Posted on 05/14/2010 1:32:12 PM PDT by fathers1
It’s so refreshing to read a piece about shared parenting that’s free of the mis-/dis- information we so often see. That’s the case with this editorial about HB 1400 currently pending before the Massachusetts legislature (Worcester Telegram, 5/13/10). HB 1400 that’s backed by Fathers & Families would establish the presumption of equally shared parenting on divorce. The pertinent part of the bill is here:
In making an order or judgment relative to the custody of a minor child, there shall be a presumption that, absent emergency conditions, or abuse or neglect of said child, the parents shall have shared legal custody and shared physical custody of said child. The judge may enter any order or judgment for sole legal custody for one parent and/or sole physical custody for one parent if written findings are made setting forth the specific facts supporting a determination that the child would be harmed as a result of shared legal or shared physical custody. In making any order or judgment concerning the parenting schedule of each parent with a minor child, the rights of the parents, absent emergency, abuse, or neglect of one of the parents, shall be held to be equal, and the Court shall endeavor to maximize the exposure of the child to each of the parents so far as the same is practicable.
The Telegram’s editorial makes several simple points that bear repeating. First, the vast majority of custody cases are between parents who are entirely qualified to care for their children. It’s true that the ugly, acrimonious cases are the ones that get the headlines, but the overwhelming majority of them aren’t that kind. So by establishing a presumption of equal parenting, the law will accomplish that in most cases. In short, in most divorces with children, fathers and mothers will be able to parent equally and children will not lose one parent.
Will there be cases in which shared parenting is either impossible or isn’t in the best interests of the child? Of course there will be. Those cases will still make the headlines. And, as they do now, judges will be forced to make some tough calls about custody, visitation and what is in the child’s best interests. Because those calls are tough, some of them will be made wrongly and some of those wrong calls will be tragically wrong. Those are sad but true facts.
But they’re no less true now. Irrespective of what the law is on custody, there will always be some parents who will flout it; there will always be parents who are so at odds with the other that they make the children suffer; there will always be parents who will go to any lengths - even illegal ones - to deny access to the other parent; and there will always be parents who abuse children. That’s true now and it will be true if HB 1400 passes. The bill seeks to change the law, not human nature.
HB 1400 would enact into law what we know and what we aspire to. What we know is that children do better with two parents than with one. What we know is that fathers are vital to the wellbeing of children. What we know is that the current system marginalizes non-custodial parents in the lives of children, even to the extent of becoming non-parents. And what we know is that 84% of those non-custodial parents are fathers. HB 1400 seeks to keep children connected to both parents post-divorce.
What we aspire to is gender equality. That means parental equality for dads and workplace equality for moms. Currently, as I said above, 84% of non-custodial parents are fathers. Social science shows that, whether the non-custodial parent is a mother or a father, he/she tends to become a non-factor in the child’s life. That harms the child and it harms the parent. HB 1400 seeks to equalize fathers and mothers in the child’s life after divorce.
By equalizing parenting, the bill would have the collateral benefit of helping women to be equal in the workplace. Currently, women earn less than do men. An enormous amount of data show that one of the major reasons women earn less is that they work less at paid employment. They work less at paid employment because they do more childcare than do men. Even a cursory glance at Bureau of Labor Statistics figures bears this out. When time spent at paid work and at childcare are added together, men’s and women’s times are essentially identical. But men spend more time earning and women spend more time in childcare. The result is that men earn more than women; they also get more promotions and save more for retirement. Equally shared parenting would help to equalize men and women in the workplace.
That’s my only quibble about the Telegram editorial. It’s headlined “Fairness for Fathers.” That’s accurate enough, but it excludes the fact that HB 1400 is fair for children and mothers as well.
By equalizing parenting, the bill would have the collateral benefit of helping women to be equal in the workplace. Currently, women earn less than do men. An enormous amount of data show that one of the major reasons women earn less is that they work less at paid employment. They work less at paid employment because they do more childcare than do men. Even a cursory glance at Bureau of Labor Statistics figures bears this out. When time spent at paid work and at childcare are added together, men’s and women’s times are essentially identical. But men spend more time earning and women spend more time in childcare. The result is that men earn more than women; they also get more promotions and save more for retirement. Equally shared parenting would help to equalize men and women in the workplace.
Yep, gals, this is all about you. Again! It could have been 100%, and the unfairness would not have been evident without the italicized paragraph above.
Just damn...
And who is paying the custodial parent upwards of half their salary just to make things fair in 85% of these cases? Is anyone talking about that? Talk about your divorce settlement disparities...
I had a friend (the father) who had shared custody. Those two boys were stressed out to the max because of not being settled. Half the week was spent with one parent and the other half of the week with the other. Perhaps it would have been more beneficial for the parents to switch out instead of the kids.
Maybe if the parents had to be the ones to move to and fro they would really think long and hard before going through a divorce for petty reasons.
As a child of divorce, the kids are the ones who get the raw end of the deal for their parents decisions.
Exactly!
I don’t know if there is a good way to do any of this, however we are burying a family member this week because of an ugly divorce situation. Looking back I cannot see how the courts used any common sense at all. I don’t have any answers, and I know it’s too much to ask that adults act like adults (not pointing fingers at anyone on this thread, just in looking at the topic in general) but it seems that everyone gets hurt. Maybe it was better back in the day when divorces were very very difficult to get.
If I ran the world the parents would be required to have a place for the child or children. That would THEIR home. Parents who wanted to share in custody would have to come and go from there, not the other way around. I have a 10-year-old granddaughter who has practically never had her own bedroom. Her mom has taken up with another lady in the office and the little girl has to sleep on a couch. She had to get rid of her pet hamsters because the new partner didn't think they room enough for them.
