Equal 50:50 parenting
Parent treaty. Sounds like a very good idea to me. Something we could do in New Zealand.
Working on a draft Declaration of Equal Parenting created by David Shackleton (Everyman’s editor and publisher) and Andrew C. MacDonald, each section was lovingly laboured-over by a small group of men and women. It was then brought to the plenary, where David Shackleton focussed the many voices until they came to a statement that all could endorse. During a moving ceremony, the document was signed by everyone present.
International Men’s Network
Declaration of Equal Parenting
Belgium, of all places, has now passed laws enforcing equal 50:50 parenting as a rebuttable presumption.
Oh, What’s this: Jim Bailey New Zealand National President of the IMN, Founder of Family Orientated Men, NZ
Jim has now retired to spend more time with his family, we wish him all the best. I don’t see Jim as retired.
Equal 50:50 parenting gives both the parents power to decide how they will raise their children together. Alot of parents work this out for themselves and personally I know parents that move in the same area so as to share responsibility. Some parents discuss weeks with each other so that they can both work and play and have new relationships. Others have set days of the week. Set activities like sport. This is especially helpful when children play different sports at the same time.
And then, unfortunately, we have so many that don’t share because they can’t or won’t work things out.
We can blame the women’s movement for the cause justifyably because it is this movement that created the consequenses we have today. But we cannot blame every woman (as all posts agree).
Australia is thinking DPB changes expecting the women or men on the benefit to go to work once the child turns 5 and I remember National was thinking of this around election time. This would put alot of pressure on parents to work at shared parenting. There will of course be a small growing number of single parents getting pregnant every 5 years to stay on the benefit but we can conteract that with the male pill.
Conclusion: It is achievable to bring in a new law in New Zealand and/or change the law.
I think we need to discuss it between the sexes as Jim is certainly trying to make a strong point with alot of expreience behind him. Did you notice how he commented the same thing this morning on every post.
Julie,
you are such a treasure and thanks for the blast from the past. I have had 5 Heart and Reflux prosedures and now take 11 different types of pills daily to keep this rather fragile body of mine going.
I did so called retire several years back when it all became to much health wise and of course the fight with WINZ to recognise my “Equal” Parenting, and then another procedure and you might say back to life. My last one was just after this Christmas just gone and next day the 3 week Family tour with Javan. I was serverely told off when my surgeon found out.
WINZ now inform me that they are taking a further 50/60 dollars off me because of legislation changes. I asked how I was to bring Javan up as I am already heavily dependant on “Loaves and Fishes” FoodBank and Shop as it is. I asked why they can’t share the Child Part of the DPB and got the stock answer, that its because of legislation. Legislation to destroy any chance of real “Equal” Parenting I responded. Silence was the answer.
You be doing a great job and its seems you research in depth very well indeed.
I really enjoyed talking with you the other day. Your enthusiasm is inspiring.
I would like to extend that to offering you a dinner, Spit roast chicken with a simple salad, the promise of much more conversation and rough red wine at my place sometime soon, tonight even.
Javan comes back on Monday so next week is out, although this weekend is free except for church, Demo amd BBQ tommorrow, but we can get around that when he is not here if you would like it to be the week after next.
There is much happening World-Wide to move toward various plans for “Presumptive Equal Parenting”. Much has been learnt from some reasonally successful attempts at getting “Equal” parenting into some states and some countries. USA,NY just resently, Belgium, Italy, OZY etc. The biggest disaster which had much hope is our neighbour OZY and Italy a close second.
Some have now realized that “Presumptive Equal Parenting” is the only way to go. Anything else allows the “Empire of Injustice” to expand, either with self gradizing Lawyers or Feminazi councellors and Bureaucrats.
I try my best to keep the E-Group HandsOnEqualParent-News up to date. Join and get a daily report as there is often much happening. Trying to keep up with those commenting in the HandsOnEqualParent Guest-BOOK is yet another job.
This morning I have been talking with one of my Italian coleagues and sharing his frustrations
We Kiwi’s must get “Presumptive “Equal” Parenting” in place before all these other wonderful ideas for change or those changes will be a bigger desaster than current as is the case in OZY and Italy.
