View Single Post
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01-09-2017, 04:30 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
LovingFather32 LovingFather32 is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point

Originally Posted by PeacefulMoments View Post
Hi LF:

Not sure what I said in the above quote that goes against 50/50 presumed?

In case I wasn't clear, I am for it unless there is strong evidence against it or if one parent actually doesn't want it or is unable to have it for a legitimate reason.

If it seemed I wasn't supporting presumed 50/50 as a starting point, I apologize for not being more clear in my writing.

Guess it is not directly above anymore lol. See your post where you quoted me.
I totally understood your post Peaceful...and agree with it. I was just elaborating.

I also agree that sometimes there is actual abuse that doesn't always have evidence to back it up .. which makes things more complex.

When that's the case, I believe that judges should look at "PATTERNS". Patterns should be studied and investigated thoroughly.

Lately there have been parents stopping by saying "I don't want to give the OP 50/50 because he's a jerk to me..or he has a g/f my kid called mom once...or he's in it for money". They have the audacity to come on these forums, proclaim they're the better parent and that they will not "allow" an equal relationship to the other parent.

If a judge sees a clean police record, no CAS involvement, clean drug tests, and no documented evidence of abuse/power or control whatsoever, no significant disruptions in the child's routine ....... why are these parents still blocking an equal relationship? Why not give it a chance in the very least? These parents are doing their homework and stepping up to the plate. The kids are lucky to have parents who fight so hard. They deserve to have parents like that in their life.

The recent poster "Angie" really boggled my mind. Her ex had 35% access for 5-8 years or something. Dad's in court, spending money and fighting for an equal relationship and mom's saying no. Over a measley 15% increase in time.

Her reasoning is that the kids are being harmed and dad doesn't really want them.

So they won't be harmed at 35% access..but they will at 40%-50%? Does that make sense to anyone else? Anyhow .. that's just an example.

And she says dad's motivated by money ...but he's throwing thousands of dollars in court just to have an equal relationship? If he was that money motivated he wouldn't be putting his lawyers and judges kids through college....he would keep it.

I see this nonsense all the time on these forums and it's gut wrenching. So I took McDreamy's advice and started my own thread in the political forum so she couldn't shut it down.

Last edited by LovingFather32; 01-09-2017 at 04:36 PM.
Reply With Quote