We do out best to keep our opinions about the situation to ourselves. That can very difficult though when she starts telling us about Mom's latest tattoo.
I am quite surprised at how resilient kids can be, but think it would be so much better if they didn't have this to contend with in addition to all the stuff in today's world!
Nice that they are working on custody. I’m not sure of the exact details, but custody lasts forever, which leads many women to shack up instead of getting married. I have heard of cases where the new wife’s salary is needed to pay the old wife’s alimony.
The fallout in ugly divorces isn’t pretty and often far reaching. We are paying for the breakdown of the family when you think about it. Look at how nuts zer0 is with his family issues.
There are times when it’s necessary for safety reasons but most divorces are usually because of irreconcilable differences. It’s one thing if there are no children but if there are, short of abuse and adultery it would probably be better if divorce was much harder to get than it is now.
I really do agree with you.
I agree! I’ve had students who were totally traumatized by having to travel from one parent’s house to the other EVERY NIGHT. These kids were in 1st and 3rd grades and had to carry an extra backpack each day.
The only shared custody I’ve seen work is where the parents shared an apartment that was the kids’ home, and each parent moved in and out as necessary. But that takes a LOT of money.
>>> I had a friend (the father) who had shared custody. Those two boys were stressed out to the max because of not being settled. Half the week was spent with one parent and the other half of the week with the other. <<<
And how much more stressed out would those young boys have been if they rarely got to see one of their parents ?
The damage divorce does to kids is immense.
The damage divorce does to parents is immense.
The damage divorce does to society is immense.
Shared parenting is a horrible custody situation...
But it is still far better than any other possible custody outcome.
Suicide or murder?
The male suicide rate after divorce is 4x the normal suicide rate.
This is in large part because of how horribly they get treated by the court system.
>>> I have watched this play out with our grandchildren and an niece. No matter how carefully it’s done it’s my observation that it has a decidedly adverse affect on the children involved. It’s especially bad when the parents barely tolerate each other. <<<
Yes, divorce has a horrible effect on children.
The custody arrangement that is least harmful to children is a Shared Parenting arrangement.
>>> I have a 10-year-old granddaughter who has practically never had her own bedroom. Her mom has taken up with another lady in the office and the little girl has to sleep on a couch. <<<
That poor girl. My daughter had two homes and two bedrooms.
Based on what you are saying, the mother is a horrible parent.
Shame on her for making her daughter sleep on the couch.
Shame on her for putting her lesbian lover over her daughter.
She should have lost custody.
>>> She had to get rid of her pet hamsters because the new partner didn’t think they room enough for them. <<<
Hamsters don’t take up any room - that was clearly a lie.
Sounds like a very messed up ‘partner’
>>> We do out best to keep our opinions about the situation to ourselves. That can very difficult though when she starts telling us about Mom’s latest tattoo. <<<
Hooo boy, a real winner (NOT) of a mom.
I sure hope the dad is better than this!
Shared parenting is only better if the children get the house. If the parents live close enough to do the shared parenting thing, then they should be the ones forced to move every 3.5 days. Seriously, how stressed and tired would you be if you never got to stay somewhere for more than a half week?
Like I said, I saw the results of those two boys being shuffled back and forth as a friend and as a caregiver for the preschool they attended. Both had behavior issues and it was directly related to their living situation.
In my opinion that is abuse. Unless there is abuse or adultery if the parents can’t afford to move back and forth they shouldn’t be allowed to divorce. I know it won’t ever happen but that is how it should be.
I see no reason why the only people who had nothing to do with the marriage or the divorce should be the ones who suffer either by losing one parent most of the time or by having to move back and forth.
As a child of divorced parents, I really like the way you think!
>>> Seriously, how stressed and tired would you be if you never got to stay somewhere for more than a half week? <<<
You make it sound like they are never going back to the first house.
They have two stable and secure addresses - assuming that they have fit parents.
>>> Like I said, I saw the results of those two boys being shuffled back and forth as a friend and as a caregiver for the preschool they attended. <<<
The stress is from their parents being asses and getting divorced in the first place.
Divorce is a plaque on our society. It is going to result in its complete and total destruction.
>>> Both had behavior issues and it was directly related to their living situation. <<<
No. They had behavior issues related to their parents DIVORCE.
I knew the situation and these boys biggest behavior issues was due to the constant turmoil of being shuffled back and forth due to the divorce. You weren’t there, didn’t know the family or the situation. So please don’t tell me what the problem was.
Children need STABILITY. They need security. Moving back and forth every 3.5 days is not going to provide that. IMO the father should have received full custody.
If the parents live close enough for shared custody, they should be the ones to move back and forth. The kids come before new girlfriends, boyfriends, second marriages and second families.
>>> If the parents live close enough for shared custody, they should be the ones to move back and forth. <<<
The parents can not be the ones that move back and forth. That is not a safe arrangement for the parents. It is also an even more expensive arrangement than shared parenting. Your ‘solution’ requires the family maintain three houses.
The correct solution is to eliminate divorce in the first place. The mom, dad and the kids should be living in the same house.
All other arrangements seriously damage the children - especially when it comes time for them to get married.
>>> The kids come before new girlfriends, boyfriends, second marriages and second families. <<<
While kids come first before new girlfriends and boyfriends, they do not come first before a new marriage.
Stepmoms and stepdads greatly increase the stability of the biological parents.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.