We have much to learn from overseas if we bother to look
Onward – Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 11:02 am
I don’t agree with equal parenting. It must be noted that one parent is a better parent than the other. I think it is determined by the child’s comfort as to where they live. This is because the child makes friends in one area, go to school in one area and more.
Whilst a child can easily change school at an early age, it becomes important in their later schooling that they are more stable.
I am glad in a way that my ex hasn’t bothered to help raise my son. This has made my decisions final and I and my son can get on with our lives much easier.
Comment by Ron — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 12:04 pm
The child has a right to both parents and parents should not be arguing over the child. Only animals have the right to fight, we as adults should know better. Children have to adjust to parental guidence. No, not the child but the parents.
Comment by Dr. H. Clarke — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 12:10 pm
Ron,
Thanks for the opertunity to comment on the negatives of “Presumptive “Equal” Parenting”.
My Son Javan needs to talk with you. He loves his Mum and His Dad and all the Family and Friends that come from knowing both. Several people that comment on NZ Groups know him well. He moved schools this last Christmas and I can assure you is making it loud and clear that we did the right thing. Better grades, won the swimming sports and loves school.
The school is a couple of K from mum and a short walk from my home. He usually walks to/from my home with several friends and enjoys the other week bike riding to/from with Mum.
Its the Parents that need to make sure the Child is comfortable I agree but that is not acheived by taking away a Parent and all that leads to.
You may well be glad of not having to deal with your X as I to would be, however the Child is not yours and in time will want to know its other side you might say. Who will the child think blocked the other side I wonder? Good Luck to you.
I would like some face to face with you Ron. We may both have something to learn
Onward – Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 1:27 pm
Hi, Jim,
We do need to get together as we are moving in the same direction. I am not interested in band-aids but in prevention as cure.
Ron is someone from my group of friends and he is not the only one you have to convince. I will invite him to one of the groups we hold.
Probably we as a group (and this is way outside single parents) are going to be part of your support.
It is mostly the men that are upset with me being a part of this but there are some that tell me to keep on track with my personal goals of riches so as to have credibility. You are probably aware that there are heaps of other men fighting for men’s rights in other areas that will join with you when you are up and going.
It always sucks how you have to continually look at the long run instead of the short run because there is so much sacrafice to get to the long run. But don’t give up.
I would love to see you again and will. I have 2 assignments due this week and am full on at present.
Now to my opinion. Well, I am not sure how I feel about shared parenting. I am a female and love the good things that happen to me. In fact I don’t know any females that will compromise to lose their benefits.
Shared parenting has to have alot of credibility in itself to be sold to women.
Ron does have a good point.
I am sorry to make this hard for you as I do want to support but I have to believe in something before I back it.
Comment by julie — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 2:16 pm
Hi again Jim,
Please don’t be disheartened by my not agreeing totally with shared parenting, YET. I am looking into it and am being open-minded.
It is just a new idea to me and many I talk to but something we are all willing to explore.
Look at it as a challenge. I do debate alot with people like Ron and lucky, they are open minded and easy to relate to. So you will have fun if anything else.
Comment by julie — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 7:23 pm
Julie,
No worries there mate, just sharpening my sword. Chicken was good.
The Palmerston DEMO went well. Just got off the phone to a lady who took video and stills. They will be up on HandsOnEqualParent tomorrow in the BOTHERING Section.
Also a very excited call from a young cousin of mine who did his first turn of MEGAPhone Theoropy there today.
YO! – Onward – Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 7:38 pm
Ron says:
The idea isn’t that all children should spend exactly half their time with each parent. If families agree on other arrangements that suit them better that’s fine.
The problem is that if you DON’T have a presumption of shared parenting, you end up with a corrupt institution like the Family Court designed to pick the winner and the looser.
When substantial financial and emotional rewards are available to the parent who gets custody (and vice-versa), conflict between separating parents is promoted and supported by the very system that should be promoting mediation, conflict-resolution, parenting plans, parent education etc, etc.
Unfortunately, too many lawyers, psychologists, counsellors and other professionals have careers dependent on things staying as they are.
