equal rights for fathers??

sassa

This stems from a conversation i have had manys a drunken night with friends I think that when a couple separates that a father should have the same rights as the mother. shockingly a lot of my friends disagree saying that newly single fellas would be more worried about getting back "out there" than looking after their child. Whick also raises another point of why should fathers only get to see their kids on weekends? which is what most women expect them to agree to?

andrewh5

The idea that mothers should get automatic custody is both archaic and discriminatory. Fathers should get the same rights as mothers unless there is extremely strong evidence to prove otherwise. How many times do social workers leave kids with unfit mothers rather than agree to them going to the father? Lots of times is the answer and it is so wrong.

sassa

andrewh5 wrote: »

The idea that mothers should get automatic custody is both archaic and discriminatory. Fathers should get the same rights as mothers unless there is extremely strong evidence to prove otherwise. How many times do social workers leave kids with unfit mothers rather than agree to them going to the father? Lots of times is the answer and it is so wrong.

there is girl I know of that only lets her children stay with their father if she wants to go out and has no other babysitter.

Dfens

sassa wrote: »

This stems from a conversation i have had manys a drunken night with friends I think that when a couple separates that a father should have the same rights as the mother. shockingly a lot of my friends disagree saying that newly single fellas would be more worried about getting back "out there" than looking after their child. Whick also raises another point of why should fathers only get to see their kids on weekends? which is what most women expect them to agree to?

Good topic for discussion. From your post above I'm assuming that your friends who believe this are mostly male, maybe I'm wrong? Quite an immature attitude imo.

I believe that it takes 2 people to create the child, so equally so both people should be responsible for the care & welfare of that child until independent. Of course this is assuming that both parents are of fit mind & capable to care for the child, & that there is not some really good reason (central to the welfare of the child) why this may not be the case.

Unfortunately, in some cases, parents can't be bothered with the hassle or responsibility of looking after their child. Or use the child as a weapon to get back at the other parent rather than being adult about it all & dealing with that relationship as a seperate issue to the childs welfare. And I am not being baised towards either sex of parent in my own personal thoughts on this.

sassa

Dfens wrote: »

Good topic for discussion. From your post above I'm assuming that your friends who believe this are mostly male, maybe I'm wrong? Quite an immature attitude imo.

sorry but you're wrong all females present that believe the only good parent is the mother! I would hope that if me and my partner ever split up that we could come up with a better arrangement for our daughters between us, because as it stands the only ones that lose out really are the children.

G&T

If the father has been a part of the child's life
while the parent's are together then it should be
the same routine if they split.

I don't agree with the dad getting access every weekend
though,life is very busy mon-fri and the mom's get a raw deal
because they get no lazy day with the children when there
is no homework ect.

Dfens

sassa wrote: »

sorry but you're wrong all females present that believe the only good parent is the mother!

Thanks for the clarification....it reads like your friends must have a bad opinion of men. I am a mother too by the way. While I'm sure their opinion is justified for some dads, I'm sure there are lot of dads who would gladly spend every waking moment with their child and are very competent as parents.

sassa wrote: »

I would hope that if me and my partner ever split up that we could come up with a better arrangement for our daughters between us, because as it stands the only ones that lose out really are the children

+1 & I would hope likewise if OH and I were ever in that situation. I think children need something different from both parents & that they need to have a constant relationship with both if at all possible.

G&T made a valid point though, I'm sure it's not very nice for mom to be doing the routine 'boring' parenting (from the childs point of view) all week, only for dad to come at the w/end & whisk them away somewhere fun. There has to be a better solution.

sassa

I think that fathers have just as much right to look after the kids during the week. It's not right to expect them to cancel plans and take their kids when the mother decides at the last minute its suitable for her!

1huge1

Its culture really, its changing but slowly, the courts favour women most of the time even if it is unfair to the father.
Personally I think its a disgrace because im a huge supporter of equality and this just seems to me to be blatant ignorance to it.

Still though from what I see the attitude is changing, slowly but surely. As the fact of the matter is fathers can be just as good parents towards their child and are equally important.

Nevyn

Personally I think that looking at it from a father's rights point of you is conter productive.
I think I should be about the child's right and that all custody and access should be child centric so all decisions are made with that is best for the child being the upper most concern.

