Situation becoming messy.

Ophiopogon

Bit of background, I had an affair and became pregnant. The fathers partner does not live here at the moment.

Initally when I told the father of the pregnacy he was shocked but very supportive. We sat down and talked calmly about what we were going to do and were coming to some sort of agreement.

Then he told the partner, her initial reaction was that I was to get rid of the baby so that they could mend their relationship. I had considered a termination before this but could not go through with it. I said no and her next issue was he was to choose between her and the baby. He has chosen the baby and she has since deciced to stay with him anyway.

During this time mine and fathers communication has been gradually disintergrating. He wanted to leave the country and disown the child. Through calmly talking I managed to change his mind as I felt he would in the future come to regret missing the childs first years. I have done everything possible to try and keep him in the childs life as I feel it is important for them both to know each other from the beginining.

Since then I have met himself and the partner. The partner has been very vocal about what she wants. She wants access to the child along with the father. I said I couldn't agree to this straight off to which the meeting ended badly.

I am now questioning if I wanted either of them in my child's life. The father had said that he felt he was too selfish to have a child and to be honest his recent behavior has begun to prove this. He had not been 100% honest with his partner and I feel this will backfire on him. (this is his descion and his realionship).

I can't figure out if I am being unfair in not agreeing straight away to her having access as well. I feel she is (understandble) very bitter about the situation and I'm worried about how that would impact on the child, also it may be that she is unable to have children of her own and this worries me alot.

At first when things began to turn bad the father did not want his name on the birth cert to which I refused. Now I am not so sure I want he's name on it either. I can't understand the full legal implications of his name being on the birth cert and so do not want it there.

There has been a lot of questioning of me re the paternity and I have agreed to a test post birth as I have no doubt he is the father. However the questioning has continued even though I have asked to stop as I find it very upsetting.

The situation is so far from ideal and beyond anything I would ever have wanted. I have tried my best to be amiable so that my child would know their father. I myself have an amazing father who fought hard to stay in our lives so I wanted to make this as easy as possible for all parties.

However, I now feel I am being made to be the scapegoat ( for the affiar, etc) and really have been treated very badly by him and his family. I'm still trying to come to terms with the physicality of the pregnancy as well as the pratical stuff and am under a huge anount of stress now because of all this.

I'm really struggling so if anyone has any experience/ideas they could offer I would really apprecitate it.

CaraMay

I think you don't need the stress of dealing with this pair right now. I suggest you cut contact with them until its time for the birth. Let him see the baby once born but you are under no obligation to let his wife see the baby. Step away from the interaction for a while, mind yourself and your baby and deal with your own feelings for now.

wolfpawnat

First things first, the biological parents are not always the best parents.

You have agreed to the paternity test after the birth, so that matter should no longer be up for discussion except for the date it will take place.

Also you were part of the reason for the situation, but so was he, he had his family need to cop the hell on!

The baby is coming and it is not ideal but all you can do now is get on with it and make the best of it. With regards the Birth Cert. It means very little legally without agreeing to joint guardianship or anything else. There is a lot of talk about forcing a fathers name on it legally in the future but as you can imagine that is a political minefield. He or you may see things differently once the test proves paternity.

It is an awkward one as he is married/in a relationship. If he sees the child then unless it is stated otherwise, she will more than likely see it too. I am not sure what to say about that. When my parents separated I saw my father's partner every time I saw him. I can understand her resentment, but I can see the concern you may have about her taking it out on the child, even just with her body language.

You need to go with your gut for now, if they are stressing you out, then that is not good for the baby or you, all the crap can wait until the baby is born, and say that to them.

Moonbeam

Are either of you married?
Is the father Irish?
I think that his name should be on the birth cert,it gives him no rights but helps for maintenance and I think where possible a child should be entitled to have both names on it.
If he refuses to go with you to register the child then you can get a court order to put his name on it.
It is very hard to leave a baby for the 1st few months so you might find although you want to give access it might be with you there as well.

Big Bag of Chips

You are only seeing things from your perspective at the moment, which is completely natural. Your main concern is yourself, and the baby.

But there are various other complicated sides to this too.

She is not in the wrong here. She didn't ask for any of this. You and he had an affair, and a baby has now been brought into the mix. I'm guessing she knew nothing of this affair until you got pregnant. So not only was she landed with the news that the man she loves, and who she assumed loved her, had an affair behind her back... But he is now having a baby with this woman.

