My Intro: Thanks for Reading!

[billclay18]

...he no longer wants to compensate financially for having left the marriage and wants to make it more legit.

Completely understandable, but regardless why your marriage is where it is, who can say what fair compensation is? Maybe 1/3 is too much, maybe not enough. A&K and I don't know yours or your W's financial sitch. I suggest you consult with a L before talking with your W. You don't want to offer more than you should because once you set that precedent a judge may make you stick to it, even if it's more than equitable. This is really best left to the lawyers. You and your W are in no condition emotionally to handle the business end of this right now. I tried...it didn't work. It cost me $14k and 2-1/2 yrs of my life, but as I posted earlier it worked out pretty well for me.

[billclay18]

Mediation is the way to go. Sometimes it takes an unbiased 3rd person to clarify the sitch. My ex and I went round and round about custody, but once an impartial 3rd party told her this was no slam dunk for her, reality hit her and had an agreement in days. Sometimes a couple can negotiate effectively, but that's usually not the case because emotions are running high. Save yourself the emotional torture.

[RedSoxFan]

I agree with A&K, in most situations it's best for there to be one custodial parent and one place the children truly consider home and that should be with whomever was the primary caregiver over the years.

My case is somewhat unique in that my ex and I were equals as far as care giving and time spent with our D11. If that wasn't the case, the mediator would not have come to the conclusion he did. One of the conditions of our agreement was that our D11 would go to school where ever my ex lived, however we both had to live in in a certain predefined area. This ensured that that my D11 would go to good schools and that my ex couldn't move 50 miles away with her.

RSF, you've got to take an honest look at your sitch. Was your W the primary caregiver? Did she spend more time with the kids? If so, the courts will most likely favor her and rightfully so.

Your desire for 50/50 custody is honorable, but is it best for the kids? Will it upset their lives and routine too much? Only you can answer that.

I consider myself truly blessed that I have my D11 in my life as much as I do.

It's interesting to me after talking with various folks about this how much prejudice and preconceived notions come into play. At the end of the day all of the choices for custodial and parenting relationships depend on the parents doing the right thing.

So W and I both work and have the luxury of working from home. We both share in taking care of the kids. I do think she keeps me at arms length a bit because she is trying to possess rights to the kids. I am allowing it because I haven't wanted to pressure her. I digress. So the point is on paper we are perfectly suited to be 50/50 custodial parents but that doesn't mean either of us will or can deliver. Same holds true if one or the other of us had been stay at home parent. That doesn't mean that person is or should be custodial parent.

My belief is that if both parents are 100% dedicated and capable, 50/50 custody is the best route. Right now W believes that it is unfair that I ask that because I walked out. That is about her not the kids.

[RedSoxFan]

Mediation is the way to go. Sometimes it takes an unbiased 3rd person to clarify the sitch. My ex and I went round and round about custody, but once an impartial 3rd party told her this was no slam dunk for her, reality hit her and had an agreement in days. Sometimes a couple can negotiate effectively, but that's usually not the case because emotions are running high. Save yourself the emotional torture.

This makes a lot of sense. I agree.

Believe it or not, I still have some confidence that if confronted with the situation, W and I could resolve without mediation. We really do both love our children dearly and could probably put the emotion aside to agree and do whats right.

It's harder right now in this sate where I'm not pushing her on the D thing, doing the DBing, etc. but still trying to participate accordingly.

[ClingingToHope]

My belief is that if both parents are 100% dedicated and capable, 50/50 custody is the best route. Right now W believes that it is unfair that I ask that because I walked out. That is about her not the kids.

My friends think I'm nuts if I don't push for custody if we D because my W has a very stressful, hours intensive job (55-65 hours a week).

Me? I've got a good job with lots of flexibility and I have specialized skills that mean I'll be the last person let go.

I can come and go mostly as I please and I've been, for the last five years, the one who stays home when they're sick, or takes them to dance class, etc.

