Traditional roles, Are they really....
Find a Conversation
Traditional roles, Are they really....
| Tue, 09-21-2004 - 9:04am |
healthy for women or men? Let me just preface this by saying I have been living in a traditional role my entire married life. Dh brings home the paycheck and I raise the kids. This past weekend we came from a family gathering that involved all the women working and all of the men sitting and watching sports. Frankly, I am sick of it.I am completely wiped out after those things! I have four kids, two of which are 3 and 5 and need to be supervised, so I am working twice as hard! Just this morning dh told me not to buy anything without clearing it with him first....bleck! I am beginning to feel as if the kids get short changed when families are traditional. Dads don't interact with their kids as much as they should. Moms get to feel like a slave to their families. I am beginning to feel as if it is best for families if the mom at least works part time because then the dh can be more active in parenting and keeping up the household. This is sort of a vent but a debate as well. I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts.~Lisa

Pages
"I don't agree with joint custody because I think it's too disruptive to kids. That, however, doesn't mean I don't think dads are important. It just means I think kids need to know where home is."
If two people are mature enough in a divorce, it doesn't have to be disruptive and the end result would be children with both a father and a monther actively involved in their lives on an equal basis (one of your strongest beliefs about the importance of a mother working is that it helps to foster a more equal relationship for the father with his kids). In fact, I've seen joint physical custody work out very well for several families. It is the norm in Sweden: most parents make an extreme effort to stay in the same city in reasonably close proximity and the children switch off weeks with each parent. It takes a few months to make the adjustment, but most of the kids I know in that situation are doing very well and appreciate the positive aspects of having equal time with both father and mother.
They know where home is, they just happen to have two homes. Of course, it could be that it works out very well for most children here because they do see it as the norm and have friends who are in the same situation. In your case, it might mean a bit of trailblazing and you may not be up for that.....even if it would result in the ideal you have often professed (equal time for mothers and fathers). If dh and I were ever to divorce, this would be my ideal custody situation since I have seen it work out so well for so many.
"However, in STBX's case, there will be no one to stop him from smoking around the kids when we're divorced. That alone is reason to deny him custody. My lawyer says there's precidence to call his smoking around the kids child abuse."
If his smoking around the kids constitutes child abuse and you have allowed it to go on for 9+ years, what does that say about your own responsibility? Haven't you essentially condoned child abuse? How many times have we heard about mothers who stay with fathers in spite of repeated physical child abuse on the part of the fathers and wondered how on earth the mothers could possibly sit by and not take active steps to protect their children? If it is child abuse, you have been allowing it for 9 years, so it shouldn't matter a bit if he continues to do it while having custody of his children.
"He also doesn't think 9 yo's need a baby sitter."
That may well be a matter of opinion (to which he is entitled as their father even if you disagree with it). Most children in Sweden between the ages of 9 and 10 start going home on their own and are usually on their own at home for a couple of hours every day. So this just doesn't seem like an automatic case of child abuse to me.
Trying to deny him access other than supervised visits on the basis of his smoking seems positively bizzare to me given that you have lived with him doing it around the girls for so many years. Unless his other habits truly constitutes an active risk to the children, I can't imagine why you would go against every principle you have held and deny your girls active, regular and equal contact with their father.
Laura
<>
Not really. The question is, why is it NOW too much to take, when it wasn't before? Unless you're stupid, it's because before there was some sort of trade off in the situation that isn't there any more.
As I predicted. You refuse to listen.
After over 2000 of your posts, I think we all have
However, that doesn't mean I don't think fathers are important. I do. Unfortunately, when you divorce, if you're going to give the kids the stability of having a place to call home, one parent will be primary. That's one of the ugly things in divorce.
What they do in Sweden is irrelevent. It's illegal here to leave a 9 yo home alone let alone watching her little sister. It's called neglegence. I don't care what someone else does. It is not ok with my kids or by law here. End of argument.
WRT fathers importance and a child's need for stability, you have to go with what is more important of the two and as a child of divorce myself, I'll vote for stability. It doesn't matter anyway as STBX has already told me I can have the kids all I want. He just wants legal custody. My guess is he just wants the child support check. So, either way, the kids are going to live with me. It's a question of whether I get the financial support or he does. If the court does award joint custody, I'd have to pay him but I'd get the kids the vast majority of the time. I don't consider that right.
It really doesn't matter what I think the importance of fathers is here. I don't see how you can give kids both a stable household and both parents without living together. This is one of the negatives that comes with a divorce and one of the reasons I perferred, for a long time, to stay in the marriage in spite of dh.
Edited 10/2/2004 12:17 pm ET ET by grimalkinskeeper
There has been more than one occaision where he tried to get me to go out with him after the kids went to bed where he boasted that he used to leave the boys alone when they were 8 and 3 after they went to bed. Apparently, in his view, sleeping children don't need supervision. I disagree. This is one I wish I'd known about. Every time we went out, he hired a sitter. I never knew he left the boys alone once they went to bed. That would have been a tip of right there.
If it is illegal to leave a 9 yo alone and your husband is in the habit of doing this, I can see the argument for him being declared not responsible enough for full shared custody, but then again have you been in the habit of letting him do this? Has he ever done this? I noticed you didn't address the whole "smoking is child abuse" argument in relation to your allowing it for 9 years.
Laura
Your way, (put up with crap) only avoids confrontation, gets you nowhere, breeds resentment, essentially traps you in your own inertia. His way (trying to talk) was a step, a small step to meet the issues, even if in your perspective was wholly offensive. But sometimes, you gotta see the bigger picture -- it was the attempt -- that was significant. But maybe you didn't want to see it as the olive branch it was trying really hard to be. Maybe you were just done.
Which is okay too. Everybody gets to the point of total saturation-can't take this b.s. anymore-got no joy-desire-whatever-gotta get off this train feeling. But I gotta tell you, speaking from experience, even if the other was really a creep and totally not worthy and you totally justified in leaving -- it still feels like a failure, so we re-invent history to make the leaving okay -- to make it "not failure." But it still feels like failure to leave a marriage esp after 20 something years good grief.
We eventually all have to meet our demons some day. You're just not ready to meet yours. Which is okay, until you want to start again, and you definitely don't want to start fresh dragging the same old garbage around. Wouldn't be fair to the kiddos and the nice guy you'll eventually meet.
We're all imperfect CLW, we get so obsessed with our goals, dreams, whatever, and let me just say, you are one hard driven woman. We don't see that has an effect on others and think that because we have good motives, f$ck everybody else, either get on this train and work it with me or get off.
Doesn't work that way.
Good luck. Maybe I should have typed this in Cantonese.
Pages