Having children ruins everything

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I think there's truth in this, but I also think that for some parents this is correct and they do, indeed give it up.

Especially men. Because we let them slide on it, to be honest. You hear about deadbeat dads sucking and everyone poo poos them, but that deadbeat dad? He tells everyone what a bitch his ex is, how she's sucking all his money out of him, how she changed when she became a mom, blah blah blah.

And people buy it.

Fuckers.

My ex complained when we were first divorced that the state would take too long to process my payments, so she wanted to be paid directly. Because it went for my kids, I agreed. Then, she refused to sign something acknowledging the direct payments even though they got paid, so I got tagged with arrears. I filed a motion to get credited, brought in the cancelled check stubs to prove it had been paid in the full amount of $1400. Well, despite even the prosecutor telling her to admit it, she refused, so my $1400 payments were classified as "gifts", and I was still stuck with about $15k in arrears that I had to pay as well. Even the judge was pissed at her, but there was nothing that could be done because that's the way the law is written in may state.

So, I've not only never missed or been late with a payment, but the bitch took me for an extra $15k.

Oh, and because our agreement says I have to pay medical, she deliberately goes out of network whenver the kids need something so I get stuck with a 30% copay instead of having full coverage.

Not every single dad is a cheap bastard.

[Kalbear]

I'm not saying that there aren't good single dads out there, but you're the big rarity - and in my experience there are plenty of dads like you that claim issues like this when there's a lot more to it than that. I'm not saying you're lying; I'm saying I've heard a lot of stories that sound just like yours, and they end up being fiction or exaggeration.

Just curious though - given the massive abuse history in that family and whatnot, why is she the one with primary custody? Why is she going to the doctor at all? it's normal to have both parents agree on any medical care beforehand if there is any issue (such as for orthodontics) if one parent's coverage is the primary, which is why I ask; it sounds like you don't have custody in that case.

[Mya Stone]

I feel like I should post here...but I forgot what I was going to say.

[Sis Who Swears]

Damn I'm mad I missed that. That sounds about right for Minaku.

It was pretty damned impressive. And informative. And yeah when she left were all like HOLYFUCKINGFUCK. :eek:

[Rockroi]

I'm not saying that there aren't good single dads out there, but you're the big rarity - and in my experience there are plenty of dads like you that claim issues like this when there's a lot more to it than that. I'm not saying you're lying; I'm saying I've heard a lot of stories that sound just like yours, and they end up being fiction or exaggeration.

Okay so before I respond, let me give you my credentials: I am an attorney licensed to practice in Massachusetts. My client-base fluctuates but at any given time its usually 50/50 split between male and female clients. I have been practicing for 11 and a half years, all but two of those years dedicated to Family Law.

In my experience, the vast majority of parents (both male and female) who are divorced and who have children try very hard to be good, caring people and parents under the circumstances. I have seen a few (not many, but a few) more fathers than mothers try like hell to get out of their parental responsibilities (ie: less in child support etc) but its a small portion. The vast majority of divorced parents (that I have dealt with) are just doing what it takes to survive. That "survival" is hard. Balancing careers, money, the kids, household issues etc is a stress and divorced couples have limited options less resources and more conflict.

Just curious though - given the massive abuse history in that family and whatnot, why is she the one with primary custody? Why is she going to the doctor at all? it's normal to have both parents agree on any medical care beforehand if there is any issue (such as for orthodontics) if one parent's coverage is the primary, which is why I ask; it sounds like you don't have custody in that case.

The story above is a far, far cry from something that would cause the court to switch parenting. In order to take away custody from a parent (after its been awarded) you have to do something particularly mind-blowing. Being a dick on money is never one of them.

Well then why do fathers give up custody so fast? Well, that's looking at the result (physical custody to moms outstrips custody to dads by a considerable margin) and negating the factors that go into making the decision to fight custody. The vast majority of families out there have the mother as what is termed "the primary caregiver." And the physicality of that result is easy to understand: mom usually took some time off from work during pregnancy and more time after the child was born. Dad went back to work pretty quickly (comparatively to mom) and for good reason: they had to earn money. Usually (not always) that sets the roles. Men tend to make more money than women and the vast majority of single-earner households are with the father earning the only paycheck. Therefore, when the couple files for divorce, the court will look to see the structure of the home and ask "Who is the primary caregiver" and "who is the primary wage-earner?" Answers are, routinely - Dad earns the money, mom takes care of the kids (mostly, not always). Mom may still have a job, but she usually still is the primary care-giver to the children and dad usually earns more money.

In Massachusetts that is the "leg-up" most courts look to to award custody; mom usually takes on that primary-caregiver roll. Courts do not want to disrupt the children any more than they have to. If the Father objects the court will appoint what is called a "Guardian ad Litem" ("next friend of the child") to investigate who should be awarded physical custody. And this will cost anywhere from $5,000.00 to $15,000.00 (and sometimes much more). And people do not have that kind of money to throw around. And given the situation as I described above most men opt not to fight that battle UNLESS there is a significant problem. And those fights are the nastiest.

So, what is a dad to do? Well, he has to pay child support. And child support is calculated off your gross income and does not take into account your expenses, taxes etc. You plug dad's gross income into a formula and compare it to Mom's GI and that gives you the total "available income." You then multiply that by a % and multiply that by the # of kids and you get the result. There are a few credits (child care cost - ie: day care; health insurance, dental, vision) but mostly its a "Tough shit, you have to pay this or else you become a social pariah." So, they pay.

Dad's complain about paying it. Why? Because its human nature. Many dads automatically assume they are getting "screwed" (interestingly enough few blame the mom; most blame the 'system'); the child support guidelines are utterly void of nuance and take virtually nothing outside of gross income into account. Dads struggle to make ends meet. Hell, it does not take divorce to get me to complain. My daughter gets lunch at school and when we have to pre-pay for the week, I complain. Does that mean I want her to starve to death? No; just means I bitch about money. And when dads get the kids for overnight visits, they DO NOT get a credit for money they spend on the children when the children are with the, (and I do not think they should). So, that's why they complain.

And mom's complain about getting child support. Why? Because its human nature. They think dad is hiding money; makes more than he says, etc. And they struggle to make ends meet. Moms get caught "in the trenches"; they are the front-line of child care. Child has some unexpected costs that need to be accounted for? That falls squarely on mom; if she turns to dad, he has an out: I pay you child support, use that. Moms also have to say "no" far more often than dads when money is short. Children can grow to resent both parents when money is tight, but mom bares the brunt of that attack. Mom's also have no support caring for the children after work etc. So, they complain.

And in my experience, for every complaint of a father bitching (erroneously) about a mom taking him to the cleaners on child support there is a mirror-image mom out there bitching (erroneously) that dad is "getting away with murder." Sometimes mom is right; sometimes dad. But the "great middle" are the moms and dads out there that write the checks and cash them and go on trying to do their best to care for the kids and do right by them. Its fucking hard. Harder still when there is true animosity about why the marriage failed or as an out-growth in parenting styles (ie: mom at home does not have the same rules and discipline enforcement as dad at his home). Just as it is EASY to say dad is getting away with something, its also very easy to claim that mom is complaining about nothing.

And I could tell you my "nightmare" stories: the one about the dad who became addicted to drugs and the mom who had to kick him out of the house; or the one about the mom who knew she was too attractive to be nailed down to her husband and their two kids and wanted to spend a few more years "being free" so she gave up custody to dad without a whimper. Or how about the mom who was a drug addict and so lost custody of the kids and the kids' father who -even after mom got clean -would do all he could to ruin her relationship with the kids. Or the one about the mom who busted her hump to get her kid into a great school and the dad who fought and tried to not have to pay a dime- for school, for medical costs - nothing!

These are the exceptions though. Nobody likes paying too much and not seeing the product of their payments; nobody likes not knowing if they are getting enough of what they deserve.

However, to cavalierly say that its all a sham; that dads just like to bitch and that moms are the ones who are getting screwed is a massive oversimplification. In my experience (and that is all I can speak to) most parents in divorced households try their best and when there is an abuse of payments or refusal to pay, while dads are more likely the abuser, its by a slim margin. There is, as they say, enough blame to go around, but enough complaining to dwarf that.

[Kalbear]

The story above is a far, far cry from something that would cause the court to switch parenting. In order to take away custody from a parent (after its been awarded) you have to do something particularly mind-blowing. Being a dick on money is never one of them.

no, it was the 'leaving the baby crying and swimming in a puddle of her own vomit' part that I was talking about switching parenting - and more importantly, I am confused why the dad in question didn't contest the custody more in that circumstance given both her obvious neglect and her obvious desire to not, ya know, actually parent and stuff.

However, to cavalierly say that its all a sham; that dads just like to bitch and that moms are the ones who are getting screwed is a massive oversimplification. In my experience (and that is all I can speak to) most parents in divorced households try their best and when there is an abuse of payments or refusal to pay, while dads are more likely the abuser, its by a slim margin. There is, as they say, enough blame to go around, but enough complaining to dwarf that.

I didn't say that, so I agree.

I did say that it's much easier for a man to simply say 'fuck this' and decide to be a deadbeat dad. The penalties against them aren't particularly severe. I know of several simply in my friend group, not to talk about the stereotype that exists. And I said to those deadbeat dads: fuck them.

[Nukelavee]

Rockroi- wow. Interesting post.

[Kalbear]

The non-custodial parent pretty much has to prove - prove, by third party validation (such as by using expensive PIs) - that the custodial parent is keeping the kid in a crack house to have custody changed.

This happened during the marriage. Custody hadn't been established. That's why I don't understand the custody agreement. She clearly didn't want to have custody all that much if FLOW is accurate, and he clearly did - so why did she end up with custody? After the fact, yes, I agree, but that's not the question I'm raising.

Someone's (especially an "interested party" ex-spouse's/divorcing spouse's) word on simple neglect that was only alleged once is NOT nearly enough.

It was the word of the child themselves.

It also costs about $30,000 to try and contest physical custody after it's been decided - and unless the aforesaid crack-smoking isn't happening (say it's just the other spouse bad-mouthing the other in front of the kid, not providing a stable environment, etc), then it's a toss-up, with the better-than-even money being on an attorney being $30,000 richer.

What about actually before custody has been established, like I have been saying repeatedly?

It's also really amusing that y'all think I'm totally ignorant in this given my background.

[Nukelavee]

Because we all know it?

One thing I found odd in this topic, the way people were discussing children, and if they are all monsters or not, etc...

Really - none of you have clear memories as a child? I have clear ones back to 3, and can remember earlier if i work at it. My opinion? Being a small child is confusing as fuck, it's like being on shrooms for 4 years straight. Nothing makes sense, nothing. So many rules, and exceptions, and new ones popping up, and everything is new, and a surprise.

It can be stressful. so, shit happens, because it seemed like a good idea, until you discovered it wasn't.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

I'm not saying that there aren't good single dads out there, but you're the big rarity - and in my experience there are plenty of dads like you that claim issues like this when there's a lot more to it than that. I'm not saying you're lying; I'm saying I've heard a lot of stories that sound just like yours, and they end up being fiction or exaggeration.

The vast majority of divorced dads I know are good guys. But there are enough shitbirds to give us a bad name. And I think you may underestimate the number of single moms who aren't the paragons of virtue presented on Lifetime. Reality is a lot more complex.

Just curious though - given the massive abuse history in that family and whatnot, why is she the one with primary custody? Why is she going to the doctor at all? it's normal to have both parents agree on any medical care beforehand if there is any issue (such as for orthodontics) if one parent's coverage is the primary, which is why I ask; it sounds like you don't have custody in that case.

First, there is a huge presumption that the woman is the more suitable parent, particularly with younger children. You need a lot to overcome that, particularly when, as in my case, I had been working full-time and she was home with the kids. The court is going to presume that she's more bonded, more able to take care of them with me earning the money to keep two households afloat.

Second, the reality is that I'd have had to put the kids in day care. So, telling a court to give me custody to put the kids in day care rather than at home with their mother full-time (she wasn't working) is an even bigger hurdle.

Third, the things I described happened when my daughter was a baby. At the time of the divorce, she was 7 or 8. Any crib stories, sleeping in until noon, etc., wouldn't have carried any real weight considering that they had happened years before. My ex was neurotic and very immature (she still freaking SUCKED HER THUMB), but there wasn't anything close to legal abuse I could have proven. The only really abusive stuff towards the kids was the sleeping in, not hearing them when they cried to get up, etc. But really, I told that story to point out that I didn't have it easy as someone whose wife did all the work. And as I said, you can choose whether to believe that or not, but there are some folks here who likely remember at least some of those details from way back then.

And fourth, the cost. Not just in money (which would have meant I'd had to have sold the house that I wanted to keep the kids in, etc.) but the emotional cost to my kids. I'd have had to go into court and argue that she was an unfit mother, etc. That battle would have created animosities that would have horribly scarred my kids. She's have told them everything I said, made me out to be the horrible man saying horrible things about their mommy, trying to take them away from her, etc. There is no winner there, and there is no way I could do that to them. She was immature, and not a great role model, but she wasn't so unfit that putting the kids through all that would have made them better off.

ETA: Just to add something. In my state, they changed the law so that deadbeat dads lose their driver's license. When the economy here went south, there were a lot of people who lost their jobs. If you were suppose to pay your child support, but lost your job and couldn't, you also lost your license. Which then presented the question of how the fuck guys were supposed to get and hold a new job if they weren't allowed to drive. It is insane. I don't do that kind of work, but it happened to a guy I know who was devoted, but simply had no money when his company went under. He drew down all his savings to pay support for about 8 months, then was broke. He couldn't make the payments, and CSEA took his license. He asked me to help him, and I found there wasn't a damn thing I could do.

So, I told him the only option was to drive illegally, without a licence, and hope he didn't get busted. Oh, btw. On my counties child support site, there are 30 "FAQ's" listed for parents having problems with child support payments. Not a single one of those questions is from the perspective of the payor. Nothing like "What if I've paid but my payment isn't credited", or "What if I've changed jobs", or anything else. it is ridiculous.

[Kalbear]

Third, the things I described happened when my daughter was a baby. At the time of the divorce, she was 7 or 8.

Ah. That was the part I was missing; I thought it was a lot closer to the divorce. That makes more sense. Thanks.

As to the dad stuff:

The vast majority of divorced dads I know are good guys. But there are enough shitbirds to give us a bad name. And I think you may underestimate the number of single moms who aren't the paragons of virtue presented on Lifetime. Reality is a lot more complex.

This is my fault; I wasn't more clear.

Your situation is a rarity because it's very rare where the mom is really incompetent and the dad is really competent. It's usually either that the mom is the more competent one or both are fairly reasonable (but disagree about something fundamental); from the court cases and documentation I've seen you don't tend to get a lot of deadbeat moms, as it were. Deadbeat dads are also a rarity, but they're less rare. Sorry I wasn't more clear; I do know quite a few good single fathers.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

from the court cases and documentation I've seen you don't tend to get a lot of deadbeat moms, as it were. Deadbeat dads are also a rarity, but they're less rare.

Moms overwhelmingly get custody, which means dads are generally going to be the payees. So, you're not going to get many deadbeat momes because such a small percentage of them are paying child support.

That being said, you're right. While I don't think most dads are deadbeats, I do think a higher percentable of men abdicate their responsbility to their children compared to the percentage of women who do so. I know a few guys whose wives just upped and disappeared, leaving them with the kids, but that's comparatively rare. It is more common with men.

The thing is, when you read about court cases, your necessarily reading only about those instances where men haven't complied. Generally, when men comply, there's no court case, so nobody reads about it.

[Kalbear]

The thing is, when you read about court cases, your necessarily reading only about those instances where men haven't complied. Generally, when men comply, there's no court case, so nobody reads about it.

Sure, but you'd still read about the court cases of women not complying either - again, that's far more rare. As are incidents of women up and leaving (without their kids; women up and leaving WITH their kids comprises a lot of that kidnapping charge).

[ZombieWife]

I come from a broken home where payments were always received on time, where my parents never bitched about child support, where my folks worked their asses off to make things easy and pleasant for us. So, I do think there are a lot of folks out there who do make it work in the best interest of the child.

But, I think a lot of men do get screwed and that the whole image of "dead beat dad" is just something we've come to accept, that the "wronged woman who's getting screwed by the ex-husband who's out with the new sports car and a brand-spankin' new 19-year-old-girlfriend with diamond jewelry" is not exactly a common thing here.

A pal of mine divorced. The child went to the ex wife. This was 1980s Wyoming. He learned she was doing drugs and using part, if not most of the child support money on drugs. He sued for custody, but because he did not have as good a job as she did and because he was a part-time college student as well, he did not get custody. Even though he had familial support for the child, they denied him. Furthermore, when he tried to tell them that she was using the funds for drugs and that necessities like food and diapers and clothing for the child was not met, the court pretty much told him, "Sorry, there's nothing we can do."

So, he stopped paying child support and sent a money order each month to his ex's mother for the amount. SHE would, in turn, go out and buy food, clothing, diapers, whatever the child needed. Put some away for doctor visits, etc. He saved every single one of those receipts for the money orders. His ex was pissed. Utterly pissed. Reported him and he started having his wages garnished. He had to drop out of school and work full time. So, she still got her drug money, but at least his kid got what she needed too.

But, I agree with Rockroi. For every guy who's got a lame sob story, there's a woman who also feels the need to play the victim card. There's bonafied victims on both sides and really crappy tales of how parents have had to rise above it all to do what's best for their kids, even if it meant paying out the nose. It shouldn't be necessary in some of these cases. I'd think that the system would work, but sometimes it doesn't.

[Angalin]

I think the child support/post-divorce discussion would be better off in its own thread (and didn't we have one of those recently?).

On-topic: no, having children doesn't ruin everything, although it changes a whole lot of things. And if they don't work the way you expected, you can't take them back for a refund.

Children are relentless and all-consuming, which is why, eg, teaching them about boundaries is so important - you're building a human from scratch! It's never going to be easy, much depends on how well you match up with your kid, and like any job, at times it will be great and other times it will be awful.

[Newsun]

I greatly enjoy being with young kids, and taking care of two babies last night lead me to the decision that once I'm done with school I almost certainly want children. There's just something satisfying about taking care of another human being. However, I definitely want to finish whatever schooling I have in my future and hopefully have a stable financial situation before having kids. On the flip side, I don't want to be a father at a relatively old age; there's nothing inherently wrong with it, but because of my fathers age I missed out on doing a lot with him, and don't want that to happen with my potential children.

[Nukelavee]

See, I totally know enjoying being around kids is not the same as being the parent. No way I'm taking on that job.

Plus, you know, never been able to actually breed anyways.

Which, btw, is a really depressing thought, but not the way you'd think. It's just, here I am, the end result of, what, a billion years brutal competition in evolution, a fucking apex predator, a member of an insanely effective species, and the whole experiment on this model is over. All those life forms that managed to be succesful at life, paying it forward every time, and all for nought.

I'm a tragic waste of potential.

[ICE CROW]

If having children ruins everything does having everything ruin children?

[Greywolf2375]

If having children ruins everything does having everything ruin children?

Regardless of what the Hiltons and Kardashians show on TV, no.

[Eponine]

Agreed on the older mom thing. I'd been married nearly 10 years, had a master's degree and a successful career before having a kid. I had all my partying out of my system.

If it happens, I'll be at least in my early 30s and married relatively recently. At this time, I am in the process of a fairly expensive and time consuming career change. I am somewhat concerned about my career growth, but the reality is that I have nothing to complain about.

I most definitely don't regret not having children earlier. If I'd had a child when my ex-H wanted me too, right now I would be a single mother with a 6 year old. And that is nothing I wanted at any level. What I would have done differently was to get my career/education shit together then, so I wouldn't have spent the last 7 years with no career direction and be trying to get it together now.