I say that the woman who has custody of the three young children should ask the judge to put in a clause in the divorce agreement, that should the non'custodial parent (the father) ever renage on his privilige to exercise his rights and see the children on weekends, summer vacation, etc. then he should be charged 10% for each time . Twenty years is a long time. If I had had extra money on weekends I could have entertained the children better. Especially when the father is financially equiped to take them.Especially when the father goes out an plays golf. Maybe the father will think twice before he chooses to break their hearts. This should be a law.
2007-02-10 08:21:22 · 12 answers · asked by WOLFIE 2 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
i totally agree with you on this. i would vote for this.
2007-02-10 08:25:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
How about we simply make premarital counseling a requirement to getting a marriage license. And 12 months of post-marital counseling a requirement to granting a divorce.
Then, we make a law that says Kids Stay Home. This means that divorced parents alternately share a Home, and an apartment. Every weekend, the parents pack a little suitcase and switch houses. The kids don't have to be schlepped all over town, the parents can "visit" their kids instead.
Maybe if the parents had to suffer what they inflict on their kids, they'd reconsider their vows.
2007-02-10 08:32:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Wolfie you sound like a great mom.
As long as he's paying alimony or child support, he can do what he wants.
If he chooses not to see the kids then it's his loss. He will never get that time back.
Chances are if he doesn't see the kids, they will probably have nothing to do with him later on in life.
Hopefully the kids see and understand that the father is not trustworthy and constantly lets them down.
The court should rule to limit his contact and take some of his rights away if he keeps failing to show up.
2007-02-10 08:31:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
That is a great idea! I would definitely vote for that. It is so sad when a parent lets down their child. A child should always be able to depend on their dad. But your children will know what a great parent you are with or without the money to take them places. When they're old enough, they'll see their dad for who he really is. And always appreciate all that you did do for them.
2007-02-10 08:52:11 · answer #4 · answered by nymom 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the father was financially equipped, then who is it hurting?? Duh! the kids are the ones that pay for divorce to begin with and for every time daddy doesn't show or mom degrades him in front of them or an argument ensues over them...they pay again. My girls father stopped spending time with them and over the years stopped seeing them altogether, by the time they graduated high school and got married and had kids of their own, he is of little importance in their lives as well as their children's. He is now the one that is left out, and it is not my doing that life is this way for him, I tried to tell him way back when he first stopped getting them that some day he would want to be part of their lives but he was always Too Busy...maybe a reality check is needed with him
2007-02-10 08:33:01 · answer #5 · answered by sassywv 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
ABSOLUTELY NOT! That's just plain old greed coming out! Father's get taken to the cleaners enough in most divorce situations. Their children are used as pawns for money, they aren't allowed to see them whenever they want. That's extortion and then to add insult to injury if something comes up and they "God Forbid" miss one of their weekends, he should have to pay for that too! Women like you are what makes the entire judicial process of divorce look bad, feel bad and leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth!!
Stop using your kids to "get even" with your ex! You already get child support! USE IT TO SUPPORT THE KIDS WHICH DOES INCLUDE ENTERTAINMENT!!
2007-02-10 08:30:33 · answer #6 · answered by Starla_C 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I personally think its a bad idea.You would be forcing a man who may not want his kids with him to choose to take them but not for LOVE but MONEY he would lose.I am a single father with my children living with me and am the custodial parent and there mother does the same things so its not only men its women also who do this.The way I figured it if she didn't want them when she was supposed to have them I knew that was more time I would get to spend with them because they grow up fast and they will remember who was there for them.Good Luck
2007-02-10 08:27:35 · answer #7 · answered by sparky75us 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
confident i found one and that i've got 4 babies. My husband became a genuine blessing. they're some good men out their you in basic terms would desire to attend and see. do no longer flow finding in simple terms enable issues fall in place. And be careful who you meet via fact your significant subject would desire to be the wellbeing and well being of your babies. You on no account be conscious of who you're assembly at the instant.
2016-12-17 06:55:11 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do agree with you. Because the truth of the matter is....
When you get divorced the other parent forgets their place. I knew that when my husband left me, that he wouldn't be there for his kids.
It should be a clause in there that states exactly that.
I think we should do something about that.
2007-02-10 08:28:27 · answer #9 · answered by summer 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I totally agree with you and this will help them to become a better parent as well to their kids.
2007-02-10 09:01:53 · answer #10 · answered by JoJoBa 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that would be great. Fines for letting your children down.
2007-02-10 08:27:21 · answer #11 · answered by lucki female 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