View Full Version : A Solution to Custody and Support
Clark Simmons
August 22nd 03, 06:08 PM
I want to offer a viable solution to problems associated with separation and
divorce that address child custody and support. This is NOT theory, but is
based on an actual divorce case. It is NOT joint custody. It should meet
current guidelines in most states as they now exist.
It enables both parents to continue to be involved in children's lives where a
divorce has occurred.
The usual procedure in a divorce action is that one parent obtains primary
custody of children and both parents are to provide for the support of the
children. This so often breaks down to the point that the children fail to
receive access to the love of the non-custodial parent, and also the financial
support to which they are entitled.
A solution then, is for each divorced parent to share the responsibility for
child rearing on an absolute equal basis. This model is based on the
traditional practice of one parent having physical custody of the children, and
the other providing financial support. The only difference is that the
custodial roles change every year and child support becomes more manageable.
The children actually move into the other parents home, probably each July 1.
Child support amounts would be based on the difference of the historical ability
of the parents to pay and would only be paid by the non-custodial parent in the
years that he/she does not have physical custody provided there is a significant
difference.
Both parents tend to be more cooperative with this arrangement, since they know
that the tables are turned each July 1. This model should be the starting point
in all child custody cases. Modifications should be considered only in the
cases where there are unfit parents, substandard living conditions, child abuse,
etc.
My own case is the only case of this type that I know of. My former wife and I
still respect each other. I still have the love and respect of our daughter,
who is now 23. The only problem that occurred, easily remedied, was that we
each agreed to pay full child support in the alternating years. That created
severe hardships for both of us. It would have been better had only the better
equipped parent paid, and then only the difference in ability to pay, and in
alternating years.
The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was heard and decreed in The
County Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988. It
might be useful as a precedent that could be cited in future cases.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
be seen as beneficial for the child.
It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
b.
California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
be seen as beneficial for the child.
It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
b.
Clark Simmons
August 22nd 03, 11:51 PM
So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom each
year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward to
it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights of
parents.
There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each other
and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven when
the parents separated.
The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
existing law.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
> wrote in message ...
>
> California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
> standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
> to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
> child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
> be seen as beneficial for the child.
>
> It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
> be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
>
> Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
>
>
>
> b.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Clark Simmons
August 22nd 03, 11:51 PM
So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom each
year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward to
it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights of
parents.
There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each other
and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven when
the parents separated.
The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
existing law.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
> wrote in message ...
>
> California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
> standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
> to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
> child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
> be seen as beneficial for the child.
>
> It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
> be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
>
> Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
>
>
>
> b.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Virginia
August 23rd 03, 12:44 AM
As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
Clark Simmons wrote:
> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom each
> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward to
> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights of
> parents.
>
> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each other
> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven when
> the parents separated.
>
> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> existing law.
>
Virginia
August 23rd 03, 12:44 AM
As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
Clark Simmons wrote:
> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom each
> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward to
> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights of
> parents.
>
> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each other
> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven when
> the parents separated.
>
> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> existing law.
>
Clark Simmons
August 23rd 03, 01:50 AM
What is so damaging to children is to have lost a parent because of the
vindictiveness of one of the parents to influence the child adversely. I can
vouch for my statements because I've had it both ways.
I haven't seen or talked to my oldest son in 15 years. Youngest son in almost
5, then only because he didn't know I was going to attend a funeral. It's
pretty bad when a father doesn't even recognize his own son. I wouldn't have
recognized him then if one of my cousins had not sail something. That divorce
occurred in 1973.
When my second wife filed for divorce in 1988, I would only agree to the
arrangement I describe. Changing schools was no problem.
What's the problem with changing schools, anyway? Is that any worse than losing
love and respect for a parent? I think not. The traditional arrangement
encourages that.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
> military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
> curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
> same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
> different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
> and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
> they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
> and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
> (with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom
each
> > year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward
to
> > it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights
of
> > parents.
> >
> > There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each
other
> > and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven
when
> > the parents separated.
> >
> > The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
> > Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> > existing law.
> >
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Clark Simmons
August 23rd 03, 01:50 AM
What is so damaging to children is to have lost a parent because of the
vindictiveness of one of the parents to influence the child adversely. I can
vouch for my statements because I've had it both ways.
I haven't seen or talked to my oldest son in 15 years. Youngest son in almost
5, then only because he didn't know I was going to attend a funeral. It's
pretty bad when a father doesn't even recognize his own son. I wouldn't have
recognized him then if one of my cousins had not sail something. That divorce
occurred in 1973.
When my second wife filed for divorce in 1988, I would only agree to the
arrangement I describe. Changing schools was no problem.
What's the problem with changing schools, anyway? Is that any worse than losing
love and respect for a parent? I think not. The traditional arrangement
encourages that.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
> military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
> curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
> same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
> different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
> and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
> they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
> and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
> (with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom
each
> > year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward
to
> > it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights
of
> > parents.
> >
> > There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each
other
> > and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven
when
> > the parents separated.
> >
> > The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
> > Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> > existing law.
> >
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Clark Simmons
August 23rd 03, 02:01 AM
I don't claim that it'll work in every case. My former wife and I both moved
out of state in opposite directions. We were able to agree on extended
visitation in the summer since weekends wouldn't work.
One other advantage was when her stepfather starting treating the daughter
badly, my former wife asked if I'd take her even though it was her year.
I've been in constant contact with the daughter even during the four years she
spent in Australia.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Leslie" > wrote in message
om...
> This type of custody and support sounds very interesting. However, it
> would only work (for school age children) if the parents live close
> enough to each other to where the kids would not have to change
> schools every year. That would be the only problem I would have with
> it, is if the kids had to change schools every year.
>
> I would have actually considered this type of situation when I
> divorced, which was also in Montgomery County, TX. However, at the
> time of my divorce my EX was not interested in any type of custody
> whatsoever. He never used all of the visitation he was given either.
>
> There was also a time some years after our divorce that we both were
> looking for homes to buy. Since we both worked at the same company
> (he had 8+ years there, I had just started) I proposed to him that we
> purchase homes within the same school district, that would be close to
> where we work, with the hope that a 50/50 custody situation could be
> looked at. He did not feel this was the right thing for him to do at
> that time.
>
> So, this type of custody/child support could not work in my case,
> because my EX was not interested. I'm glad to hear that you have
> found a way to keep the children active in both households!
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
>...
> > I want to offer a viable solution to problems associated with separation and
> > divorce that address child custody and support. This is NOT theory, but is
> > based on an actual divorce case. It is NOT joint custody. It should meet
> > current guidelines in most states as they now exist.
> >
> > It enables both parents to continue to be involved in children's lives where
a
> > divorce has occurred.
> >
> > The usual procedure in a divorce action is that one parent obtains primary
> > custody of children and both parents are to provide for the support of the
> > children. This so often breaks down to the point that the children fail to
> > receive access to the love of the non-custodial parent, and also the
financial
> > support to which they are entitled.
> >
> > A solution then, is for each divorced parent to share the responsibility for
> > child rearing on an absolute equal basis. This model is based on the
> > traditional practice of one parent having physical custody of the children,
and
> > the other providing financial support. The only difference is that the
> > custodial roles change every year and child support becomes more manageable.
> > The children actually move into the other parents home, probably each July
1.
> >
> > Child support amounts would be based on the difference of the historical
ability
> > of the parents to pay and would only be paid by the non-custodial parent in
the
> > years that he/she does not have physical custody provided there is a
significant
> > difference.
> >
> > Both parents tend to be more cooperative with this arrangement, since they
know
> > that the tables are turned each July 1. This model should be the starting
point
> > in all child custody cases. Modifications should be considered only in the
> > cases where there are unfit parents, substandard living conditions, child
abuse,
> > etc.
> >
> > My own case is the only case of this type that I know of. My former wife
and I
> > still respect each other. I still have the love and respect of our
daughter,
> > who is now 23. The only problem that occurred, easily remedied, was that we
> > each agreed to pay full child support in the alternating years. That
created
> > severe hardships for both of us. It would have been better had only the
better
> > equipped parent paid, and then only the difference in ability to pay, and in
> > alternating years.
> >
> > The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was heard and decreed in
The
> > County Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988.
It
> > might be useful as a precedent that could be cited in future cases.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Clark Simmons
August 23rd 03, 02:01 AM
I don't claim that it'll work in every case. My former wife and I both moved
out of state in opposite directions. We were able to agree on extended
visitation in the summer since weekends wouldn't work.
One other advantage was when her stepfather starting treating the daughter
badly, my former wife asked if I'd take her even though it was her year.
I've been in constant contact with the daughter even during the four years she
spent in Australia.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Leslie" > wrote in message
om...
> This type of custody and support sounds very interesting. However, it
> would only work (for school age children) if the parents live close
> enough to each other to where the kids would not have to change
> schools every year. That would be the only problem I would have with
> it, is if the kids had to change schools every year.
>
> I would have actually considered this type of situation when I
> divorced, which was also in Montgomery County, TX. However, at the
> time of my divorce my EX was not interested in any type of custody
> whatsoever. He never used all of the visitation he was given either.
>
> There was also a time some years after our divorce that we both were
> looking for homes to buy. Since we both worked at the same company
> (he had 8+ years there, I had just started) I proposed to him that we
> purchase homes within the same school district, that would be close to
> where we work, with the hope that a 50/50 custody situation could be
> looked at. He did not feel this was the right thing for him to do at
> that time.
>
> So, this type of custody/child support could not work in my case,
> because my EX was not interested. I'm glad to hear that you have
> found a way to keep the children active in both households!
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
>...
> > I want to offer a viable solution to problems associated with separation and
> > divorce that address child custody and support. This is NOT theory, but is
> > based on an actual divorce case. It is NOT joint custody. It should meet
> > current guidelines in most states as they now exist.
> >
> > It enables both parents to continue to be involved in children's lives where
a
> > divorce has occurred.
> >
> > The usual procedure in a divorce action is that one parent obtains primary
> > custody of children and both parents are to provide for the support of the
> > children. This so often breaks down to the point that the children fail to
> > receive access to the love of the non-custodial parent, and also the
financial
> > support to which they are entitled.
> >
> > A solution then, is for each divorced parent to share the responsibility for
> > child rearing on an absolute equal basis. This model is based on the
> > traditional practice of one parent having physical custody of the children,
and
> > the other providing financial support. The only difference is that the
> > custodial roles change every year and child support becomes more manageable.
> > The children actually move into the other parents home, probably each July
1.
> >
> > Child support amounts would be based on the difference of the historical
ability
> > of the parents to pay and would only be paid by the non-custodial parent in
the
> > years that he/she does not have physical custody provided there is a
significant
> > difference.
> >
> > Both parents tend to be more cooperative with this arrangement, since they
know
> > that the tables are turned each July 1. This model should be the starting
point
> > in all child custody cases. Modifications should be considered only in the
> > cases where there are unfit parents, substandard living conditions, child
abuse,
> > etc.
> >
> > My own case is the only case of this type that I know of. My former wife
and I
> > still respect each other. I still have the love and respect of our
daughter,
> > who is now 23. The only problem that occurred, easily remedied, was that we
> > each agreed to pay full child support in the alternating years. That
created
> > severe hardships for both of us. It would have been better had only the
better
> > equipped parent paid, and then only the difference in ability to pay, and in
> > alternating years.
> >
> > The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was heard and decreed in
The
> > County Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988.
It
> > might be useful as a precedent that could be cited in future cases.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Mel Gamble
August 23rd 03, 08:38 AM
Not to mention the positive benefit of being ablet to maintain friendships and
other relationships on a continuing basis. One example is the soccer team I've
got my daughter in this fall is the same one she was in last fall - same
sponsor, same coach and - most important - at least SOME of the same kids. She
would be very disappointed if she could only do this during alternate years.
And my daughter has a horse - what about pets? Would you suggest shipping a
horse across the country so she can have access to it???
>As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
>military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
>curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
>same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
>different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
>and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
>they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
>and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
>(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
>
>Clark Simmons wrote:
>> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom
>each
>> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward
>to
>> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the
>rights of
>> parents.
>>
>> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each
>other
And NEITHER respected the child enough to consider her need for stability
enough to stay in the same area.
Divorcing parents with kids in school should be told that NEITHER may move more
than 20 minutes from their original home unless BOTH can agree to move to the
same area - just like real families. Sure, it's a major restriction on your
life. That's what you get when you start creating kids.
Mel Gamble
>> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven
>when
>> the parents separated.
>>
>> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The
>County
>> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
>> existing law.
Mel Gamble
August 23rd 03, 08:38 AM
Not to mention the positive benefit of being ablet to maintain friendships and
other relationships on a continuing basis. One example is the soccer team I've
got my daughter in this fall is the same one she was in last fall - same
sponsor, same coach and - most important - at least SOME of the same kids. She
would be very disappointed if she could only do this during alternate years.
And my daughter has a horse - what about pets? Would you suggest shipping a
horse across the country so she can have access to it???
>As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
>military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
>curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
>same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
>different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
>and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
>they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
>and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
>(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
>
>Clark Simmons wrote:
>> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom
>each
>> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward
>to
>> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the
>rights of
>> parents.
>>
>> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each
>other
And NEITHER respected the child enough to consider her need for stability
enough to stay in the same area.
Divorcing parents with kids in school should be told that NEITHER may move more
than 20 minutes from their original home unless BOTH can agree to move to the
same area - just like real families. Sure, it's a major restriction on your
life. That's what you get when you start creating kids.
Mel Gamble
>> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven
>when
>> the parents separated.
>>
>> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The
>County
>> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
>> existing law.
Paul Fritz
August 23rd 03, 01:11 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new
classroom each
> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked
forward to
> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the
rights of
> parents.
Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of the
parents.
>
> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each
other
> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven
when
> the parents separated.
>
> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The
County
> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> existing law.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> > wrote in message
...
> >
> > California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
> > standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
> > to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
> > child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
> > be seen as beneficial for the child.
> >
> > It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
> > be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
> >
> > Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
> >
> >
> >
> > b.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
>
>
Paul Fritz
August 23rd 03, 01:11 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new
classroom each
> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked
forward to
> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the
rights of
> parents.
Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of the
parents.
>
> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each
other
> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven
when
> the parents separated.
>
> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The
County
> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> existing law.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> > wrote in message
...
> >
> > California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
> > standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
> > to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
> > child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
> > be seen as beneficial for the child.
> >
> > It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
> > be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
> >
> > Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
> >
> >
> >
> > b.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
>
>
Bob Whiteside
August 23rd 03, 06:17 PM
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new
> classroom each
> > year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked
> forward to
> > it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the
> rights of
> > parents.
>
> Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
the
> parents.
That's how the "best interest of the child" custody model is defined.
Unfortunately, the best interest of the parent, usually the mother, is
substituted and the children suffer as a result.
Bob Whiteside
August 23rd 03, 06:17 PM
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new
> classroom each
> > year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked
> forward to
> > it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the
> rights of
> > parents.
>
> Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
the
> parents.
That's how the "best interest of the child" custody model is defined.
Unfortunately, the best interest of the parent, usually the mother, is
substituted and the children suffer as a result.
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:35 PM
It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to a
horse, it's okay with me.
No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on something.
There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
current school.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Not to mention the positive benefit of being ablet to maintain friendships and
> other relationships on a continuing basis. One example is the soccer team
I've
> got my daughter in this fall is the same one she was in last fall - same
> sponsor, same coach and - most important - at least SOME of the same kids.
She
> would be very disappointed if she could only do this during alternate years.
> And my daughter has a horse - what about pets? Would you suggest shipping a
> horse across the country so she can have access to it???
>
> >As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
> >military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
> >curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
> >same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
> >different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
> >and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
> >they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
> >and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
> >(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:35 PM
It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to a
horse, it's okay with me.
No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on something.
There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
current school.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Not to mention the positive benefit of being ablet to maintain friendships and
> other relationships on a continuing basis. One example is the soccer team
I've
> got my daughter in this fall is the same one she was in last fall - same
> sponsor, same coach and - most important - at least SOME of the same kids.
She
> would be very disappointed if she could only do this during alternate years.
> And my daughter has a horse - what about pets? Would you suggest shipping a
> horse across the country so she can have access to it???
>
> >As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
> >military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
> >curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
> >same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
> >different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
> >and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
> >they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
> >and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
> >(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:47 PM
I agree withj your post. Either parent should be able to live anywhere they
choose. With my model, visitation becomes less important. It provides a means
for both parents to have access to the children on a totally equal basis.
