Voluntarily giving up custody? - Page 7

[Kirsten]

Originally Posted by thismama

I personally would think that moving away is off limits, no matter how exciting the possibilities.

Absolutely. When you have a baby, I think that BOTH parents - whether together or not - have the responsibility to stay within a few hours drive of each other for the next 18 years. I would absolutely come down just as hard on a father who wanted to move away for a job. I wouldn't ever think that was ok - regardless of climbing the corporate ladder, making more money, or any other reason. I also think it is wrong to move away from the child's extended family if they have had that.

Originally Posted by lanamommyphd07

Regardless of whether the kid goes with to Alaska or stays back with dad, this kiddo will have a very lasting impression "mom's husband is more important than me" and nothing you do will be able to change that impression.

This is the truth of the situation.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

OP, you are getting a lot of very undeserved heat for this not because what you are considering is bad, but because it is so unthinkable to so many here because of deeply ingrained societal norms about female behavior and 'mothering'. I am shaking with anger and sadness at the prejudice and bigotry, the hate and intolerance behind some of these comments.

Wow. No, it is not undeserved heat. I actually think posters are holding back, in an attempt to be respectful while still showing their extreme shock that this is something the OP is considering in her situation. And yes, what she is considering is bad. It is not prejudice, bigotry, hate or intolerance to believe that a child deserves to be nearby BOTH parents.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

We are never good enough parents, friends, lovers, whatever. Because we are women. Women are less, and therefore never good enough. You can see it some of these responses...the giving up of all hopes and dreams, the relinquishing of all desires not related to giving endlessly, to sacrificing endlessly for children and everyone around us. The guilt and shame associated with doing for yourself as a female.

I just disagree with every word, and feel sorry that anyone would think this way. I do understand how we can swing too far to the side of focusing all our attention, energy and money on our kids, sacrificing what we want. That balance between what kids need and what we need is hard to find, and I do think more focus should be on getting to that point. But the answer isn't "kids be damned; do whatever you want".

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

once we have children, our lives as autonomous people end (indeed, if they ever began...women are defined in relation to others from birth)...forever. No matter how old they get, no matter where they go...our children come first. Period. No matter what we have to give up, how important it is to us, how vital it is to our well-being and sanity...once we reproduce, tough. We don't matter. What we want doesn't matter. What we need doesn't matter.

Our lives, needs, desires shouldn't end. If we let them, we are wrong. But it isn't all or nothing.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

Few people would come down on a man for moving away from a child for work (or for anything we crap on mothers for doing...just showing up gets men kudos most of the time). Because men are men and their desires and needs and personhood are give space and respect.

Many of us have said that we would come down on a man just the same.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

We have no right to put ourselves first, ever, but especially in regards to children.

When you have a child, whether you are a man or a woman, you should understand that you are done "putting yourself first". The needs of each member of the family are now considered. If you want to follow your dreams, regardless of others, then don't be partnered or have kids. If you want to put yourself first, then be the only one there. If you are part of a couple or a family, then no one is put first - although the needs of the kids should get some pretty high priority IMO. The day will come when they are grown, and you can teach in Alaska or whatever else is important to you.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

You're catching heat for even suggesting this because most women have bought the line wholeheartedly that they are nothing without their lovers and children and friends. We can't survive on our own, and we certainly shouldn't want to do anything on our own, or do something for just ourselves, especially as mothers. Motherhood is supposed to be the be all and end all of our existence, the only thing we value, the only thing that matters.

I disagree with all of this. I can survive on my own, but it would be selfish for me to do so currently. I can do things on my own - work, volunteer, participate in activities that have nothing to do with kids or mothering - but moving to a different state and giving up custody of a FOUR year old to a situation that is not safe for him isn't one of them. I found out how important it is to do things for myself, to put my needs into the equation - but it isn't all kids or all me. There is a balance during the years they are CHILDREN.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

That said, I think you should take a closer look at your own particular situation and be sure your son's father can and is willing and would do well to be your son's sole caretaker for a long period of time. Talk to your son as well. Be sure he understands the situation and how it would be as much as he can. Excitement about new possibility is not wrong, but can sometimes cloud our judgment about what's right.