That is a terrible, terrible blow for any person. So for the moment, I'd stop blaming her for offering ultimatums. She doesn't know what's happening, or what she wants.

Very often in situations like this you hear of the 2 women battling it out, each blaming the other and the "poor hapless man" in the middle saying nothing, and managing to avoid a lot of the blame too.

I agree with a previous poster, you don't need to have any contact with them now, until the baby is born. You are all only antagonising each other.

If you want him to have a role in his child's life, then you can't go putting rules on it. If he stays with her after the baby is born, and he wants access, then she will also have access to the baby. He is the father. She is his family.

His name should be on the birthcert. Why would you not put it on? You don't seem too sure of the reasons yourself, so maybe that's something you should look into before you decide against it. Unless you are going to lie to your child forever more about who their das is, then there is no genuine reason to not include the father's name.

But that is all down the line.

For now, leave them alone to sort out their relationship, one way or another. And continue your pregnancy free from hassle.

Ophiopogon

No one is married and myself and himself are Irish.

My initial reason for having his name on the birth cert was that I saw no reason not to as he is the father and I don't intend to lie to my child. However, I have been told not to by a couple of people as they said that it would give him automatic rights to the child, although it now appears that it may not?

I fully understand the stress that she is under, no one is getting out of this unscated. There is serious hurt on all sides. But yes all I care about at this point is my baby and myself. I keep being told that she is being very understanding and that's fair enough but she did demand I abort the baby and I was put under serious pressure to do so. Yes she was in shock but so was I and due that could've buckled and gone through with it.

I have no intention of not allowing her access, I just think that for at least the first few meetings after the birth, I would be present and I don't really feel the need to see her so I would rather her not be there. As soon as he would be taking the child out by himself, then they could all go off together maybe.

Even at that, they want me to make a decsion on access. I don't really know how much I can give in the first year really. I plan on breast feeding but apart from that I'm not entirely comfortable at the idea of the child staying over night with them in the first year. Is this the norm? Has anyone any experience of how much access is good with a baby so young?

I'm not trying to play the victim, I know what I did was wrong. But there was two of us in it so I don't feel I should get the brunt of her anger nor is it wrong for me to feel protective of my baby.

We've aggreed to have no contact till the paternity test post birth.

Big Bag of Chips

He's the baby's father. So should have access as soon as possible. Overnights should also become part of the norm, sooner rather than later. The baby will possibly adjust better the younger they are.

Like it or not he is as much a parent to the child as you are. I think it would be silly to start off before the baby is even born, saying you don't think there should be overnights for at least a year. Why?

I know as a new mother we can become a but like "Mamma Bear"and be fiercely over protective, but just as you will be learning as a new mother, you need to allow him to learn as a new father.

If you can express enough milk for overnight, again there is no valid reason to not allow over night access in the first year... Other than being over protective.

Don't make any decisions yet. Play it by ear. Things you might think you'd never do/definitely do could all change when baby arrives!

It's not going to be any easy road for any of you.

January

Ophiopogon wrote: »

No one is married and myself and himself are Irish.

My initial reason for having his name on the birth cert was that I saw no reason not to as he is the father and I don't intend to lie to my child. However, I have been told not to by a couple of people as they said that it would give him automatic rights to the child, although it now appears that it may not?

I fully understand the stress that she is under, no one is getting out of this unscated. There is serious hurt on all sides. But yes all I care about at this point is my baby and myself. I keep being told that she is being very understanding and that's fair enough but she did demand I abort the baby and I was put under serious pressure to do so. Yes she was in shock but so was I and due that could've buckled and gone through with it.

I have no intention of not allowing her access, I just think that for at least the first few meetings after the birth, I would be present and I don't really feel the need to see her so I would rather her not be there. As soon as he would be taking the child out by himself, then they could all go off together maybe.

Even at that, they want me to make a decsion on access. I don't really know how much I can give in the first year really. I plan on breast feeding but apart from that I'm not entirely comfortable at the idea of the child staying over night with them in the first year. Is this the norm? Has anyone any experience of how much access is good with a baby so young?

I'm not trying to play the victim, I know what I did was wrong. But there was two of us in it so I don't feel I should get the brunt of her anger nor is it wrong for me to feel protective of my baby.

