or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Single Parenting › Voluntarily giving up custody?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Voluntarily giving up custody? - Page 8

post #141 of 153
I would not do it. DH and I were separated and had joint custody of DS1. DH was going to move out of state and I was going to follow. My boyfriend at the time was pissed but I would not give up my son nor would I deny my son access to his father.

In OP situation either I would not move or pursuade ex to move as well. Splittng up the family would never be an option.
post #142 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutie Patootie View Post
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.

:
post #143 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrissy View Post
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?
Chrissy, I do not think there is a yardstick for this, and it doesn't matter. Young kids need both parents, unless something's gone seriously wrong with one of them -- like to the point where they're dangerous.
post #144 of 153
I am defending the OP. I am supporting her. In doing so, I am trying to support all women to make choices that the status quo/mainstream find unappealing for whatever reason.

That's my agenda.

Mamameg, I've heard your arguments and similar before. I am unconvinced by them. There are many people of all genders who suffer. I believe a central cause of that suffering is patriarchy...it does hurt all of us, but most especially women, as that is the gender it is primarily (or was primarily) designed to oppress. Until patriarchy ends, that concern will never be outdated. I hope to live to see the day that it is.

I do think jealousy, resentment, and feeling threatened have a lot to do with a lot of the sentiments being expressed here. I can empathize with the OP because of similar circumstances in my life, certainly, but that is not the same as projection. I evaluated her case on it's own merits. I defended her because I felt she needed defending.

Pointing out the root cause of a lot of the unfair and pointless anger and hatred being directed at this mother is not fluff. It strikes at the heart of this issue: being that most people commenting here are not out to give advice or help this mother make a decision or help her son. They are posting to give voice to their internalized anger and hatred at themselves, and using this as a convenient outlet. This is something all women (all people really, but especially women living in and under patriarchal pressure) do. I'm calling it out, saying it's wrong, and that it has it's roots in sexism. In doing so I'm trying to stand up for the rights of all of us, those who disagree included. If some of us don't have the right to speak or be heard without being shamed and ridiculed and humiliated and hurt, then none of us do.

I think children's needs are individual and varied. In general, I say the more loving caregivers the better. They don't have to be related, they don't have to be in love, they don't have to be the same race or culture or nationality or sexuality. They just have to love and care for and support their child(ren). I don't think there is one right way to do this, and I don't think it always has to involve two or more caregivers in close proximity. There are many good ways to parent. I don't think what the OP is suggesting is necessarily a bad one. Or a good one, for that matter. I am saying it's her/her family's choice to make, and if you disagree, you can do so without insulting or humiliating her...and if you feel the need to do so, it's not about what she'd doing, it's about you.

Edited to add: There will always be exceptions to any rule. There will always be the few mothers who do not support their children/are not good parents. They are the exception, however. There will always be men who for whatever reason are beholden to/under the control of certain women with bad intentions, and children who suffer for it, for whatever reason. But again, these are exceptions, and do not disprove the rule that patriarchy exists and that it serves the interests of men, and that in many cases judges (mostly men) award custody to fathers who are undeserving or unfit parents.
post #145 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cutie Patootie View Post
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.
Yu-huh.

When my STBX told me he's thinking of move 5 hours away, I told him it was not ok to put his social life (his basic reason) ahead of his kids. If his kids don't fit into his vision of self-fulfillment, well, then he should either suck it up, or revise his dreams.
post #146 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjuniverse View Post

Pointing out the root cause of a lot of the unfair and pointless anger and hatred being directed at this mother is not fluff. It strikes at the heart of this issue: being that most people commenting here are not out to give advice or help this mother make a decision or help her son. They are posting to give voice to their internalized anger and hatred at themselves, and using this as a convenient outlet. This is something all women (all people really, but especially women living in and under patriarchal pressure) do. I'm calling it out, saying it's wrong, and that it has it's roots in sexism. In doing so I'm trying to stand up for the rights of all of us, those who disagree included. If some of us don't have the right to speak or be heard without being shamed and ridiculed and humiliated and hurt, then none of us do.
I wholeheartedly disagree with the statement in bold above ( bolded by me).

Again, the issue here has nothing to do with the pages and pages you are posting about. The issue here is about a mother(or grandmother, or sister, or relative, or primary care provider...doesn't really matter) sending a 4yo off to live with his alcoholic father...who for the umpteenth time, drove drunk with his child in the car (in January, I think it was?) to go live in Alaska with her new husband because she "will no longer have the time to care for him". (her words) The 4yo is the only one who needs someone to "stand up" for him in this circumstance. The op did not make a choice, and we are not berating her for making one. She asked for advice, recommendation etc. and we are giving it based on her op and information she has given us. Start your own thread about equality and such. We are only giving the op what she asked for, and I see no one being unkind or unfair, and I don't go for the "I support you in whatever decision you make for your family" business...especially when someone is asking for advice and when the child in question may be endangered in the choice. I agree she knows her ex, etc. etc. Judging by her previous posts, this isn't a good idea.
post #147 of 153
I am not jealous of a woman who wants to hand over her child to a man she took to court two months ago, because he, you know, drove drunk with the kid. Your advice is bordering on dangerous, and I seriously question your hold on reality, cj.
post #148 of 153
The responses to the OP and her suggestion have everything to do with what I'm posting about, as I've outlined several times. Advice is one thing, and a few have offered advice in a non-judgmental, non-insulting manner. Many (most, I'd say) have not. Why? Because the OP is a woman and this culture punishes women, harshly, for stepping out of the 'ideal mother' mode, and all that entails indeed even thinking of doing so, as has been reiterated here.