Instead of either parent having complete parental rights, both do at separate
times.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message ...
> Mel:
>
> You say that "divorcing parents with kids in school should be told that
> NEITHER may move more than 20 minutes from their original home unless
> BOTH can agree to move to the same area."
>
> You say that's what SHOULD happen. I agree. However, why does it not
> happen? The answer is that, as a practical matter, such a rule would
> impose restrictions on the freedom of mothers to move with the children,
> since they nearly always have custody of the children, and case after
> case in the courts has ruled that mother's freedom to move cannot be
> interfered with. (Of course, that's a ludicrous basis on which to
> decide the cases, since the issue isn't mothers' freedom to move -- it's
> their freedom to take the children with them.)
>
> Furthermore, imposing the Mel Gamble rule would be seen as restricting
> mother's freedom to divorce their husbands -- just as any post-divorce
> conditions on mother's behavior are seen as limiting women's freedom to
> divorce.
>
> This is yet another situation where what SHOULD happen isn't going to
> happen until the politics of the situation changes. Until fathers have
> effective political power, no one is going to restrict the activities of
> mothers. In fact, the whole history of the last 20-30 years is of moves
> in the opposite direction. Women have been granted more and more
> options, where necessary at the expense of children and fathers.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:47 PM
I agree withj your post. Either parent should be able to live anywhere they
choose. With my model, visitation becomes less important. It provides a means
for both parents to have access to the children on a totally equal basis.
Instead of either parent having complete parental rights, both do at separate
times.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message ...
> Mel:
>
> You say that "divorcing parents with kids in school should be told that
> NEITHER may move more than 20 minutes from their original home unless
> BOTH can agree to move to the same area."
>
> You say that's what SHOULD happen. I agree. However, why does it not
> happen? The answer is that, as a practical matter, such a rule would
> impose restrictions on the freedom of mothers to move with the children,
> since they nearly always have custody of the children, and case after
> case in the courts has ruled that mother's freedom to move cannot be
> interfered with. (Of course, that's a ludicrous basis on which to
> decide the cases, since the issue isn't mothers' freedom to move -- it's
> their freedom to take the children with them.)
>
> Furthermore, imposing the Mel Gamble rule would be seen as restricting
> mother's freedom to divorce their husbands -- just as any post-divorce
> conditions on mother's behavior are seen as limiting women's freedom to
> divorce.
>
> This is yet another situation where what SHOULD happen isn't going to
> happen until the politics of the situation changes. Until fathers have
> effective political power, no one is going to restrict the activities of
> mothers. In fact, the whole history of the last 20-30 years is of moves
> in the opposite direction. Women have been granted more and more
> options, where necessary at the expense of children and fathers.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:51 PM
With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of the
> parents.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:51 PM
With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of the
> parents.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:55 PM
I believe that both parents should play an active role in the childs life.
Equally, not just one of them, which, as you say, is usually the mother.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Bob Whiteside" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> That's how the "best interest of the child" custody model is defined.
> Unfortunately, the best interest of the parent, usually the mother, is
> substituted and the children suffer as a result.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 06:55 PM
I believe that both parents should play an active role in the childs life.
Equally, not just one of them, which, as you say, is usually the mother.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Bob Whiteside" > wrote in message
k.net...
>
> That's how the "best interest of the child" custody model is defined.
> Unfortunately, the best interest of the parent, usually the mother, is
> substituted and the children suffer as a result.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
gini52
August 24th 03, 09:02 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to
a
> horse, it's okay with me.
>
> No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
>
> As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
> school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at
the
> current school.
==
Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
class
and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents put
aside
their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child, both
parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young, as.
The
separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of their
relationships. This is
not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing the
needs of the child which
should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
that, fine. That is between
you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or any
other parent who
is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
==
==
gini52
August 24th 03, 09:02 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to
a
> horse, it's okay with me.
>
> No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
>
> As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
> school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at
the
> current school.
==
Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
class
and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents put
aside
their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child, both
parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young, as.
The
separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of their
relationships. This is
not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing the
needs of the child which
should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
that, fine. That is between
you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or any
other parent who
is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
==
==
gini52
August 24th 03, 09:07 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
==
I'm not sure what "selfishment" is but as long as your "model" requires
changing schools every
year, it is damaging to children and you need to go back to the drawing
board.
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
the
> > parents.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
gini52
August 24th 03, 09:07 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
==
I'm not sure what "selfishment" is but as long as your "model" requires
changing schools every
year, it is damaging to children and you need to go back to the drawing
board.
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
the
> > parents.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
gini52
August 24th 03, 09:08 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> Perhaps you could explain with a bit more clarity why you think
alternating
> custody is the worst possible setup? What do you think is wrong with it?
My
> personal experience says otherwise.
==
According to you--We have yet to hear from your kids.
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > No doubt.........I am all for joint/shared parenting...have had it for
12
> > years now.....however, the model the OP proposed is probably the worst
type
> > of setup that could be done.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
gini52
August 24th 03, 09:08 PM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> Perhaps you could explain with a bit more clarity why you think
alternating
> custody is the worst possible setup? What do you think is wrong with it?
My
> personal experience says otherwise.
==
According to you--We have yet to hear from your kids.
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > No doubt.........I am all for joint/shared parenting...have had it for
12
> > years now.....however, the model the OP proposed is probably the worst
type
> > of setup that could be done.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Virginia
August 24th 03, 09:20 PM
actually there are different graduation requirements for different
schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
Clark Simmons wrote:
> As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on something.
> There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
> school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
> current school.
>
Virginia
August 24th 03, 09:20 PM
actually there are different graduation requirements for different
schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
Clark Simmons wrote:
> As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on something.
> There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
> school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
> current school.
>
Paul Fritz
August 24th 03, 10:08 PM
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
As well as retarding social development, the inability to participate in any
meaningful way WRT team sports from year to year, etc etc.
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
the
> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
at the
> > current school.
> >
>
Paul Fritz
August 24th 03, 10:08 PM
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
As well as retarding social development, the inability to participate in any
meaningful way WRT team sports from year to year, etc etc.
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
the
> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
at the
> > current school.
> >
>
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 11:30 PM
Are you saying that both parents should not have an influence in raising a
child? Which one should not?
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I agree withj your post. Either parent should be able to live anywhere
> they
> > choose. With my model, visitation becomes less important. It provides a
> means
> > for both parents to have access to the children on a totally equal basis.
> >
> > Instead of either parent having complete parental rights, both do at
> separate
> > times.
>
> Which is the absolute worse way to raise a child.
>
> >
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 24th 03, 11:30 PM
Are you saying that both parents should not have an influence in raising a
child? Which one should not?
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I agree withj your post. Either parent should be able to live anywhere
> they
> > choose. With my model, visitation becomes less important. It provides a
> means
> > for both parents to have access to the children on a totally equal basis.
> >
> > Instead of either parent having complete parental rights, both do at
> separate
> > times.
>
> Which is the absolute worse way to raise a child.
>
> >
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:13 AM
This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the child.
Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not looking for
criticism. you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
relationship with the NCP.
Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
> Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
> class
> and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents put
> aside
> their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child, both
> parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young, as.
> The
> separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of their
> relationships. This is
> not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing the
> needs of the child which
> should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
> that, fine. That is between
> you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or any
> other parent who
> is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
> ==
> ==
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:13 AM
This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the child.
Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not looking for
criticism. you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
relationship with the NCP.
Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
> Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
> class
> and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents put
> aside
> their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child, both
> parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young, as.
> The
> separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of their
> relationships. This is
> not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing the
> needs of the child which
> should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
> that, fine. That is between
> you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or any
> other parent who
> is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
> ==
> ==
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:15 AM
That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even better
education.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at
the
> > current school.
> >
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:15 AM
That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even better
education.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at
the
> > current school.
> >
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:17 AM
Social development is enhanced, not retarded.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
> > actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> > schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> > school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> > year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> > lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> > by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> > years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> > often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>
> As well as retarding social development, the inability to participate in any
> meaningful way WRT team sports from year to year, etc etc.
>
>
> >
> > Clark Simmons wrote:
> > > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> something.
> > > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
> the
> > > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
> at the
> > > current school.
> > >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:17 AM
Social development is enhanced, not retarded.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
> > actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> > schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> > school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> > year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> > lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> > by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> > years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> > often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>
> As well as retarding social development, the inability to participate in any
> meaningful way WRT team sports from year to year, etc etc.
>
>
> >
> > Clark Simmons wrote:
> > > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> something.
> > > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
> the
> > > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
> at the
> > > current school.
> > >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:23 AM
And you probably won't either. I don't even hear from the ones from the
conventional divorce. They were taught disrespect. It's different with the one
from the second marriage. She learned to respect both parents.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Perhaps you could explain with a bit more clarity why you think
> alternating
> > custody is the worst possible setup? What do you think is wrong with it?
> My
> > personal experience says otherwise.
> ==
> According to you--We have yet to hear from your kids.
> ==
> ==
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > No doubt.........I am all for joint/shared parenting...have had it for
> 12
> > > years now.....however, the model the OP proposed is probably the worst
> type
> > > of setup that could be done.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:23 AM
And you probably won't either. I don't even hear from the ones from the
conventional divorce. They were taught disrespect. It's different with the one
from the second marriage. She learned to respect both parents.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Perhaps you could explain with a bit more clarity why you think
> alternating
> > custody is the worst possible setup? What do you think is wrong with it?
> My
> > personal experience says otherwise.
> ==
> According to you--We have yet to hear from your kids.
> ==
> ==
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > No doubt.........I am all for joint/shared parenting...have had it for
> 12
> > > years now.....however, the model the OP proposed is probably the worst
> type
> > > of setup that could be done.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:29 AM
That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is 23 and
very well adjusted.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> ==
> I'm not sure what "selfishment" is but as long as your "model" requires
> changing schools every
> year, it is damaging to children and you need to go back to the drawing
> board.
> ==
> ==
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
> the
> > > parents.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:29 AM
That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is 23 and
very well adjusted.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> ==
> I'm not sure what "selfishment" is but as long as your "model" requires
> changing schools every
> year, it is damaging to children and you need to go back to the drawing
> board.
> ==
> ==
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
> the
> > > parents.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
gini52
August 25th 03, 12:31 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
child.
> Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>
> Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
> mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
==
This is not the only alternative to your model. You seem to have one
dimensional
thinking. No one here will suggest that custody/visitation is good for
children. Most here
are strong proponents of true 50/50 custody. The problem with your
experience is changing schools every year.
Change your model to require both parents to live in the same district and
it might be more palatable.
(More Below)
==
> I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not looking
for
> criticism.
==
The you came to the wrong place. We criticize everyone.
(More)
==
you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
> relationship with the NCP.
>
> Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
==
Actually, a stable home life does not include changing
residences every year.
==
==
>
> "gini52" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
> > class
> > and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents
put
> > aside
> > their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
both
> > parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young,
as.
> > The
> > separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of
their
> > relationships. This is
> > not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing
the
> > needs of the child which
> > should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
> > that, fine. That is between
> > you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or
any
> > other parent who
> > is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
> > ==
> > ==
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
gini52
August 25th 03, 12:31 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
child.
> Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>
> Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
> mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
==
This is not the only alternative to your model. You seem to have one
dimensional
thinking. No one here will suggest that custody/visitation is good for
children. Most here
are strong proponents of true 50/50 custody. The problem with your
experience is changing schools every year.
Change your model to require both parents to live in the same district and
it might be more palatable.
(More Below)
==
> I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not looking
for
> criticism.
==
The you came to the wrong place. We criticize everyone.
(More)
==
you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
> relationship with the NCP.
>
> Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
==
Actually, a stable home life does not include changing
residences every year.
==
==
>
> "gini52" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
> > class
> > and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents
put
> > aside
> > their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
both
> > parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young,
as.
> > The
> > separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of
their
> > relationships. This is
> > not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing
the
> > needs of the child which
> > should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
> > that, fine. That is between
> > you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or
any
> > other parent who
> > is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
> > ==
> > ==
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:31 AM
The needs of the child AND the parents are met. And very well, too.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> And the Pope is a methodist. In your model......the needs of the child
> come last, far behind the two parents.
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
> the
> > > parents.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 12:31 AM
The needs of the child AND the parents are met. And very well, too.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> And the Pope is a methodist. In your model......the needs of the child
> come last, far behind the two parents.
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of
> the
> > > parents.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Paul Fritz
August 25th 03, 12:49 AM
Only in your mind.......
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> The needs of the child AND the parents are met. And very well, too.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > And the Pope is a methodist. In your model......the needs of the child
> > come last, far behind the two parents.
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness
of
> > the
> > > > parents.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Paul Fritz
August 25th 03, 12:49 AM
Only in your mind.......
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> The needs of the child AND the parents are met. And very well, too.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > And the Pope is a methodist. In your model......the needs of the child
> > come last, far behind the two parents.
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness
of
> > the
> > > > parents.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 01:22 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even
better
> education.
Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
children a better education?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
> > actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> > schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> > school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> > year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> > lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> > by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> > years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> > often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >
> > Clark Simmons wrote:
> > > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> something.
> > > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
the
> > > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
at
> the
> > > current school.
> > >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 01:22 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even
better
> education.
Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
children a better education?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
> > actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> > schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> > school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> > year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> > lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> > by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> > years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> > often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >
> > Clark Simmons wrote:
> > > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> something.
> > > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
the
> > > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
at
> the
> > > current school.
> > >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 01:25 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
>
> It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is 23
and
> very well adjusted.
That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children it
would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school, no
sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "gini52" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> > ==
> > I'm not sure what "selfishment" is but as long as your "model" requires
> > changing schools every
> > year, it is damaging to children and you need to go back to the drawing
> > board.
> > ==
> > ==
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness
of
> > the
> > > > parents.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 01:25 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
>
> It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is 23
and
> very well adjusted.
That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children it
would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school, no
sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "gini52" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> > ==
> > I'm not sure what "selfishment" is but as long as your "model" requires
> > changing schools every
> > year, it is damaging to children and you need to go back to the drawing
> > board.
> > ==
> > ==
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness
of
> > the
> > > > parents.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 01:28 AM
Perhaps in your experience, Clark. But you, yourself, said that you and
your ex are the only ex-couple you know of that handled custody that way.
How can you justify generalizing your very limited experience across an
entire population of divorced couples with children?
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> The needs of the child AND the parents are met. And very well, too.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > And the Pope is a methodist. In your model......the needs of the child
> > come last, far behind the two parents.
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness
of
> > the
> > > > parents.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 01:28 AM
Perhaps in your experience, Clark. But you, yourself, said that you and
your ex are the only ex-couple you know of that handled custody that way.
How can you justify generalizing your very limited experience across an
entire population of divorced couples with children?
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> The needs of the child AND the parents are met. And very well, too.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > And the Pope is a methodist. In your model......the needs of the child
> > come last, far behind the two parents.
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness
of
> > the
> > > > parents.
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:18 AM
The fewer restrictions placed on the parents (and the child), the more conducive
development is for the child. That's what it's all about, isn't it?
When she changed schools, she came home on the first day all bubbly and excited.
That caused no problems whatsoever.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
> child.
> > Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
> >
> > Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
> > mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
> ==
> This is not the only alternative to your model. You seem to have one
> dimensional
> thinking. No one here will suggest that custody/visitation is good for
> children. Most here
> are strong proponents of true 50/50 custody. The problem with your
> experience is changing schools every year.
> Change your model to require both parents to live in the same district and
> it might be more palatable.
> (More Below)
> ==
> > I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not looking
> for
> > criticism.
> ==
> The you came to the wrong place. We criticize everyone.
> (More)
> ==
> you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
> > relationship with the NCP.
> >
> > Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
> ==
> Actually, a stable home life does not include changing
> residences every year.
> ==
> ==
> >
> > "gini52" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
> > > class
> > > and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents
> put
> > > aside
> > > their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
> both
> > > parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young,
> as.
> > > The
> > > separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of
> their
> > > relationships. This is
> > > not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing
> the
> > > needs of the child which
> > > should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
> > > that, fine. That is between
> > > you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or
> any
> > > other parent who
> > > is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
> > > ==
> > > ==
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:18 AM
The fewer restrictions placed on the parents (and the child), the more conducive
development is for the child. That's what it's all about, isn't it?
When she changed schools, she came home on the first day all bubbly and excited.