Talk to her FOUR YEAR OLD about whether or not to make such a major life decision? Do you really think a child that young can understand what the long term effects of this decision are?? Way to put an adult's responsibility on a young child... He comes to you as an adult, angry, wanting to know why you abandoned him for your dream of teaching in Alaska - and you say "well, you said it was ok". He is FOUR.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

Believe me, I understand the need to explore. To try new things. To wander. You are not wrong for having these urges, or for considering an alternative custody arrangement due to them. You are not wrong at all. You are human. You have every right to dream, and have goals and aspirations that do *not* center around others.

I understand the need to explore, try new things, wander. She is not wrong to have these feelings. She is wrong to act on them when she has a four year old. Again, it is not all or nothing. She can do these things in short term - a week vacation to Alaska, or a whole summer teaching summer school but with her child. 14 years from now she is free to go there. I would say the same thing to her ex, if he wanted to move away for a job.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

Your son is a child. He is not stupid. He is not made of glass. Human beings are not fragile and eternally vulnerable to every twist of fate. We have survived as long as we have as a species due to our ability to adapt to adversity and change. He will not fall apart if you leave, your relationship will not disappear/be destroyed. There is no one right way to live, or to parent, or to be. You know your son, your ex, and yourself. You know what the right decision for all of you is. You do not need to ask permission of anyone, but only do what you know is right in your situation.

No one is saying he is stupid or cannot adapt to changes. We are saying that his relationship with the OP, and how he trusts or doesn't in all relationships from now on, is on the line if she leaves him here to move away with a new dp to follow a dream. She can follow the dream when her son is grown, or when she can convince her ex to move to Alaska too, or find a closer dream. Her current dp can find a job here. And her ds won't fall over never to stand again, but emotional damage will occur. The reason she is here asking permission/opinions/etc is because she KNOWS it is wrong, and is looking for someone to agree with her, to say it is ok to go. It isn't.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

A good parent is loving, attentive, understanding, gentle, supportive, and kind. A good parent shows their children how to be strong, how to adapt, how to make the most of life. A good parent does not stop being human, stop being an individual because they have children. They teach their children balance by being good parents and good people who have their own lives, interests, will, and desires.

I agree with all this - with one addition. A good parent is THERE.

Originally Posted by sunkissedmumma67

You said his dad had issues, i don't know what they are but 2 months isn't enough time to say he's really changed!

Exactly. He hardly has a good track record.

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

Look at women who live in other countries. It's nightmarish. It's obscene. It's women who are suffering.

And children. Doesn't that matter?

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

OP, I hope you are doing well, and have made the decision you feel is best for you and your family.

This is such an interesting sentence. What the OP wants to do may be "best" for her, but not for her son. Her loyalty to him should trump a 3 month marriage, and the new spouse's job possibility. He can find a job here. She can parent the child she has. She can follow the dream later. Alaska and teaching possibilities will still be there when her child turns 18.

[chaoticzenmom]

Originally Posted by Mamato3wild ponnie

I just stumbled over this post and i was/am in a very similar situation. My DH was deported to Mexico..cant come back to the states, we have one son together and i'm currently prego's. I have 2 children from ex. My youngest son by DH has not spent much time with his dad, because he was sitting in prison fighting immigration issues. So when my DH got out of prison and gave up the fight to stay he was deported. I tried to get permission to take my oldest children with me to Mexico. However there non paying c/s father refused to sign passports. I took him to court over this and the judge ruled that ex had to sign for passports and then at the next court date he ruled that the children could not leave the country and that i should cont. to have primary physical custody and ex have secondary and everything should remain the same. Except if i followed through with my move to MX that ex would gain primary and i could only visit children in our home state. Here i'm faced with my kids in the states, my DH in Mexico who has not been able to see his son ever other than prison visitations. What do i do? I hired another attorney and she did nothing for me. I also acted out of pure heart feelings for my husband and signed over primary physical custody for secondary physical. In return there dad agreed to allow kids to visit with me in MX over the summers and at Christmas and any time we mutaully agreed in the states. Well i leave and go to MExico. Kids go with dad. It was the hardest things i've ever done. I cried everyday in MX. I coudnt be happy with out my kids. In the mean time i found out i was prego's and couldnt stand being away from my kids back in the states. I came back to the states and i see my kids every weekend. I'm here with out my DH/with out my kids everyday. And i'm hurting so bad inside i dont know what to do. I have no money for an attorney. My kids want to be back with me and i dont know what to do. My DH cant come to the states ever. So when i hear you talk about moving on, yeah it looks good when your talking about it. But once it's done it's done. I would really suggest doing some soul searching with your husband and figure out a happy medium. Sorry to post such a long post but you are not alone in this situation at all. I've been through it and regret every part of leaving my kids. Now i feel that i will never get them back intime. I feel that i have scarred them for life. I was on ly gone for 2 months but that time feels like eternity to me, that time i will never get back. I miss my DH so bad and i'm torn between everyone right now.

