Children stay in home/ parents travel?

[bakerliz]

Has anyone heard of/ tried having one parent live in the home with the children and having parents trade off time staying in the home and apartments or something? The idea would be that the children have the stability of the same home, but the parents trade off overnights there (separate lockable bedrooms).

I had read a reference to this idea, then my husband mentioned it out of the blue. I'm the one who wants the divorce, and he doesn't seem to care about me, but doesn't want to lose time with the kids.

This seems tough, but possibly a way to keep the kids' standard of living and consistency going...

I thought of trying to work out something with a lawyer on costs of the home, etc., and agreeing to discuss it again after a year?

Any thoughts?

Thanks!

Liz

[Momtwice]

I had a friend who did this and found it worked extremely well. She had 4 kids. It wouldn't work for me, but if you have a decent coparenting relationship it could work.

I needed more boundaries than that.

[meemee]

i also had a friend who did this. BUT not as one living permanently in the house. only the kids lived permanently. the parents both got apts and moved out, and then they would switch weeks with the kids. they could afford to have 3 residences.

what a few of my aquaintances did was live v. close to each other, either next door or within a block from each other and it worked really, really well too. the children could go in and out of the homes as they pleased. so for instance they could go over and have dessert at dad's place or just go over and kiss him gnight.

i could do a block over. but not next door.

[GranoLLLy-girl]

This is the arrangement that Jon and Kate from the TV reality show have. Although, it really appears that she lives there more than he does.
I would think that this would be a good arrangement for a large family.
I am going through a divorce now--not my choice--and I don't think that this would work for us--even though the house is big enough. I would feel like I was invaded upon in my new life. Just my two cents.

[VocalMinority]

This practice has a growing popularity with the courts in my state. In fact, there's one judge who uses this as his standard custodial arrangement. I don't know anyone who does it, but my father is a family law atty. here. He says when it works, it seems to be much better for the kids. He also thinks it's more fair - the people who chose to create the upheaval in the family bear the greater brunt of that upheaval. That's hard to argue with. But obviously, once a divorced couple starts dating, getting into serious relationships - much less remarrying - there will be complications, such that it seems impossible to continue that arrangement until the children leave home. Plus, even with separate, lockable bedrooms, it still requires a lot of trust, to have your ex spend every other week in "your" home and see what you've stocked in your kitchen cabinets to feed the kids, where you've let things get cluttered, to wonder whether he's going through your paperwork or your bathroom drawers? Or must you lock absolutely every personal thing in your bedroom, as though you're in a college dorm?

I wonder whether starting such an arrangement wouldn't make it more difficult for the kids in the long run? Rather than adjusting to the total rearrangement of their family all at once - and knowing it's permanent and getting used to it - they might adjust to this partial rearrangement, then have to deal with a whole new upheaval, disappointment and insecurity down the road, if the parents could no longer hack it. So, I guess the benefit would depend on your and STBX's commitment to having your home and your life revolve completely around the children every other week and not feeling like the home you share with your kids is truly "yours".

[philomom]

Bird nesting is far less disruptive for the children. They don't have to have two sets of clothing, toys and everything. They can have playdates and friends over. They never forget their violin at the other parents house.

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_ml...095_index.html

The big downside is lack of privacy at the parental apt. Because only the very wealthy could have three residences.

[Moochie Mamma]

Originally Posted by Jeannine

I wonder whether starting such an arrangement wouldn't make it more difficult for the kids in the long run? Rather than adjusting to the total rearrangement of their family all at once - and knowing it's permanent and getting used to it - they might adjust to this partial rearrangement, then have to deal with a whole new upheaval, disappointment and insecurity down the road, if the parents could no longer hack it.

I'm also wondering about this. DH and I are separating- the kids and I are moving next month into a house which we currently own and have as a rental. Dh is staying in our current house which will most likely be either sold or foreclosed on at some point (trying to negotiate with bank and there's a small chance we'll keep it but that's another story). The new house is 2 blocks from the kids' school in a very kid-friendly neighborhood so I've been looking forward to moving there. We have talked about having the kids stay put and DH and I move back and forth between houses. When we told the kids we're moving DS (9 yrs) got really upset, crying, wants to stay in the old house. We didn't even get around to telling them about the split or that daddy is staying back- just that "we" are moving. We decided to give them time to get used the idea of moving before adding more info.

I'm wondering what is best for kiddos- do the bird nesting thing for a while in order to ease them into the separation then disturb their lives later by having them go to having 2 homes? Or just have them split time from the start and still be able to see friends in the old neighborhood?

[meemee]

Originally Posted by Moochie Mamma

I'm wondering what is best for kiddos- do the bird nesting thing for a while in order to ease them into the separation then disturb their lives later by having them go to having 2 homes? Or just have them split time from the start and still be able to see friends in the old neighborhood?

dont think about the children. think about yourselves. do what it takes to make YOUR lives easier. that would mean less stress for you. which would mean less stress for your children.

if you do the other way and think of children and it meant more stress for you parents, it just does not work. it works better for parents to have peace of mind. and then see what works with your family. there is change in the family. you have to give everyone the chance to adjust.

what would be great is if you guys lived close by. ideally a block or two away or not more than 10 mins away.

