be left alone in peace to
>raise our children
Ok now lets think... Did she mean 'our' as in mine and the childs father
or 'our' as in benevolent sisterhood? Gee I wonder? Do I see a budding
feminist in our midst?
> rather than try to rectify the financial
>inequity and see our children suffer abuse, and to having to
>take more abuse ourselves.
Ok enough fun.....
Do you think that sole custody is in the best interest of the kids?
Do you think that the childrens best interests come first?
Do you think that dad has any intention of 'getting out of the picture'?
Do you think that maybe you should give him sole custody for, of course,
'the kids best interest'?
Or maybe you...
think it causes him less pain to lose touch with his kids than it
would cause you?
think they are more your kids than his?
think it doesn't hurt the kids to lose contact with a parent?