Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Maximum Contact Principle: An Important Consideration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    So assuming your statement is a fair statement, and I am not saying it is but for argument sake, then I would say we could also state that the majority of deadbeat parents are Male. And also the majority of parents who get to walk away and. start their lives socially,sans kids, are male.

    With all statistics and scenrios there is only one for sure thing. Kids are caught in the middle!

    I listen to Dr Laura while driving in the car. Hey it beats the sports! She is of the opinion that should your relationship fail and there are kids involved you should

    A. Move back home with Mom and Dad so the kids have a solid homelife.
    B. Refrain from another relationship until your children have reached the age of at least 18.

    So then there would not be all these issues. Just plain misery for all and everyone would be in the same position.

    Comment


    • #32
      These numbers are almost 20 years old

      CHILD CUSTODY - Selected Statistics on Canadian Families and Family Law: Second Edition

      Sharing Custody - When Parents Separate: Further Findings from the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (2004-FCY-6E)

      http://canadianepc.org/wp-content/up...-L-Nielsen.pdf



      Court Ordered Custody
      Mother Exclusive Custody 79.3%
      Father Exclusive Custody 6.65%
      Shared Physical Custody 12.8%
      Other Total 1.2%


      Living Arrangement %
      Child lives with mother only 86.8
      Child lives with father only 7.0
      Shared, mainly mother 2.9
      Shared, mainly father 0.9
      Equally shared 2.5
      Total 100.0

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by wantmyfreedom View Post
        Now you have an internet bill.
        Ah, but I already had an internet bill to begin with.

        Allow me to explain, in a less snippy manner, why I object to your 'courts are fair" comment.

        It's not even about whether they are fair or not. It's about the fact that there shouldn't be such a reliance on courts in the first place.

        Imagine going to a store and buying a pound of bacon. Upon arriving at home, you discover that the package only contained a half pound of bacon. You pursue the matter with the store, and they decline to correct the matter. After a year in court, the judge finally orders that the store give you the other half pound of bacon that you paid for. A legal expert would say that this is an excellent example of how the system has worked, and that the courts fairly righted a wrong. You would say that it was ridiculous that you had to go to court to get something that you did indeed pay for and had a right too. Most people would agree with this scenario. Then why, oh why, do people have such an issue with the concept of custody being defaulted in a similar fashion? (with the exception of those who don't want it, those who are unfit, etc. etc.)

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Beachnana View Post
          So assuming your statement is a fair statement, and I am not saying it is but for argument sake, then I would say we could also state that the majority of deadbeat parents are Male. And also the majority of parents who get to walk away and. start their lives socially,sans kids, are male.


          I agree with with all of these statements, and I think that it is equally deplorable when men ditch their fundamental responsibilities.

          Keep in mind that I'm a 50/50 dad that pays about $900 in offset child support, and sends his share of section 7 stuff to the ex on the same day that it is spent, by request.

          So, I'm puffed up with righteous fury from both sides of the fence.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
            I agree with with all of these statements, and I think that it is equally deplorable when men ditch their fundamental responsibilities.

            Keep in mind that I'm a 50/50 dad that pays about $900 in offset child support, and sends his share of section 7 stuff to the ex on the same day that it is spent, by request.

            So, I'm puffed up with righteous fury from both sides of the fence.
            Awesome Dad! Lucky child/ren.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Beachnana View Post
              Awesome Dad! Lucky child/ren.
              Thanks Beach! I try. I really do. Boy 5, Girl 8. Divorced two years. Started at 50/50 and never looked back, and to my ex's credit, neither did she.

              Comment


              • #37
                [QUOTE=Straittohell;186426]Ah, but I already had an internet bill to begin with.

                Allow me to explain, in a less snippy manner, why I object to your 'courts are fair" comment.

                It's not even about whether they are fair or not. It's about the fact that there shouldn't be such a reliance on courts in the first place.

                Hey it's all good if you object. We agree to disagree. I stand behind my opinion that the courts are fair.

                I'm in total agreement with you regarding the reliance on the court system. In a perfect world marriages wouldn't fall apart, children wouldn't be used as pawns, and ranbows n unicorns.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Straittohell View Post
                  HammerDad and Mother touched on this in other threads, by stating that 50/50 needs to be enshrined as a proper default. I would argue that is entirely correct, and also needs to be mandatory police enforceable.

                  Feel free to launch into the 'what if the other parent is abusive/negligent' argument, because I know you will, and I'll simply respond that those should be the exceptions to the rule. Right now, the practical default is that if the mom wants to take sole access, she can, and the dad then has to fight to get it back. That's reality.
                  Well - your mileage may vary. My bf's ex wanted sole custody (on teh grounds that she had been the stay-at-home mom); he wanted 50/50; he got 50/50. In two separate court actions. His ex is gearing up for a third court fight and it's going to fall out exactly the same way the third time. I also know two other male friends who successfully rebuffed efforts by their (female) exes to get sole. This is not to say that my bro-science is better than yours, only that from other people's perceptions, it doesn't look like there's an automatic presumption for the female parent.

                  I would be really leery of any mandatory presumption, whether it's 50/50 or primary caregiver or status quo or whatever. The vast majority of divorcing parents come to an agreement on how to share the kids' custody and residence without going to court. For the small minority who do go to court, the parental relationship has typically become so conflictual and convoluted (although each party will insist that he or she is the reasonable one and the other party is "high conflict") that any automatic default would be inappropriate. I'd like to see courts having as much leeway as possible to craft solutions which work for the particular (highly conflicted) family concerned.

                  Principles like "best interest of the child" are important for guidance, but rigid legal formulae specifying that "the residence of the child(ren) of the marriage shall be xyz unless conditions abc are met" will create more problems than they solve.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Boy I would love to chime in on my own thread here...

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I am lost, where am I? Who is here? What? Why? Where???

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Tell me about it mother. I discusses 50/50 parenting versus being employed and was directed to my thread with snarkiness. lol

                        I get out of the shower. My girlfriend apparently set up her own account from her own phone (diff. IP) and started talking about me. She said her phone ran out of batteries so continued posting from my phone. I said "noooooo". lol They'll look at the IP and think it's me. lol

                        Now she's banned and I may be too. I had no idea she was doing that. But in hindsight it was not a duplicate account at all. Her IP on her phone is different than mine. Separate accounts and I had no idea she was poting.

                        Honestly mods .. I know you track IP's. I wouldn't insult your intelligence like that.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Oh, I think I understand what had happened. As 6:13 pm LF32 tried to post what he wrote about posting on his thread. But because mods restricted him from posting, it was put on hold until now, when people started to ask them inconvenient questions.

                          Then all the posts with the discussion of the mods anarchy was deleted by someone and at 9 pm + some change LF32's post finally appeared. How democratic! No explanations whatsoever.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I wonder if there are "fresher" numbers than 20 years old and where to find them? Google gives nothing.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Statistics Canada report on parenting arrangements and child support after divorce in Canada, published 2014 using data collected 2011. Most authoritative and rigourous source of information.

                              Parenting and child support after separation or divorce

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Mother View Post
                                Oh, I think I understand what had happened. As 6:13 pm LF32 tried to post what he wrote about posting on his thread. But because mods restricted him from posting, it was put on hold until now, when people started to ask them inconvenient questions.

                                Then all the posts with the discussion of the mods anarchy was deleted by someone and at 9 pm + some change LF32's post finally appeared. How democratic! No explanations whatsoever.
                                Oh. And here I'm thinking I was having a blonde seniors moment ( i'm both) lol

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X