step mom??

the14me

hey !!
just wondering if any1 here has had experience with their partner having a child from another relationship???
My bf had a daughter when he was only 20 , 4 years ago. He does not see her regularly and does not speak with the mother of the child.
I confused as to how to feel about this or deal with it ! Should I just keep my nose out ? Is it nothing that should concern me ?
He does not like to talk about it at all


any thoughts???

Femelade

Keep out of it.
What can you achieve here really...?
You cant make him and the mother of his child be friends. When he's older he will be more mature and possibly want to rekindle his relaionship with his daughter.

metrovelvet

How long have you been seeing him?

I would have questions about why he doesnt see his daughter and how this relates to his character. And then I would have my doubts about seeing him.

He could be a victim or he could be a scumbag who abandoned his child and girlfriend.

I think these are things you need to know but I dont know how you can find out.

the_syco

Maybe he isn't talking to her, as she isn't allowing him access.

the14me

his parents take the daughter almost ev wkend they live about 2 hours away . anytime iv been with him &we visited he does make a small effort but is still quite cold towards her. but to be honest i think he might act differently because i am there. could be wrong but thats the way it seems.
ive been with him for 10months now &hes nothing but loving towards me and i would say more in touch with his feelings & emotions than any other man i know

Beruthiel

the14me wrote:

his parents take the daughter almost ev wkend they live about 2 hours away . anytime iv been with him &we visited he does make a small effort but is still quite cold towards her.

That is a tad odd, his parents have weekly access and he's not that interested either way.
I'd expect that 10 months into a relationship he could at least tell you what's going on with regards to the above.
No matter what went on between him and his ex, the fact that he's cold towards his daughter is odd.
Me, I'd just ask straight out.

the14me

yes thats what i find hard to understand also
his parents try get him to spend time with the child but hes not interested
could this be something to do with me? that he thinks i wont like it? or that hes ashamed of his past? of course its not ideal but i can deal with it!!

Talliesin

We don't know. He does (though maybe not clearly). Ask him.

the14me

thats sound
just looking for opinions!!
thanks

pjproby

encourage him to see hs child. it will be better for both of them. maybe he thinks he needs your permission!

dame

The fact that the child's mother is in regular contact with his parents and lets them see and take care of the child every weekend says to me that she is a reasonable person. I'd have second thoughts about seeing a man who refused to talk to the seemingly reasonable mother of his child every now and again and who showed little interest in his child. I wouldn't care how young or immature he was when he had his daughter, he still sounds immature.

Tell him his daughter is a lovely child and that you don't mind and would in fact like to see him spend more time with her. Even suggest outings the he or the two of you could bring her on some saturday/sunday. If he doesn't show signs of being a bit more enthusiastic within the next few months then I'd think seriously about what type of man he is and whether I could see myself with someone that can't be bothered going regularly to his own parents house to spend time with his own daughter.

the_syco

the14me wrote:

anytime iv been with him &we visited he does make a small effort but is still quite cold towards her.

It may be cos previous women have run a mile when they see he's emotionally attached to a kid thats not theirs.

dame wrote:

Tell him his daughter is a lovely child and that you don't mind and would in fact like to see him spend more time with her. Even suggest outings the he or the two of you could bring her on some saturday/sunday. If he doesn't show signs of being a bit more enthusiastic within the next few months then I'd think seriously about what type of man he is and whether I could see myself with someone that can't be bothered going regularly to his own parents house to spend time with his own daughter.

2nd this.

The Corinthian

the14me wrote:

My bf had a daughter when he was only 20 , 4 years ago. He does not see her regularly and does not speak with the mother of the child.

Would that be a poor reflection on his character? Perhaps. But you do have to bare in mind that we get ‘bad’ fathers and not ‘bad’ mothers is generally because women who are not ready for parenthood can choose other options, men cannot.

At 20 it’s quite possible that he was not ready for fatherhood and his then girlfriend (assuming she was even that) was - leaving him in a situation where he was going to become a father regardless. Reverse the rolls and we would not be discussing this, because the child would have long been either terminated or put up for adoption by a mother who didn’t want it.

Another factor is his relationship with the mother. If acrimonious then his position will be difficult at best. His rights to the child will probably be limited which means that she could either leave the country with the child if she wishes or settle down with another man and have him adopt it – either way cutting the father off forever. Most men would be very careful about investing emotionally in any child who could be taken off them this way even if they wanted to be fathers.

