Divorced With Children: When Favors Are Treated Like Demands
Divorced With Children: When Favors Are Treated Like Demands
I’ve seen it happen on too many occasions to count: ex-partners making demands of their former spouses instead of treating them as the ‘favors’ they truly are. Is their attitude in part caused by ignorance of the law and parenting? Perhaps. Could their demands, in part, be a control tactic? That’s possible too; an attitude of “entitlement” follows many of those who pay child and spousal support.
Nonetheless, ignorance is not an excuse. Nor should controlling behavior be enabled. You teach your ex how to treat you, just as you did during your marriage. With that in mind, here are two real-life scenarios where exes demanded something of their ex-wives. But instead of caving out of guilt / fear, both women consulted a mediator…and their exes were given a wrist-slapping.
Case 1: Paul suddenly decided his ex-wife should drive the kids to his house for evening visits. He demanded this of her, saying it was just as much her responsibility as his; and why should he be the only having to deal with rush-hour traffic?
Now, at first glance it may seem do-able, arguably even fair. It may even work for some. But in this woman’s particular case, it would mean chaos — she also had step-children to prepare dinner for and do homework with. Then there was the fact that Paul was constantly late — always had been, probably always will be. Her intuition told her that if she were to give in, she’d hustle across town with the kids dressed and ready, only to sit waiting in front of his house for an hour.
In the end, they brought the issue before a mediator. His take? It was Paul’s responsibility to not only go pick up his kids, but to do so on time. If Paul wanted his ex-wife to help him out, he could respectfully ask this “favor” of her. In no way was she obliged. She declined.
Case 2: Robert thought his ex-wife should be responsible for having the kids call HIM. As a father who worked out of town, he’d never consistently phoned his young children; sometimes weeks, if not months went by without calling them. He complained that the kids often didn’t want to talk to him when he phoned. Sometimes they seemed more interested in watching TV. He insinuated it was his ex’s fault, even though she’d strongly encouraged him to call more regularly and gave him free gamut to call whenever he pleased.
What did the mediator say? Given that Robert had full access to a phone while at work or at home, it was absolutely his responsibility to phone to them — not his wife’s, NOR his children’s. If Robert wanted his ex to have his kids phone him now and then, then he could respectfully request it as a FAVOR. She was not obliged. His relationship with his kids was not HER responsibility. He further added that young children are often distracted when they talk on the phone with a parent — but that’s no excuse to stop calling. What’s important is that the phone calls are consistent, that dad’s presence is felt. There WILL be times when the kids talk his ear off.
Just because someone is paying child and spousal support, doesn’t mean they own your soul. You can be flexible and grant some favors because that’s the kind of person you are. But it’s a two-way street. And sometimes the other party needs a crash course in not only legal matters, but good manners.
Comments
Kids need both their parents! (With formatting)
That's incredibly petty, and it is just absurd that the blogger would support such nonsense.
Look: Get over yourselves. You are not the issue here. Compliance with the letter of your divorce agreement is not the issue here either. (I'm looking at you, first Guest commenter.)
The real issue is that kids need to have solid, meaningful, and sustained relationships with both their parents, even after divorce. And it is simply irresponsible of you as a custodial parent to allow your kids to think that it is somehow acceptable for them to not talk or not interact or not spend time with their other parent.
I for one would never tolerate such disrespect from my children towards their other parent. I would ensure that specific time were set aside in our daily schedule for the kids to call their other parent. If the other parent weren't available, I would tell the kids to leave a brief message.
And if my ex requested (whether politely or rudely -- remember, your kids welfare takes priority) that I drive the kids to visit them, I would certainly agree that it is only fair for me to carry half the responsibility, and I would discuss it calmly and reasonably. I would do my best to work out a transportation schedule that enabled me to fulfull approximately half the responsibility of transporting the kids.
So if transporting the kids to my ex's house conflicts with dinner preparation, then I would offer to pick them up instead. Or I would arrange for a friend to take them, or call a trusted taxi service to take them and pay at least half the cost. Or find some other solution, that works for all parties. (Where there's a will, there's a way.)
And yes, I would do it all gladly, knowing that I would be doing what's best for my kids: Ensuring that they maintain a loving and close relationship with the non-custodial parent. I would hold my head high, knowing that I'm taking the high road and doing the right thing for my kids.
That's why, in my view, both mediators made very bad decisions. It is very easy for non-custodial parents to be shunted out of their children's lives. So if the non-custodial parent raises a logistical or communication issue that is hindering the children from maintaining a meaningful relationship with the non-custodial parent, the mediators should ensure that the custodial parent
And first Guest commenter: Weren't you the one who decided to move 4 hours away? So what kind of meaningful relationship can your kids possibly have with their father, if they're living 4 hours away and speak with him only once a week?
And why are you begrudging your ex the phone calls he wants from his children? Phone calls are all your ex has!
First Guest, from my perspective, you're sitting there, smugly proclaiming that you're complying with the letter of your divorce agreement, as if that is what really matters to your kids. Here's a clue, dear: You're just hurting your own kids by your passive-aggressive approach to excluding their father from their lives.
In my view, it would be best if you would reconsider your position, and take active steps to ensure your kids have a positive and daily relationship with their father --- your kids need him to be involved in their lives, even if you don't want him in yours. Your kids might resist at first, but over time they will get used to talking to dad every day. Eventually, your kids will thank you for it, one day.
Kids needs both their parents!
Interesting on the second
Post new comment