[Oriole]

Kirsten said it best. I hope OP takes that into consideration.

[FancyD]

Originally Posted by mama41

Given money, men will, in general, spend it on a good time; the women will use it for the children. This is why policies have existed, in some industrializing countries, of handing the men's pay to the women (and the women's job is then to keep the money even when the man tries to beat her up and take it away).

The Grameen Bank found that to be true.

Women were initially given equal access to the schemes, and proved not only reliable borrowers but astute enterpreneurs. As a result, they have raised their status, lessened their dependency on their husbands and improved their homes and the nutritional standards of their children. Today over 90 percent of borrowers are women.

It was thought that poor rural women in particular were not bankable; in fact, they accounted for 94 percent of borrowers in early 1992.

Mohammad Yunus

[mama41]

cj, I just wanted to say that I sympathize entirely on the violently unfair sense that women are supposed to sacrifice all for motherhood. And that varies, actually, by SES, but in general is true.

I happen to be in a very privileged position. I'm older, well-off, well-educated with prestigious degrees. The circles I move in aren't particularly family-oriented, for the most part. I could do exactly what the OP is proposing and pay little social price for it; the people who would be indignant wouldn't be the ones with power in my world. In other words, to a pretty fair degree, I can be an honorary man again if I choose. Not too many people in my field would be interested in where I'd stashed my kid.

However, it is clear to me that the parenthood gig is not only important and interesting; it absolutely does not lend itself to half-assed efforts. The consequences to the child for my being half-assed about it are steep. The very same training and seriousness that led me to career success also make it very plain that there's a serious job to do here, and the heavy lifting ain't done till the kid is independent. Does that interfere with other work? Yes. Did I buy that knowingly? Yes. Do I expect to pick the other work back up at the end of this job, and is it a realistic proposition? Yes.

Now it's true that there are structural problems that interfere unnecessarily. The fact that i'll have to drop my work midafternoon every weekday to go pick my kid up from school is one example. That's just unnecessary and can be fixed. But the fact that the kid needs my presence cannot be fixed. I cannot have an adventuresome journo/research career as a couch-surfer in world capitals and research institutions. That part will wait.

Now, getting rid of the man, that helps tremendously. I've realized in the last week or so that losing the obligations to a husband and the confinement of marriage means I have a great deal of freedom outside childrearing demands. I think these next ten years are going to be a very satisfying and productive time. Yes, there will be some awkwardness about travel, and I'll need to solve that problem. But on the whole I think this will work well.

[Mama Poot]

I would try to put myself in my child's position: Okay, so first his parents got a divorce and he feels torn between them. Then his mother gets remarried and now she moves away to go live another life with her new husband and pretty much leaves her child in the dust behind. That's how a 5 year old feels about something like this. The feelings of abandonment would be so tremendous and not likely to be something he's ever going to recover from. Think about it-this will dramatically impact how your son develops relationships and attachments to other people. I'm probably not saying anything that hasn't been said already. Go to Alaska when your child is grown up and not dependent on you anymore. Now is not the right time.