The father being an alcoholic and all are mitigating factors she must consider and resolve if she is to follow through with her plan or not. That's up to her.

I believe the OP is capable, and has every right to make the decision she feels is best for her family, in conjunction with her family, without being crapped on and told she is a bad person, that she doesn't love her kid, etc. That's not advice, that's abuse. And it's not about her. It's about the people that are doing it. Why they are doing it I've discussed in detail.

I very much believe the OP needed someone to stand up for her, which is why I did. I think she's capable of standing up for her son, and making good choices for both of them, on her own...or at least without being dragged through the mud as she has been. You can express disagreement without being hateful or abusive.

By the way, OP...have you come to a decision yet? Any updates? Wishing you and yours well.

I have a pretty firm hold on the reality of what it's like to live as a woman in a similar circumstance as the OP.
post #149 of 153
I question ANY parent who hands over a child to an addict. Harshly. But I'm pro-child that way.
post #150 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyD View Post
I question ANY parent who hands over a child to an addict. Harshly. But I'm pro-child that way.
:
Uh...yep. Dido. Dido. Dido, but why talk about the real issue here when there are so many other exciting things we can talk about?

post #151 of 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjuniverse View Post
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?
You'd better frickin believe it.

Quote:
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.
So try it. Go try organizing women. Here's one: Try organizing women around anything but victimhood and making demands based on suffering morality. I've been working with a women's center that I love for the last five years, on and off. They exist on a ridiculous, pathetic shoestring of a budget. They need money, and they need to get serious about it. Well, lotsa luck there. We have women engineers here, women in business, women who are valuable people for networks. One of my favorite ladies in town is the state majority whip. We have a terrific old-girls' network here. But at the Center, they cannot get young, up-and-coming non-women's-studies non-LBGTA women to come near the place, because the women's center is about being broken. Even the furniture is broken. Now, I am all for having a place to drag yourself off to when you're broken. But that can't be the whole show; it can't even be a large part of the show. And the rest of the show can't be about Crimes Committed Against Us.

But it is. Know why? Well, partly because of how the headband crew allowed themselves to get tackled in the 70s. But mostly, at this point, because it's run by and for people who exist in the land of if and should. Women with high ideals who refuse to acknowledge that if you want power, you have to grab it. Very likely you'll have to beat other people up for it. You'll have to make the power play and get the bucks. You'll have to get your posse and your network, and stop playing circular ideological firing squad.

In the next few years, the women's center here will lose its home, and unless it's rescued by city organizations, it will wither away. This is preventable. But it involves programming that's not about subjugation. It involves Emily's List and the like. It involves having a large contingent that is serious about power and money. Would that make it more conservative? Yes, absolutely. Welcome to practical politics.

There are serious costs to hope that is not firmly rooted in demonstrated realities and human nature as we know it.

Until women get much more hardheaded about these things, it ain't happening. I recall suggesting some years ago, on babycenter, that if the point of the public-health push for bf was to save WIC and Medicaid dollars, that nursing mothers should demand a cut of the take. A large one. Or refuse to cooperate. After all, we're doing the work. If we save the taxpayer $1, I say look for 75 cents, and give every nursing mother a stipend. My God, you'd have thought I was suggesting some terrible horror. But who did they think was going to get that tax savings? Nice families? Playground building committees? A college-grant fund? No; they don't want to look at how the money comes and goes, and by and large they don't have to. So there's your women working together.

Quote:
I don't think either parent has to be present or available 24/7 to be a good parent.
Who said 24/7? The OP was talking about moving, what, 4000 miles away, permanently, and leaving her kid with a drunk. That's a little different from having a weekend to yourself.

Quote:
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.
Military families have a large and remarkably supportive social structure, which this little boy has not got. As for me, yes, I would choose. Military or kids. Not both. I wouldn't have had kids with a military guy.

Quote:
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.
Wrong. Many, particularly when the husband makes the decision after they've had the kids, and raising the children solo was not in the original deal for the wife. My XH used to talk about wandering off to [exotic locale] for a year or so to work there. I thought he was out of his mind (and, in fact, he was; luckily this was all fantasizing for him and far from a real possibility), and told him so, forcefully. A year to a child is a tremendously long time.

Quote:
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....
Dude...you are in the wrong room.

I'm serious. Right string, wrong yo-yo.

It's a wonderful speech. But you are, rather insistantly, misinterpreting why people here have been coming down so hard on the OP. There's no shortage of people who need to hear your speech. But you need to find better concentrations of them.

Quote:
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.
cj, how much of this are you using as an excuse, yourself? Where is your business, your election committee? Are you up at 4 am making the big bucks, looking to expand, funding campaigns? Are you studying policy and coming up through the networks, are you drafting legislation for people actually in a position to put it through? No? Then when does your internship begin?

If you want power, you have to go get it. Not talk. Get. And not in loony revolutionary-forces fashion, either. In deeply conservative fashion, because, like it or not, that's the nature of lasting power.

I still think you're pissing in the wind, because you cannot force people to change their natures. But if you want a good run at it, you'll need to do like old Hill, there.
post #152 of 153
Great post mama41.
post #153 of 153
I think the op has received plenty of advice and opinions and points to ponder. I hope she considers the needs of her child as she makes her decision. I will leave this up, but for now, it is closed to new posts.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Single Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Single Parenting › Voluntarily giving up custody?