We've aggreed to have no contact till the paternity test post birth.

Unless you are married to each other he has no rights over the child whether his name is on the birth cert or not.

pwurple

+1 on above. Not married, no rights whatsoever.

Birth cert name does nothing. Only guardianship would give him some rights, but this does not happen unless you specifically arrange it with a solicitor, or you are married to him.

ladysarah

my friend was the woman whose husband had an affair and he got this lady pregnant twice but she lost the first baby. my friend stood by her husband but had a nervous breakdown. have some consideration for the wife. she did not ask for any of this.

iguana

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

He's the baby's father. So should have access as soon as possible. Overnights should also become part of the norm, sooner rather than later. The baby will possibly adjust better the younger they are.

Like it or not he is as much a parent to the child as you are. I think it would be silly to start off before the baby is even born, saying you don't think there should be overnights for at least a year. Why?

I disagree with this completely and so do the courts in every single case I know of and there are statements from the FSAI which back that up. A breastfeeding infant should not be separated from it's mother as it carries too high a risk of being detrimental to the breastfeeding relationship. It also carries a very high risk of causing severe physical pain to the mother through mastitis and blocked ducts. As sad as it is for the father overnight access to a breastfeeding infant, away from it's mother, is not advisable.

Big Bag of Chips

For a whole year?

She's already planning to not allow the baby overnights for the first year. With little or no basis other than she thinks the baby shouldn't be away over night.

I'm not saying to send a raw breastfed infant for over night access, but equally I'm saying, don't put a time scale on it, in her mind yet. Because once the baby has arrived, and once they are all settled, things could change quickly.

I always smile when I hear of "routines". Routines are constantly changing. Especially with small babies.

All I'm saying is don't be trying to make definite decisions just yet.... Things change.

iguana

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

For a whole year?

She's already planning to not allow the baby overnights for the first year. With little or no basis other than she thinks the baby shouldn't be away over night.

I'm not saying to send a raw breastfed infant for over night access, but equally I'm saying, don't put a time scale on it, in her mind yet. Because once the baby has arrived, and once they are all settled, things could change quickly.

For however long the baby night feeds for, tbh be that 3 months or 3 years. Bear in mind that the WHO recommends breastfeeding for at least 2 years and it's the biological norm for many humans to need to feed to sleep or feed during the night as toddlers. I have someone in my family who was denied overnight access to his child for close to 2 years because of breastfeeding and while it was awful for him it was in the best interests of the child and the child is the only one who's interests really matter when it comes to access rights.

Ophiopogon

Bag of chips, I've not really said anywhere that the decsions I am thinking about now are for definite. That may be why I'm actually posting on Boards looking for opinions.

I said I was not entirely comfortable at the idea of overnight visits not that this was my only plan.

What Iguana has posted regarding the breastfeeding was kind of the reason for my reluctance. However, I don't know enough about it so will read up first.

Without trying to sound like a heartless b!tch, with regard to the partner, she has made her own decsion to stay with him and resulting problems that may occur are no longer my concern. My only concern is to raise a healthy, happy child.

My own parents seperated when I was four, so I understand the importance of access first hand.

Thanks for the info re, the birth cert.

Big Bag of Chips

Ophiopogon wrote: »

Bag of chips, I've not really said anywhere that the decsions I am thinking about now are for definite. That may be why I'm actually posting on Boards looking for opinions.

And I'm giving mine!

You may not always like what you hear on a public forum, I don't know you, or them, and am only commenting on what I have read in your posts.

I know your head is all over the place at the moment and you are kind of "throwing it all out there". And I am just "throwing" some thoughts back at you. You don't have to take any of it on board.. but it might make you think of something you hadn't considered before.

Is that not the real reason we post on public forums looking for opinions, to get many and varied opinions? Otherwise we'd just ask our friends and they'd tell us what we want to hear.

Ophiopogon

I know you are giving your opinion and I have not discounted it either. All I am pointing out is that I feel you implyed I had my decision and I have not.

The Corinthian

What ever happened to expressing the breast milk for later feeing? Or that there are many mothers who either cannot or do not breastfeed without apparent issue?

How she approaches the father's role as a parent now is going to effectively set the tone for the foreseeable future. Doing things such as refusing any over-nights and otherwise 'laying down the law' will contribute towards resentment and alienation on his part, and this can quickly escalate to a point where the father will either walk away or usher in decades in and out of the courts.

