Shared custody the best and worst

Welcome to the new age child who has four parents.

http://www.theage. com.au/opinion/ society-and- culture/shared- custody-the- best-and- worst-20100507- ujm0.html

Shared custody the best and worst

JO CASE
May 8, 2010
ICLIMBED into my son's bed, kicking aside the school books on his Manchester United quilt. That's when I really started to cry. Lying there, looking at the posters torn from old Footy Records on his wall, watching the sliver of light in the hallway where I'd usually be standing at bedtime, it hit me that I was only there because he wasn't.
Snot ran into my mouth. My eyes swelled beneath my fingers. I realised that my sobbing, expelled from deep inside my chest, actually sounded like "boo-hoo, boo-hoo".
It was probably this moment of self-awareness that made me realise how ridiculous I was being. It propelled me out of bed and into the bathroom, to alternately blow my nose, exhale a final series of stuttering sobs, and inspect the damage.
Come on, I told myself sternly, looking deep into my own slitted red eyes. He's not dead, he's just at his father's. Like he is every other week of his life. You'll see him soon. The next thought, the one that really sobered me up, was, ''What if his father rang you right now and asked you to take him for the week? How would you get your work done and your deadlines met?''
When people hear that I share custody of my son with his dad on an arrangement of one week on, one week off, they generally have one of three reactions.
The most common, oddly, is, ''You're so lucky. You get the best of both worlds.'' This mostly comes from harried mothers, who juggle work and kids and partners and say things like, "I can't remember the last time I saw a film." To them, my life is a kind of paradise of going out, having a career free of childcare restrictions, and finding time to visit the hairdresser's alone.
The second reaction is, ''I could never do that. I'd just go insane with missing him/her/them. That's so good of you.'' Again, this comes from fellow mothers. These ones disinfect their kids' toys when they drop them on the floor and no longer accept lunch or dinner invitations because their child needs their routine and must be in bed at the designated hour, no matter what, to prevent transformation into a pumpkin. Translation:
''I could never do that. You must not love your child like I do. Life must be easy when you can farm your child off to someone else for half your life.''
The third reaction is, ''Wow. Really? That is great. Good on you.'' This comes from separated fathers who are only allowed access to their children for one weekend a fortnight. They tend to beam at me like I am a saint. (Generally because they were once married to women like the ones who give me Reaction Two, and share the opinion that my actions are rare and benevolent - only they are sincere.) "Well, it's only what's fair," I say. This is true - though I feel, under these men's admiring gaze, as if I am being deliberately disingenuous. And maybe I am.
The truth of my experience reflects a mix of all these reactions. I do get more time to spend on my friends and career (and, technically, at the hairdresser's, though you wouldn't know it from looking at me). I do sometimes resent that extra time, badly miss my son, and cry so hard I swallow my own snot. And though our custody arrangement is - logically - fair, it is not the most common outcome when parents separate. Sometimes I wish I had never been so ''reasonable'', and suspect myself of having been so depressed when I left my son's father that I accepted shared custody out of exhaustion rather than fairness.
But, when all my guilt-tinged analysis has been exhausted, one fact remains. Shared custody, despite its effects on me or my former partner, is the best thing for my son. He has two parents who want him, who care about him, and who are intimately involved in his everyday life.
Plus, he gets to listen to songs with swear words in them at my house (so long as he doesn't sing them aloud). He has Garage Band on his computer at dad's. My partner takes him to footy games. His dad teaches him to play soccer.
"What's good about having two houses?" I asked him recently.
"Well, I have four parents instead of two," he said, surprising me. Then he thought about it, and his smile curved into a frown. "Actually, that means I have four parents to tell me what to do."
"But four people who really care about you, too," I said. "Right?"
"Yeah," he agreed, reverting to being happy about it.
He has the best of both worlds. And, yes, the worst of both worlds, too.
Jo Case is associate editor of the journal Kill Your Darlings and books editor of The Big Issue.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

High Court rejects shared parenting plan

Another blow for fatherhood.

http://news. theage.com. au/breaking- news-national/ high-court- rejects-shared- parenting- plan-20100303- pir2.html

High Court rejects shared parenting plan

March 3, 2010
AAP
A court order requiring a Sydney mother and Mount Isa father to share parenting of their seven-year-old might have been in the child's best interests, but it just wasn't feasible, the High Court has ruled.
High Court judges said the Federal Court magistrate who made the original order should have considered whether it was actually practicable for the daughter to spend equal time or even substantial time with each parent.
The High Court initially handed down its decision in December but only released its reasons on Wednesday.
The court heard the couple lived together in Sydney from 1993 until 2007, and their daughter had been born in August 2002.
In January 2007 the family moved to Mount Isa to allow the husband to gain work experience.
The parents separated in August 2007, with the mother and daughter returning to Sydney. But three months later they returned to Mount Isa in accordance with interim orders sought by the father and made by the Federal Magistrates Court.
Final orders, made in April 2008, gave the parents equal shared responsibility for their daughter and directed that she spend equal time with each parent on the basis that both would live in Mount Isa.
The Full Court of the Family Court dismissed the mother's appeal, but the High Court took a different view.
Judges noted that the legislation stipulated that a child's best interests were to be the paramount consideration in parenting orders, with a presumption that this could be best achieved by parents sharing responsibility.
However, that presumption could be rebutted, with the legislation also requiring consideration of the parents' circumstances, particularly the mother.
In this case, the mother was living in a caravan park and relying on welfare payments and income from casual work, with her daughter staying with her every second week.
The mother was also suffering depression from her poor living conditions, lack of employment opportunities and isolation from her family in Sydney.
The High Court judges said the federal magistrate addressed only the question of whether it was in the child's best interests for her to spend equal time with each parent.
He made no assessment of whether spending equal time with each parent was actually feasible, they said.
"Had consideration been given to the question, only one conclusion could have been reached, one which did not permit the making of the order," they said.
The case was sent back to the Federal Magistrates Court to be reheard.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Failure to Protect: The Crisis in America’s Family Courts

The same can be said of the New Zealand Family Court. The corruption and destruction of broken children and the heartbroken paternal family is on par with how the Nazis' dealt with people in the second world war. Sad but true. What else would you expect from a Court built on lies and gender discrimination!!Lying lawyers cause so much misery. They enjoy inflicting pain on the innocent. Often the lies run for a life time and the falsely accused must take it on the chin because the system cannot rectify its mistake. What a scumbag Court of deceit!!



Failure to Protect: The Crisis in America’s Family Courts

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

USA = Appeals Court allows lawsuit

If the Courts were interested in the best interests of the child then why do the many so called professionals that fester in the Court promote parental alienation through false allegations and meandering litigation? Year after year goes the heartbreak. The damage to my children after eight years being forced Family Court clients is both disgusting and tragic. The Family Court is gender bias and has its gravy train hands dripping in blood.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/05/nj_appeals_court_allows_lawsui.html

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

300 - Manowar - Spartan Warriors

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

FATHERS.COM - How to Spy on Your Kids

FATHERS.COM - How to Spy on Your Kids

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

The Prague Post - News - Fathers fight for custody

  If only the New Zealand Family Court was fair for fathers. 

A ruling by the Czech Constitutional Court promises to make it easier for fathers to gain custody of their children, with the court saying cases should be decided according to a child's best interests.


The Prague Post - News - Fathers fight for custody

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS