Can you post a link please?Studies have shown that the most serious threat to a child is the mother's boyfriend,
It is changing, from a situation where it was 100% in favour of the mother to where it's 80% in her favour (my figures for illustrative purposes, obviously). But it's an uphill struggle for any father no matter how much of the parenting he did before the split.The only reason Im staying married is so I dont become a McDonalds dad to my kids.
If I split from my wife she will get custody while I will get very limited access while paying for everything.
That is just the way it is with family law in Ireland.
I honestly think they would or would actually be more likely to side with the dead father's partner - for the reason that for the child to be living with the natural father plus partner in the first place, then either (a) there was a compelling reason for the child NOT to live with the natural mother in the first place, or (b) the natural mother didn't fight for the child to live with her originally.I am simply curious that if a natural mother brought the same case, would the courts find in the same way?
It's unfortunately a very well known phenomenon.Can you post a link please?
This isn't necessarily the best advice as the poster appears to value his relationship with his children above everything. My husband has a friend who split from his wife and the wife did everything in her power to sour the relationship he had with the kids - was never (literally never) home when he called to collect them for access and bad-mouthed him to the kids ('he doesn't want to see you') for years. He brought her to court numerous times and despite being ordered time and again to allow him access, she never did despite being threatened with jail (because she knew no judge was actually going to send her to jail). He has absolutely no relationship with his kids now (they're older now and don't want to see him as he is effectively a stranger who they have been told bad stories about) and it is heart-breaking to see how sad he is about it.If that's the only reason you are together then you should split. You will end up bitter and resentful of each other and it's a bad relationship model for your kids to see.
I honestly think they would or would actually be more likely to side with the dead father's partner - for the reason that for the child to be living with the natural father plus partner in the first place, then either (a) there was a compelling reason for the child NOT to live with the natural mother in the first place, or (b) the natural mother didn't fight for the child to live with her originally.
In this case, my reading is that the judge wasn't impressed with the natural father being more interested in pressing for HIS rights and entitlements rather than being interested in what was best for the child.
This isn't necessarily the best advice as the poster appears to value his relationship with his children above everything. My husband has a friend who split from his wife and the wife did everything in her power to sour the relationship he had with the kids - was never (literally never) home when he called to collect them for access and bad-mouthed him to the kids ('he doesn't want to see you') for years. He brought her to court numerous times and despite being ordered time and again to allow him access, she never did despite being threatened with jail (because she knew no judge was actually going to send her to jail). He has absolutely no relationship with his kids now (they're older now and don't want to see him as he is effectively a stranger who they have been told bad stories about) and it is heart-breaking to see how sad he is about it.
I'm not saying all break-ups would be as bad or all women as vindictive, but you can quickly find yourself very powerless in the most important aspect of your life.
hoping that I would only ever do what was in my childs best interests.
But that's the whole point. In your scenario (child with natural dad + partner, natural dad dies), the natural mother has already been judged less suitable once - and as you say, that's unusual. So if she was judged unsuitable once (a big decision for a judge, presumably with good reasons), she probably would be again.Not sure to be honest. Courts have nearly always found on the part of the mother when it comes to custody disputes between mother and father unless there was a risk to the child. I can't see them not doing the same if it was a dispute between the childs mother and the ex husbands partner.
That supports the view that children are better off with their biological father in a split as his partner or future partner is far less likely to hurt the children.It's unfortunately a very well known phenomenon.
This study is from the States:
The Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect
"According to the report, children living with their mother and her boyfriend are about 11 times more likely to be sexually, physically, or emotionally abused than children living with their married biological parents."
A 2005 Missouri study, published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, reports that "children living with a stepparent or unrelated adult were 50 times more likely to die of inflicted injuries than children living with both of their parents".
[broken link removed], found that the incidence of abuse was an astounding 33 times higher in homes where the mother was cohabiting with an unrelated boyfriend than in stable nuclear families.
Leslie Margolin of the University of Iowa in the journal Child Abuse and Neglect. Prof. Margolin found that boyfriends were 27 times more likely than natural parents to abuse a child.
Here's some info on the Cinderella Effect.
Absolutely.That supports the view that children are better off with their biological father in a split as his partner or future partner is far less likely to hurt the children.
It would be interesting to see the link between addiction, criminal records and social condition of the mothers and partners in the incidents where Cherenkov were harmed and/or abused.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?