That caused no problems whatsoever.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
> child.
> > Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
> >
> > Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
> > mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
> ==
> This is not the only alternative to your model. You seem to have one
> dimensional
> thinking. No one here will suggest that custody/visitation is good for
> children. Most here
> are strong proponents of true 50/50 custody. The problem with your
> experience is changing schools every year.
> Change your model to require both parents to live in the same district and
> it might be more palatable.
> (More Below)
> ==
> > I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not looking
> for
> > criticism.
> ==
> The you came to the wrong place. We criticize everyone.
> (More)
> ==
> you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
> > relationship with the NCP.
> >
> > Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
> ==
> Actually, a stable home life does not include changing
> residences every year.
> ==
> ==
> >
> > "gini52" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
> > > class
> > > and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents
> put
> > > aside
> > > their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
> both
> > > parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young,
> as.
> > > The
> > > separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of
> their
> > > relationships. This is
> > > not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing
> the
> > > needs of the child which
> > > should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
> > > that, fine. That is between
> > > you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or
> any
> > > other parent who
> > > is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
> > > ==
> > > ==
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:21 AM
It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
> children a better education?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:21 AM
It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
> children a better education?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:27 AM
She did no better or worse than if the divorce had not occurred. She certainly
would have lost a father if this arrangement was not used.
It even serves as a safety net for abusive stepparents. It did in our case.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
> I'm very happy your daughter is doing well but don't be surprised if you get
> turned
> down at the patent office. One good experience does not a study make. The
> reason for
> her doing well may have nothing to do with her custody experience. Surely
> you have heard of intervening variables.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:27 AM
She did no better or worse than if the divorce had not occurred. She certainly
would have lost a father if this arrangement was not used.
It even serves as a safety net for abusive stepparents. It did in our case.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
> I'm very happy your daughter is doing well but don't be surprised if you get
> turned
> down at the patent office. One good experience does not a study make. The
> reason for
> her doing well may have nothing to do with her custody experience. Surely
> you have heard of intervening variables.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
gini52
August 25th 03, 02:31 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
==
She's a teacher. She knows these things.
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year
gives
> > children a better education?
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
gini52
August 25th 03, 02:31 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
==
She's a teacher. She knows these things.
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year
gives
> > children a better education?
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:37 AM
That's not the way it works. There were no problems with adjustment. She
rather liked the idea of having two homes. After a year in one school she
looked forward to returning to the other.
I need to know what specific problems you might expect from this.
Psychological. phisical, loss of self esteem, other? None of these happened.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
> >
> > It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is 23
> and
> > very well adjusted.
>
> That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
> generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children it
> would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school, no
> sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:37 AM
That's not the way it works. There were no problems with adjustment. She
rather liked the idea of having two homes. After a year in one school she
looked forward to returning to the other.
I need to know what specific problems you might expect from this.
Psychological. phisical, loss of self esteem, other? None of these happened.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
> >
> > It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is 23
> and
> > very well adjusted.
>
> That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
> generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children it
> would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school, no
> sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:50 AM
I have not generalized it across the entire population. I am simply relating my
own experience. No one has to accept it. It's simply a possible means of
making certain that both parents negotiate on an equal footing.
I mainly object having the mother using the child as a pawn to extort money from
the father. That's the way it works now.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Perhaps in your experience, Clark. But you, yourself, said that you and
> your ex are the only ex-couple you know of that handled custody that way.
> How can you justify generalizing your very limited experience across an
> entire population of divorced couples with children?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:50 AM
I have not generalized it across the entire population. I am simply relating my
own experience. No one has to accept it. It's simply a possible means of
making certain that both parents negotiate on an equal footing.
I mainly object having the mother using the child as a pawn to extort money from
the father. That's the way it works now.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Perhaps in your experience, Clark. But you, yourself, said that you and
> your ex are the only ex-couple you know of that handled custody that way.
> How can you justify generalizing your very limited experience across an
> entire population of divorced couples with children?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
gini52
August 25th 03, 03:00 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> She did no better or worse than if the divorce had not occurred.
==
Well, since the divorce occurred, whether she would have done better or
worse in an intact home
is not knowable.
==
> She certainly
> would have lost a father if this arrangement was not used.
>
> It even serves as a safety net for abusive stepparents.
==
Why do we need a safety net for abusive step-parents? Let 'em fall.
==
> It did in our case.
==
You should have let him/her fall.
==
==
gini52
August 25th 03, 03:00 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> She did no better or worse than if the divorce had not occurred.
==
Well, since the divorce occurred, whether she would have done better or
worse in an intact home
is not knowable.
==
> She certainly
> would have lost a father if this arrangement was not used.
>
> It even serves as a safety net for abusive stepparents.
==
Why do we need a safety net for abusive step-parents? Let 'em fall.
==
> It did in our case.
==
You should have let him/her fall.
==
==
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 03:09 AM
I figured that she's a teacher by her ID. But so am I, although not in public
schools.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
> She's a teacher. She knows these things.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 03:09 AM
I figured that she's a teacher by her ID. But so am I, although not in public
schools.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"gini52" > wrote in message
...
> She's a teacher. She knows these things.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 03:42 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
It worked out that way for your daughter, Clark. It does not work out like
that for all children. Kids who have a difficult time adjusting to new
situations do not learn to adjust just because they are forced into a new
situation every year. Many children, especially in the lower grades, have a
hard time getting used to a new teacher each year, even when they are with
the same classmates as the year before. And going to a new classroom is far
less traumatic than going to a new school. Just because it worked for your
daughter does not means it will work for all children! To assume that what
worked for you and yours is the best plan to put into place for everyone is
a bit arrogant, don't you think?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year
gives
> > children a better education?
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 03:42 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
It worked out that way for your daughter, Clark. It does not work out like
that for all children. Kids who have a difficult time adjusting to new
situations do not learn to adjust just because they are forced into a new
situation every year. Many children, especially in the lower grades, have a
hard time getting used to a new teacher each year, even when they are with
the same classmates as the year before. And going to a new classroom is far
less traumatic than going to a new school. Just because it worked for your
daughter does not means it will work for all children! To assume that what
worked for you and yours is the best plan to put into place for everyone is
a bit arrogant, don't you think?
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year
gives
> > children a better education?
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 03:53 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> That's not the way it works. There were no problems with adjustment. She
> rather liked the idea of having two homes. After a year in one school she
> looked forward to returning to the other.
>
> I need to know what specific problems you might expect from this.
> Psychological. phisical, loss of self esteem, other? None of these
happened.
They didn't happen to YOUR child, Clark! You cannot assume that, because it
worked for your child, it will work for all children! I see children every
year who have difficulty moving to the next level at the school they
attended the year before--let alone moving to a totally different school! I
see children come to the school from another school who take 1/3 of the year
to feel comfortable--which certainly affects their learning during that
period of time. I also see custody arrangements where the children are with
mom half the week and dad the other half. This seems to work very well for
them. Both parents have made the commitment to live in the area as long as
their children are in school. THIS seems to me to be the best arrangement
outside a two-parent home. And neither parent misses every other year of
their child's development.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
> > >
> > > It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is
23
> > and
> > > very well adjusted.
> >
> > That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
> > generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children
it
> > would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school,
no
> > sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 03:53 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> That's not the way it works. There were no problems with adjustment. She
> rather liked the idea of having two homes. After a year in one school she
> looked forward to returning to the other.
>
> I need to know what specific problems you might expect from this.
> Psychological. phisical, loss of self esteem, other? None of these
happened.
They didn't happen to YOUR child, Clark! You cannot assume that, because it
worked for your child, it will work for all children! I see children every
year who have difficulty moving to the next level at the school they
attended the year before--let alone moving to a totally different school! I
see children come to the school from another school who take 1/3 of the year
to feel comfortable--which certainly affects their learning during that
period of time. I also see custody arrangements where the children are with
mom half the week and dad the other half. This seems to work very well for
them. Both parents have made the commitment to live in the area as long as
their children are in school. THIS seems to me to be the best arrangement
outside a two-parent home. And neither parent misses every other year of
their child's development.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
> > >
> > > It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is
23
> > and
> > > very well adjusted.
> >
> > That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
> > generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children
it
> > would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school,
no
> > sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 04:11 AM
I'm not saying it works for everybody. I just think it should be considered
when one is facing a divorce action.
What's traumatic is for a child to lose a parent. It just doesn't happen under
this arrangement. Regardless of what the child was told, she was secure in the
knowledge that she was wanted by both parents.
There is little chance of a CS parent turning the child against the NCS parent.
I know because I lived it. It was devastating to me and the children.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> It worked out that way for your daughter, Clark. It does not work out like
> that for all children. Kids who have a difficult time adjusting to new
> situations do not learn to adjust just because they are forced into a new
> situation every year. Many children, especially in the lower grades, have a
> hard time getting used to a new teacher each year, even when they are with
> the same classmates as the year before. And going to a new classroom is far
> less traumatic than going to a new school. Just because it worked for your
> daughter does not means it will work for all children! To assume that what
> worked for you and yours is the best plan to put into place for everyone is
> a bit arrogant, don't you think?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 04:11 AM
I'm not saying it works for everybody. I just think it should be considered
when one is facing a divorce action.
What's traumatic is for a child to lose a parent. It just doesn't happen under
this arrangement. Regardless of what the child was told, she was secure in the
knowledge that she was wanted by both parents.
There is little chance of a CS parent turning the child against the NCS parent.
I know because I lived it. It was devastating to me and the children.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> It worked out that way for your daughter, Clark. It does not work out like
> that for all children. Kids who have a difficult time adjusting to new
> situations do not learn to adjust just because they are forced into a new
> situation every year. Many children, especially in the lower grades, have a
> hard time getting used to a new teacher each year, even when they are with
> the same classmates as the year before. And going to a new classroom is far
> less traumatic than going to a new school. Just because it worked for your
> daughter does not means it will work for all children! To assume that what
> worked for you and yours is the best plan to put into place for everyone is
> a bit arrogant, don't you think?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 04:20 AM
Can you offer me any assurance that joint custody as you describe it will
guarantee that a parent will remain in the area? Sometimes it just isn't
possible.
A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom or a new
school.
I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP arrangement
stinks.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > That's not the way it works. There were no problems with adjustment. She
> > rather liked the idea of having two homes. After a year in one school she
> > looked forward to returning to the other.
> >
> > I need to know what specific problems you might expect from this.
> > Psychological. phisical, loss of self esteem, other? None of these
> happened.
>
> They didn't happen to YOUR child, Clark! You cannot assume that, because it
> worked for your child, it will work for all children! I see children every
> year who have difficulty moving to the next level at the school they
> attended the year before--let alone moving to a totally different school! I
> see children come to the school from another school who take 1/3 of the year
> to feel comfortable--which certainly affects their learning during that
> period of time. I also see custody arrangements where the children are with
> mom half the week and dad the other half. This seems to work very well for
> them. Both parents have made the commitment to live in the area as long as
> their children are in school. THIS seems to me to be the best arrangement
> outside a two-parent home. And neither parent misses every other year of
> their child's development.
>
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
> > > >
> > > > It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is
> 23
> > > and
> > > > very well adjusted.
> > >
> > > That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
> > > generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children
> it
> > > would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school,
> no
> > > sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 04:20 AM
Can you offer me any assurance that joint custody as you describe it will
guarantee that a parent will remain in the area? Sometimes it just isn't
possible.
A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom or a new
school.
I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP arrangement
stinks.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > That's not the way it works. There were no problems with adjustment. She
> > rather liked the idea of having two homes. After a year in one school she
> > looked forward to returning to the other.
> >
> > I need to know what specific problems you might expect from this.
> > Psychological. phisical, loss of self esteem, other? None of these
> happened.
>
> They didn't happen to YOUR child, Clark! You cannot assume that, because it
> worked for your child, it will work for all children! I see children every
> year who have difficulty moving to the next level at the school they
> attended the year before--let alone moving to a totally different school! I
> see children come to the school from another school who take 1/3 of the year
> to feel comfortable--which certainly affects their learning during that
> period of time. I also see custody arrangements where the children are with
> mom half the week and dad the other half. This seems to work very well for
> them. Both parents have made the commitment to live in the area as long as
> their children are in school. THIS seems to me to be the best arrangement
> outside a two-parent home. And neither parent misses every other year of
> their child's development.
>
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > That was a typo. It was supposed to be "selfishness".
> > > >
> > > > It was not damaging to the child to change schools every year. She is
> 23
> > > and
> > > > very well adjusted.
> > >
> > > That may be how it happened for your child, Clark. But you cannot
> > > generalize it across the population. For some (probably most) children
> it
> > > would be devastating to be moved back and forth from school to school,
> no
> > > sooner getting settled in one when it's time to go back to the other.
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Virginia
August 25th 03, 04:36 AM
Clark Simmons wrote:
> A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom or a new
> school.
>
A well adjusted, above average, outgoing, not shy, not fearful, not
overly consumed with the peer groups view of self, etc child may have no
trouble but by far it's not the majority of children. I'm glad it seems
to have worked for your daughter but very few kids would fit the bill
for this type of arangement.
> I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP arrangement
> stinks.
>
yeah that can be agreed upon in regards to relationships where both
parents want to be involved.
Virginia
August 25th 03, 04:36 AM
Clark Simmons wrote:
> A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom or a new
> school.
>
A well adjusted, above average, outgoing, not shy, not fearful, not
overly consumed with the peer groups view of self, etc child may have no
trouble but by far it's not the majority of children. I'm glad it seems
to have worked for your daughter but very few kids would fit the bill
for this type of arangement.
> I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP arrangement
> stinks.
>
yeah that can be agreed upon in regards to relationships where both
parents want to be involved.
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 04:44 AM
No one has to give up their child for a year. Think of it from the child's
position. The NCP is a real flesh-and-blood entity, not just someone that pays
child support. I never felt that I was giving up my child for any length of
time. I was able to call at any time and so was she. I was also able to
discuss the child's development with her mother. The rule was that the CP for
that year had authority for the child. That did not preclude seeking advice
from the NCP.
The child can visit the NCP during extended weekends, etc if there is distance
between parents.
It's interesting that you favor 50/50 custody with little money changing hands.
That's exactly what I had. If you can think of a way to attain it without
placing undue restrictions on the parents, I'd certainly like to discuss it.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> I would say that most everyone here would agree that the way things are now
> is not working out for either the child or the NCP. Most, I think, would
> like to see 50/50 custody with little if any money changing hands. I don't
> think I know anyone who would be willing to give up their child every other
> year.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 04:44 AM
No one has to give up their child for a year. Think of it from the child's
position. The NCP is a real flesh-and-blood entity, not just someone that pays
child support. I never felt that I was giving up my child for any length of
time. I was able to call at any time and so was she. I was also able to
discuss the child's development with her mother. The rule was that the CP for
that year had authority for the child. That did not preclude seeking advice
from the NCP.
The child can visit the NCP during extended weekends, etc if there is distance
between parents.
It's interesting that you favor 50/50 custody with little money changing hands.
That's exactly what I had. If you can think of a way to attain it without
placing undue restrictions on the parents, I'd certainly like to discuss it.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> I would say that most everyone here would agree that the way things are now
> is not working out for either the child or the NCP. Most, I think, would
> like to see 50/50 custody with little if any money changing hands. I don't
> think I know anyone who would be willing to give up their child every other
> year.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 05:02 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> No one has to give up their child for a year. Think of it from the
child's
> position. The NCP is a real flesh-and-blood entity, not just someone that
pays
> child support. I never felt that I was giving up my child for any length
of
> time. I was able to call at any time and so was she. I was also able to
> discuss the child's development with her mother. The rule was that the CP
for
> that year had authority for the child. That did not preclude seeking
advice
> from the NCP.
>
> The child can visit the NCP during extended weekends, etc if there is
distance
> between parents.
>
> It's interesting that you favor 50/50 custody with little money changing
hands.
> That's exactly what I had. If you can think of a way to attain it without
> placing undue restrictions on the parents, I'd certainly like to discuss
it.
Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests of
their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the necessity of
constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to each
other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen to
make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > I would say that most everyone here would agree that the way things are
now
> > is not working out for either the child or the NCP. Most, I think,
would
> > like to see 50/50 custody with little if any money changing hands. I
don't
> > think I know anyone who would be willing to give up their child every
other
> > year.