This is not to say that she should give in on over-nights, even though I would think expressing milk for those occasions is a reasonable compromise. Another option might be to offer guardianship (bare in mind he can apply anyway and would likely get it) to make up for the lack of over-nights, as a sign of good faith.

Ultimately, it's important to remember that there are consequences to all her actions, especially at this stage and setting a negative or belligerent tone to the parental relationship may result in long-term consequences for the child far greater than feeding an infant formula or expressed milk.

iguana

The Corinthian wrote: »

What ever happened to expressing the breast milk for later feeing? Or that there are many mothers who either cannot or do not breastfeed without apparent issue?

As for the part in bold. Breastfeeding doesn't really work very well that way for most women, especially when it comes to night feeds. The suckling by the baby stimulates the exact amount of milk and hormonal and nutritional content that it needs at that exact time of day. If the baby doesn't suckle when it needs to it disrupts the supply of milk and can end the ability of the mother to breastfeed, this is especially important at night. There is a reason that the WHO states that actual breastfeeding is the top recommended way to feed a baby and expressed milk from the babies mother is second. The nutritional benefit to the baby is different. It will also cause physical pain and greatly increased risk of medical issues, like mastitis, to the mother as the mother's body produces milk at the time it was last needed. An expressing mother needs to do it in a consistent daily pattern and weekly/twice weekly overnights are unlikely to work and she is very likely to be spending the nights she is apart from the baby in a lot of pain.

For the rest, it's actually rare for a mother to not be able to breastfeed, less than 2% of the female population have a physical inability to produce any/enough milk. It's lack of knowledge and suggestions like 'just express milk for later feeding' or supplement unnecessarily which cause most supply issues. As for, without apparent issue? Apparent is the key word there. Formula feeding has been so widespread in our society for the last 3 generations that many health problems caused by not breastfeeding are now seen as common childhood ailments when they aren't the biological norm at all.

If it came to custody through the courts, a decent solicitor who can present the proper medical advice, should be enough to ensure that overnight custody remains solely with the mother while she is still breastfeeding the child at night. It is unfortunate for the father, that's undeniable, especially when if the father and child live far apart but babies can form strong bonds with people even when they only see then for a number of hours a week and once the baby is older, they will adapt to a newly established pattern of spending nights with someone who they already love.

The Corinthian

iguana wrote: »

It is unfortunate for the father, that's undeniable, especially when if the father and child live far apart but babies can form strong bonds with people even when they only see then for a number of hours a week and once the baby is older, they will adapt to a newly established pattern of spending nights with someone who they already love.

I believe you completely missed, or ignored, the point I made.

Big Bag of Chips

OP, I think the most important thing in this situation is not to start off on the defensive. It will be difficult when it feels like you are being attacked.

Of course people are not going to be happy with you. His family were hardly likely to welcome you with open arms into the fold.

His gf isn't going to be happy, and will not be inclined to make things easy.

You have mentioned he hasn't been honest with her.. of course he hasn't, and I'd be very surprised if he's been 100% honest with you. He will do/say anything to either of you, to make things easier for himself.

It's a difficult situation and the one thing you need to force yourself to do is make decisions to try help access rather than automatically come up with reasons to deny it.

If you breastfeed and overnights are not possible, then you have to try come up with and offer alternatives.

I agree with The Corinthian (and that's not often ) how you (both) approach this from the start, will set the tone for the rest of your baby's life. Like it or not, you are linked to this man, his family and potentially his partner, for the rest of your life.

2xj3hplqgsbkym

iguana wrote: »

less than 2% of the female population have a physical inability to produce any/enough milk. It's lack of knowledge and suggestions like 'just express milk for later feeding' or supplement unnecessarily which cause most supply issues.

Formula feeding has been so widespread in our society for the last 3 generations that many health problems caused by not breastfeeding

Sorry I know this is of topic, but it is statements such as these that make mothers feel inadequate, guilty and useless when they cannot breastfeed.
Just because only less than 2% of women cannot produce enough milk it does not mean that the is the only reason the baby cannot be breastfed.

I breastfed my first child and tried my best to breastfeed my second but simply couldn't. I had help, instruction and support from numerous mid wives, breastfeeding consultants, doctors and family but it just didn't work for no particular reason. Nothing to do with lack of knowledge or other peoples suggestions.