[cjuniverse]

Mama41 and others -

My intention here is to support the OP in her desire to live a different kind of life, or need to, or whatever. I am living an unconventional parenting arrangement, and taking a lot of heat for it, so can empathize in a very direct way.

My intention here is also to point out the needless, and gender-based discriminatory anger and shaming being directed towards the OP because she is a woman presenting this scenario. Now, it may be that some would disapprove if she were a man as well. But with such disgust? With such hatred? With so many very personal, hurtful, direct and indirect insults? I think not. I've experienced this directly on MDC...no matter what a man does, he is never ganged upon the way a woman is for doing the same or similar. Never. Not even close. People may express disapproval, and often do. But not in the same way. Not with the same underlying sense of hatred for any woman who steps out of, or apparently even thinks of stepping out of line. That's sexism, internalized by all of us. Self-hating. That's basically what I'm saying.

Now, based on the particulars of the OP's situation, as I've said several times already, she should analyze carefully her decision. And yes, I think her child should be involved. He should not be the primary maker of the decision, but he should be involved. I can speak to the horrible, unfair burden of being asked to make major life decisions as a young child, my parents did that to me, too. I hated my father for making me decide whom to live with...him or my mother. I chose my mother because we were with her at the time and I figured it would be easier...obviously, I did not have the rational capacity and sense enough of the big picture to make a better decision... and my brother and I both suffered a great deal because of that. But even still, I can recognize the difference between put in the middle and made to make an age-inappropriate. life-altering decision all on my own, and given a say in making a cooperative, life-altering decision with my family as a whole, if indeed that is possible in the OP's scenario.

I stand in support of women's agency, of women's right to think through their own individual situations and make the decisions they feel are best for them and for their families. I support women's right to live and parent in ways that are outside the mainstream (as indeed most of us at MDC do already!), I support women's right to weigh the consequences of their actions, think things through, and act according to their own beliefs and conscience. I trust women to make their own decisions, and to make decisions alone or in cooperation with others...even if I or others disagree with them.

I do not support the tearing down of women, the shaming and humiliating and character assassinating of women who make different choices than the majority, or supposed majority. I do not support a one-size-fits-all approach to parenting or living. I do not support prejudice on the part of those with more (real or perceived) societal privilege, or acting upon it in such a way as to hurt those with less (real or perceived) societal privilege, as I have seen here and elsewhere. I do not support the idea that only one type of upbringing, one type of family structure, one type of living situation, one type of custody arrangement, is good or best or even better for children. I do not support the idea that only one type of family structure, one type of living situation, one type of custody arrangement is good or best or even better for mothers or fathers.

All families are different. All families have unique dynamics and unique people within them with unique needs and desires. I think each family balancing these factors in a way that is agreed upon works best for them is the sovereign right of all. Including the OP. Which means, once again, that the decision is hers and her family's to make.

Mama41, I believe women can come together. I believe women can make things better for women. I believe women can overcome our differences in ways that allow us to come together to end sexism. I have to believe that, or I lose all hope for all of us. I refuse to lose hope. I refuse to give up on the idea of a world where men and women can co-exist without hurting each other. I don't believe it has to be that way. I don't believe hate and intolerance between the sexes, races, classes, countries, anyone is written in stone or in our DNA. I believe we can adapt and evolve. I believe things can change for the better, if we want them to.

Kirsten -

As I said, I don't support tearing the OP down because she is suggesting doing something you don't approve of or think is wrong. I think the need to tear her down is indicative of your own feelings about women and yourself, and expressing anger and disgust towards her is not about helping her or her son, but about making yourself feel better about that.

I don't think either parent has to be present or available 24/7 to be a good parent. How many of us would condemn the husband who is deployed, and has left a wife and young children in another country? Would we say he has abandoned his children, that he never should've put himself in a situation to have children (after all, when applying for the army, it is well known that deployment, dismemberment, even death are possible and often likely)? Being in the army's a job, too. This man (or woman) made a decision to stick with the job and have a family, too.

