ssmom79
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/27/07
Posts: 7806
|
|
1. Whatever the parents decide. Typical would depend on the state, the situation, etc.
2. The can start immediately, unless there is some kind of a problem.
3. We gradually moved into 50/50, and my kids could not be happier with the arrangement. Totally depends on the kid. Some adapt well to change, some do not. You'd have to try it and see to know in your situation. My SD was 3 when her parents divorced and she did have trouble adjusting.
3. Why shouldn't he be OK doing that? I traveled all the time from a tiny infant to well...to now. Would it be OK if you did that with your kid? Maybe you think it's never a good idea to travel with a small child. Many people do travel and it's not a big issue. Again, it depends on the child since all kids aren't cookie-cutter.
5. I think in general courts are interested in getting you out of there as soon as possible so they can go on to the next case.
Consistency is key at any age. Whether it's consistently going to dad's every other weekend or consistently staying with dad for a week at a time. You can definitely have consistency while having a 50/50 relationship.
We started every other weekend, grew to an overnight a week, then two overnights a week, then a week at a time.
|
c_jane
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 04/06/07
Posts: 1759
Loc: In the Great State of Texas
|
|
OR, as the MAJORITY of men do that get 50/50 or PRIMARY, he will move a woman in ASAP so the WOMAN can take care of the child and he doesn't have to.
--------------------
John Constantine: God's a kid with an ant farm.... He's not planning anything.
|
annieo
veteran
Reged: 07/07/10
Posts: 1413
Loc: Pacific Northwest
|
|
You can travel with young children - my parents traveled back and forth to Europe starting when I was 3 months old and I took my son to Hawaii when he was 2 years old with little issue - he got tired when the plane was delayed (I can't remember why) but we had to wait two additional hours at the airport and even though I had a stroller he could sleep in he go tired and there were so many people around I couldn't let him stretch his legs much but other than that he did fine. I also traveled 8 hours one way twice a year to see my parents starting at 2 months with my son - I drove and when he was an infant he slept a lot of the way and as he got older we stopped more at a park, rest stop, or a fast food play-land - I made sure I knew where they were in all the towns we passed. Most of the time my husband could not come (work) so son and I would go.
Why someone would not travel with a young child (imo) makes no sense.
If my hubby and I were to divorce I would want 50/50 for my child even though I am the primary care giver in our home - my husband supports up and I take care of the home so he is unable to be here and involved in every task with our child but I know if he had to he would be able to make sure our son is fed, clean, taken to sports practices, etc... He would have to learn to manage his time better and pay attention to more things but he would be able to fulfill the basic needs of our son. Would he do things the way I do - probably not but he would find his way given half a chance. It is amazing what a person can do when they have to and no one else is doing it. Taking care of a child is not rocket science ;)
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30372
|
|
Yeah, you're not bitter...LOL.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30372
|
|
That is just it, this is not a case of an uninvolved parent, this is a case of a guy who has been traveling to SEE the child regularly (almost every day if I recall).
What I am disagreeing with is that a CHILD, in a situation where BOTH parents are interested and able to do 50/50, WILL adjust to the situation. YOUR child would be able to adjust if she had two parents that WANTED 50/50 and were willing to work to make it happen. She does not have a father that is willing to do that, so she hasn't. But if she DID< she could adjust to it.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30372
|
|
Personally, I HATE the term, "primary caregiver". It denotes the person who APPLIES the resources as somehow above the person who EARNS the resources, and that isn't fair.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20191
|
|
"Personally, I HATE the term, "primary caregiver". It denotes the person who APPLIES the resources as somehow above the person who EARNS the resources, and that isn't fair."
In my home, I am primary caregiver and primary wage earner, does that make me somehow above myself... the phrase primary caregiver only denotes the person who provides the majority of care, it has nothing to do with earned resources or their application.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30372
|
|
"the phrase primary caregiver only denotes the person who provides the majority of care, it has nothing to do with earned resources or their application."
It is usually used to denote a stay at home parent, and they are NO more important to the child that the person who works and earns the resources that ALLOW one parent to stay at home.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20191
|
|
"It is usually used to denote a stay at home parent, and they are NO more important to the child that the person who works and earns the resources that ALLOW one parent to stay at home. "
Must be ESL, cause that phrase doesn't denote anything to me other than the person who provides the majority of care. When I was married to ex, we both worked full time, I was still the primary caregiver.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30372
|
|
"Must be ESL"
Nope, just your typical little semantics game.
"cause that phrase doesn't denote anything to me other than the person who provides the majority of care"
In MOST custody cases, it denotes the LESSOR wage earner, and is used as an EXCUSE to give them full custody.
"When I was married to ex, we both worked full time, I was still the primary caregiver."
{golf clap}. Now, are you capable of realizing that like MOST of us regulars on this site, our cases are in the MINORITY?
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