My guess is that it was probably the former rather than the latter reason in his case; he was not ready for fatherhood at 20 and she was. She had the child and then pursued him for maintenance. His parents then pushed him towards getting access (maintenance and access are often linked). I don’t think that would make him a bad person, it just means he is not a saint – he was placed in a position not of his choosing and you can hardly damn him for not being magically persuaded by it.

I think the only way to really understand is to ask him to tell you the story behind it, baring in mind you’ll only be getting his own, potentially, sanitized version.

The Corinthian

dame wrote:

The fact that the child's mother is in regular contact with his parents and lets them see and take care of the child every weekend says to me that she is a reasonable person.

Or that the court awarded access to the father, so no it doesn't mean that she's reasonable automatically.

metrovelvet

You should just ask him why he isnt interested in his daughter. Its a reasonable question from someone who would be dating him. It may be painful for him to talk about,but its certainly more painful for his daughter, who is passed like a parcel from one resentment to the next.

Poor little thing.

dame

The Corinthian wrote:

Or that the court awarded access to the father, so no it doesn't mean that she's reasonable automatically.

If she was very unreasonable she wouldn't bother complying with the court ordered access arrangements. Many women don't.
I think it's safe to assume a certain level of reasonableness on her part, given that she seems to have her child's best interests at heart by encouraging and allowing regular contact for her daughter with her daughter's extended family.

The Corinthian

dame wrote:

If she was very unreasonable she wouldn't bother complying with the court ordered access arrangements. Many women don't.

I’m not saying she’s very unreasonable only that you’re jumping to conclusions that she’s reasonable. We know very little of his situation – maybe he’s a complete asshole, maybe he’s a victim but chances are that it’s not so black and white, so making the assumption that she’s the reasonable one in the child’s life and inferring he’s not is simply not valid.

I think it's safe to assume a certain level of reasonableness on her part, given that she seems to have her child's best interests at heart by encouraging and allowing regular contact for her daughter with her daughter's extended family.

I think it’s almost always safe to assume some degree of reasonableness on everyone’s part, but assuming that her actions are purely for the child’s best interests are a bit of a jump. Mothers can be as selfish and as self absorbed as any father and can often project their own interests as being the child’s, thus justifying them.

Not knowing the full and unabridged story we can only assume that there is likely to be both reasonableness and unreasonableness on both sides.

luckat

Poor little girl, this must be wounding for her.

Yes, you need to ask him. You also need to think about what kind of future you want with him - and with his daughter, because she's part of his family, however he behaves.

Was he living with the little one's mother when they had the child, or was it a more casual relationship? (Not that this makes any difference to the little girl, but it might explain his cold attitude.)

metrovelvet

It makes no sense that a man who would spend the effort and expense to go through a custody/access battle would then not treasure the time that he fought so hard for.

It is more likely that he is resentful of this child's existense and is still through his coldness, his freezing her out, trying in someway to kill her off. Four to five years later and he's still there.

It is well documented that in unplanned pregnancies, men often feel resentment and can lead them to extreme behaviors, such as murder: I dont want to say that he is anywhere near this level of monstrosity, but to illustrate in stark terms how out of control these guys feel.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/story?id=522184&page=1

They lose control, they lose control of their partners bodies, they lose control of their destinies and see the child as an obstacle to the life they want to lead.

I would tread carefully here OP. If hes this resentful then he will also resent you for pushing him in a direction he doesnt want to go in.

Its called reactance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactance_(psychology)

Reactance is an action in direct contradiction to rules and/or regulations that threaten or eliminate specific behavioral freedoms; it can occur when someone is heavily pressured to accept a certain view or attitude. Reactance can cause the person to adopt or strengthen a view or attitude that is contrary to what was intended and also increases resistance to persuasion. A mild example could be a boy being all the more interested in a girl playing "hard to get", or teenagers drinking to excess in an environment of prohibition when they would not do so in a less restrictive culture.

The essence of reactance is rebellion.

He'll feel it when he's old.

dame

Corinthian, this reluctant-father/bad-mother thing seems to be a recurrent theme for you. Whay can't you just believe the best of people? Fact is, there's a child. This particular child has two parents and the OP wants to know if people think she should keep her nose out, talk to him or encourage him to see his daughter. A debate on reluctant-fatherhood is not called for here. You did the same with a thread of Trinity1's on the Parenting Forum not so long ago. If you wish you can always start up your own thread/debate about it or even a support group for reluctant fathers if you feel the need.