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 05:02 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> No one has to give up their child for a year. Think of it from the
child's
> position. The NCP is a real flesh-and-blood entity, not just someone that
pays
> child support. I never felt that I was giving up my child for any length
of
> time. I was able to call at any time and so was she. I was also able to
> discuss the child's development with her mother. The rule was that the CP
for
> that year had authority for the child. That did not preclude seeking
advice
> from the NCP.
>
> The child can visit the NCP during extended weekends, etc if there is
distance
> between parents.
>
> It's interesting that you favor 50/50 custody with little money changing
hands.
> That's exactly what I had. If you can think of a way to attain it without
> placing undue restrictions on the parents, I'd certainly like to discuss
it.
Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests of
their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the necessity of
constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to each
other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen to
make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > I would say that most everyone here would agree that the way things are
now
> > is not working out for either the child or the NCP. Most, I think,
would
> > like to see 50/50 custody with little if any money changing hands. I
don't
> > think I know anyone who would be willing to give up their child every
other
> > year.
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Leslie
August 25th 03, 05:22 AM
Well, my EX and I both agree that changing schools every other year
would not be in the best interests of our children. You are more than
welcome to your opinion on whether it will adversely affect your
children or not, but I personally feel it would be a very bad
situation for my children to change schools every year.
I hope your situation works out well for you and your children. Good
luck!
Leslie
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message >...
> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom each
> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward to
> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights of
> parents.
>
> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each other
> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven when
> the parents separated.
>
> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> existing law.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> > wrote in message ...
> >
> > California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
> > standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
> > to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
> > child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
> > be seen as beneficial for the child.
> >
> > It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
> > be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
> >
> > Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
> >
> >
> >
> > b.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Leslie
August 25th 03, 05:22 AM
Well, my EX and I both agree that changing schools every other year
would not be in the best interests of our children. You are more than
welcome to your opinion on whether it will adversely affect your
children or not, but I personally feel it would be a very bad
situation for my children to change schools every year.
I hope your situation works out well for you and your children. Good
luck!
Leslie
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message >...
> So what if a clild does have to change schools? They go to a new classroom each
> year anyway. That excuse is a cop out. My daughter actually looked forward to
> it. One should never consider friends of greater importance than the rights of
> parents.
>
> There is a precedent to a divorce of this type. Both parents respect each other
> and both are active in the life of the child who is now 23. She was seven when
> the parents separated.
>
> The Divorce Decree is Cause Number 87-06-01960. It was decreed in The County
> Court at Law No. 1 of Montgomery County, Texas on October 19, 1988 under
> existing law.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> > wrote in message ...
> >
> > California law would prohibit this from happening from a practical
> > standpoint. The "Burgess Decision" allows for the custodial parent
> > to move away from the NCP. As a result, with your example the
> > child would have to change schools on an annual basis which wouldn't
> > be seen as beneficial for the child.
> >
> > It would only work if both parents considered the child's interest to
> > be primary, which is not mandated by the courts here.
> >
> > Good in theory but wouldn't be enforced by the courts here.
> >
> >
> >
> > b.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/2003
Paul Fritz
August 25th 03, 05:41 AM
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even
> better
> > education.
>
> Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
> children a better education?
Because he is an idiot
>
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > et...
> > > actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> > > schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> > > school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend
next
> > > year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's
just
> > > lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school
and
> > > by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> > > years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> > > often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> > >
> > > Clark Simmons wrote:
> > > > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> > something.
> > > > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning
of
> the
> > > > school year. It's really no different than going into a new
classroom
> at
> > the
> > > > current school.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
Paul Fritz
August 25th 03, 05:41 AM
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even
> better
> > education.
>
> Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
> children a better education?
Because he is an idiot
>
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > et...
> > > actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> > > schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> > > school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend
next
> > > year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's
just
> > > lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school
and
> > > by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> > > years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> > > often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> > >
> > > Clark Simmons wrote:
> > > > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> > something.
> > > > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning
of
> the
> > > > school year. It's really no different than going into a new
classroom
> at
> > the
> > > > current school.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
> >
> >
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 05:58 AM
I have to respond by paragraph since this is getting a little hard to trim....
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Can you offer me any assurance that joint custody as you describe it will
> > guarantee that a parent will remain in the area? Sometimes it just isn't
> > possible.
>
> What if your ex had gone to court in the state she lived in after getting
> her daughter back from you that first time and asked a judge to give her
> permanent custody because the moving every year was just too hard on the
> child? How do you think your arrangement would have ended up then? It only
> worked because both of you chose to see it through--and you only know that
> from hindsight--there were no guarantees.
Anyone can go into court at any time. She agreed to the arrangement in the
first place, and she would have had to prove her case. The child's school
grades would have been good evidence to the contrary. By then she had realized
that it was in the best interest of the daughter.
Maybe there were no guarantees. Are there ever?
>
> >
> > A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom or
> a new
> > school.
>
> Here you are incorrect, Clark. A timid child has far more difficulty making
> the change than does an outgoing child--and that does not mean that the
> child is not well adjusted--just that he/she is timid. A child who has just
> gone through divorce has seen his/her world crumble around them--some
> children will take far longer to deal with this than others. And it does
> not mean that the child is not well adjusted.
Most children are somewhat timid around authority figures. All children should
receive assurance. My daughter was very timid, but she was able to overcome it
fairly easily.
I don't think she felt her world had crumbled around her. She was secure in the
knowledge that she would always have two parents.
>
> >
> > I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP arrangement
> > stinks.
>
> I think that the SYSTEM, and the way family courts have power over such
> arrangements, and the enforcement of the arrangements stinks. I think that
> the parents should be given far more responsibility in coming up with
> workable arrangements, rather than the court having all the power and the
> parents being forced to obey what the government says is best for their
> children.
Divorce attorneys will usually do all they can to increase enmity between the
two parties. And sometimes they make such a mess that they are assured of
additional fees. My first attorney was like that.
My second attorney was recently divorced and had a son. He was quite intrigued
by what I wanted to do and filed a cross-petition to that effect. The ex wife
realized that that was the only way I would agree to the divorce. She finally
agreed. Her attorney was still trying to create havoc, but the judge saw
through that. She finally found in my favor without comment.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 05:58 AM
I have to respond by paragraph since this is getting a little hard to trim....
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Can you offer me any assurance that joint custody as you describe it will
> > guarantee that a parent will remain in the area? Sometimes it just isn't
> > possible.
>
> What if your ex had gone to court in the state she lived in after getting
> her daughter back from you that first time and asked a judge to give her
> permanent custody because the moving every year was just too hard on the
> child? How do you think your arrangement would have ended up then? It only
> worked because both of you chose to see it through--and you only know that
> from hindsight--there were no guarantees.
Anyone can go into court at any time. She agreed to the arrangement in the
first place, and she would have had to prove her case. The child's school
grades would have been good evidence to the contrary. By then she had realized
that it was in the best interest of the daughter.
Maybe there were no guarantees. Are there ever?
>
> >
> > A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom or
> a new
> > school.
>
> Here you are incorrect, Clark. A timid child has far more difficulty making
> the change than does an outgoing child--and that does not mean that the
> child is not well adjusted--just that he/she is timid. A child who has just
> gone through divorce has seen his/her world crumble around them--some
> children will take far longer to deal with this than others. And it does
> not mean that the child is not well adjusted.
Most children are somewhat timid around authority figures. All children should
receive assurance. My daughter was very timid, but she was able to overcome it
fairly easily.
I don't think she felt her world had crumbled around her. She was secure in the
knowledge that she would always have two parents.
>
> >
> > I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP arrangement
> > stinks.
>
> I think that the SYSTEM, and the way family courts have power over such
> arrangements, and the enforcement of the arrangements stinks. I think that
> the parents should be given far more responsibility in coming up with
> workable arrangements, rather than the court having all the power and the
> parents being forced to obey what the government says is best for their
> children.
Divorce attorneys will usually do all they can to increase enmity between the
two parties. And sometimes they make such a mess that they are assured of
additional fees. My first attorney was like that.
My second attorney was recently divorced and had a son. He was quite intrigued
by what I wanted to do and filed a cross-petition to that effect. The ex wife
realized that that was the only way I would agree to the divorce. She finally
agreed. Her attorney was still trying to create havoc, but the judge saw
through that. She finally found in my favor without comment.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
Tracy
August 25th 03, 06:02 AM
I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr. Clark
Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago. He
got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny, Paul,
Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people here
now.
Hope everyone had a great weekend. I know I did. :)
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > It's interesting that you favor 50/50 custody with little money changing
> hands.
> > That's exactly what I had. If you can think of a way to attain it
without
> > placing undue restrictions on the parents, I'd certainly like to discuss
> it.
>
> Nice to see you admit your selfishness
>
Tracy
August 25th 03, 06:02 AM
I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr. Clark
Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago. He
got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny, Paul,
Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people here
now.
Hope everyone had a great weekend. I know I did. :)
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > It's interesting that you favor 50/50 custody with little money changing
> hands.
> > That's exactly what I had. If you can think of a way to attain it
without
> > placing undue restrictions on the parents, I'd certainly like to discuss
> it.
>
> Nice to see you admit your selfishness
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 06:16 AM
Unfortunately, divorce attorneys are a big part of the sickness of the
system. I share Shakespeare's opinion of attorneys!
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> I have to respond by paragraph since this is getting a little hard to
trim....
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Can you offer me any assurance that joint custody as you describe it
will
> > > guarantee that a parent will remain in the area? Sometimes it just
isn't
> > > possible.
> >
> > What if your ex had gone to court in the state she lived in after
getting
> > her daughter back from you that first time and asked a judge to give her
> > permanent custody because the moving every year was just too hard on the
> > child? How do you think your arrangement would have ended up then? It
only
> > worked because both of you chose to see it through--and you only know
that
> > from hindsight--there were no guarantees.
>
> Anyone can go into court at any time. She agreed to the arrangement in
the
> first place, and she would have had to prove her case. The child's school
> grades would have been good evidence to the contrary. By then she had
realized
> that it was in the best interest of the daughter.
>
> Maybe there were no guarantees. Are there ever?
> >
> > >
> > > A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new
classroom or
> > a new
> > > school.
> >
> > Here you are incorrect, Clark. A timid child has far more difficulty
making
> > the change than does an outgoing child--and that does not mean that the
> > child is not well adjusted--just that he/she is timid. A child who has
just
> > gone through divorce has seen his/her world crumble around them--some
> > children will take far longer to deal with this than others. And it
does
> > not mean that the child is not well adjusted.
>
> Most children are somewhat timid around authority figures. All children
should
> receive assurance. My daughter was very timid, but she was able to
overcome it
> fairly easily.
>
> I don't think she felt her world had crumbled around her. She was secure
in the
> knowledge that she would always have two parents.
> >
> > >
> > > I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP
arrangement
> > > stinks.
> >
> > I think that the SYSTEM, and the way family courts have power over such
> > arrangements, and the enforcement of the arrangements stinks. I think
that
> > the parents should be given far more responsibility in coming up with
> > workable arrangements, rather than the court having all the power and
the
> > parents being forced to obey what the government says is best for their
> > children.
>
> Divorce attorneys will usually do all they can to increase enmity between
the
> two parties. And sometimes they make such a mess that they are assured of
> additional fees. My first attorney was like that.
>
> My second attorney was recently divorced and had a son. He was quite
intrigued
> by what I wanted to do and filed a cross-petition to that effect. The ex
wife
> realized that that was the only way I would agree to the divorce. She
finally
> agreed. Her attorney was still trying to create havoc, but the judge saw
> through that. She finally found in my favor without comment.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 06:16 AM
Unfortunately, divorce attorneys are a big part of the sickness of the
system. I share Shakespeare's opinion of attorneys!
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> I have to respond by paragraph since this is getting a little hard to
trim....
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Can you offer me any assurance that joint custody as you describe it
will
> > > guarantee that a parent will remain in the area? Sometimes it just
isn't
> > > possible.
> >
> > What if your ex had gone to court in the state she lived in after
getting
> > her daughter back from you that first time and asked a judge to give her
> > permanent custody because the moving every year was just too hard on the
> > child? How do you think your arrangement would have ended up then? It
only
> > worked because both of you chose to see it through--and you only know
that
> > from hindsight--there were no guarantees.
>
> Anyone can go into court at any time. She agreed to the arrangement in
the
> first place, and she would have had to prove her case. The child's school
> grades would have been good evidence to the contrary. By then she had
realized
> that it was in the best interest of the daughter.
>
> Maybe there were no guarantees. Are there ever?
> >
> > >
> > > A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new
classroom or
> > a new
> > > school.
> >
> > Here you are incorrect, Clark. A timid child has far more difficulty
making
> > the change than does an outgoing child--and that does not mean that the
> > child is not well adjusted--just that he/she is timid. A child who has
just
> > gone through divorce has seen his/her world crumble around them--some
> > children will take far longer to deal with this than others. And it
does
> > not mean that the child is not well adjusted.
>
> Most children are somewhat timid around authority figures. All children
should
> receive assurance. My daughter was very timid, but she was able to
overcome it
> fairly easily.
>
> I don't think she felt her world had crumbled around her. She was secure
in the
> knowledge that she would always have two parents.
> >
> > >
> > > I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP
arrangement
> > > stinks.
> >
> > I think that the SYSTEM, and the way family courts have power over such
> > arrangements, and the enforcement of the arrangements stinks. I think
that
> > the parents should be given far more responsibility in coming up with
> > workable arrangements, rather than the court having all the power and
the
> > parents being forced to obey what the government says is best for their
> > children.
>
> Divorce attorneys will usually do all they can to increase enmity between
the
> two parties. And sometimes they make such a mess that they are assured of
> additional fees. My first attorney was like that.
>
> My second attorney was recently divorced and had a son. He was quite
intrigued
> by what I wanted to do and filed a cross-petition to that effect. The ex
wife
> realized that that was the only way I would agree to the divorce. She
finally
> agreed. Her attorney was still trying to create havoc, but the judge saw
> through that. She finally found in my favor without comment.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:19 AM
No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just adds
more resentment.
It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In my
case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of getting
reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives. The only
restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices. The ex
wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our lives foa
some unknown factor.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests of
> their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
> placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the necessity of
> constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to each
> other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
> move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen to
> make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
> because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
> trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:19 AM
No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just adds
more resentment.
It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In my
case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of getting
reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives. The only
restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices. The ex
wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our lives foa
some unknown factor.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests of
> their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
> placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the necessity of
> constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to each
> other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
> move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen to
> make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
> because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
> trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
gini52
August 25th 03, 06:24 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just
adds
> more resentment.
>
> It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
> readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In
my
> case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
getting
> reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives.
The only
> restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices.
The ex
> wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our
lives foa
> some unknown factor.
==
And what unknown factor would that be? The well-being of the child?
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests
of
> > their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
> > placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the
necessity of
> > constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to
each
> > other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
> > move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen
to
> > make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
> > because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
> > trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
>
>
gini52
August 25th 03, 06:24 AM
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just
adds
> more resentment.
>
> It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
> readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In
my
> case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
getting
> reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives.
The only
> restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices.
The ex
> wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our
lives foa
> some unknown factor.
==
And what unknown factor would that be? The well-being of the child?
==
==
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests
of
> > their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
> > placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the
necessity of
> > constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to
each
> > other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
> > move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen
to
> > make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
> > because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
> > trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:29 AM
Yup. "First we kill all the lawyers". I have known some decent ones, though.
One of my best friends is an attorney. My wife is a legal secretary, so I know
how they work.
If you (or anyone else) wishes to email me privately, go to one of the websites
and initiate an email from the little mail box. My address is encoded in HTML
to thwart spam harvesters. My user ID on usenet is munged.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Unfortunately, divorce attorneys are a big part of the sickness of the
> system. I share Shakespeare's opinion of attorneys!
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:29 AM
Yup. "First we kill all the lawyers". I have known some decent ones, though.
One of my best friends is an attorney. My wife is a legal secretary, so I know
how they work.
If you (or anyone else) wishes to email me privately, go to one of the websites
and initiate an email from the little mail box. My address is encoded in HTML
to thwart spam harvesters. My user ID on usenet is munged.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Unfortunately, divorce attorneys are a big part of the sickness of the
> system. I share Shakespeare's opinion of attorneys!
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 06:29 AM
Just a short time ago, a judge in Italy awarded the house tothe children,
and shared custody for the parents. Every six months the current parent
moved out and the other one moved in. The children had the stability of the
same home and the parents--the ones who had chosen to divorce--shouldered
the inconvenience of their decision.