On topic, if you are a single mother op you might be delighted of a co parent to help out once your baby is born, so do not dismiss his interest.

inocybe

I breastfed for a year and was never able to express milk. I can remember using up precious nap time, spending 45 min for the sake of a few ml of milk, and just crying in frustration (and exhaustion). And then my baby wouldn't take it from the bottle anyway. Expressing isn't always possible, and no mother should be put under pressure to do so.

ElleEm

OP, you didn't make this baby by yourself, so you shouldn't get all the rights in relation to the child's life. The father (under Irish law) will have no automatic rights to the baby, imagine how that must make him feel. It is disgusting that unmarried fathers are treated like this, and it really upsets me that there are people who would consider this a positive thing.

You should make it your duty to ensure that your baby has the best start in life, the baby has a RIGHT to know who it's father is, and also has a right to develop a relationship with their dad (and his family). You should really be the one who encourages this. You have no reason to believe that the baby would not be safe and cared for in the care of the dad and his partner. I understand that you feel/ will feel protective once the baby arrives, so maybe do as others suggested, and be present for the first few months of visits. The baby isn't here yet, so you don't know how ANYONE will feel when he/she arrives.

I really advise you to try your best to facilitate the relationship between the dad and the baby, (re; overnights, expressing milk where possible, etc.). Until they show you otherwise, give them the benefit of the doubt and allow them to bond with the baby.

Ophiopogon

Thank you everyone for your replies.

I will be seeking counseling and mediation as obviously the situation to too emotive to deal with by ourselves.

I just wanted to say that I did say in my OP that I had talked the father into staying in the country for the importance of the their(his and the baby) relationship.

Also, from talking to people in similar situations it appears that unmarried fathers do actually have rights unlike has been suggested here. I have no links regarding this. I know my father had very little rights even as a married father 30 years ago but this appears to have changed.

I ended up in hospital yesterday due to not paying attention to physical symptoms so for now I feel I really need to concentrate on giving this baby the best start physically that I can.

ElleEm

Ophiopogon wrote: »

Thank you everyone for your replies.

I will be seeking counseling and mediation as obviously the situation to too emotive to deal with by ourselves.

I just wanted to say that I did say in my OP that I had talked the father into staying in the country for the importance of the their(his and the baby) relationship.

Also, from talking to people in similar situations it appears that unmarried fathers do actually have rights unlike has been suggested here. I have no links regarding this. I know my father had very little rights even as a married father 30 years ago but this appears to have changed.

I ended up in hospital yesterday due to not paying attention to physical symptoms so for now I feel I really need to concentrate on giving this baby the best start physically that I can.

Unless the woman agrees to giving the man guardianship (through signing a form) or him taking her to court if she refuses to sign the form, the unmarried father will have as much rights to their own child/ren as your next door neighbour has to it. NONE!

http://www.treoir.ie/target-fathers.php#legal_rights

Get in contact with Treoir, they are a fantastic organisation for unmarried parents. They will give you any info or advice you need.

Sorry to hear you haven't been well, look after yourself.

LittleBook

Ophiopogon wrote: »

Also, from talking to people in similar situations it appears that unmarried fathers do actually have rights unlike has been suggested here. I have no links regarding this. I know my father had very little rights even as a married father 30 years ago but this appears to have changed.

It's a common assumption because of how archaic the system is here and how incredible the reality is, but it's simply not true. Feck all of any substance has changed in this regard in 30 years.

inocybe

ElleEm wrote: »

Unless the woman agrees to giving the man guardianship (through signing a form) or him taking her to court if she refuses to sign the form, the unmarried father will have as much rights to their own child/ren as your next door neighbour has to it. NONE!

Going to court for guardianship is very simple, the man can represent himself and unless there are extreme circumstances he will get guardianship and then access. Of course unmarried fathers have rights, they just have to look for them.

OP focus on you and your pregnancy, and try to enjoy it. Try to get some support in place for when the baby is born.

pwurple

inocybe wrote: »

Going to court for guardianship is very simple, the man can represent himself and unless there are extreme circumstances he will get guardianship and then access. Of course unmarried fathers have rights, they just have to look for them.

Several people are saying the same thing.

They have no rights to begin with.

They can acquire some later through courts.

Many don't, either through ignorance, or through unwillingness.