The Corinthian

dame wrote:

Corinthian, this reluctant-father/bad-mother thing seems to be a recurrent theme for you.

Actually it seemed to me you were pushing a good mother / deadbeat father theme.

Whay can't you just believe the best of people?

Actually I am, I’m suggesting that it may not be a simple case the mother being the reasonable one and the father just being “immature”.

So if you really do think I should believe the best of people, you might start by practicing what you preach.

A debate on reluctant-fatherhood is not called for here.

People were discussing the motivations for his apparent coldness or lack of involvement long before I proffered two, so you can hardly blame me. Just because their ideas sit more comfortably with your worldview is no reason to censor others.

Anyhow, I’ve not actually debated that topic, so I don’t really understand why you’re suggesting I have.

I have played devils advocate in light of people with imperfect knowledge assuming that it could only be the father to blame and even accepted that it could well be. You on the other hand assumed that the mother could not be to blame, with imperfect knowledge, and that the father was – then you accuse me of not believing the best of people?

It seems more like you believe the best of only some people.

the14me

thanks for all your opinions & thoughts!!

the fact is he never fought for access the mother just leaves her at his parents on a fri eve & collects her sun night. to me it is not so the daughter can get to know her father but more so that she can go out at the weekend, thats how it seems to me. even at xmas she would not let them she her xmas day but left her there stephens day up until new years day so it really is not about her being reasonable, more that shes taking advantage of the grand parents

luckat

OP, obviously you know better than others about this particular mother and child, but I can completely understand why she'd want to have her child at Christmas, but also want the grandparents to have the pleasure of the child after Christmas.

She's in a difficult position - presumably she wouldn't herself be welcome at their Christmas table?

metrovelvet

OP

How much of this is any of your business, except to the extent that if you got pregnant by him chances are your child can expect the same treatment. Thats what I would worry for you. And also if you can handle step motherhood up the line. But these are things only you can answer.

Disengage. Your not even her step mother, you're her "father's" girlfriend of 10months.

Parent is a verb not just a noun, and it doesnt sound like he does much of it so I cant see how you will be a step mother to a child who in name,dna and legality has a father but not in love, discipline or affection.

What exactly is your concern, or who is your concern? Can you name it or is it general unease?

The Corinthian

the14me wrote:

the fact is he never fought for access the mother just leaves her at his parents on a fri eve & collects her sun night. to me it is not so the daughter can get to know her father but more so that she can go out at the weekend, thats how it seems to me. even at xmas she would not let them she her xmas day but left her there stephens day up until new years day so it really is not about her being reasonable, more that shes taking advantage of the grand parents

Well that might be a little unfair on the mother. There may well be some selfish motivation involved in that the mother gets to have free babysitters in the shape of the grandparents, but at the same time it would be understandable also that the mother would want the child to have contact with its paternal grandparents too for its own good.

It does appear however that the father did not have any interest in fatherhood to begin with in this particular case, which is unfortunate for the child. I wouldn’t write him off though simply because of this though as it may have been because of his age at the time or simply because the mother was the wrong person for him. At the right age and/or with the right person he could be quite a different type of father – it happens all the time.

On the other hand perhaps he is a lost cause in the fatherhood stakes, but I don’t think anyone could answer that without prejudice here. Myself included.

kaalgat

the14me wrote:

hey !!
just wondering if any1 here has had experience with their partner having a child from another relationship???
My bf had a daughter when he was only 20 , 4 years ago. He does not see her regularly and does not speak with the mother of the child.

My boyfriend sees his fella nearly every day, as well as communicating with the mother every day, i.e. texting, phoning, her coming by the house to drop the little fella off etc.

Personally, I often think it would have been so much easier to deal with if he didn't keep in contact with the mother on a daily basis.

In a way you are lucky that you don't have to deal with that. I think if he doesn't want to talk about it, then leave it be. It certainly causes less heartache.

luckat

Kaalgat, I disagree. You know your boyfriend is loving and loyal to his child. An important character reference!

The Corinthian

luckat wrote:

Kaalgat, I disagree. You know your boyfriend is loving and loyal to his child. An important character reference!

Does that mean that a woman who's either had an abortion or has given her child up for adoption is a bad person?

luckat

Corinthian, no; circumstances vary. But a man who keeps loving contact with a child after splitting up with the child's mother strikes me as a real jewel.

metrovelvet

luckat wrote:

Kaalgat, I disagree. You know your boyfriend is loving and loyal to his child. An important character reference!

this is no doubt hard on kaalgat. Some women will see it as good character and others will be jealous and competitive.

