Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why do children need both parents?
#1
Anyone been asked why its in their childs best interest to have 50/50 shared care? two homes? what is your answer?
Reply
#2
Not been asked, but if I were I would say that children have the right to as much loving support as they can get from both parents, so both parents should be allowed to give as much time as they reasonably can. If that means 50-50 then fair enough, so long as it works for the children themselves.
Reply
#3
I would answer back why is it in child's best interest to have more time with mum or more time with dad?

It is not a matter of 50/50 in the mathematical sense. It is a matter of if practical, why not? Why any other arrangement?

Rather than spelling out 50/50 in the court I would argue on a schedule of care that I would think that works best.

e.g. week on/week off might work because there is less switch overs.

Mon/Tuesday with one parent, Thursday/wed with the other, and alternate weekends is good because you the child is with same parent weekdays so best for planning activities.

Why would any other arrangement work better? It is about putting forward options and balancing pros and cons.
Reply
#4
Had this discussion recently with Solicitor. 1) To help prevent alienation getting a grip 2) To minimise changeovers 3) To let child know both parents are equally involved and important in their lives 3) To allow sufficent time with both parents to help close relationships, without long gaps between seeing a parent. On my court application it was - to help child's Mother accept child had two parents.
Reply
#5
I made a big speech about the fact that what builds up a sense of security and being loved for the child isn't fun visits, it's both parents putting in hard work day in day out to make the child feel valued.  You can only do that if you have them staying with you half the time. It went down very well with the justices (who agreed with me).
Reply
#6
I just struggle to articulate it sometimes. For me its the "responsibility" part of PR, I cant abdicate my responsibility because the ex is being awkward. Problem is that answer is not very "child centered".
Thanks for the answers guys.
Reply
#7
It is hard to articulate. Marwood's post is good for that! I agree - how can you exercise responsibility and care for them if you don't see them enough or able to care for them enough and are blocked from it.

I think in the legal sense they see a difference between Parental Responsibility and "Care". You can have PR and only be allowed to be involved in legal and medical decisions. But if you have "shared care" you are fully involved in everything. So maybe focus on the "Shared care" aspect.
Reply
#8
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20...094228.htm

http://time.com/3836627/divorced-parents-joint-custody/
"Being a good father, for its own sake, does not require your ex to see it or agree"
Reply
#9
Great stuff LTD - saved it.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)