The Corinthian

inocybe wrote: »

Going to court for guardianship is very simple, the man can represent himself and unless there are extreme circumstances he will get guardianship and then access. Of course unmarried fathers have rights, they just have to look for them.

It's all far more complex than that. To begin with many fathers will not get guardianship on their first request (difficult to say how many but to give an idea the 30% is the figure most quoted for overall refusals) and will instead be told to come back after a certain period once they've 'proved' their commitment - depends on the judge, I expect. Even then there's the question of enforcement of guardianship rights, and most are completely ignored, especially those that deal with the educational and religious upbringing of the child, regardless of the father's former marital status.

Personally I don't see much point arguing on this issue as it has little to do with the OP and frankly one would have to be utterly deluded to believe that fathers in Ireland have any significant rights to their children to speak of.

ectoraige

Just regarding the birth cert issue, the child has the right to know his parentage. You can't tell if the father will be a part of the child's life or not but it is important for medical reasons that the child's genetic lineage be established.


Not having his name on the certificate will not prevent a determined father from gaining access to his child. Paternity tests can establish that he is the father.

Finally, it angers me that this is even up for debate, it is indicative of the prejudice unmarried fathers suffer.

December2012

Op

You are holding all the cards - don't abuse your position.

You slept with a man who was in a relationship.

You decide to keep the baby.

You convince him not to leave the country.

You want to ban his partner from seeing the baby post birth.

What did this woman ever do to you to justify you treating HER so badly?

Out of the 3 of you in this parenting relationship, she is the only one that has done no wrong.

Now you're considering what other power you are going to control over her, the baby's father, and your child?

You guys are going to be in each others lives for the rest of your life. She is not your enemy (although she might feel that you are to her). Can't you feel some compassion? How do you think his family should treat you at this moment in time? Can't you see that it is a prickly situation and just accept that for now?

At all times remember that the right is for the child to have access to his / her parents and family members.

The sooner you can come to terms with that the better.

You mentioned that you were unwell and I do hope you're feeling better. You don't need more stress right now, maybe a way to get rid of stress is to let go of some of your "victimness".

Paddy Cow

December2012 wrote: »

What did this woman ever do to you to justify you treating HER so badly

Most of your post I agree with but this stood out for me. There are three things that this woman did that would have alarm bells ringing in my head if I was the op.

1 She wanted the op to have an abortion

2 She wanted her partner to chose between her and the child

3 She now wants access to the child

I understand that this woman has been thrown into a difficult situation and probably isn't thinking straight but that is why I would have reservations about her. She has gone from wanting to abort the child to having access. Her emotions are all over the place right now and I would have serious reservations about leaving a newborn in her care. Many people struggle to bond with children when they enter a relationship knowing that the person has kids. She isn't just dealing with a stepchild but also the emotions that surface when a partner cheats. She has decided to continue her relationship with her partner but how will she cope when there is a mini me reminder of that affair?

We can argue the morality about having an affair and who is to blame or who should have their feelings considered etc but at the end of the day, there is an innocent child being born into this and it's the child who should be put first, not the mother, father and father's partner. As to whether or not the father should be put on the birth cert, this is only my opinion but whenever possible the father should be on it. It is next to impossible to change a birth cert after it has been registered and every child should at least know the name of their parents.

I am not a parent but I lost my father as a child. I remember doing a workshop when I was a teenager for kids from one parent families. I remember the counseller asked us whether we thought it was harder to lose a parent through death or separation and loss of contact (looking back I can't believe they actually asked that question :eek:). The kids who's father's died said they would've preferred if they walked out as it would mean that they were still alive and there was a chance that they might be able to contact them and build a relationship at some stage and the kids who's father's walked out were undecided as they didn't know if they wanted a relationship with their father.

OP you are in a very tough situation and I hope you have a good support network around you. Right now you don't know how things are going to work out and the only thing you know for sure is that you are having a baby. I know you want to breastfeed and seem to be planning access in the future based on this but don't put so much pressure on yourself. Not all women can breastfeed and if it turns out you are one of them, given the pressure you are under now it could cause you an awful lot of stress. Plus even if you bottle feed, newborns don't feed to schedule so it's unrealistic to be thinking about access just now. Some babies wake up every 1 - 2 hours, which would be a nightmare if trying to juggle them between two houses.

I wish you all the best.