The Working Mom and Custody Issues

Avatar for tickmich
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
The Working Mom and Custody Issues
1693
Mon, 11-30-2009 - 8:24pm

There was an article in this month's Working mother magazine about wrking mom's losing custody to SAHD's.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-31-2009
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:17pm
Does than mean that your parents should not have let you go to events unsupervised like you stated that they did?

Most things I went to WERE supervised.


Does it also mean that you will not ever let your child go to any events unsupervised?


I never said that, did I? What kinds of events are you considering a child to go to that are unsupervised?


iVillage Member
Registered: 12-31-2009
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:19pm
Do your
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:20pm

Well since you continue to refuse to answer those questions...there isn't much point.


I will say though, ds1 and I talked about this tonight, he asked the very same questions that I did, that haven't been answered....he was especially curious about the required supervision...why was it needed and even the high school students?


<<If you're a school that's lucky enough to have security, if security finds somebody wandering around without a reason, they can send them to a supervised area to wait for a ride or back to the activity or whatever. >>


I wouldn't consider that lucky, a school that needs security to keep students where they are supposed to be and is needed to do so, even for high school students.

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2000
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:20pm

I'm only speaking from my experience, but where I live, the private schools in this area don't have security guards. I'm sure there are private schools that do, but I suppose the ones near me don't need them or they would have them. Generally, since private schools can be selective as to who they admit, if they had kids who were "bad seeds" they would be capable of expelling them. Often public schools don't have that ability, or they don't have as much leeway in preventing troubled kids from attending their school as a private school does.

As to why the public schools have them, I guess they have security problems. I know the public h.s. for my district has a metal detector as well as a police officer assigned to the school b/c they have had problems with kids having guns as well as fighting.

I also don't presume that all public middle/high schools have them.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-10-2009
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:21pm
Has anyone here said their kid will NEVER do anything wrong?
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-31-2009
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:22pm
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-31-2009
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:25pm
The thread is not about kids doing things wrong but being aware of the things that COULD and DO happen when kids are left to just "hang out". I am very surprised that someone who won't let their teenage son stay home by themselves (for what a hour or two since her job is so flexible) would allow them to hang out at school with basically nothing to do after the clubs and activities are over.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-10-2009
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:28pm
Where do you get this stuff?
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2008
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:28pm
I think a double standard is having two different sets of rules, it's only unjust for one side, don't you think? Not both sides.



If it's unjust to one side, that's a double standard. The limited ways in which I will treat my son differently than my dd's are not unjust to any of them.



I think though if one applies those principles (be safe) in different ways, allowing privileges for one gender and not the other....it's not the same.



That is the key. Ensuring safety without actually removing privileges, so as to keep it fair and just while still addressing the additional risk. If one were to address the risk by removing privileges and making it unfair to one gender, then that might be a double standard. However, my approach does not constitute a double standard, because the privileges are the same, the principles are the same - the way a child gets from point A to point B might be different, but still fair and reasonable to either side.



Different rules means that there are double standards. I have double standard now, between my two boys, based on their maturity and ages they are allowed to do different things.



No, that is not the sole test of a double standard. A double standard would be if your boys were the same age, same maturity, and one was denied a privilege. For example, if when your younger son reached the age/maturity your older son is now, but did not obtain the same privileges with no apparent reason. That would be unfair, and therefore a double standard. Fair application of principles that may differ based on a legitimate risk factors is fair, and if it does not actually infringe on a persons privileges or opportunities, then most definitely it's fair.

"The last of human freedoms - the ability to choose one's attitude in a given set of circumstances." - Viktor Frankl.



Photobucket



Ten Rules for Being Human
"The key to good decision making is not knowledge. It is understanding."
Malcolm Gladwell Blink

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Fri, 01-08-2010 - 10:30pm

<>


Please don't change my words or what I have stated, as I have already corrected you at least

PumpkinAngel

Pages