How many of us condemn the husbands with jobs that require lots of travel/away time/sometimes even residency in other states/countries for long periods of time as 'bad parents', bad people? Few, I would think. So long as the wives are home with the children, all is well in our minds. Reverse the situation, and suddenly there's trouble. There's anger. There's fierce, hateful, hurtful comments from people about how horrible, how selfish, how cruel and inhuman and unloving and unwomanlike these women are. Why? Why the discrepancy? Sexism is why. We expect men to go out and work, expect men to have peripheral influence in their children's lives, at least when they are very young. We don't condemn them for it...it's natural to us. It's what we were all raised to expect. Turn that on it's head, and we're in scary and unfamiliar territory. And many of us react with anger and viciousness, because that's also what we were raised to do and to expect. When a woman steps out of line, in any way really, we are all there to shame and guilt her back into line. If she fails to comply, we reject her. We ostracize her. We leave her to fend for herself without support and without compassion.

All of which has been played out right here in this very discussion, several times over. All of which is sexist, and deeply sad.

I don't hate men (but I don't blame any woman who does). I hate patriarchy, and what it has done to men and to us. Period.

[bnhmama]

Originally Posted by becoming

I wanted to find a kind way to say that I hope you rethink this and put your child's needs and feelings first. But, mama, this:



makes me so sad for your son. It seriously sounds like you're talking about a pet parakeet or something. This is your CHILD that you brought into the world--you don't get to say, "We won't have time for him in our new life." It doesn't work that way. You don't just get to make life choices that aren't compatible with being a parent.

I think your new love and your son's loyalty to his father are really clouding your love and devotion to your son right now. Think back to when he was that teeny newborn that you rocked and snuggled and loved. He is the same person now that he was then, mama. He still needs you just as much.

And yes, I would say the same thing to a father who was considering doing this.

I couldn't have said any better.

OP, please reconsider and place your son's needs first. As someone who grew up with only visitation with my mother who chose to pursue her own freedoms and life (Even in the same town), Don't do it. You can't repair that damage.

[MissLotus]

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

We don't matter. What we want doesn't matter. What we need doesn't matter. Only our children (lovers, husbands, friends, whoever) matter. This cannot and does not send a healthy or fair message to children or anyone. And it somehow sends a fair and "healthy" message to this little boy if his mother - his primary caregiver - leaves him behind?


We can't survive on our own, ...Well, I can and have survived on my own...I do believe that on this board, you will find many women who are indeed surviving on their own! The question is not a matter of ability, it's a matter of having our families with us.


He will not fall apart if you leave, your relationship will not disappear/be destroyed. And how do you know that? After all this kid has been through, you just know he won't become emotionally distraught? Or is that not a big deal to a woman who sets out to make all her dreams come true?


I think it is important that, as women and parents of sons especially, we hold on to our agency and teach our sons that women are not functions of other's needs, that we have the right to put ourselves first and to love ourselves and do for ourselves. If we teach them that women can be, are, and should be independent thinkers with lives of their own, they will not expect women to be doormats who live for everyone else but themselves. We teach them to love themselves (and most importantly, women) as we have loved ourselves.

Yeah...what a great way to teach a kid! I'm sure that if this little boy's mother leaves him behind while she runs off to teach in the bush with his stepfather, he'll grow up to treat women like queens. And I'm so positive that his alcoholic father will be sure to model behavior that he should emulate, regarding women. Bravo!

Really. Hey, I'm all for pointing out the inequality between genders...and I fully agree with your quote, "...just showing up gets men kudos most of the time" - that's true and ridiculously unfair; I've often said it myself. But this thread is not the appropriate place. No one's trying to keep this mother down. They're thinking of this poor kid, whose only other option is an alcoholic father that just drove drunk with him in the car!!! That's no footnote...that's a MAJORLY BIG PROBLEM HERE. So saying, "Oh and by the way, think twice before you leave him with a drunk but go, girl, Follow your dreams!" is incongruous. Love may not = sacrifice, but responsibility sure as hell does. Who's going to be responsible for this little boy, if his mother runs off to the bush? That would be the drunken father. Even if he wasn't a drunk, the point is that his mother has been his primary caregiver! Humans may not be glass, or whatever you said, but they sure do need stability as kids. Do you really think that someday his chest will swell with pride that his mother left him when he was tiny, so that she could follow her dreams in the bush....or does some part of you realize that there's a large possibility that he'll be hurt...very hurt?