I do not consider myself restricted by my children. When we chose to have
children, we knew that many of the things we had been free to do would be
"restricted" by our children's needs. But that is part of being a parent.
I feel no resentment about that!
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just
adds
> more resentment.
>
> It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
> readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In
my
> case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
getting
> reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives.
The only
> restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices.
The ex
> wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our
lives foa
> some unknown factor.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests
of
> > their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
> > placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the
necessity of
> > constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to
each
> > other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
> > move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen
to
> > make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
> > because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
> > trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
>
>
teachrmama
August 25th 03, 06:29 AM
Just a short time ago, a judge in Italy awarded the house tothe children,
and shared custody for the parents. Every six months the current parent
moved out and the other one moved in. The children had the stability of the
same home and the parents--the ones who had chosen to divorce--shouldered
the inconvenience of their decision.
I do not consider myself restricted by my children. When we chose to have
children, we knew that many of the things we had been free to do would be
"restricted" by our children's needs. But that is part of being a parent.
I feel no resentment about that!
"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
> No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just
adds
> more resentment.
>
> It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
> readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In
my
> case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
getting
> reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives.
The only
> restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices.
The ex
> wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our
lives foa
> some unknown factor.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests
of
> > their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
> > placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the
necessity of
> > constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to
each
> > other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
> > move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen
to
> > make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
> > because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
> > trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
>
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:32 AM
Phibbit!
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> Nice to see you admit your selfishness
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:32 AM
Phibbit!
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> Nice to see you admit your selfishness
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:36 AM
I'm glad that they do respond. I want other's views.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Tracy" > wrote in message
t...
> I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr. Clark
> Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago. He
> got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny, Paul,
> Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people here
> now.
>
> Hope everyone had a great weekend. I know I did. :)
>
>
> Tracy
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:36 AM
I'm glad that they do respond. I want other's views.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Tracy" > wrote in message
t...
> I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr. Clark
> Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago. He
> got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny, Paul,
> Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people here
> now.
>
> Hope everyone had a great weekend. I know I did. :)
>
>
> Tracy
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:42 AM
The child is now 23, and it has already worked out. To everyone's advantage at
that. So I don't expect it to work out.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Leslie" > wrote in message
om...
> Well, my EX and I both agree that changing schools every other year
> would not be in the best interests of our children. You are more than
> welcome to your opinion on whether it will adversely affect your
> children or not, but I personally feel it would be a very bad
> situation for my children to change schools every year.
>
> I hope your situation works out well for you and your children. Good
> luck!
>
> Leslie
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:42 AM
The child is now 23, and it has already worked out. To everyone's advantage at
that. So I don't expect it to work out.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Leslie" > wrote in message
om...
> Well, my EX and I both agree that changing schools every other year
> would not be in the best interests of our children. You are more than
> welcome to your opinion on whether it will adversely affect your
> children or not, but I personally feel it would be a very bad
> situation for my children to change schools every year.
>
> I hope your situation works out well for you and your children. Good
> luck!
>
> Leslie
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 10:40 AM
My daughter would think I had abandoned her if I told her she was only going to
see me during the summer and a half-dozen weekends during the school year, but
just for THIS year 'cause next year will be better. My daughter wants to see
me more often than that. She doesn't want to go that long without seeing me.
You must have convinced your kids it wasn't that bad to go for weeks without
seeing you....hmmm, guess you were right.
Mel Gamble
>I agree withj your post. Either parent should be able to live anywhere they
>choose. With my model, visitation becomes less important. It provides a
>means
>for both parents to have access to the children on a totally equal basis.
>
>Instead of either parent having complete parental rights, both do at separate
>times.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
>> Mel:
>>
>> You say that "divorcing parents with kids in school should be told that
>> NEITHER may move more than 20 minutes from their original home unless
>> BOTH can agree to move to the same area."
>>
>> You say that's what SHOULD happen. I agree. However, why does it not
>> happen? The answer is that, as a practical matter, such a rule would
>> impose restrictions on the freedom of mothers to move with the children,
>> since they nearly always have custody of the children, and case after
>> case in the courts has ruled that mother's freedom to move cannot be
>> interfered with. (Of course, that's a ludicrous basis on which to
>> decide the cases, since the issue isn't mothers' freedom to move -- it's
>> their freedom to take the children with them.)
>>
>> Furthermore, imposing the Mel Gamble rule would be seen as restricting
>> mother's freedom to divorce their husbands -- just as any post-divorce
>> conditions on mother's behavior are seen as limiting women's freedom to
>> divorce.
>>
>> This is yet another situation where what SHOULD happen isn't going to
>> happen until the politics of the situation changes. Until fathers have
>> effective political power, no one is going to restrict the activities of
>> mothers. In fact, the whole history of the last 20-30 years is of moves
>> in the opposite direction. Women have been granted more and more
>> options, where necessary at the expense of children and fathers.
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 10:40 AM
My daughter would think I had abandoned her if I told her she was only going to
see me during the summer and a half-dozen weekends during the school year, but
just for THIS year 'cause next year will be better. My daughter wants to see
me more often than that. She doesn't want to go that long without seeing me.
You must have convinced your kids it wasn't that bad to go for weeks without
seeing you....hmmm, guess you were right.
Mel Gamble
>I agree withj your post. Either parent should be able to live anywhere they
>choose. With my model, visitation becomes less important. It provides a
>means
>for both parents to have access to the children on a totally equal basis.
>
>Instead of either parent having complete parental rights, both do at separate
>times.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
>> Mel:
>>
>> You say that "divorcing parents with kids in school should be told that
>> NEITHER may move more than 20 minutes from their original home unless
>> BOTH can agree to move to the same area."
>>
>> You say that's what SHOULD happen. I agree. However, why does it not
>> happen? The answer is that, as a practical matter, such a rule would
>> impose restrictions on the freedom of mothers to move with the children,
>> since they nearly always have custody of the children, and case after
>> case in the courts has ruled that mother's freedom to move cannot be
>> interfered with. (Of course, that's a ludicrous basis on which to
>> decide the cases, since the issue isn't mothers' freedom to move -- it's
>> their freedom to take the children with them.)
>>
>> Furthermore, imposing the Mel Gamble rule would be seen as restricting
>> mother's freedom to divorce their husbands -- just as any post-divorce
>> conditions on mother's behavior are seen as limiting women's freedom to
>> divorce.
>>
>> This is yet another situation where what SHOULD happen isn't going to
>> happen until the politics of the situation changes. Until fathers have
>> effective political power, no one is going to restrict the activities of
>> mothers. In fact, the whole history of the last 20-30 years is of moves
>> in the opposite direction. Women have been granted more and more
>> options, where necessary at the expense of children and fathers.
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 10:50 AM
Better than insisting that your kids cede THEIR rights...
>It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to a
>horse, it's okay with me.
.... to a selfish pig.
>No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
Yeah, no wonder...
>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on something.
Already clued in, jerk - YOU failed to learn the value of stability in a kid's
life. You'll never know how much better a person you would have been if you
hadn't been jerked around so much as a child. And now your kid will never
know...
>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
>school year.
There is no need for that, either...unless you're being forced to abide by the
wishes of parents who put their own convenience above what's best for their
kids.
>It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
>current school.
You don't have a clue. Didn't have a lot of freinds as a kid, did you....it
shows.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Not to mention the positive benefit of being ablet to maintain friendships
>and
>> other relationships on a continuing basis. One example is the soccer team
>I've
>> got my daughter in this fall is the same one she was in last fall - same
>> sponsor, same coach and - most important - at least SOME of the same kids.
>She
>> would be very disappointed if she could only do this during alternate
>years.
>> And my daughter has a horse - what about pets? Would you suggest shipping
>a
>> horse across the country so she can have access to it???
>>
>> >As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
>> >military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
>> >curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
>> >same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
>> >different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
>> >and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
>> >they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
>> >and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
>> >(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
>
>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 10:50 AM
Better than insisting that your kids cede THEIR rights...
>It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to a
>horse, it's okay with me.
.... to a selfish pig.
>No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
Yeah, no wonder...
>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on something.
Already clued in, jerk - YOU failed to learn the value of stability in a kid's
life. You'll never know how much better a person you would have been if you
hadn't been jerked around so much as a child. And now your kid will never
know...
>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
>school year.
There is no need for that, either...unless you're being forced to abide by the
wishes of parents who put their own convenience above what's best for their
kids.
>It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
>current school.
You don't have a clue. Didn't have a lot of freinds as a kid, did you....it
shows.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Not to mention the positive benefit of being ablet to maintain friendships
>and
>> other relationships on a continuing basis. One example is the soccer team
>I've
>> got my daughter in this fall is the same one she was in last fall - same
>> sponsor, same coach and - most important - at least SOME of the same kids.
>She
>> would be very disappointed if she could only do this during alternate
>years.
>> And my daughter has a horse - what about pets? Would you suggest shipping
>a
>> horse across the country so she can have access to it???
>>
>> >As someone who switched schools frequently (since my father was in the
>> >military) let me clue you in on something. We don't have a national
>> >curriculum or even statewide curriculum. Actually two classes in the
>> >same school in the same grade may be using different books and learning
>> >different material entirely. so what? children need to learn skills
>> >and information in a fairly predictable order for them to learn what
>> >they need to succeed scholatically and having children switch schools
>> >and even districts or states each year would do damage to the child
>> >(with the exception of the exceptionally gifted ie smartest of children).
>
>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 10:59 AM
Yeah, right...
>This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
>child.
....every second year. And for alternate years, you can totally disregard the
child's needs. Unfortunately, by dragging the kids away from
everyone/everything they know and screwing up their education you are also NOT
focusing on their needs during the year they are forced to live with you
either.
>Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
It isn't a factor anyway...
>Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
>mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
So breaking an arm is better than breaking a leg...
>I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways.
Well, keep trying...maybe you'll get it right sometime, but don't hold it
against us if we don't hold our collective breath.
>I'm not looking
>for
>criticism.
Hey clueless, if you come here telling us it's OK to jerk kids across the
country every year and prevent them from forming bonds with their peers and
keep plunking them down into school systems that don't correlate....you can
EXPECT to be criticized.
>you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
>relationship with the NCP.
And where did you get THAT stupid idea????
>Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
Kids need a parent who gives a **** about them.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>> Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
>> class
>> and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents put
>> aside
>> their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
>both
>> parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young, as.
>> The
>> separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of their
>> relationships. This is
>> not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing
>the
>> needs of the child which
>> should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
>> that, fine. That is between
>> you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or any
>> other parent who
>> is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
>> ==
>> ==
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 10:59 AM
Yeah, right...
>This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
>child.
....every second year. And for alternate years, you can totally disregard the
child's needs. Unfortunately, by dragging the kids away from
everyone/everything they know and screwing up their education you are also NOT
focusing on their needs during the year they are forced to live with you
either.
>Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
It isn't a factor anyway...
>Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
>mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
So breaking an arm is better than breaking a leg...
>I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways.
Well, keep trying...maybe you'll get it right sometime, but don't hold it
against us if we don't hold our collective breath.
>I'm not looking
>for
>criticism.
Hey clueless, if you come here telling us it's OK to jerk kids across the
country every year and prevent them from forming bonds with their peers and
keep plunking them down into school systems that don't correlate....you can
EXPECT to be criticized.
>you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
>relationship with the NCP.
And where did you get THAT stupid idea????
>Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
Kids need a parent who gives a **** about them.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>> Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in their
>> class
>> and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents put
>> aside
>> their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
>both
>> parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young, as.
>> The
>> separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of their
>> relationships. This is
>> not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of prioritizing
>the
>> needs of the child which
>> should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
>> that, fine. That is between
>> you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or any
>> other parent who
>> is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
>> ==
>> ==
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:05 AM
She probably came home "bubbly" thinking that THIS would be the year she'd
finally fit in with all those kids who knew each other from the year before and
looked on her as an outsider....
>The fewer restrictions placed on the parents (and the child), the more
>conducive
>development is for the child. That's what it's all about, isn't it?
>
>When she changed schools, she came home on the first day all bubbly and
>excited.
>That caused no problems whatsoever.
I'd be much more interested in how "bubbly" she was after the first 3 weeks in
the new school when there still wasn't anyone she had anything in common with
and when they found out that not only was she new this year, she wasn't going
to be around NEXT year either. I'd be much more interested in hearing whether
the grown child is able to form any close relationships or whether you totally
destroyed her ability to do so.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
>> child.
>> > Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>> >
>> > Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to
>the
>> > mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
>> ==
>> This is not the only alternative to your model. You seem to have one
>> dimensional
>> thinking. No one here will suggest that custody/visitation is good for
>> children. Most here
>> are strong proponents of true 50/50 custody. The problem with your
>> experience is changing schools every year.
>> Change your model to require both parents to live in the same district and
>> it might be more palatable.
>> (More Below)
>> ==
>> > I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not
>looking
>> for
>> > criticism.
>> ==
>> The you came to the wrong place. We criticize everyone.
>> (More)
>> ==
>> you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
>> > relationship with the NCP.
>> >
>> > Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
>> ==
>> Actually, a stable home life does not include changing
>> residences every year.
>> ==
>> ==
>> >
>> > "gini52" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in
>their
>> > > class
>> > > and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents
>> put
>> > > aside
>> > > their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
>> both
>> > > parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young,
>> as.
>> > > The
>> > > separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of
>> their
>> > > relationships. This is
>> > > not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of
>prioritizing
>> the
>> > > needs of the child which
>> > > should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
>> > > that, fine. That is between
>> > > you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or
>> any
>> > > other parent who
>> > > is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:05 AM
She probably came home "bubbly" thinking that THIS would be the year she'd
finally fit in with all those kids who knew each other from the year before and
looked on her as an outsider....
>The fewer restrictions placed on the parents (and the child), the more
>conducive
>development is for the child. That's what it's all about, isn't it?
>
>When she changed schools, she came home on the first day all bubbly and
>excited.
>That caused no problems whatsoever.
I'd be much more interested in how "bubbly" she was after the first 3 weeks in
the new school when there still wasn't anyone she had anything in common with
and when they found out that not only was she new this year, she wasn't going
to be around NEXT year either. I'd be much more interested in hearing whether
the grown child is able to form any close relationships or whether you totally
destroyed her ability to do so.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
>> child.
>> > Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>> >
>> > Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to
>the
>> > mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
>> ==
>> This is not the only alternative to your model. You seem to have one
>> dimensional
>> thinking. No one here will suggest that custody/visitation is good for
>> children. Most here
>> are strong proponents of true 50/50 custody. The problem with your
>> experience is changing schools every year.
>> Change your model to require both parents to live in the same district and
>> it might be more palatable.
>> (More Below)
>> ==
>> > I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways. I'm not
>looking
>> for
>> > criticism.
>> ==
>> The you came to the wrong place. We criticize everyone.
>> (More)
>> ==
>> you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
>> > relationship with the NCP.
>> >
>> > Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
>> ==
>> Actually, a stable home life does not include changing
>> residences every year.
>> ==
>> ==
>> >
>> > "gini52" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > Except that at the same school, they will know most of the kids in
>their
>> > > class
>> > > and the kids will know them. Mel is absolutely right. If the parents
>> put
>> > > aside
>> > > their relationship with each other and focus on the needs of the child,
>> both
>> > > parents will stay in the same school district while the kids are young,
>> as.
>> > > The
>> > > separation is bad enough without being ripped away from the rest of
>> their
>> > > relationships. This is
>> > > not a matter of ceding "parental rights." It is a matter of
>prioritizing
>> the
>> > > needs of the child which
>> > > should be a prerequisite for becoming a parent. If you are unable to do
>> > > that, fine. That is between
>> > > you and your children. But, you really have no room to chastize Mel or
>> any
>> > > other parent who
>> > > is willing to conduct themselves in their child's best interest.
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:10 AM
Just came here to start an argument, didn't ya... The freakin' trolls are
back.
Mel Gamble
>That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even
>better
>education.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
>> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>
>> Clark Simmons wrote:
>> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>something.
>> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>the
>> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at
>the
>> > current school.
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:10 AM
Just came here to start an argument, didn't ya... The freakin' trolls are
back.
Mel Gamble
>That's a very minor issue. In practice the student will obtain an even
>better
>education.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
>> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>
>> Clark Simmons wrote:
>> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>something.
>> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>the
>> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom at
>the
>> > current school.
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:13 AM
: ) : ) : )
Look at her handle, stupid...