Right now, though, if we D, I'm not going to push for custody because I don't want the kids to see us fight over it. Her self-esteem is really tied into the girls. She wants to be a good mom even though her job really hurts her ability to do that.

She's not going anywhere in her career -- no degree so she's stuck -- and the demands on her time continue to grow. So over time I'd end up getting them more and more anyway.

[aliveandkicking]

I am allowing it because I haven't wanted to pressure her.

You've been doing what you are accusing her of doing. If you think it is/was in the better interest of the kids to have more of you, then you should be on that like a fly on sh*t regardless of DBing (some might disagree but I don't see how)...for you to go this long as is and then try to vie for my time because she wants a divorce seems disingenuous. Regardless if you believe it is better, check yourself, run it by a pro (not just us shmos here) and then act on it.

[billclay18]

Yes, you've got to deal with it realistically, now. She may be pissed but there is no way for her to know what D you really entails if it is not laid out.

So true RSF...if you've followed my thread, you know that my W is now suddenly seeking her share of the equity in the house when I sell it. We discussed this months ago and she said she would not be going after it. The house was mine before we married and was never in her name, but she is entitled to her share of the equity since we were married. Equity can be positive or negative, a gain or a loss. In the current market, it's a loss of about $30k. I doubt when she decided to raise this issue again she ever considered that possibility, but reality rears it's ugly head. I had no intention of sharing that loss with her, but for now it's my trump card if she chooses to raise any other previously agreed upon issues. Sucks, but I've got to cover my a$$.

I hate saying this because I'm so relating to her but you both have to deal with the brutal reality and neither of you should be punitive. Aaargh.

Yep...be fair, be willing to compromise, don't let yourself get screwed.

[aliveandkicking]

Completely understandable, but regardless why your marriage is where it is, who can say what fair compensation is? Maybe 1/3 is too much, maybe not enough. A&K and I don't know yours or your W's financial sitch. I suggest you consult with a L before talking with your W. You don't want to offer more than you should because once you set that precedent a judge may make you stick to it, even if it's more than equitable. This is really best left to the lawyers. You and your W are in no condition emotionally to handle the business end of this right now. I tried...it didn't work. It cost me $14k and 2-1/2 yrs of my life, but as I posted earlier it worked out pretty well for me.

I am the W with the WAH who I will probably have to divorce and get the same treatment as the WAWs get. Nothing fair about divorce.

[RedSoxFan]

You've been doing what you are accusing her of doing. If you think it is/was in the better interest of the kids to have more of you, then you should be on that like a fly on sh*t regardless of DBing (some might disagree but I don't see how)...for you to go this long as is and then try to vie for my time because she wants a divorce seems disingenuous. Regardless if you believe it is better, check yourself, run it by a pro (not just us shmos here) and then act on it.

I ta;lk about it a lot with IC. I've gone through different periods and tried different approaches. fpor a while I was hanging around the house all the time and that really worked. Then things got weird and I backed off for a while. I tried to do more over the phone. I tried to shuttle them to activities. Tried a bunch of things. What I've concluded is that I need to be closer so that's the reason for same school attendance zone. I can be close but not have to spend too much time the other house which can be awkward. I hope to find a place soon.

This stuff would sort out pretty fast if the marriage ended...I hope to save it though and in the interim it is hard to figure out how far to push

[aliveandkicking]

Same holds true if one or the other of us had been stay at home parent. That doesn't mean that person is or should be custodial parent.

RSF, what you want is for the kids to have stability and as little upheaval as possible. Parenting is not about quantity it is about quality. If one parent has been a stay at home parent and a good one, that must be considered.

My kids love being with their dad but they struggle with the mere two nights a week away from me because I have been there making them dinner, getting them to bed every night since they were born. Yes, it makes him feel better to be alone with them and to be the "awesome" dad he is but they are really torn. And, more time with him would exacerbate that. The poor kids are in the middle. All facets must be considered. This is not about us parents dividing the kids "evenly" like property. It actually makes me sick that people think you can even do that. It is about giving these kids some semblance of a stable and predictable childhood.