I have a friend ("Tom") with a 7 year old son ("Charlie"). Tom and Charlie's mom ("Elizabeth") divorced when Charlie was quite young. They have maintained joint custody of Charlie during their entire divorce. Elizabeth remarried shortly after she and Tom divorced and divorced hubby number two after 2 years. She is now working on hubby number 3 ("Mark")(and she is all of 27 years old...) with her wedding scheduled sometime next year.
My question is: Tom has always been involved in Charlie's life, with regular visitation, payment of child support and what not. When he has Charlie, he plans on fun things with him, and gives him lots of time and attention. However, Elizabeth wants to usurp Tom's visitation time so that Charlie can spend time and "bond" with Mark. She wants to be sure Charlie is home when Mark is off of work...which would be fine, except that Mark and Tom have the same work schedule/same weekends off. Should Charlie spend those weekends with Tom (bio-dad) or Mark?
2007-02-28 07:44:47 · 11 answers · asked by irish77princess 2 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
***Names have been changed.
***Mom has also been caught gently pushing Charlie to call Mark "dad"...again Tom is very active in Charlie's life, and wants to spend time with his son...but Elizabeth wants to dictate that Charlie spend weekends with Mark, instead of Tom...(the both have rotating on-call schedules that fall on the same weekends...)
***the divorce decree has a parenting plan in it, however, it states that they share the children 50/50...it is not so explicit thatit dictates who gets Charlie when...They have already fought in court over this before, but Tom wants to avoid that if possible, as it is not healthy for anyone, most especially Charlie....
2007-02-28 07:50:42 · update #1
Mom sounds very selfish. Most divorced mothers would beg at the chance for the real dad to step in and spend time with his kids. She can not go against a court order. The step dad will never be more importatnt to him than his real father. Actually sounds like the step dad wont be around forever anyway given her track record. I would have him tell her no, hell no. She can her son spend time with Mark when its more convienient for dad.
2007-02-28 07:53:06 · answer #1 · answered by tcg7213 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's not a good idea to disrupt the normal routine of a 7 year old. With everything you've written that he's been through - 3 dads in 7 years!! he needs the solidarity of his biological father, Tom...and can 'bond' with his new 'step dad' Mark, when it's the mothers appointed time to have Charlie. Otherwise, if Charlie is forced to spend time with Mark when he is looking forward to being with Tom, he might start to resent Mark....
Tom should also talk to Charlie about the new marriage, and make sure he doesn't have any questions that he feels he can't talk to mom about. Remind him that even though life seems hectic right now, he's got alot of people around him who love him.
2007-02-28 07:51:11 · answer #2 · answered by 1912 Hudson 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Charlie should be spending as much time with his dad Tom as possible! It is wrong of Elizabeth to try and stop this as Im sure her new boyf can see him other times! After all he probably doesnt work 24/7, he can see the kid when he gets home.
However his father has more right to see the kid than Mark, who has no rights and no say since its not his kid!
2007-02-28 07:54:47 · answer #3 · answered by Smartie 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dad is more important, sorry Mark. It doesn't matter what mom wants, if that"s the fathers time then it's his time and he needs to take it back to court and shove it down her throat. If she keeps this up she is going to cause resentment with everyone including Charlie. Charlie should be with his dad whenever possible. Mark will have time with Charlie but it shouldn't be pushed.
2007-02-28 08:04:54 · answer #4 · answered by Gremlin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
With his bio dad!!! That is the most important relationship. Plus there is NOTHING worse than a parent forcing their new partner on a child!! My mom did that with me and the two are now split up. Its not fair to put the child in the middle, make the child choose, or put the parent's need before the child's. Parents are SO selfish!!! The mother should NEVER take time away from the dad. Especially if the child looks forward to certain weekend visits!!!
2007-02-28 07:50:15 · answer #5 · answered by Ambre B 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe that the Bio Dad has more rights, but at the same time shouldn't hinder a bond with "maybe" new dad. May be they could share time together and have a Guys Day with Charlie. I know silly but, just an idea. That way you could judge what kind of man he is and how he would benefit Charlie.
2007-02-28 07:50:15 · answer #6 · answered by Been There Done That 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Personally, I think Charlie should still be spending time with Tom. They have bonded after all.
2007-02-28 07:51:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
She should NOT be getting in the way of farther and child. Period.
Under no circumstance should she try. As for wanting the son to call plaintiff number 3 " Dad" also a bad idea.
Why would any person think she should know what is good for a child when her life is a revolving door.
I think that were I his father I think I would be in court looking for removing the son from her.
2007-02-28 08:02:06 · answer #8 · answered by Flagger 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The divorce papers will tell "Elizabeth" when "Tom" gets "Charlie".
2007-02-28 07:50:31 · answer #9 · answered by e.sillery 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
bio dad should have regularly scheduled visitation that is spelled out in the divorce decree and should be abided by
2007-02-28 07:48:33 · answer #10 · answered by sunbun 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