What people have to accept in these situations is that they are not responsible for the relationship between their boyfriend/girlfriend and his or her child, and that it is a seperate entitity to their own. They need to stay out of it for their own mental health and for the family they are dating.

Obviously up the road when you are considering a blended family, this obviously gets more difficult for everyone as loyalty issues arise. that, and the extensive amount of compromise required is why the divorce rate among stepfamilies is twice that of nuclear.

So ladies, I hope these guys are worth the trouble.

luckat

metrovelvet wrote:

... the divorce rate among stepfamilies is twice that of nuclear.

Really? Is this an Irish figure? Where did you get it, please? Interesting!

The Corinthian

luckat wrote:

Corinthian, no; circumstances vary.

They do, which is actually part of my point. We don't know exactly what happened that caused the father in this case to apparently reject the child, but he was instantly demonized by half of the posters here. Yet if a mother chooses adoption or abortion and essentially does the same, we are expected to feel nothing but sympathy for her.

metrovelvet

luckat wrote:

Really? Is this an Irish figure? Where did you get it, please? Interesting!

Its an American figure. Irish figures cant really be collected with all the "unofficial divorces". You know those people who aren't together but are still legally marrried, despite having moved on and created new families.

There is a lot of data on blended families and step parenting on the web and in bookshops. It will be easy for you to find.

luckat

Mm. Wonder why it would be. I suppose it's more difficult to live with people with all the insecurities and jealousies, and everyone already perhaps feeling wounded by a broken-up relationship, while an original marriage - if it 'takes' - might have fewer strains.

It's a sad thought. From my own, tiny, limited experience among a circle of friends, those who've settled into a relationship after a few tough experiences have stayed with it for 20 years or more. But it is a tiny circle of friends that I have, obviously, not a big international study group!

metrovelvet

1. financial strain

2. Loyalty issues

3. Geographic conflicts

4. Parenting issues

5. Housing and space issues

6. Jealousies

7. Lack of incest prohibition within step families

the list is endless.

luckat

I can understand why there might be extra strains - I'm just surprised at the figure, because in my own small circle, none of the stepfamilies have broken up. The stepfamilies were second, more mature marriages (or non-marriages, though mostly they've got married for financial reasons about 15 years or 25 years after getting together), while the first marriages (or non-marriages) were impassioned early relationships.

The Corinthian

In fairness, most divorce statistics show that there is a considerably higher divorce rate in second marriages than in first, regardless of stepchildren. This may well be down to the unfortunate probability that those who have failed in a relationship in the past are more likely to fail again in the future.

Certainly stepchildren would add to the stresses imposed on any relationship, but simply noting a correlation is not enough to claim causation without looking at the bigger picture.

metrovelvet

30% of all weddings in the US give birth to a stepfamily (i.e., are stepcouple weddings), and now we know that without intervention around 70% will end in legal divorce.

http://www.successfulstepfamilies.com/view.php/id/176

Nasty_Girl

The Corinthian wrote:

Yet if a mother chooses adoption or abortion and essentially does the same, we are expected to feel nothing but sympathy for her.

I've never heard anyone feel sorry for a women who has an abortion.
Unless it has the "Oh she was raped" tagline strapped to it.

Women who have abortions are called murderers and inhuman. Even the bloody MAP is still frowned upon in this country!

Check out the first few posts of this for example, I couldn't read all of it because it was sickening
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055056702
Women who give up kids for adoption are called monsters and unfeeling.

A woman can't just walk away from a child she doesn't want she has to make a concious effort to "get rid of it".

Why does everything on boards have to turn into a battle of the sexes?

metrovelvet

Indeed.

And what everyone seems to be forgetting is that the father knowlingly or not, is practising is child abuse and OP is absolutely powerless to stop it and that this child will be and probably is in emotional pain.

The Corinthian

Nasty_Girl wrote:

I've never heard anyone feel sorry for a women who has an abortion.
Unless it has the "Oh she was raped" tagline strapped to it.

I said that we are expected to feel nothing but sympathy, not that we always do and your post, complaining that we don’t, underlines this.

And many people do feel sympathy for women who had abortions, for the circumstances that brought them there and the repercussions, social and psychological, that they have had to endure as a result.

Women who give up kids for adoption are called monsters and unfeeling.

No they’re not. Outside of a few nutcases who believe that adoption is a crime against humanity, that’s simply not true.