Comment by JohnP — Sat 20th May 2006 @ 10:06 pm
John,
You once again make good points clearer however I beleive it is important that Children do spend close to 50/50 with each side of their Biological-FAMILY. Anything less causes a distortion, confusion in some way directly/indirectly for generations
Less than 50/50 is a convenience to Parents but not much good for the Kids.
Onward – Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sun 21st May 2006 @ 2:10 am
Jim,
I am glad you wrote “I beleive it is important that Children do spend close to 50/50 with each side of their Biological-FAMILY.”
Because that is the impression that I get.
It sounds good but I hear stories from America’s way of 50/50 and unless the parents live in a close neighbourhood it must be hard on the children.
Mum has Sun, Mon and Tues. Drops child off to school on Wed. Dad picks child up from school on Wed, has Thurs, Fri and Sat. Drops child to Mum’s on Sun. Whole process starts again.
If parents live in 2 different towns then child goes to 2 different schools and has 2 different sets of homework. In this case they may make one month on, one month off.
Yes, it would be an inconvience and we are thinking of around 18 years of a child’s life unless the child speaks up and says where they want to live.
I suppose I should learn the laws of countries that enforce this by law so as to get a clearer picture.
Maybe it should be one year on, one year off.
I believe this would be fine when the children are small but as they grow a year or a month can be like meeting a stranger, who is the child. They change so quickly when they are older.
Comment by julie — Sun 21st May 2006 @ 8:26 am
Julie,
Take Parents convenience out of the equasion
Parents choose to be Parents every time they leap into bed. Or do they leap into bed for sport and bugger the result.
Kids don’t choose the Parents they end up with, they usually love us anyway until the cognative years begin to test them.
I beleive “Equal” Parenting must be as stable as poss and the least changes the better.
Maybe week about is to often. I am not so sure today having lived it now 7 years.
What I do know is that Kids need “Equal” doses of Mum and Dad and all those that come with and behind them.
Onward – Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Sun 21st May 2006 @ 8:54 am
Jim,
I agree that children need equal doses of mum and dad and I know there are major consequenses all round if something is not done. And, I know too well how hard it is raising children by yourself especially when they have issues or special needs.
It is a good discussion topic.
However, we look at it I do not and will not expect parents to be totally treated as responsible people. It’s not real in my eyes. Adults are children too.
Be back to topic later.
Have a neat day.
Comment by julie — Sun 21st May 2006 @ 9:11 am
Julie writes:
Yep, that’s the key issue all right. Realisticly, people who want to share parenting need to live in the same neighborhood, preferably within walking or bike riding distance.
Felicity and I bought a house close to my ex-wife, and it was the best move we ever made – over a kid’s lifetime the taxi-driving KMs are more than enough as it is!
Our experience was that no particular shared parenting arrangement worked permenantly, so we decided that we would negotiate term-by-term (to forestall any “then I’m going to live with Mum” dramas). Over the 12 years we tried just about every permutation you could think of.
Jim says:
Many parents have periods where they have to work overseas, or be away from the family for other reasons, and there is no evidence that this is harmful to children. It is only when the kids become pawns in a battle that the damage gets done.
Jim, if you are suggesting parents should be somehow compelled to be “active-hands-on”, then I think you are going way too far.
Comment by JohnP — Sun 21st May 2006 @ 11:18 am
John,
Just from observation of parents that share parenting I see that one bows down to the other.
It does not mean that one parent is weaker than the other because we all know that the one who walks away from the argument or who simply does not continue the argument on or the one sometimes known as the peace-keeper is considered the smarter one.
But there must be friction somewhere and at sometime. And from what I see, those that are sharing the parenting are friends even though they have to work at it sometimes or even often. They have to support the new partners so to not run them down to the children etc.
If there was to be a law requiring 50/50 or shared parenting then we have to believe that both parents are going to stay friends. From the very beginning of a split there is pain which can become resentment blah, blah, blah. I believed you know the scenarios.
Maybe we should just advertised shared parenting as a benefit for the child and for both parents. Sales people will tell you, it is not their job to make the horse drink but just to make it thirsty. (from, you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.)
Comment by julie — Sun 21st May 2006 @ 11:02 pm
If we had Presumptive HandsOnEqualParenting as the corner stone of all FAMILY Law and Social Policy there would be little to fight about. Why do you think lawyers don’t want it?