The willingness and abilty of both parents should be assesed and it's the child's right to know both parents and have a relationship with both parents and the support of both parents which should be what is spoken about imho.

The_Conductor

I agree with chunks of the above.
Any decisions that are made should be in the best interests of the child, whatever that may be. Its all very well to wave a flag for father's rights- or for the mother in family court- but the person who matters in the equation is the poor child who is being used as a bargaining pawn by bickering parents.

People should be mature enough to come to some sort of an arrangement that is conducive to a happy, well rounded child, who is neither poisoned towards one parent, nor denied access to a parent or a maternal or paternal side of the family.

The judiciary do not tend to assist in this regard- though they are improving. I believe in equality of rights- however this should also read as equality of responsibilities towards the child(ren).

Having to fight for visitation rights is a sad reflection on the state of judiciary- and indeed on maturity of the bickering parents- when in the case of a relationship failure they should be sitting down and trying to chart a course for the children, not using them as weapons against one another.

Dfens

sassa wrote: »

I think that fathers have just as much right to look after the kids during the week.

Yes, agreed that this should be the case ,but perhaps not always workable, for example if dad routinely works a night shift & kids are in school all day I think that would be very difficult to work around.

sassa wrote: »

It's not right to expect them to cancel plans and take their kids when the mother decides at the last minute its suitable for her!

Agreed, not right at all for moms to do this. Equally not right for dads falling through on plans to spend time with the child at the last minute & disappointing the child etc.

I agree with Thaedydal, the focus should be what is best for the child, their emotional welfare & development, & relationship with both parents.

andrewh5

sassa wrote: »

there is girl I know of that only lets her children stay with their father if she wants to go out and has no other babysitter.

He needs to get his backside into a court then. She is bang out of order!

wolfpawnat

I am currently 36 weeks pregnant, my OH and I want the baby to have his surname and want him to have shared guardianship-we both think its only fair, to do this though I cannot have his name put on the birth cert until 2 weeks after the baby is born and it cannot be given his surname until we both are together at the registry office after it is born, and we have to go to the commissioner of the oaths for me to sign over half legal guardianship. I'm sorry I respect there are alot of people out there who are happy with this system but IMO it is bollix. I think if both parents are in the room the time the registry staff come in, and they both agree to have all these things, it should be able to be done on the spot!

Also as a product of a one parent family, who only say my dad at weekends, I have to say it is very selfish of women to expect to not see their childen during the week (mostly because of school and work) and then throw them to their fathers for a few hours sat and sun. I think if mum and dad live near each other they should be adult enough to be able to share responsibility throughout the weekends and weekdays, that way both can still have social lives and time with their children!

gerrycollins

i think what King Soloman did and decided to cut the baby in two, giving a half to each person, then the one who loved the child as much as the other but wanted whats best for the child stood up and gave that child to the other.

Of course this bibical story is about two women but each father and mother should put themselves in the above position and ask what they would do.

Im all for equal rights etc but you cant split the child in two and have the father suffer the homework/school nights some times and so on so on in a position where the mother has custody. and vice versa.

Week on week off another option but if the dad lives a long way from the school then thats impossible so there has to be some sort or reality check by some people before they start demanding their rights(non existant) as a father or parent there is a difference.

im married with 2 and another on the way

lostinnappies

You cant really generalise, you can get some really awful parents both male and female. It really aught to be on a case by case basis, but the question of wither or not mothers should be automatically given custody .. if I have to generalise then I would say yes. Not out of any badness or any kind of feminist superiority complex but simply on the differences between male and female natures. Now before you all jump down my throats here im not saying that everyone is like this but in the vast majority of houses you will find that wemon have more patience are gentle and are more concious of how what they do and say effects children. Even when you get the nicest, gentleist guy in the world when it comes to children the lose the plot quicker and can be more gruff with kids. You can get the other way around also i know there are some selfish evil mothers out there but if we are going to generalise that would be my opinion.

craiginireland

I'm a single dad and at the moment the system is not fair. Far from it actually. The comments about only seeing the child when there is no other babysitter is something I'm familiar with. It took a court to fix that.

Tarring every single father with the same brush "oh you should see the child so mammy can go out during the week" is wrong, for instance, I spent so much money on court cases and solicitors that i couldnt afford to live near the child any more. This affected my relationship with the child, as it happens i have him every weekend and love my time with him. But the system is far from fair and, lets be honest, doesnt suit the child, its done for the benefit of the mothers. I work 5 days a week and have the child the other two. The mother has him 5 days when he's not at playschool and gets the other two days to herself.