>It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
.... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more about such
things than you do....
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
>> children a better education?
>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:13 AM
: ) : ) : )
Look at her handle, stupid...
>It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
.... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more about such
things than you do....
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year gives
>> children a better education?
>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:16 AM
You can't really say that, Teach...
>"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
>> It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
>
>It worked out that way for your daughter, Clark.
It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had a
chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
classmates from the previous year...
>It does not work out like
>that for all children. Kids who have a difficult time adjusting to new
>situations do not learn to adjust just because they are forced into a new
>situation every year. Many children, especially in the lower grades, have a
>hard time getting used to a new teacher each year, even when they are with
>the same classmates as the year before. And going to a new classroom is far
>less traumatic than going to a new school. Just because it worked for your
>daughter does not means it will work for all children! To assume that what
>worked for you and yours is the best plan to put into place for everyone is
>a bit arrogant, don't you think?
I'm not sure he's as arrogant as he'd have us believe - his posts are starting
to look like something just intended to incite...
Mel Gamble
>> Regards,
>> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>> God Bless America and her friends!
>>
>>
>>
>> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> > Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year
>gives
>> > children a better education?
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:16 AM
You can't really say that, Teach...
>"Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
...
>> It just seemed to work out that way. How can you say it doesn't?
>
>It worked out that way for your daughter, Clark.
It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had a
chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
classmates from the previous year...
>It does not work out like
>that for all children. Kids who have a difficult time adjusting to new
>situations do not learn to adjust just because they are forced into a new
>situation every year. Many children, especially in the lower grades, have a
>hard time getting used to a new teacher each year, even when they are with
>the same classmates as the year before. And going to a new classroom is far
>less traumatic than going to a new school. Just because it worked for your
>daughter does not means it will work for all children! To assume that what
>worked for you and yours is the best plan to put into place for everyone is
>a bit arrogant, don't you think?
I'm not sure he's as arrogant as he'd have us believe - his posts are starting
to look like something just intended to incite...
Mel Gamble
>> Regards,
>> Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>> http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>> http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>> God Bless America and her friends!
>>
>>
>>
>> "teachrmama" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>> > Huh? How can you possibly believe that changing schools every year
>gives
>> > children a better education?
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:20 AM
If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I don't think
he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
Mel Gamble
>With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of the
>> parents.
>
>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:20 AM
If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I don't think
he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
Mel Gamble
>With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
>> Develpment of the child is of greater importance than te selfishness of the
>> parents.
>
>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:26 AM
Hmmm.....
>Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
>
>Both parents should be involved.
And being involved only every other year is your definition of "involved"? Or
the corollary - that being NOT involved every other year is just peachy keen in
clark's world....
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
>>
>>
>> Clark Simmons wrote:
>>
>> > A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom
>or a
>new
>> > school.
>> >
>>
>> A well adjusted, above average, outgoing, not shy, not fearful, not
>> overly consumed with the peer groups view of self, etc child may have no
>> trouble but by far it's not the majority of children. I'm glad it seems
>> to have worked for your daughter but very few kids would fit the bill
>> for this type of arangement.
>>
>> > I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP
>arrangement
>> > stinks.
>> >
>>
>> yeah that can be agreed upon in regards to relationships where both
>> parents want to be involved.
>>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:26 AM
Hmmm.....
>Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
>
>Both parents should be involved.
And being involved only every other year is your definition of "involved"? Or
the corollary - that being NOT involved every other year is just peachy keen in
clark's world....
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
>>
>>
>> Clark Simmons wrote:
>>
>> > A well adjusted child should have no trouble going into a new classroom
>or a
>new
>> > school.
>> >
>>
>> A well adjusted, above average, outgoing, not shy, not fearful, not
>> overly consumed with the peer groups view of self, etc child may have no
>> trouble but by far it's not the majority of children. I'm glad it seems
>> to have worked for your daughter but very few kids would fit the bill
>> for this type of arangement.
>>
>> > I think that we can both agree that the usual permanent CP/NCP
>arrangement
>> > stinks.
>> >
>>
>> yeah that can be agreed upon in regards to relationships where both
>> parents want to be involved.
>>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:37 AM
: ( : ( : ( : ( ...
>No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just adds
>more resentment.
>
>It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
>readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In my
>case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
>getting
>reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives. The
>only
>restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices. The
>ex
>wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our lives
>foa
The following is clark's...
******************************
>some unknown factor.
******************************
nickname for his daughter....
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests of
>> their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
>> placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the necessity
>of
>> constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to each
>> other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
>> move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen to
>> make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
>> because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
>> trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
Mel Gamble
August 25th 03, 11:37 AM
: ( : ( : ( : ( ...
>No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just adds
>more resentment.
>
>It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
>readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In my
>case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
>getting
>reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives. The
>only
>restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices. The
>ex
>wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our lives
>foa
The following is clark's...
******************************
>some unknown factor.
******************************
nickname for his daughter....
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>> Clark, it is the parents' responsibility to act in the best interests of
>> their children. The parents I have seen with the 50/50 arrangement have
>> placed restrictions on their own lives to save the children the necessity
>of
>> constant adjustment. They have chosen to live in close proximity to each
>> other, have chosen to put their children's welfare above their desire to
>> move to a different location. It works because the parents have chosen to
>> make it work. The problem with a lot of the situations we see today are
>> because one parent has enlisted the SYSTEM to be on their side, and that
>> trumps any decision the other parent may want to make.
>
Virginia
August 25th 03, 12:50 PM
parents don't create adjustment children do parents just assist. some
children could not be well adjusted enough to do this regardless of
their parents actions or commitment to them. I have one daughter that
could do that with no problem and another that would never be able to do
so. You assume that beacuse your child could do it that all children
could but the truth couldn't be any farther from the truth. If you were
to study the various learning styles of children and the different love
expressions of children (there are 5 basic ways children show and
understand love: verbal, action, touch, Can't remember what the other 2
are) etc, you would see just how many variables are in achild's
personality and ablity to learn adapt etc. THe fact your child had the
exact mix needed to do this easily without adverse effect is very rare.
Clark Simmons wrote:
> Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
>
> Both parents should be involved.
>
Virginia
August 25th 03, 12:50 PM
parents don't create adjustment children do parents just assist. some
children could not be well adjusted enough to do this regardless of
their parents actions or commitment to them. I have one daughter that
could do that with no problem and another that would never be able to do
so. You assume that beacuse your child could do it that all children
could but the truth couldn't be any farther from the truth. If you were
to study the various learning styles of children and the different love
expressions of children (there are 5 basic ways children show and
understand love: verbal, action, touch, Can't remember what the other 2
are) etc, you would see just how many variables are in achild's
personality and ablity to learn adapt etc. THe fact your child had the
exact mix needed to do this easily without adverse effect is very rare.
Clark Simmons wrote:
> Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
>
> Both parents should be involved.
>
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 01:38 PM
It wasn't a matter of convincing her of anything. She did understand that we
should work with what we have. And that she couldn't be with both parents 24/7.
If her mother was the permanent custodial parent, she might just move thousands
of miles away, and you might never see her again at all. It happened to me with
my first divorce and we lived in close proximity. My first wife defaulted on
visitation rights. Several attorneys would do nothin except collect a fee to do
nothing.
The second time, had the mother defaulted, it would have been parental
kidnapping. Contempt of Court is a joke. It went without saying that she would
be in hot water if she defaulted. She cooperated because she knew the shoe
would be on the other foot next July First.
There was no sense of abandonment an the part of the daughter.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> My daughter would think I had abandoned her if I told her she was only going
to
> see me during the summer and a half-dozen weekends during the school year, but
> just for THIS year 'cause next year will be better. My daughter wants to see
> me more often than that. She doesn't want to go that long without seeing me.
> You must have convinced your kids it wasn't that bad to go for weeks without
> seeing you....hmmm, guess you were right.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 01:38 PM
It wasn't a matter of convincing her of anything. She did understand that we
should work with what we have. And that she couldn't be with both parents 24/7.
If her mother was the permanent custodial parent, she might just move thousands
of miles away, and you might never see her again at all. It happened to me with
my first divorce and we lived in close proximity. My first wife defaulted on
visitation rights. Several attorneys would do nothin except collect a fee to do
nothing.
The second time, had the mother defaulted, it would have been parental
kidnapping. Contempt of Court is a joke. It went without saying that she would
be in hot water if she defaulted. She cooperated because she knew the shoe
would be on the other foot next July First.
There was no sense of abandonment an the part of the daughter.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> My daughter would think I had abandoned her if I told her she was only going
to
> see me during the summer and a half-dozen weekends during the school year, but
> just for THIS year 'cause next year will be better. My daughter wants to see
> me more often than that. She doesn't want to go that long without seeing me.
> You must have convinced your kids it wasn't that bad to go for weeks without
> seeing you....hmmm, guess you were right.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 01:45 PM
The world is full of "what ifs". We just have to make the most out of what we
have. We need to look at the real world and handle things as they occur.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> She probably came home "bubbly" thinking that THIS would be the year she'd
> finally fit in with all those kids who knew each other from the year before
and
> looked on her as an outsider....
>
> I'd be much more interested in how "bubbly" she was after the first 3 weeks in
> the new school when there still wasn't anyone she had anything in common with
> and when they found out that not only was she new this year, she wasn't going
> to be around NEXT year either. I'd be much more interested in hearing whether
> the grown child is able to form any close relationships or whether you totally
> destroyed her ability to do so.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 01:45 PM
The world is full of "what ifs". We just have to make the most out of what we
have. We need to look at the real world and handle things as they occur.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> She probably came home "bubbly" thinking that THIS would be the year she'd
> finally fit in with all those kids who knew each other from the year before
and
> looked on her as an outsider....
>
> I'd be much more interested in how "bubbly" she was after the first 3 weeks in
> the new school when there still wasn't anyone she had anything in common with
> and when they found out that not only was she new this year, she wasn't going
> to be around NEXT year either. I'd be much more interested in hearing whether
> the grown child is able to form any close relationships or whether you totally
> destroyed her ability to do so.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:03 PM
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Yeah, right...
>
> >This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
> >child.
>
> ...every second year. And for alternate years, you can totally disregard the
> child's needs. Unfortunately, by dragging the kids away from
> everyone/everything they know and screwing up their education you are also NOT
> focusing on their needs during the year they are forced to live with you
> either.
My daughter's needs were met at all times. She wasn't dragged anywhere. It was
a normal event for her to change schools.
>
> >Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>
> It isn't a factor anyway...
Oh yes it is...
>
> >Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
> >mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
>
> So breaking an arm is better than breaking a leg...
Poor example. Stick to reality.
>
> >I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways.
>
> Well, keep trying...maybe you'll get it right sometime, but don't hold it
> against us if we don't hold our collective breath.
It matters not one way or the other whether you agree with me or not. I'm
simply citing a real world success. It's not theory. It's fact.
>
> >I'm not looking
> >for
> >criticism.
>
> Hey clueless, if you come here telling us it's OK to jerk kids across the
> country every year and prevent them from forming bonds with their peers and
> keep plunking them down into school systems that don't correlate....you can
> EXPECT to be criticized.
I don't care iof I'm criticized or not. I'm secure knowing that I did the right
thing.
>
> >you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
> >relationship with the NCP.
>
> And where did you get THAT stupid idea????
My own experience as a result of my first divorce. That happens all the time,
and you know it.
>
> >Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
>
> Kids need a parent who gives a **** about them.
When people have no argument, they often resort to profanity.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:03 PM
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Yeah, right...
>
> >This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
> >child.
>
> ...every second year. And for alternate years, you can totally disregard the
> child's needs. Unfortunately, by dragging the kids away from
> everyone/everything they know and screwing up their education you are also NOT
> focusing on their needs during the year they are forced to live with you
> either.
My daughter's needs were met at all times. She wasn't dragged anywhere. It was
a normal event for her to change schools.
>
> >Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>
> It isn't a factor anyway...
Oh yes it is...
>
> >Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
> >mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
>
> So breaking an arm is better than breaking a leg...
Poor example. Stick to reality.
>
> >I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways.
>
> Well, keep trying...maybe you'll get it right sometime, but don't hold it
> against us if we don't hold our collective breath.
It matters not one way or the other whether you agree with me or not. I'm
simply citing a real world success. It's not theory. It's fact.
>
> >I'm not looking
> >for
> >criticism.
>
> Hey clueless, if you come here telling us it's OK to jerk kids across the
> country every year and prevent them from forming bonds with their peers and
> keep plunking them down into school systems that don't correlate....you can
> EXPECT to be criticized.
I don't care iof I'm criticized or not. I'm secure knowing that I did the right
thing.
>
> >you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
> >relationship with the NCP.
>
> And where did you get THAT stupid idea????
My own experience as a result of my first divorce. That happens all the time,
and you know it.
>
> >Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
>
> Kids need a parent who gives a **** about them.
When people have no argument, they often resort to profanity.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:16 PM
Responses below....
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> You can't really say that, Teach...
>
> It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had a
> chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
> classmates from the previous year...
You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
>
> I'm not sure he's as arrogant as he'd have us believe - his posts are starting
> to look like something just intended to incite...
I'm not trying to incite anyone. If you're incited by my statements, that's
your problem. If they put you into a snit, enjoy it as long as you wish.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:16 PM
Responses below....
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> You can't really say that, Teach...
>
> It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had a
> chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
> classmates from the previous year...
You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
>
> I'm not sure he's as arrogant as he'd have us believe - his posts are starting
> to look like something just intended to incite...
I'm not trying to incite anyone. If you're incited by my statements, that's
your problem. If they put you into a snit, enjoy it as long as you wish.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:26 PM
Is that all you have to offer to this debate?
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> Because he is an idiot
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:26 PM
Is that all you have to offer to this debate?
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
>
> Because he is an idiot
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:30 PM
No, I didn't intend to start an argument. You're the one who wants to argue. I
offered peoof in my original post. The divorce decree is a matter of public
record, and a certified copy can be obtained from the court.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Just came here to start an argument, didn't ya... The freakin' trolls are
> back.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:30 PM
No, I didn't intend to start an argument. You're the one who wants to argue. I
offered peoof in my original post. The divorce decree is a matter of public
record, and a certified copy can be obtained from the court.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Just came here to start an argument, didn't ya... The freakin' trolls are
> back.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:41 PM
It's noty every other year. It's 24/7 every year. I was.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Hmmm.....
>
> >Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
> >
> >Both parents should be involved.
>
> And being involved only every other year is your definition of "involved"? Or
> the corollary - that being NOT involved every other year is just peachy keen
in
> clark's world....
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:41 PM
It's noty every other year. It's 24/7 every year. I was.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Hmmm.....
>
> >Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
> >
> >Both parents should be involved.
>
> And being involved only every other year is your definition of "involved"? Or
> the corollary - that being NOT involved every other year is just peachy keen
in
> clark's world....
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:46 PM
I can't argue with that. In some cases adjustments need to be made. There are
no catchall solutions. Problems need to be addresses as they become apparent.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> parents don't create adjustment children do parents just assist. some
> children could not be well adjusted enough to do this regardless of
> their parents actions or commitment to them. I have one daughter that
> could do that with no problem and another that would never be able to do
> so. You assume that beacuse your child could do it that all children
> could but the truth couldn't be any farther from the truth. If you were
> to study the various learning styles of children and the different love
> expressions of children (there are 5 basic ways children show and
> understand love: verbal, action, touch, Can't remember what the other 2
> are) etc, you would see just how many variables are in achild's
> personality and ablity to learn adapt etc. THe fact your child had the
> exact mix needed to do this easily without adverse effect is very rare.
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
> >
> > Both parents should be involved.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 02:46 PM
I can't argue with that. In some cases adjustments need to be made. There are
no catchall solutions. Problems need to be addresses as they become apparent.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> parents don't create adjustment children do parents just assist. some
> children could not be well adjusted enough to do this regardless of
> their parents actions or commitment to them. I have one daughter that
> could do that with no problem and another that would never be able to do
> so. You assume that beacuse your child could do it that all children
> could but the truth couldn't be any farther from the truth. If you were
> to study the various learning styles of children and the different love
> expressions of children (there are 5 basic ways children show and
> understand love: verbal, action, touch, Can't remember what the other 2
> are) etc, you would see just how many variables are in achild's
> personality and ablity to learn adapt etc. THe fact your child had the
> exact mix needed to do this easily without adverse effect is very rare.
>
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > Responsible parents raise well adjusted children. That should be the norm.