You said “The peace-keeper is considered the smarter one”. What nonsence, Javan would not have a DAD on that basis.
Onwards – Jim
Comment by JimBailey — Sun 21st May 2006 @ 11:11 pm
Jim,
I toatally agree with both biological parents raising the children whether living together or apart.
Today I spent the day with parents and their children and everywhere we went there were dads with their kids. There were dads treking with kids, riding bikes, pushing swings and more. There was one who was dragging his child along the ground in a big leaf. The child was estatic. I saw more dads with their children than mums today.
Personally Jim, I do things to keep the peace. And my children ask me to do it.
Comment by julie — Mon 22nd May 2006 @ 12:01 am
Julie,
I look forward to the day when MEDIA after MEDIA see what you saw on Sunday. More Dads with their Kids on Sundays than Mums. Its been that way for generations.
Its been that way since MEN and young BOYS went down the mines you might say. Boys don’t become fully rounded Men in Mines. Check-out gimly’s conversation in “Lord of the Rings”.
Maybe we had to do it that way to bring our world into this modern eara, or as gandoff said to get to where we needed to go.
Our FAMILYS and thus Society have paid a very high price.
The Girls in high places and some boys are holding back the maturing of our Nation, our World, fearing maturity/responcibilty/care, NOT rescue/control of each other, as teenages do.
We must return NOW to HandsOnEqualParenting from Conception and in a few generations accept maturity.
The modern world gives us the tools. We now have a society where MEN and WOMEN can almost interchange the menial task and most certainly many others.
However there will always be the gender factor of the majority being better at some things. Our tasks are different, as different as our bodies.
Once again if you leave either gender out or fund one above the other, or protect one above the other eventually we get troubles.
The Biological-FAMILY must be the major protection of itself and Society protecting that FAMILY, that way of living.
Anything else is secondary and causes troubles should it rule.
Imagine if the survivors of the Titanic had been left on an island for 2/300 years. How long would it have taken for Women to let go their BOYS/GIRLS so that they could become MEN/WOMEN and thus bring their surving society into maturity. The MEN went down with the ship or perhaps died or were weakened in world-wars.
Kids seem more emmotionly attached to MUM than Dad from dot is my observation. DAD must bring the Kids from under MUMS influence into maturity, begining from Conception.
The sooner DADs relationship with off spring starts the easier the DAD task. BOTH gender tasks being of “Equal” importance. BOTH needing maturity.
If he is blocked by Law and Social Policy on top of the natural cling-on nature of Mum, to make herself feel important/valuable you might say or is it simply part of forming the cocoon to nuture early growth?
If we continue to get it wrong society moves backwards and even worse into deviant sexual stuff which is a display of the little boy syndrom having not risen above the very sensitive bit in his loins.
This in no way suggests that loin meeting be band, GOD forbid.
Part of Nurture (Mums version) is about keeping the peace as Julie says. Part of Men-Tor (Dads version)is about showing and leading the best way as he with her influence in Love sees it.
Take one task from the other and you do not have Parent. Parent is synonomous is it not?
The interlects can’t see it so expect arguement.
AS I say to my **NZ-FATHERS-Coalition** coleagues, if we are worthy of being Men/DADs we do not need a spokesMan. Every Man/DAD is worthy of his “Equal” place as spokesmen, if we don’t listen hard to each other we fail and form pyramids which isolate most and form clicks of elite, blind power.
I dream of the day when MEDIA after MEDIA go to the parks/malls to get the DAD perspective instead of those of us with some understanding of these things having to draw attention to ourselves. Thus BOTHERING to draw MEDIA attention to DADs and their Kids and Societies huge mistakes.
Onward – Jim
Comment by Jim Bailey — Mon 22nd May 2006 @ 6:06 am
Jim,
I agree with what you have written and you wrote it well.
You know how it is and how it must be and I am confident that we can work together.
There are always going to be exceptions to the rule, situations that cannot work at shared parenting but the majority can. Educate the politicians, educate the media and educate the people.
You have my support.
Comment by julie — Mon 22nd May 2006 @ 7:51 am