A woman can't just walk away from a child she doesn't want she has to make a concious effort to "get rid of it".

Yes, she does. But in the case of the father in this thread, he is not allowed to do even that, or if he attempts to he is vilified.

Why does everything on boards have to turn into a battle of the sexes?

Everything doesn’t, but this issue does because it is built on a gross legal injustice that is entirely gender biased.

flamingo

The Corinthian wrote:

Everything doesn’t, but this issue does because it is built on a gross legal injustice that is entirely gender biased.

Not sure I can agree with this ... the child's health and well-being are paramount, and this father's neglect of his child is inexcusable. In fact, in this case, it's not simply neglect, so much as complete & utter overt rejection, it would seem -far better for a child not to know their father, than to be faced with a cold and uncaring rejecting father!

Regardless of whether or not he is 'ready' for the child, the child is here, and he has responsibilities. It's not a 'gender' issue, per se. I would be (and very much am) as critical of mothers who do not acknowledge their children's needs, who reject their children, who refuse to let their children hug them, who believe that their own behaviours will have no impact on the neglected child. I work in this field every day, and see, day in day out, the long-term impact of parents who chose not to take proper responsbility for their children. It is inexcusable.

So, no, it over simplifies the issues to try to make this an issue of gender inequalities. It's not about the father OR the mother, it's about the child.

The Corinthian

flamingo wrote:

In fact, in this case, it's not simply neglect, so much as complete & utter overt rejection, it would seem -far better for a child not to know their father, than to be faced with a cold and uncaring rejecting father!

I would tend to agree with this. Of course, we don’t know the circumstances behind his unwilling contact; his parents appear to be the driving force there.

Regardless of whether or not he is 'ready' for the child, the child is here, and he has responsibilities. It's not a 'gender' issue, per se.

Well it is. The child is here because he had no choice in the matter. Had he been a woman who did not want to become a parent, then she could have chosen otherwise and we would not be discussing responsibility. So unfortunately the rights afforded by gender does play a significant role in this.

I would be (and very much am) as critical of mothers who do not acknowledge their children's needs, who reject their children, who refuse to let their children hug them, who believe that their own behaviours will have no impact on the neglected child. I work in this field every day, and see, day in day out, the long-term impact of parents who chose not to take proper responsbility for their children. It is inexcusable.

Again, I’d tend to agree with you. If a mother or father chooses to be one, then they certainly have that responsibility.

It’s difficult to say what happened in the case of the father in this thread. It’s certainly possible that he made that choice then changed his mind after the fact, in which case I certainly agree that he is in gross dereliction of at least his emotional responsibilities towards his child. However, his parents may have forced the issue and chosen to involve themselves regardless of his wishes, in which case he’s simply been put in an even more difficult situation. Either way, it’s difficult to say.

So, no, it over simplifies the issues to try to make this an issue of gender inequalities. It's not about the father OR the mother, it's about the child.

Yet all you’re doing then is replacing one oversimplification with another. It’s not about the father or the mother or the child, it’s about the father and the mother and the child.

simu

The thread seems to be going in a humanities direction...

Back to the OP - I don't know if there's a correct response in this situation - how you react will depend on how you feel about the issue, how serious you are about your bf, what sort of qualities you expect in a bf, how your bf feels about the whole thing. Personally, I wouldn't be happy to see someone close to me neglecting a child of theirs, I would try to encourage the father to build a better relationship and if it didn't work out, I would seriously reconsider my relationship with him. (That's if it was a serious relationship - if it was casual, I'd leave things be). But that's only one way of going about things. The situation obviously bothers you though - have you ever got your bf to talk about how he feels about his daughter? That might provide some explanation of his behaviour - better than endless speculation, anyways.

Nasty_Girl

The Corinthian wrote:

I said that we are expected to feel nothing but sympathy, not that we always do and your post, complaining that we don’t, underlines this.

Where exactly did I complain that we don't???
I just said I've never heard it.
I rarely hear people feel sorry or "nothing but sympathy" for them.
I didn't actually give my opinion on how I feel about abortion or adoption I just indicated the views that I as a female have encountered.

The Corinthian wrote:

No they’re not. Outside of a few nutcases who believe that adoption is a crime against humanity, that’s simply not true.

If you say so, but I've heard otherwise. Mostly by women. I'm not going to argue because unless we go around to every person in the world and record their views we're not going to have any proof are we?

The Corinthian wrote:

Yes, she does. But in the case of the father in this thread, he is not allowed to do even that, or if he attempts to he is vilified.

