Benk, <"It reduces neglect by giving both parents a break. It reduces physical and sexual abuse by ensuring that children have a variety of adults looking out for them. It deprives child abusers of the secrecy that they need."

I do realise that the writer has an agenda. She has some bias against men's groups.
However, I don't believe that all families are better off with 50/50 shared parenting. It should be considered on a case by case basis depending on the circumstances in that family.

If it is in the kids best interest to spend most of their time with one parent rather than the other, then it doesn't matter what the other parent wants- don't you see that? Shouldn't the kids needs and wants come first?

If warring parents are so angry with each other that they can't do what is right for their kids, then there really is no choice but to let the courts decide is there?

Robert, all I was saying was that if there is allegation of any form of abuse against either parent, then the children should not remain in their care until the allegations have been investigated and proven unfounded.

We just can't take the risk that they could be true allegations can we? I feel sorry for any innocent parents who have been wrongly accused- but the children's safety and wellbeing must come first, ALWAYS.

If mediation helps the courts to decide, then more power to that process should be given. True feelings or tendencies of both warring parties will eventually come out, given time.

And it will be obvious to whoever is the mediator- whether they are male or female, single or married. We can't pick and choose who does these jobs to a certain degree

Suzie I appear to have a lot less confidence in the impartiality and competence of relationship mediators and counselors than you do.

I also have a different view to a lot of others about the childs wants aspect of this. My own son has always prefered to live with his mum. As far as I can tell that is mostly about the difference in discipline between us, my son would prefer a home where breaking the rules does not carry any consequences. I doubt that is particularly uncommon for children to prefer to be able to get away with what they want. His mum does do better than I do at some aspects of parenting, but they are things I do Ok at.

I also think that the principle of a child's best interests is misused as a trump card to ignore basic concepts of fair play and do stuff to others which we would never accept in other circumstances. The concept is treated by some as a black and white issue rather than an issue of balance.

If a childs best interests were the only consideration (and based on selective criteria) we could find excuses to take children away from many parents and place them with families who might be able to do a better job with them especially if we do it early enough that the child does not know it's happened. If it's Ok to deny significant involvement in childrens lives to one parent for reasons other than wrong doing or incompetence by that parent then why not do so for all parents? The use of the concept of a childs best interests by some reminds me what I've heard of forced adoption of the children of single mum's in times past.

R0bert

Suzeonline

I agree with all your points. Apparently there are those who believe that very grey issues can be solved if:

The 'right' people are mediators - whatever that means. Fact is some counsellors are brilliant and some aren't - irrespective of gender. None of them are part of some 'great feminist conspiracy'. BTW if there is a great feminist conspiracy - why haven't I been invited? Why are women still being raped? And why are there so few women in power? As a 'conspiracy' it is lame.

R0bert

I see from your post that father knows best for his son, but your son disagrees.

Have I understood you correctly?

Suze

I agree that it isn't in the interests of many children to spend half of their lives with each parent, particularly when one parent is proven to be unfit to care for them. I also agree with Robert, that the listening only to what the children want leads to parents trying to win their children over with gifts and a lack of boundaries.

I just took issue with the implication that father's groups are the main obstacle to protecting children and that a greater effort to protect children will necessarily mean keeping them away from their fathers.

If it is always against the interests of the child to spend half of his/her time with either parent, why then wouldn't the same thinking apply to childcare where a child can spend from 7am to 7pm with strangers?

I don't mind what arguments are advanced either way but there should be some consistency.

Outside of one or both parents throwing a log or two in the road and creating stress, there is no reason why sharing shouldn't work well and to the benefit of all concerned.

Severin I do believe that adults generally should and do know better than children on most key issues.

I've skimmed back over the preceding posts and you appear to be the first to mention a 'great feminist conspiracy'. Are you trying to misrepresent what others are saying to polarize the discussion even further or are you reading into comments what has not been said (or as far as I can tell implied)?

Maternal bias by individuals does not imply a conspiracy nor does it imply feminist.

Much of what the mothers groups push relies on outdated gender stereotypes which don't do any favors for men or women wanting an end to those stereotypes and to be less constrained by assigned gender roles.

Thankfully we have made a lot of progress in changing perceptions about parenting, when my son was born I had the expectation that I could and should be a hands on parent doing the dirty nappies, giving him his baths, taking him out for walks, reading the bed time story etc. The same goes for a lot of other men (but not all). There is still a way to go when it comes to attitudes about parental leave vs maternal leave but progress is being made there as well. I had no expectation that I could be the stay at home parent at the time.

There are men and women who are more comfortable with the old roles but I don't see that they should be able to use that to push those stereotypes back on the rest of us.

My gender should not have counted when it came to residency but it did and in my view the agenda Barbara and others push is very much about maternal bias rather than a genuine concern for which parenting arrangement really are in a child's best interests.

R0bert