[wytchywoman]

I had a friend who did this but it didn't work well in her circumstance. She left because her DH was abusive, and this type of scenario gave him continued access to her and her belongings and it just fueled the fire. It got to the point where she had to lock up her laundry, as he was searching her underwear for signs that she might have had sex with someone else. It was really creepy and pathological.So I'd say it really depends on the couple. If things are amicable and both people are really stable and everyone thinks they can pull this off in a healthy way, then sure it would be best for the kids. But if one partner is abusive or controlling or there is a lot of animosity, then I'd say no, the continued drama would be far more of a detriment to the kids than having two households.

[2xand2y]

I'm wondering why you would need 3 residences. If you can share the "kids" home, why couldn't you also share a 2 bedroom apartment as well? Certainly, 3 would be nice but I could see 2 working also.

[Moochie Mamma]

No abuse or control issues in my case- we are good friends and I'm sure will continue to be. In fact we are all on a 2-week vacation right now. The houses are only a couple miles apart so travel isn't an issue.

Am interested to hear other stories of whether a "bird's nest" situation worked out or not.

[vannienicole]

Just for more information, my ex and I live a block apart in two separate houses. No major traveling for the kids, but still have our own spaces. We can both be there for he kids when needed and share them 50-50 evenly. If I wanted to share a home with the guy, I would have stayed with him, ya know?

[2cutiekitties]

Originally Posted by 2xand2y

I'm wondering why you would need 3 residences. If you can share the "kids" home, why couldn't you also share a 2 bedroom apartment as well? Certainly, 3 would be nice but I could see 2 working also.

I remember when the famous reality couple did this and lawyers were discussing it on tv and they said both parents need their own established residences. So there would be 3 total.

And it didnt work out for them, because she now lives with the kids and the dad gave up his NY apt to move to an apt in town. He isnt even allowed on the property to pick up his kids....she drives them to the street.

[2xand2y]

Originally Posted by 2cutiekitties

I remember when the famous reality couple did this and lawyers were discussing it on tv and they said both parents need their own established residences. So there would be 3 total.

And it didnt work out for them, because she now lives with the kids and the dad gave up his NY apt to move to an apt in town. He isnt even allowed on the property to pick up his kids....she drives them to the street.

IMO, she has control issues- so sad, but I also admit that my opinions are merely based on what is seen in the media.

Interesting that the lawyers said three residences were needed to make it work. We currently live in a duplex and I would love to but the whole thing and have 'his' and 'hers' sides, and made a through door for children only- ahhhhh.

[ZoeyZoo]

Originally Posted by wytchywoman

I had a friend who did this but it didn't work well in her circumstance. She left because her DH was abusive, and this type of scenario gave him continued access to her and her belongings and it just fueled the fire. It got to the point where she had to lock up her laundry, as he was searching her underwear for signs that she might have had sex with someone else. It was really creepy and pathological.So I'd say it really depends on the couple. If things are amicable and both people are really stable and everyone thinks they can pull this off in a healthy way, then sure it would be best for the kids. But if one partner is abusive or controlling or there is a lot of animosity, then I'd say no, the continued drama would be far more of a detriment to the kids than having two households.

I'm in a similar situation. The scary abusive episodes have dulled for now since I filed for the divorce. I'm having a lot of trouble dealing with the lack of privacy since I'm living in the house at night and he is here during the day while I'm at work. I think it also depends on the kids ages. My dd is 2 so I think she is adjusting better than an older kid would.

[meemee]

Originally Posted by 2xand2y

I'm wondering why you would need 3 residences. If you can share the "kids" home, why couldn't you also share a 2 bedroom apartment as well? Certainly, 3 would be nice but I could see 2 working also.

two would not work at all for most folks.

two is like one moved out and keeps coming back to original home to visit.

so one of the parents would have no personal space except perhaps their own bedroom.

it wouldnt be parents 'visiting' children.

if i was rich, this is what i would have prefered myself.

[Goodmom2008]

It's called nesting. And may help the kids adjust, but really isn't a long-term solution.

Here's why:

1. What if one of you is a slob and the other isn't? The one who isn't will be cleaning up after the other.
2. What happens when significant others come into the picture?
3. And what happens when either of you get remarried?
4. How many parents can afford to have 3 homes? A place for each parent to stay when it isn't their parenting time and the place for the kids.
5. Who's going to pay what? What if one parent leaves the lights on all the time or runs the AC higher than the other? You could be paying more than if you just had your own place. And by paying more for utilities, you may be taking money away from needed items for the kids or just being able to do something fun with them.

[hillymum]

This is one of the ideas my sbx has proposed to me. I doubt it would work because of the privacy issue and the slob issue. My sbx husband has never had to keep a house clean and can bearly manage his own laundry let alone a familys laundry.

I can totally understand why some judges may think its a wonderful idea, but then they probably don't understand that boundries between ex husbands and wives need to be strong.