Is being best able to provide for a child as cogent a reason for child custody as being the primary caregiver?

Question

The father usually is better able to provide for the child although the mother was the primary care giver. Are they both equally good reasons for child custody considering they are both needed to properly raise a child?

Answer 1

Fathers are essential to rearing a child. Mothers are not.

Women abuse children more than men. Single mothers create 70% of the criminal population.

Other than giving birth and breastfeeding, what does a mother bring to the family that a father cannot?

Shivers - The difference between me and the feminazi's is I'm right and they're not. If you find it offensive, tough sh-t. That doesnt make you or any of the other soccer moms any less worthless.

Unless you can prove me wrong, f-ck off. I dont give a crap if you're offended.

Answer 2

Let me begin by saying custody battles suck, and there is no "best " solution. The best environment for a child is to have a mother AND a father working together to meet the needs of the child.
Fathers and mothers each have a unique relationship with a child. BOTH are important. "Provide for" has come to mean providing material things, but a child has many intangible cognitive and emotional needs as well. It's very sad that in many cases, the father's role has been reduced to "money machine," especially if he WANTS to be involved with his kids.
Still, I think a child is better off with a parent who spends more time than money on him. And far too often, in cases of divorce, the child ends up being in the middle of some sort of contest to see who can win his affection by buying more stuff.
Those people should not have had kids in the first place.

itisfutile - separate the abuse cases from the neglect cases and then we'll talk. Stats can be so misleading, and I would expect that many of the single mothers in your stats would be guilty of neglect in the form of leaving children unsupervised while they are at work, trying to earn enough money to feed and clothe them, or they were not given appropriate medical care because there was no insurance and no money to pay for it. That is a very different picture than a mother who directly abuses a child.

EDIT@futile - Wow, You're quick to judge (incorrectly). It's NOT a man problem at all, unless YOU choose to define it that way. I sure don't. I was pointing out one of many ways that your stats might be skewed.


As for your stats -I don't give much weight to the numbers themselves, unless I read the original study. There are too many ways the numbers can be manipulated. If you care to post a link to the study on which your stats are based, I will be happy to continue this discussion with you.

Answer 3

Statistics mean FCUK ALL!!! You can't make decisions about an individual childs live based on Australian stats!!!

If the father is the primary provider (money wise) I'm guessing he has to work full time?? So WHO exactly is looking after the child while he is doing this??

The ideal situation is that people think a lot more carefully before they breed!!!! Ideally a child needs BOTH parents.

PS. I am a child from divorced parents and I was raised by my mother while my dad (ocassionally) paid maintenance. My mother did INITIATE the divorce as your stats suggest.... however the divorce was initiated because me FATHER was unfaithful and abusive.

Answer 4

Whom ever can give the best care to a child emotionally is the one that should take care of the child. If the father has the money but cannot give the emotional support, than he gives the monatary support and has visitation. If the mother cannot give the emotional support, than the child should go with the father as long as he can. Then they will have to give financial support which usually isn't as much.

Answer 5

And this from Queesnland in Australia. Notice the percentage difference of abuse in care from natural father with care to natural mothers with care.

Family types involved in substaniated abuse and neglect
24% two parent - natural families
22% two parent - other families
42% single female parent families
4% single male parent families

http://www.auau.com.au/Statistics%20on%20Child%20Abuse%202001-02%5B1%5D.htm

edit
Alot of single mothers will brain wash their children into thinking that their fathers do not pay maintenance and that they were abusive. I feel sorry for those children because of a vindictive mother.

edit
Question Reality
Well well well, typical isnt it. Turn it around, twist it baby, hey presto. We have a man problem. Grow up and start helping kids instead of hindering. For your information 4% could not be anywhere near 42% so you cant get abuse numbers from 4% that would be anywhere neare whatever number you want to pluck out of 42% for women.

Answer 6

ChipDeadlift, your views are just as bad as those feminazi's out there. You hate feminism, see it as evil with how they scorn men so much, have you thought about how you look to others?
As a mom, I personally find your comment that mothers have nothing worthwhile to contribute towards a family and the children to be very highly offensive.

Answer 7

why are you pretending to be someone you are not?

what are you afraid of?