I would say the same thing to a man, especially a man who'd been a kid's primary caregiver. But to come onto this forum - among women who've fought tooth and nail to hang onto their babies and have tried to give them stability despite their unstable fathers - well...one may find us unable to understand voluntarily seeing their kid only a couple times of year so they can help other children! I don't think I'm a doormat for being "expected" to be responsible for my child. I want to be! I'm actually - gasp - very attached to him, and though my financial situation where I am currently sucks, I'm not going to turn my son's life upside-down just to prove to the world that I'm not going to take it anymore!

[MissLotus]

And by the way...why did the OP's new husband apply for a job so far away, anyway? One has to wonder.

If my new husband didn't realize that now he has to put my kid's needs in line with his own, then I think divorce would follow quickly. Better to lose a husband than a kid.

If Alaska's so commutable that mother & child will still be able to have a meaninful relationship, how about this: Let the new husband go to his gig in Alaska, and come to visit when he can.

[cjuniverse]

Miss Lotus -

I don't think what the OP is suggesting, should she decide it is workable, safe, and beneficial for her family, is abandoning her child. I don't think she is heartless or treating her son like a pet. I don't think she is leaving him behind or neglecting him, necessarily. I think she can do both in a way that benefits everyone, and I trust her to make that decision.

I don't know for sure what the outcome will be of her decision, though I do doubt it will be the earth-shattering, awful thing many believe it would be. I don't think even the OP could know for certain what would happen. Kind of unknowable. The point, though, is that I think she has every right to make this decision without people treating her like dirt for it, and calling her a horrible person and parent and telling her she doesn't love her child because they don't agree with her choice. That's unfair. That's cruel. That's sexist, because there are fathers all over this planet who are doing the same and similar and nobody's doing it to them. People may be disagreeing and disapproving, but they are not trying to shame them into compliance, at least not in this manner. Disagree all you want. But there's no excuse to heap hate upon this woman because you disagree with her, and nobody has any right to force her to make any decision she doesn't want to make. The need to do so is product of self-hating internalized sexism. That's what I'm saying.

And yes, I do think, especially for boy children, that seeing their mothers live independent lives without apology and shame and guilt is a good thing. For them and for us. When all women (and I truly hope someday this is the case) are free to make decisions that truly serve us, sexism and all it entails will be on it's way out.

Living independent lives without shame and apology and shame and guilt doesn't preclude being a good parent, or raising healthy children. The two can co-exist and benefit everyone. I don't know that the OP's current situation is conducive to that. Only she/her family knows. It's her/their decision. Not anyone else's.

Once more, not everyone is going to agree with what the OP is suggesting. But the crap she is getting because of this is unfair, sexist and cruel. And it's not intended to help her or her son. It's intended to hurt, shame, and humiliate her...to make others feel more secure in their life choices and less threatened by hers. There's nothing helpful in that, for her or her son.

[Cutie Patootie]

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

But the crap she is getting because of this is unfair, sexist and cruel. And it's not intended to help her or her son. It's intended to hurt, shame, and humiliate her...to make others feel more secure in their life choices and less threatened by hers. There's nothing helpful in that, for her or her son.

Oh, for pities sake! It is not. I don't care who or what the heck she is, she wants to send her 4yo ds to live with a father who is an alcoholic and has just been relieved of his shared custody of the child because he decided to drink and drive with his son in the car just 2 months ago. All the other stuff y'all are adding is fluff.

[FancyD]

cjuniverse, you are projecting here. The father is a barely rehabbed alcoholic, who not 3 months ago put his son's life in danger. Why do you refuse to see that this is not a wise choice? Hellllooooooo?

[chrissy]

you know, i do totally think it would suck if a dad did this to his kid, but, in my opinion, it is worse for a mother to do it.

young kids- all kids, but especially young kids- need their mamas. they just do. sure, if they have to, they can get along without them. but they shouldn't have to.

cjuniverse, do you really think that young kids need their moms and dads equally?