How can you just walk away from something living inside of you. You either have to be pregnant for 9 months or have an abortion. Either way you can't just ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist.

The Corinthian wrote:

The child is here because he had no choice in the matter. Had he been a woman who did not want to become a parent, then she could have chosen otherwise and we would not be discussing responsibility. So unfortunately the rights afforded by gender does play a significant role in this.

She raped him did she? Milked him while he was asleep and then used a turkey baster or brought his stuff down to the IVF clinic??
I'm really sick of this "poooor men are forced to be parents by evil selfish women" bull****.
If you don't want kids, have a vasectomey, don't have sex or do it up the ass.
The pill fails and Condoms break. That's life. Everytime you have sex there's a chance you'll cause a baby and it's time everyone realised that and took responsibility for their actions.
Abortion and Adoption are not easy run of the mill things to do, so its not a simple black and white case of "sure a women can just have an abortion", especially not in this country anyway.

Anyway none of that helps the OP really.

Its sad that this guy isn't interested in his kid, but then plenty of dads (and mothers for that matter) aren't interested in their kids even when they have "chosen" to have them and live with them, maybe he just doesn't like children at all. Some people don't.

The Corinthian

Nasty_Girl wrote:

Where exactly did I complain that we don't???
I just said I've never heard it.

Sorry, I got the impression that you disagreed with the situation whereby sympathy is withheld from women who’ve had abortions. I was obviously wrong.

If you say so, but I've heard otherwise. Mostly by women. I'm not going to argue because unless we go around to every person in the world and record their views we're not going to have any proof are we?

Indeed.

How can you just walk away from something living inside of you. You either have to be pregnant for 9 months or have an abortion. Either way you can't just ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist.

I certainly am not suggesting anyone should or can ignore the situation but women do choose to walk away from something living inside them every day. As you said yourself, it’s life.

She raped him did she? Milked him while he was asleep and then used a turkey baster or brought his stuff down to the IVF clinic??

Are you suggesting then that a woman who gets pregnant through consensual sex should be forced to bring the child to term and contribute to its upbringing? Because that is in effect what you’re suggesting of men.

I'm really sick of this "poooor men are forced to be parents by evil selfish women" bull****.

And TBH, I’m pretty sick of the same women crying out that it’s their right to choose one minute and then whinging how we should think of the children the next, whenever it suits them.

You can’t start moralising about people taking responsibility for their actions and then claim that some of those people should be given an ‘out’, however difficult, from doing so. It’s pure, unadulterated hypocrisy.

Anyway none of that helps the OP really.

No it doesn’t, but all I’ve tried to do is put forward a counter to the automatic vilification of the father that took place here. As I’ve repeatedly said, he may be the total wanker that’s been suggested by some here, but there may also be another side to the story, of which I have simply suggested a few (not even just one) possibility.

I do think ultimately this thread is going down the humanities road at this stage and that the OP has been given enough opposing views to at least feel that the situation may not be as black and white as some here believe.

Beyond that, she should discuss the matter with him, taking into account that she may only get one side of the story.

Beruthiel

OK
What exactly has all of the above to do with helping the OP?

I suggest you lot take your debate to the Humanities forum.
B

metrovelvet

Why are people assuming this child is the result of something unplanned?

Why are people assuming that he didnt want the child?

Why are people forgetting that this is a child who is being abused and she is at the heart of this?

Why dont people notice that there are horses in kildare who get better treatment than this little girl does from her own father?

Why is this about rights and entitlements of grown ups when it should be about the rights of the child to receive love from both her parents?

Why do so many threads turn into WHY CANT A WOMAN BE MORE LIKE A MAN?

luckat

The Corinthian wrote:

Everything doesn’t, but this issue does because it is built on a gross legal injustice that is entirely gender biased.

http://tinyurl.com/2hrmwk - Carol Coulter's report, Family Law Matters, on the *actuality* of divorce in Ireland, rather than the weepy fantasy of some men.

The Corinthian

luckat wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/2hrmwk - Carol Coulter's report, Family Law Matters, on the *actuality* of divorce in Ireland, rather than the weepy fantasy of some men.

WTF is your point? We're not even talking about divorce, where the issues surrounding parenting would already be different, let alone all the other ones. But feel free to add in your straw man if it makes you feel better.

Beruthiel

luckat and TC
Did either of you see my above comment?

I said take your debate to the Humanitites forum.
Consider this your last warning.
B