Well it has to include all facets and that includes equally sharing the burdon of bringing up the child financially. And before we start the barrage of looking after the children being a job and so forth. In a lot of cases both parents want custody and most people I know that it doesn't matter the cost they would bare the burdon of working and being a parent. That has been the case before separation in a lot of cases and their is no reason why it should not continue. The custodial parent should go to work and equally support the child. Oh yes now comes the house wife at home issue and the male earning capacity is a more and so on. It is not my fault that during the former years some took the initiative to strive harder. And just for the record I didn't achieve at school when my ex and I were married I took on extra study to get to and achieve where I am today and no she didn't support me. Lets make it all fair and equitable. Because two people separate males where a parent before they still are after separation. Kids are not a pawn and should have equal time with both parents. The financial side of things needs to be equitable as well. I am a payer the other party has work skills that could attract a salary of around 40,000 to 45,000 yet chooses to sit at home on government hand outs and C$A payments. Overall I guesstimate she is receiving in excess of $600 per week and not to mention the other things people get on a pension. I know a lot of people who don't earn that a week and work their backsides off. Oh yes there has been movements to do this but not strong enough and like I have had to because of the contribution I am making I now have a very restrictive life.

Sh! There are Feminists present
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/17774.html

Great article which reflects what is happening here in this forum.

JamesH where is it happening on this forum?

I don't think any posts have been censored yet for saying things that might offend feminists, I've not noticed any significant male bashing.

There are differing perspectives behind parts of the debate but no little women having a hissy fit because their feminist feelings are hurt.

It was an interesting article, I've not remarried but am finding my relationship with an educated professional woman far more satisfying than my relationship with my former wife ever was.

Are you certain that feminists are trying to shut down discussion here? If so just how are they doing it?

R0bert

fairgo4all2005

Thats Daddy Government. He's married to Nanny State and together they spawned Big Brother.

A lotta guys just cannot compete with that Trilogy.

Its far too easy to go the ladies for availing of this carefully constructed largesse of dependence on the state. Sort of fair enough, up to a point. Cant really blame them for doing what the system sets them up for. They're being played into underpinning the basis of the state and its reason for existence... control.

l guess it can help to argue with them about it, tho lm still not quite right about how its done.

Makes more sense to take on the source of this nonsense. Can lobby the powers that be. Seems to be of value, limited in nature, has yielded some basic change (presumptn of equality, mediation), hopefully not without further benefits.

Then again, can always 'vote with your feet' figuratively or literally. This one seems to be the only really effective ways to shift perspective. Takes a long time, but it appears that many men and women are just sitting it out. That pretty much solves the problem analysed in the article

By and large a good article. But the issue of time spent with the children before a divorce is actually a furphy used in the wider debate. After my second child was born I put my career on hold for 7 years and worked part time 3 days per week and shared equal care with my ex who also worked part time. I was so involved with my children that I even won a State voluntary service award for all the work I was doing at their primary school. Because my ex also claimed to have been injured (from a 3rd alleged injury she was seeking compensation payouts for) I was actually the primary caregiver. None of it counted for anything in Family Court proceedings. Even if fathers were the primary care giver prior to divorce it would not make the slightest difference. The FCA will do everything it can to help a vindictive mother drive a father out of the children's lives. The notion that the FCA and anyone connected to it cares a jolt about children's wellbeing is utterly laughable.

I think this story says what men have been saying for years that the Family Court is biased.

Anatomy of a bitter divorce
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=402938&in_page_id=1879

She is the career woman, he was the primary carer for the children.
She gets custody and moves the children away from dad.

Bingo! He put in more than equal amounts of time looking after the kids and still looses them.