In divorce, should the father have equal custody rights to his children?

I want to support shared parenting, I really do, but I don't believe kids should be moved from house to house........

Shared parenting is discussed a lot. I am pro-father and I believe shared parenting is best when the conditions are right. But generally this is not the case. I do not like the idea of kids moving around from house to house every week or every month or whatever.

I want to make sure I understand your guy's position and definitions. Does shared parenting always refer to equal time spent at each parent's home?

How would this work if the split parents lived an hour away from each other, and had three kids: a elementary student that starts school at 9 AM, a middle schooler that starts at 8:30 AM and a high schooler that starts at 7:45 AM. AND parent has a child with new spouse that attends school down the street at 9 AM. Parent also has to get children home from school, provide after school care, etc. I wont even go into team sports and activities.

How would shared parenting work for that family???

You see, I think most divorced parents know how difficult it is, and don't even request shared parenting (as in 50/50 custody). However, the ones that do request it probably have a simple family structure (say one kid -and not planning on any more) and are committed to living in close proximity to the ex. So in those cases it would not involve the kid packing up every belonging, missing activities, etc. I am all for it in simple cases.

Parents can be involved in other ways besides physical custody and, as far as I know, all parenting plans have provisions for this. Most parenting plans allow a parent to have dinner with the child several nights per week, text, phone calls, and have shared medical or religious input for the child.

I realize fathers are known to get the short end of the deal, and I am supportive of changing this, but I would never be supportive of expecting a child to pack up and relocate so often that it effects the child's social ability, learning opportunity, etc.

If adults were expected to move offices every week, think of how it would effect your efficiently level, your relationships with customers and co-workers and think of your frustration if you left something at the "other" office. It is not any different for children. Imagine all the eyeglasses, ortho retainers, homework, musical instruments, uniforms, etc that are going to be left at one parents house when it is needed at the other house.

I don't see packing up and changing locations as a good thing. And there is SO MUCH additional expenses associated with this from transportation and child care costs, and now the child(ren) need two sets of everything!!

I think fathers would like to be considered for full custody more often and changes should be made so the non-custodial parent is assured more access and influence over the child, but not expecting the child to move so often.

I think 50/50 physical custody is something that looks good to outsiders that don't have kids, I don't think the majority of split parents want their kids to move around (it is a huge expense and inconvenience depending on proximity to your ex). For many split couples, this would add hours of commute time per week and possibly hundreds of dollars in expenses -who pays for this?

Thoughts??

How would this work if the split parents lived an hour away from each other, and had three kids: a elementary student that starts school at 9 AM, a middle schooler that starts at 8:30 AM and a high schooler that starts at 7:45 AM. AND parent has a child with new spouse that attends school down the street at 9 AM. Parent also has to get children home from school, provide after school care, etc. I wont even go into team sports and activities.

How would shared parenting work for that family???

Although rarely considered, there's a simple solution to the above situation. The kids don't move. The parents do. The kids remain in the family home, and it is up to the parents to move in and out every week or every month. It is up to the parents to decide their own accommodations outside of the family home. They can get separate residences (e.g., two small apartments), or if money is an issue they can effectively share the same place since they wouldn't live there at the same time.

This is clearly in the best interest of the children. Of course, this would never sell since it's not in the best interest of the mother. And it's all about the mother.

I believe most parents aiming for shared parenting will live near each other, or at least in the same school district so that part of the kids' lives won't be interrupted. Shawn's idea is interesting, with some obvious logistical issues, but is certainly an excellent thought exercise.

The most common objection to shared parenting is it that may not work for all parents. But this is a straw man argument. Shared parenting is only a legal presumption, a starting point from which all other practical digressions can proceed. The current practice is de facto maternal custody. The headline of the opening post asks should fathers have equal custody rights, a condition which currently does not exist, and will not exist in fact, in today's biased climate.

The concept that Shawn espouses is called "nesting." As long as there is no move-away involved, this solution seems the fairest. With the present sole custody system, generally the father must move into a different dwelling, even if he has a home office in the primary residence. The nesting arrangement merely spreads the inconvenience around. And in situations where the couple cannot afford two places—usually resulting in a homeless father—the threat of rotating homelessness might convince some couples to stay together. Especially the mother.

I have heard of that solution before (where the parents take turns living in the house), but let's face it, it isn't practical for the mother OR THE FATHER. Who wants their ex-spouse in all of their business (snooping) and sleeping in their bed? (are they allowed to bring their new partner?).

Besides you forgot, in the example given the parent has a new spouse and a new child that attends local school which is an hour away from the other children's schools.

Usually when a couple is not intact, they eventually have new partners, new kids, etc. Impossible for everyone to play "musical houses".

I estimate that shared 50/50 physical custody could only work for about 10% of couples. I don't think many people ask for it.

I think what they really want is a fair shot at full custody and if not that then at least equal respect,access and influence to their children.

I have heard of that solution before (where the parents take turns living in the house), but let's face it, it isn't practical for the mother OR THE FATHER. Who wants their ex-spouse in all of their business (snooping) and sleeping in their bed? (are they allowed to bring their new partner?).

I don't see why it matters what's practical for the mother or the father. All that matters is what's in the best interests of the children. At least that's what we are always told when the father gets screwed. Oh, but now the mother has to sacrifice too. It's so unfair that she might be inconvenienced. I bet many noncustodial parents (mostly fathers) would support this or a similar setup. I bet many custodial parents (mostly mothers) would not. But it is clearly in the best interests of the children.

As for sleeping in the same bed ... I do this every time I go to a hotel. I sleep in a bed that has been previously used by hundreds if not thousands of other people. I survive. As for snooping around, I imagine that a lot of snooping happens in intact marriages. If the mother or father is worried about this, then they shouldn't bring anything to the family home that they don't want the other spouse to see. These are all excuses because it is not about the children. It is about the mother.

The scenario you described can be solved by the solution proposed. It is up to the parents to make it work. If they have new partners, it's up to the parent and the new partner to deal with it.

Most often, of course, the mother and father can live near enough to each other and in the same school district so a more traditional form of shared parenting is possible.