> >
> > Both parents should be involved.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 03:00 PM
It happened here in the U.S. a few years ago. Just another example tf tyranny
on the part of the judiciary.
I don't feel restricted by my daughter. I am restricted by my oldest, however.
I am denied the right to be involved in their lives. For over thirty years. I
am angry. Not a day goes by that they aren't in my thoughts. It's very
painful.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Just a short time ago, a judge in Italy awarded the house tothe children,
> and shared custody for the parents. Every six months the current parent
> moved out and the other one moved in. The children had the stability of the
> same home and the parents--the ones who had chosen to divorce--shouldered
> the inconvenience of their decision.
>
> I do not consider myself restricted by my children. When we chose to have
> children, we knew that many of the things we had been free to do would be
> "restricted" by our children's needs. But that is part of being a parent.
> I feel no resentment about that!
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 03:00 PM
It happened here in the U.S. a few years ago. Just another example tf tyranny
on the part of the judiciary.
I don't feel restricted by my daughter. I am restricted by my oldest, however.
I am denied the right to be involved in their lives. For over thirty years. I
am angry. Not a day goes by that they aren't in my thoughts. It's very
painful.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"teachrmama" > wrote in message
...
> Just a short time ago, a judge in Italy awarded the house tothe children,
> and shared custody for the parents. Every six months the current parent
> moved out and the other one moved in. The children had the stability of the
> same home and the parents--the ones who had chosen to divorce--shouldered
> the inconvenience of their decision.
>
> I do not consider myself restricted by my children. When we chose to have
> children, we knew that many of the things we had been free to do would be
> "restricted" by our children's needs. But that is part of being a parent.
> I feel no resentment about that!
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 03:02 PM
You're assuming again. And wrongfully so.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> : ( : ( : ( : ( ...
>
> >No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just adds
> >more resentment.
> >
> >It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
> >readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In my
> >case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
> >getting
> >reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives. The
> >only
> >restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices. The
> >ex
> >wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our lives
> >foa
>
> The following is clark's...
> ******************************
> >some unknown factor.
> ******************************
>
> nickname for his daughter....
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 03:02 PM
You're assuming again. And wrongfully so.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> : ( : ( : ( : ( ...
>
> >No one should need to place restrictions on their own lives. That just adds
> >more resentment.
> >
> >It looks like the current 50/50 arrangement creates cause for constant
> >readjustment. Parents seem to compete for the children's affection. In my
> >case, the child moved around July 1st of each year. After a few days of
> >getting
> >reacquainted, everybody settled down and we all got on with our lives. The
> >only
> >restrictions were common sense ones. No out of the ordinary sacrifices. The
> >ex
> >wife and I were secure in knowing that we didn't have to sacrifice our lives
> >foa
>
> The following is clark's...
> ******************************
> >some unknown factor.
> ******************************
>
> nickname for his daughter....
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:56 PM
Paul,
I'm beginning to grow tired of your false accusations. I'm not trying to prove
anything. Actually I'm simply offering a possible solution to parents
contemplating divorce. I don't advocate that it be mandatory, but that it be
considered.
Neither you nor I know whether it will work in any given case. It's up to the
people involved to determine the best course. It can be modified to suit the
situation.
There are prevalent problems associated with child custody. One is deadbeat
dads. Another is lack of the CP allowing access to NCPs.
It's nothing to me if you are willing to accept whatever a vindicative former
spouse can con the court into doing to you.
You can flame me from now on, but that'll never change what I already know to be
true. You will never know any better because you are willing to allow yourself
to be railroaded into submission to the will of others.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> Unfortunately there are self absorbed asshole jerks like clark, and they
> will continue to screw up kids futilely trying to prove themselves correct.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Clark Simmons
August 25th 03, 06:56 PM
Paul,
I'm beginning to grow tired of your false accusations. I'm not trying to prove
anything. Actually I'm simply offering a possible solution to parents
contemplating divorce. I don't advocate that it be mandatory, but that it be
considered.
Neither you nor I know whether it will work in any given case. It's up to the
people involved to determine the best course. It can be modified to suit the
situation.
There are prevalent problems associated with child custody. One is deadbeat
dads. Another is lack of the CP allowing access to NCPs.
It's nothing to me if you are willing to accept whatever a vindicative former
spouse can con the court into doing to you.
You can flame me from now on, but that'll never change what I already know to be
true. You will never know any better because you are willing to allow yourself
to be railroaded into submission to the will of others.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> Unfortunately there are self absorbed asshole jerks like clark, and they
> will continue to screw up kids futilely trying to prove themselves correct.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/21/2003
Kenneth S.
August 26th 03, 02:08 AM
Gini:
This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
relationship whatsoever to real life.
This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
reply."
gini52 wrote:
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Responses below....
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > You can't really say that, Teach...
> > >
> > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had
> a
> > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
> > > classmates from the previous year...
> >
> > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
> ==
> We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody case.
> That does not make it fact.
> There were other people involved in your case who may have a very different
> version of the
> "facts."
> ==
> ==
Kenneth S.
August 26th 03, 02:08 AM
Gini:
This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
relationship whatsoever to real life.
This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
reply."
gini52 wrote:
>
> "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Responses below....
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > You can't really say that, Teach...
> > >
> > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had
> a
> > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
> > > classmates from the previous year...
> >
> > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
> ==
> We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody case.
> That does not make it fact.
> There were other people involved in your case who may have a very different
> version of the
> "facts."
> ==
> ==
gini52
August 26th 03, 02:47 AM
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
> Gini:
>
> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
> relationship whatsoever to real life.
>
> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
> reply."
==
Not to worry, Kenneth. I've already moved on. My major concern now is the
guy
who wants to be father to his wife's illegitimate child--Someone needs to
stop that man!!
==
==
gini52
August 26th 03, 02:47 AM
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
> Gini:
>
> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
> relationship whatsoever to real life.
>
> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
> reply."
==
Not to worry, Kenneth. I've already moved on. My major concern now is the
guy
who wants to be father to his wife's illegitimate child--Someone needs to
stop that man!!
==
==
Paul Fritz
August 26th 03, 05:29 AM
Somebody should pair him up with moonie....would't that make a sweet couple
<snicker>
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
> Gini:
>
> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
> relationship whatsoever to real life.
>
> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
> reply."
>
>
>
>
> gini52 wrote:
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Responses below....
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > You can't really say that, Teach...
> > > >
> > > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never
had
> > a
> > > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with
her
> > > > classmates from the previous year...
> > >
> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
> > ==
> > We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody
case.
> > That does not make it fact.
> > There were other people involved in your case who may have a very
different
> > version of the
> > "facts."
> > ==
> > ==
Paul Fritz
August 26th 03, 05:29 AM
Somebody should pair him up with moonie....would't that make a sweet couple
<snicker>
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
> Gini:
>
> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
> relationship whatsoever to real life.
>
> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
> reply."
>
>
>
>
> gini52 wrote:
> >
> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Responses below....
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > You can't really say that, Teach...
> > > >
> > > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never
had
> > a
> > > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with
her
> > > > classmates from the previous year...
> > >
> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
> > ==
> > We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody
case.
> > That does not make it fact.
> > There were other people involved in your case who may have a very
different
> > version of the
> > "facts."
> > ==
> > ==
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:08 AM
Healthy Choice is a Campbell soup ...
>It wasn't a matter of convincing her of anything. She did understand that we
>should work with what we have. And that she couldn't be with both parents
>24/7.
>
>If her mother was the permanent custodial parent, she might just move
>thousands
>of miles away, and you might never see her again at all. It happened to me
>with
>my first divorce and we lived in close proximity.
*************************************************
>My first wife defaulted on visitation rights.
*************************************************
This is NOT a Healthy Choice...at least my daughter's mother knows it isn't.
>Several attorneys would do nothin except collect a fee to
>do
>nothing.
She has been informed to the effect that attorney's would be the last of her
worries...
>The second time, had the mother defaulted, it would have been parental
>kidnapping. Contempt of Court is a joke. It went without saying that she
>would
>be in hot water if she defaulted. She cooperated because she knew the shoe
>would be on the other foot next July First.
>
>There was no sense of abandonment an the part of the daughter.
Apparently she had low expectations and they were met.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:08 AM
Healthy Choice is a Campbell soup ...
>It wasn't a matter of convincing her of anything. She did understand that we
>should work with what we have. And that she couldn't be with both parents
>24/7.
>
>If her mother was the permanent custodial parent, she might just move
>thousands
>of miles away, and you might never see her again at all. It happened to me
>with
>my first divorce and we lived in close proximity.
*************************************************
>My first wife defaulted on visitation rights.
*************************************************
This is NOT a Healthy Choice...at least my daughter's mother knows it isn't.
>Several attorneys would do nothin except collect a fee to
>do
>nothing.
She has been informed to the effect that attorney's would be the last of her
worries...
>The second time, had the mother defaulted, it would have been parental
>kidnapping. Contempt of Court is a joke. It went without saying that she
>would
>be in hot water if she defaulted. She cooperated because she knew the shoe
>would be on the other foot next July First.
>
>There was no sense of abandonment an the part of the daughter.
Apparently she had low expectations and they were met.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:11 AM
Based on what you've posted ...
>You just can't discuss the issue without name calling, can you? An making
>wild-hair guesses.
*************************
>Let's stick to facts.
*************************
I have.
Mel Gamble
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Better than insisting that your kids cede THEIR rights...
>>
>> >It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to
>a
>> >horse, it's okay with me.
>>
>> ... to a selfish pig.
>>
>> >No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
>>
>> Yeah, no wonder...
>>
>> >As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>something.
>>
>> Already clued in, jerk - YOU failed to learn the value of stability in a
>kid's
>> life. You'll never know how much better a person you would have been if
>you
>> hadn't been jerked around so much as a child. And now your kid will never
>> know...
>>
>> >There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
>> >school year.
>>
>> There is no need for that, either...unless you're being forced to abide by
>the
>> wishes of parents who put their own convenience above what's best for their
>> kids.
>>
>> >It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
>> >current school.
>>
>> You don't have a clue. Didn't have a lot of freinds as a kid, did
>you....it
>> shows.
>>
>> Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:11 AM
Based on what you've posted ...
>You just can't discuss the issue without name calling, can you? An making
>wild-hair guesses.
*************************
>Let's stick to facts.
*************************
I have.
Mel Gamble
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Better than insisting that your kids cede THEIR rights...
>>
>> >It's really up to you. If you are willing to cede your parental rights to
>a
>> >horse, it's okay with me.
>>
>> ... to a selfish pig.
>>
>> >No wonder there are so many dysfunctional people around.
>>
>> Yeah, no wonder...
>>
>> >As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>something.
>>
>> Already clued in, jerk - YOU failed to learn the value of stability in a
>kid's
>> life. You'll never know how much better a person you would have been if
>you
>> hadn't been jerked around so much as a child. And now your kid will never
>> know...
>>
>> >There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of the
>> >school year.
>>
>> There is no need for that, either...unless you're being forced to abide by
>the
>> wishes of parents who put their own convenience above what's best for their
>> kids.
>>
>> >It's really no different than going into a new classroom at the
>> >current school.
>>
>> You don't have a clue. Didn't have a lot of freinds as a kid, did
>you....it
>> shows.
>>
>> Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:22 AM
So far, you're the only one ...
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Yeah, right...
>>
>> >This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
>> >child.
>>
>> ...every second year. And for alternate years, you can totally disregard
>the
>> child's needs. Unfortunately, by dragging the kids away from
>> everyone/everything they know and screwing up their education you are also
>NOT
>> focusing on their needs during the year they are forced to live with you
>> either.
>
>My daughter's needs were met at all times. She wasn't dragged anywhere. It
>was
>a normal event for her to change schools.
>>
>> >Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>>
>> It isn't a factor anyway...
>
>Oh yes it is...
>>
>> >Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
>> >mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
>>
>> So breaking an arm is better than breaking a leg...
>
>Poor example. Stick to reality.
>>
>> >I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways.
>>
>> Well, keep trying...maybe you'll get it right sometime, but don't hold it
>> against us if we don't hold our collective breath.
>
>It matters not one way or the other whether you agree with me or not. I'm
>simply citing a real world success. It's not theory. It's fact.
>>
>> >I'm not looking
>> >for
>> >criticism.
>>
>> Hey clueless, if you come here telling us it's OK to jerk kids across the
>> country every year and prevent them from forming bonds with their peers and
>> keep plunking them down into school systems that don't correlate....you can
>> EXPECT to be criticized.
>
>I don't care iof I'm criticized or not. I'm secure knowing that I did the
>right
>thing.
.... calling it that.
>> >you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
>> >relationship with the NCP.
>>
>> And where did you get THAT stupid idea????
>
>My own experience as a result of my first divorce. That happens all the
>time,
>and you know it.
YOUR experience gave you the idea that *I* don't mind something? Try reading
your own statement and the question again.
>> >Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
>>
>> Kids need a parent who gives a **** about them.
>
>When people have no argument, they often resort to profanity.
When people screw up, some just have to insist that they did the right
thing...no matter how many people tell them they screwed up.
On the other hand, some people are just so oblivious to the importance of
children's needs that they can cheat their kids out of a decent childhood and
still think they've been great parents. You're just like my daughter's mother
- when told that her kids are missing out on so much because she insists on
chasing a boyfriend all over the state every weekend, she stated that they can
have those things when THEY are adults and in charge of their own lives...just
as if joining the Scouts or learning to read well are just as rewarding after
you're 21. She has no clue. She thinks she's doing fine. She's not going to
let being a parent inconvenience her any more than you are. Peas in a pod.
Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
>> Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:22 AM
So far, you're the only one ...
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Yeah, right...
>>
>> >This offers the opportunity for both parents to focus on the needs of the
>> >child.
>>
>> ...every second year. And for alternate years, you can totally disregard
>the
>> child's needs. Unfortunately, by dragging the kids away from
>> everyone/everything they know and screwing up their education you are also
>NOT
>> focusing on their needs during the year they are forced to live with you
>> either.
>
>My daughter's needs were met at all times. She wasn't dragged anywhere. It
>was
>a normal event for her to change schools.
>>
>> >Their relationship with each other is less of a factor.
>>
>> It isn't a factor anyway...
>
>Oh yes it is...
>>
>> >Most anything is better than awarding total custody of the children to the
>> >mother with child support, etc. The father usually gets the shaft.
>>
>> So breaking an arm is better than breaking a leg...
>
>Poor example. Stick to reality.
>>
>> >I write from personal experience. I've had it both ways.
>>
>> Well, keep trying...maybe you'll get it right sometime, but don't hold it
>> against us if we don't hold our collective breath.
>
>It matters not one way or the other whether you agree with me or not. I'm
>simply citing a real world success. It's not theory. It's fact.
>>
>> >I'm not looking
>> >for
>> >criticism.
>>
>> Hey clueless, if you come here telling us it's OK to jerk kids across the
>> country every year and prevent them from forming bonds with their peers and
>> keep plunking them down into school systems that don't correlate....you can
>> EXPECT to be criticized.
>
>I don't care iof I'm criticized or not. I'm secure knowing that I did the
>right
>thing.
.... calling it that.
>> >you don't seem to mind that kids often are ripped away from the
>> >relationship with the NCP.
>>
>> And where did you get THAT stupid idea????
>
>My own experience as a result of my first divorce. That happens all the
>time,
>and you know it.
YOUR experience gave you the idea that *I* don't mind something? Try reading
your own statement and the question again.
>> >Kids need a stable hommore than they need a social life.
>>
>> Kids need a parent who gives a **** about them.
>
>When people have no argument, they often resort to profanity.
When people screw up, some just have to insist that they did the right
thing...no matter how many people tell them they screwed up.
On the other hand, some people are just so oblivious to the importance of
children's needs that they can cheat their kids out of a decent childhood and
still think they've been great parents. You're just like my daughter's mother
- when told that her kids are missing out on so much because she insists on
chasing a boyfriend all over the state every weekend, she stated that they can
have those things when THEY are adults and in charge of their own lives...just
as if joining the Scouts or learning to read well are just as rewarding after
you're 21. She has no clue. She thinks she's doing fine. She's not going to
let being a parent inconvenience her any more than you are. Peas in a pod.
Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
>> Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:29 AM
Your divorce decree is no proof of anything other than what you two did to your
daughter. It's proof that you agreed to be mostly out of your daughter's life
every other year, proof that you saw nothing wrong with putting hundreds of
miles between you and her. Proof - combined with your own words here - that
your primary concern was to not "inconvenience" yourself.