[mamameg]

Originally Posted by Cutie Patootie

Oh, for pities sake! It is not. I don't care who or what the heck she is, she wants to send her 4yo ds to live with a father who is an alcoholic and has just been relieved of his shared custody of the child because he decided to drink and drive with his son in the car just 2 months ago. All the other stuff y'all are adding is fluff.

For real.

[fujiyama_mama]

I do not buy the father's rights arguments. We live in a patriarchy. Men have all the money, guns, and power. There are disadvantages, especially emotional ones, to being a male in patriarchy, but they are the dominant class, the oppressors. They oppress us, not the other way around. As Thismama said, men who petition for custody usually get it. All arguments to the contrary are antifeminist myths designed to attack feminism, feminists, and legislation that helps women and children. Most men who do not have custody of their children do not pay child support, even with a court order

I have to disagree with this statement as a PP said her husband wanted custody and could not get it. My own father could not get custody of me though my mother had numerous drug charges and was mentally unstable. My sister's father also could not get custody of her. It was not until my mother signed away her rights to us when I was 11 years old that I was allowed to legally live with my father. That's 11 years of BS that I should not have had to live through. It took my little sister almost as much time to get to live with her father. I am so grateful everyday for my father gaining custody of me. Men have no rights in custody hearings.

edited to add..that my father not only paid child support which was garnished, but he paid our rent and bought our weekly groceries.

[Delta]

And yes, I do think, especially for boy children, that seeing their mothers live independent lives without apology and shame and guilt is a good thing. For them and for us. When all women (and I truly hope someday this is the case) are free to make decisions that truly serve us, sexism and all it entails will be on it's way out.

Sure it's good for boys to see "mothers live independent lives without apology and shame and guilt" but I'm pretty sure a 5 year old will only see this situation as their mom leaving them with their new husband that is seemingly uninterested in the boy. You don't have to leave your kid to live independently. All that would seem to teach is that you can do whatever you want without thinking of those you might be hurting.

And is it possible that the little boy is crying when he leaves his father because he doesn't like his stepdad? Also, he may be having lots of fun with his girlfriend's kids too.

[mamameg]

Originally Posted by cjuniverse

Mamameg -

I do not buy the father's rights arguments. We live in a patriarchy. Men have all the money, guns, and power. There are disadvantages, especially emotional ones, to being a male in patriarchy, but they are the dominant class, the oppressors. They oppress us, not the other way around. As Thismama said, men who petition for custody usually get it. All arguments to the contrary are antifeminist myths designed to attack feminism, feminists, and legislation that helps women and children. Most men who do not have custody of their children do not pay child support, even with a court order. If they do, it's not enough. Though there are exceptions, it is usually men who abandon and refuse to parent/support their children. Father's have plenty of 'rights'...they're men. They have all the rights they need in a world which casts them as human and women as other. Acknowledging that is not 'playing victim'. It is dealing with reality. We are victims. We are victimized every day by men. Does that mean we should give up, lie down and take it? No, but then I can't blame some women for losing hope either. It's a very tough world out there for us. We're damned and starved if we do and damned and starved if we don't. Look around you. Look at the situation of women who are poor or who are of color. Look at women who live in other countries. It's nightmarish. It's obscene. It's women who are suffering.

You have a really strong agenda and I feel it's outdated. Men are suffering, too. People are suffering. I'm not going to argue with you about it because I've had a long day on my feet and you have made it very clear you are not interested in budging on the issue, so I'm not going to bother. I have first hand experiences that completely contrast your absolute assertions about The Way Things Are. If you are truly interested in helping women, maybe you should actually listen to them. It doesn't seem like you are doing that in this thread. Good luck to you in your efforts.

[FancyD]

ITA, mamameg. cj, for someone who is advocating for gentleness and understanding towards women, you are judging a lot of mom's very harshly. Next we'll hear how we're really just envious of the OP's awesome amazing opportunity.

[kalisis]

Originally Posted by MsChatsAlot

It's not my place to say what is best for your family.

It sounds like you've got some very difficult decisions to make.

I wish you peace and love as you make those choices.

: