Woggle Posted August 27, 2009 Posted August 27, 2009 Is this woman just mad that women are now dealing with what fathers have had to put up with for years? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1209243/The-courts-took-children-away-Im-working-mother.html
TaraMaiden Posted August 27, 2009 Posted August 27, 2009 No, I don't think so. Jo was distraught. The children, particularly Ross, appeared to be missing his mother The little boy began to getting into trouble at school and once ran away from his father's home. 'The only thing that cheered me was my belief that Andy would tire of the arrangement within six months. In fact, it only went on just under four months until February this year.' According to Jo, Andy began to find it difficult to cope with two young children and his successful business. Simultaneously, Ross told his father: 'I've had enough. I want to be with Mummy.' And back the children came to their mother Today, they reach out to Jo as if they cannot believe they are with her again. Jo is thrilled and neither she, nor Andy, have gone near the courts again. They agree they both want the very best for their children. 'The court order giving me those limited visiting right to Ross and Maddie still exists. But the children want to live with me so they do,' said Jo this week.
TrustInYourself Posted August 28, 2009 Posted August 28, 2009 The children should go to the parents most equipped to care for them. I'm not talking financially, but more importantly the parent that puts them first; whether that be man or woman. This article depresses me. Materialism to the utmost. These people's identities are so tied up in what they do for a living. It's sad.
quankanne Posted August 28, 2009 Posted August 28, 2009 yep. the kids are being made into pawns by parents who are pissed off at each other. my thought is that the one who does the nurturing should have physical custody in a shared arrangement, because they're the primary care-giver of that child.
Lizzie60 Posted August 28, 2009 Posted August 28, 2009 I haven't read the article.. but I agree with Trust.. Kids should ALWAYS come first.. they didn't ask to be there and they certainly should not be in the middle of the mess... it's not fair to them... It takes immensely immature parents to make their kids pay for their mistakes.. or worst, to use them to be mean to their partner.. so low. It's not about material.. although it IS very important.. it's more about emotional stability.
TaraMaiden Posted August 28, 2009 Posted August 28, 2009 The children should go to the parents most equipped to care for them. ...... This article depresses me. Materialism to the utmost. These people's identities are so tied up in what they do for a living. It's sad. yep. the kids are being made into pawns by parents who are pissed off at each other. my thought is that the one who does the nurturing should have physical custody in a shared arrangement, because they're the primary care-giver of that child. I haven't read the article.. but I agree with Trust.. Kids should ALWAYS come first.. they didn't ask to be there and they certainly should not be in the middle of the mess... it's not fair to them... It takes immensely immature parents to make their kids pay for their mistakes.. or worst, to use them to be mean to their partner.. so low. It's not about material.. although it IS very important.. it's more about emotional stability. Well let's take a step back here. The crux of the argument, is not who was awarded custody of the children, but why. And who awarded the father custody of the children? The Judge. The decision hinged entirely on a judicial ruling. It had nothing to do with the parents or their situations between themselves, it was a ruling made by the Law and by a judge who was clearly biased and mistaken - because, look! Mother fought - and won - to get her children back! Where they are happy! if anyone is an idiot in this, it's the Judge - and the father was the one playing the 'she's career/money oriented' card. And four months into custody being awarded to him - he gladly sent them back! So the father is an idiot, and the judge is an even bigger idiot - and let me tell you, it is a given that it will have been - a man! I'm sorry Woggle, what was your question, again-?
Gunny376 Posted August 28, 2009 Posted August 28, 2009 Where is it written in stone that by defult the woman makes the better parent just because she's got a vagina? One need but watch "Cops" "The Jerry Springer Show (I know fake as wrestling) and other such shows to know this isn't true.
TaraMaiden Posted August 28, 2009 Posted August 28, 2009 It's not always the case, I would be the first to admit. but biologically, she is closer to the kids, and as a woman, has genetically more of a caring nurturing trait than a man. This is cut and dried though. Parenting, in reality, never is.
Recommended Posts