I would love to see my child more often but the system doesnt allow that. If the system was fair i'd still live near my child because i wouldnt have built up so much debt from gaining my "rights". The mother i believe got legal aid.

Thats my two cents.

planetX

This thread seems to be assuming that the father is around, and is involved - often not the case. Also assuming that the courts always favour the mother, which I can tell you is no longer the case. The idea of automatic custody for the mother being questioned I find terrifying - So when the baby is born should they just toss a coin. Biology is not equal, a baby being breastfed needs its mother, and vice versa. There's an emotional and physical attachment that can never be there for a man - but we're not allowed to say that now...

craiginireland

planetX wrote: »

There's an emotional and physical attachment that can never be there for a man - but we're not allowed to say that now...

Lets try....
There's an emotional and physical attachment that can never be there for a woman - but we're not allowed to say that now...

planetX

Have you given birth then?

craiginireland

No, I havent. I don't doubt children need there mother, they absolutely do. No question of that but they need their father just as much. This whole "untouchable" thing women have is unjustified and where the problem starts.

If the father is a **** fair enough let him rot in hell and away from the child but where the father is around he shud have absolute equal rights regardless of whether the mother feels like it.

planetX

I never said involved fathers shouldn't have rights. My point was about automatic custody of a baby for the mother. All things being equal I don't think it should be a coin toss. There is an overwhelming powerful hormonal drive to protect your baby, I've yet to meet a man who felt it.

craiginireland

So if the mother was a pschyopath or unfit or maybe the father is better with the baby thats irrelevant?

craiginireland

And it shud never be a cointoss

planetX

All things being equal - by that I meant neither parent was unfit. I'm sorry if you don't see your kids enough, I don't see mine enough either though I have custody. I'm coming from the perspective of someone who was pregnant alone, gave birth virtually alone, and did the first 7 years of parenting alone. So I admit, I'm biased here.

Nevyn

The 'new baby' smell actually triggers a biochemical response in all adults.
So a new dad will bond with the baby and vice versa if they are given the oppetunity and will form those bonds.

craiginireland

I've no doubt that was difficult for you but it's the bias part that makes things more difficult for the rest of us

planetX

craiginireland wrote: »

I've no doubt that was difficult for you but it's the bias part that makes things more difficult for the rest of us

Wrong, I have no responsibility for any of your difficulties. Anymore than you are responsible for the biased judge that I was unfortunate enough to come in front of.

The_Conductor

planetX wrote: »

Wrong, I have no responsibility for any of your difficulties. Anymore than you are responsible for the biased judge that I was unfortunate enough to come in front of.

Thats the problem though- a perception that the judiciary are biased- irrespective of whether its true or not.......

Kimbot

craiginireland wrote: »

I'm a single dad and at the moment the system is not fair. Far from it actually. The comments about only seeing the child when there is no other babysitter is something I'm familiar with. It took a court to fix that.

Tarring every single father with the same brush "oh you should see the child so mammy can go out during the week" is wrong, for instance, I spent so much money on court cases and solicitors that i couldnt afford to live near the child any more. This affected my relationship with the child, as it happens i have him every weekend and love my time with him. But the system is far from fair and, lets be honest, doesnt suit the child, its done for the benefit of the mothers. I work 5 days a week and have the child the other two. The mother has him 5 days when he's not at playschool and gets the other two days to herself.

I would love to see my child more often but the system doesnt allow that. If the system was fair i'd still live near my child because i wouldnt have built up so much debt from gaining my "rights". The mother i believe got legal aid.

Thats my two cents.

I know the feeling mate, I'm in the same boat. Got dragged through courts numerous times having to pay for legal representation when the "other party" didn't bother showing up even when it was them that demanded we go to court.

I work hard every day, see my son every weekend and provide everything I can for him.

Its hardest for the child and the courts never ever look into anything the father says, my son always telss me he wants to live with me etc but I know as fact the courts would never allow it.

planetX

Hopefully not in general - but there are a few 'rogues' out there, affecting both sides of this debate. This one seriously had a screw loose - and the other party was also deeply unhappy at his ruling btw. How do you qualify as a judge? there needs to be some kind of personality test.