Yeah, "clark", your divorce decree is proof of a lot of things.
Mel Gamble
>No, I didn't intend to start an argument. You're the one who wants to argue.
>I
>offered peoof in my original post. The divorce decree is a matter of public
>record, and a certified copy can be obtained from the court.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Just came here to start an argument, didn't ya... The freakin' trolls are
>> back.
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>
>
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:29 AM
Your divorce decree is no proof of anything other than what you two did to your
daughter. It's proof that you agreed to be mostly out of your daughter's life
every other year, proof that you saw nothing wrong with putting hundreds of
miles between you and her. Proof - combined with your own words here - that
your primary concern was to not "inconvenience" yourself.
Yeah, "clark", your divorce decree is proof of a lot of things.
Mel Gamble
>No, I didn't intend to start an argument. You're the one who wants to argue.
>I
>offered peoof in my original post. The divorce decree is a matter of public
>record, and a certified copy can be obtained from the court.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> Just came here to start an argument, didn't ya... The freakin' trolls are
>> back.
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>
>
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:35 AM
You don't debate...you just insist you're right because your solution didn't
inconvenience YOU and your daughters life didn't turn out as poorly as it might
have.
>I'm well aware that she's a teacher. So am I. That may be why we can debate
>without name calling.
Sorry to hear that your a teacher, what with so many teachers these days trying
to saddle their values onto their students. IF you're a teacher, that's the
only thing you and Teach have in common - SHE seems to be concerned about
children's needs while you seem only to be concerned about YOURS.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> : ) : ) : )
>>
>> Look at her handle, stupid...
>>
>> ... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more about
>such
>> things than you do....
>>
>> Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:35 AM
You don't debate...you just insist you're right because your solution didn't
inconvenience YOU and your daughters life didn't turn out as poorly as it might
have.
>I'm well aware that she's a teacher. So am I. That may be why we can debate
>without name calling.
Sorry to hear that your a teacher, what with so many teachers these days trying
to saddle their values onto their students. IF you're a teacher, that's the
only thing you and Teach have in common - SHE seems to be concerned about
children's needs while you seem only to be concerned about YOURS.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> : ) : ) : )
>>
>> Look at her handle, stupid...
>>
>> ... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more about
>such
>> things than you do....
>>
>> Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:39 AM
Guessing?????
>Responses below....
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> You can't really say that, Teach...
>>
>> It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had a
>> chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
>> classmates from the previous year...
>
>You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
YOU are the one who told us she changed schools every year. Unless you'd have
us believe all her classmates moved with her, it's obvious she didn't go back
to school with the same ones from the previous year. Not much guesswork
required to reach that conclusion.
>> I'm not sure he's as arrogant as he'd have us believe - his posts are
>starting
>> to look like something just intended to incite...
>
>I'm not trying to incite anyone. If you're incited by my statements, that's
>your problem. If they put you into a snit, enjoy it as long as you wish.
You seem proud of what you did for yourself.
Mel Gamble
>> Mel Gamble
>
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:39 AM
Guessing?????
>Responses below....
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> You can't really say that, Teach...
>>
>> It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never had a
>> chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with her
>> classmates from the previous year...
>
>You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
YOU are the one who told us she changed schools every year. Unless you'd have
us believe all her classmates moved with her, it's obvious she didn't go back
to school with the same ones from the previous year. Not much guesswork
required to reach that conclusion.
>> I'm not sure he's as arrogant as he'd have us believe - his posts are
>starting
>> to look like something just intended to incite...
>
>I'm not trying to incite anyone. If you're incited by my statements, that's
>your problem. If they put you into a snit, enjoy it as long as you wish.
You seem proud of what you did for yourself.
Mel Gamble
>> Mel Gamble
>
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:43 AM
Again, idiot...
>Well, all I get is opinion. You are free to order a certified copy of the
>decree from the court I cited in the orginal post. That's the version.
>That's
>an undisputable fact.
your divorce decree says nothing about how all this turned out for your
daughter.
>The other people involved may well have a different opinion. I would be
>surprised if they had no opinion at all.
************************************************** ****************************
>Another undisputabe fact is that I'm well satifified with the results.
************************************************** ****************************
How very special for you, since that seems to have been your only concern from
the start.
> Not
>mamy
>divorced persons can make that claim.
How noble of you.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
>> ==
>> We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody case.
>> That does not make it fact.
>> There were other people involved in your case who may have a very different
>> version of the
>> "facts."
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:43 AM
Again, idiot...
>Well, all I get is opinion. You are free to order a certified copy of the
>decree from the court I cited in the orginal post. That's the version.
>That's
>an undisputable fact.
your divorce decree says nothing about how all this turned out for your
daughter.
>The other people involved may well have a different opinion. I would be
>surprised if they had no opinion at all.
************************************************** ****************************
>Another undisputabe fact is that I'm well satifified with the results.
************************************************** ****************************
How very special for you, since that seems to have been your only concern from
the start.
> Not
>mamy
>divorced persons can make that claim.
How noble of you.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"gini52" > wrote in message
...
>> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
>> ==
>> We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody case.
>> That does not make it fact.
>> There were other people involved in your case who may have a very different
>> version of the
>> "facts."
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:45 AM
You've noticed the similarity, too, Paul?
Mel Gamble
>Somebody should pair him up with moonie....would't that make a sweet couple
><snicker>
>
>"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
>> Gini:
>>
>> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
>> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
>> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
>> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
>> relationship whatsoever to real life.
>>
>> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
>> reply."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> gini52 wrote:
>> >
>> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > Responses below....
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>> > > God Bless America and her friends!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
>> > > ...
>> > > > You can't really say that, Teach...
>> > > >
>> > > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never
>had
>> > a
>> > > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with
>her
>> > > > classmates from the previous year...
>> > >
>> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
>> > ==
>> > We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody
>case.
>> > That does not make it fact.
>> > There were other people involved in your case who may have a very
>different
>> > version of the
>> > "facts."
>> > ==
>> > ==
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:45 AM
You've noticed the similarity, too, Paul?
Mel Gamble
>Somebody should pair him up with moonie....would't that make a sweet couple
><snicker>
>
>"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
>> Gini:
>>
>> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
>> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
>> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
>> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
>> relationship whatsoever to real life.
>>
>> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
>> reply."
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> gini52 wrote:
>> >
>> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > > Responses below....
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>> > > God Bless America and her friends!
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
>> > > ...
>> > > > You can't really say that, Teach...
>> > > >
>> > > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid never
>had
>> > a
>> > > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with
>her
>> > > > classmates from the previous year...
>> > >
>> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
>> > ==
>> > We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody
>case.
>> > That does not make it fact.
>> > There were other people involved in your case who may have a very
>different
>> > version of the
>> > "facts."
>> > ==
>> > ==
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:47 AM
I haven't gone more than 5 days without seeing my daughter since the day she
was born, and then only because business kept me out of the area....WHO is the
loser????
Mel Gamble
>I can assure you that I'm quite real. You can obtain a certified copy of the
>divorce decree from the court of record that I posted in the original
>message.
>
>And I don't need profanity to make my point. Only losers need that.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I don't
>think
>> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:47 AM
I haven't gone more than 5 days without seeing my daughter since the day she
was born, and then only because business kept me out of the area....WHO is the
loser????
Mel Gamble
>I can assure you that I'm quite real. You can obtain a certified copy of the
>divorce decree from the court of record that I posted in the original
>message.
>
>And I don't need profanity to make my point. Only losers need that.
>
>--
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I don't
>think
>> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:52 AM
: ) : ) : ) : )
I only said it once....
>You've already said that. You're showing a gross lack of intelligence.
YOU have responded to the same post twice, idiot.
What do you teach...art or some other "creative" class?
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I don't
>think
>> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>>
>> >With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Regards,
>> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 10:52 AM
: ) : ) : ) : )
I only said it once....
>You've already said that. You're showing a gross lack of intelligence.
YOU have responded to the same post twice, idiot.
What do you teach...art or some other "creative" class?
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I don't
>think
>> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>>
>> >With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Regards,
>> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
Paul Fritz
August 27th 03, 12:48 PM
Same here......except when her mother or I take her on extended vacations
out of the country.
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> I haven't gone more than 5 days without seeing my daughter since the day
she
> was born, and then only because business kept me out of the area....WHO is
the
> loser????
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >I can assure you that I'm quite real. You can obtain a certified copy of
the
> >divorce decree from the court of record that I posted in the original
> >message.
> >
> >And I don't need profanity to make my point. Only losers need that.
> >
> >--
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I
don't
> >think
> >> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
> >>
> >> Mel Gamble
> >
>
>
Paul Fritz
August 27th 03, 12:48 PM
Same here......except when her mother or I take her on extended vacations
out of the country.
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> I haven't gone more than 5 days without seeing my daughter since the day
she
> was born, and then only because business kept me out of the area....WHO is
the
> loser????
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >I can assure you that I'm quite real. You can obtain a certified copy of
the
> >divorce decree from the court of record that I posted in the original
> >message.
> >
> >And I don't need profanity to make my point. Only losers need that.
> >
> >--
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I
don't
> >think
> >> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
> >>
> >> Mel Gamble
> >
>
>
Paul Fritz
August 27th 03, 12:50 PM
I'm betting on wood shop.......or the special ed kids........th only ones
that would not relize that he doesn't have a clue.
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> : ) : ) : ) : )
>
> I only said it once....
>
> >You've already said that. You're showing a gross lack of intelligence.
>
> YOU have responded to the same post twice, idiot.
>
> What do you teach...art or some other "creative" class?
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I
don't
> >think
> >> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
> >>
> >> Mel Gamble
> >>
> >> >With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >Regards,
> >> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>
>
Paul Fritz
August 27th 03, 12:50 PM
I'm betting on wood shop.......or the special ed kids........th only ones
that would not relize that he doesn't have a clue.
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> : ) : ) : ) : )
>
> I only said it once....
>
> >You've already said that. You're showing a gross lack of intelligence.
>
> YOU have responded to the same post twice, idiot.
>
> What do you teach...art or some other "creative" class?
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> If this guy is real....he's a totally self-absorbed asshole. But I
don't
> >think
> >> he's real, which makes him just a jerk...
> >>
> >> Mel Gamble
> >>
> >> >With my model, selfishment of the parents is totally eliminated.
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >Regards,
> >> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>
>
Paul Fritz
August 27th 03, 12:51 PM
Yep.....both dumb as a tree stump and yet always insist they are
right........no matter how wrong they are
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> You've noticed the similarity, too, Paul?
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Somebody should pair him up with moonie....would't that make a sweet
couple
> ><snicker>
> >
> >"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Gini:
> >>
> >> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
> >> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
> >> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
> >> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
> >> relationship whatsoever to real life.
> >>
> >> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
> >> reply."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> gini52 wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> > > Responses below....
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> >> > > ...
> >> > > > You can't really say that, Teach...
> >> > > >
> >> > > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid
never
> >had
> >> > a
> >> > > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with
> >her
> >> > > > classmates from the previous year...
> >> > >
> >> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
> >> > ==
> >> > We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody
> >case.
> >> > That does not make it fact.
> >> > There were other people involved in your case who may have a very
> >different
> >> > version of the
> >> > "facts."
> >> > ==
> >> > ==
Paul Fritz
August 27th 03, 12:51 PM
Yep.....both dumb as a tree stump and yet always insist they are
right........no matter how wrong they are
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> You've noticed the similarity, too, Paul?
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Somebody should pair him up with moonie....would't that make a sweet
couple
> ><snicker>
> >
> >"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Gini:
> >>
> >> This person Clark Simmons recently started posting endlessly to this
> >> news group and seems bent on turning into alt.clark simmons. He should
> >> be ignored. Commenting on what he says only generates further huge
> >> volumes of his obnoxious and dogmatic comments, which I doubt have any
> >> relationship whatsoever to real life.
> >>
> >> This is one of the situations where "silence is true wisdom's best
> >> reply."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> gini52 wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Clark Simmons" > wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> > > Responses below....
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >> > > http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >> > > http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >> > > God Bless America and her friends!
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > "Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> >> > > ...
> >> > > > You can't really say that, Teach...
> >> > > >
> >> > > > It most likely DIDN'T work out for his daughter. The poor kid
never
> >had
> >> > a
> >> > > > chance to find out what it would be like to return to school with
> >her
> >> > > > classmates from the previous year...
> >> > >
> >> > > You're guessing. Let's stick to facts.
> >> > ==
> >> > We have no facts. All we have is your version/opinion of your custody
> >case.
> >> > That does not make it fact.
> >> > There were other people involved in your case who may have a very
> >different
> >> > version of the
> >> > "facts."
> >> > ==
> >> > ==
Clark Simmons
August 27th 03, 03:07 PM
At least I haven't whined about how noble my sacrifices were. It seems that you
are angry about something. I can only guess from your statements what it is.
All you have to go on is what I've stated here. You don't seem to believe in
equality where parents are concerned.
I just want you to know that I will probably follow this ng and will probably
comment where applicable.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> You don't debate...you just insist you're right because your solution didn't
> inconvenience YOU and your daughters life didn't turn out as poorly as it
might
> have.
>
> >I'm well aware that she's a teacher. So am I. That may be why we can debate
> >without name calling.
>
> Sorry to hear that your a teacher, what with so many teachers these days
trying
> to saddle their values onto their students. IF you're a teacher, that's the
> only thing you and Teach have in common - SHE seems to be concerned about
> children's needs while you seem only to be concerned about YOURS.
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> : ) : ) : )
> >>
> >> Look at her handle, stupid...
> >>
> >> ... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more about
> >such
> >> things than you do....
> >>
> >> Mel Gamble
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/23/2003
Clark Simmons
August 27th 03, 03:07 PM
At least I haven't whined about how noble my sacrifices were. It seems that you
are angry about something. I can only guess from your statements what it is.
All you have to go on is what I've stated here. You don't seem to believe in
equality where parents are concerned.
I just want you to know that I will probably follow this ng and will probably
comment where applicable.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> You don't debate...you just insist you're right because your solution didn't
> inconvenience YOU and your daughters life didn't turn out as poorly as it
might
> have.
>
> >I'm well aware that she's a teacher. So am I. That may be why we can debate
> >without name calling.
>
> Sorry to hear that your a teacher, what with so many teachers these days
trying
> to saddle their values onto their students. IF you're a teacher, that's the
> only thing you and Teach have in common - SHE seems to be concerned about
> children's needs while you seem only to be concerned about YOURS.
>
> Mel Gamble
>
> >Regards,
> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
> >God Bless America and her friends!
> >
> >
> >
> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> : ) : ) : )
> >>
> >> Look at her handle, stupid...
> >>
> >> ... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more about
> >such
> >> things than you do....
> >>
> >> Mel Gamble
>
>
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/23/2003
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 06:36 PM
Whined????
>At least I haven't whined about how noble my sacrifices were.
Where do you come up with "whined"? I *L*I*K*E* not having to wait months to
spend time with MY child. I complain about the things her mother does - same
as you might have done for a year at a time...if it'd been more important to
you than your own convenience.
>It seems that
>you
>are angry about something.
Why? Because I respond to you the way I do? I've stated before, I assume
there are lots of people out there reading what's posted here. I think some of
them, to some extent, are using it to help them make sense out of the family
disasters that are occuring in their own lives. I'd hate to have somebody new
to this crap read your drivel and think you had a good idea and end up putting
more kids in the kind of blowing-up-yearly lifestyle you forced on your
daughter.
>I can only guess from your statements what it is.
Aw, but by your own statements you should "stick to the facts"... YOU aren't
allowed to guess. Oh, I forgot - life isn't allowed to inconvenience you so
you can make guesses even if the rest of us can't.
>All you have to go on is what I've stated here.
That's right...and the logical conclusions that come from your statements.
>You don't seem to believe in
>equality where parents are concerned.
Not at the expense of their kids I don't. Having things good for the parents
is fine as long as it doesn't require that the kids make sacrifices that will
affect them throughout their lives.
>I just want you to know that I will probably follow this ng and will probably
>comment where applicable.
If you promise to only comment where your comments are applicable we won't be
hearing much from you. Feel free.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> You don't debate...you just insist you're right because your solution
>didn't
>> inconvenience YOU and your daughters life didn't turn out as poorly as it
>might
>> have.
>>
>> >I'm well aware that she's a teacher. So am I. That may be why we can
>debate
>> >without name calling.
>>
>> Sorry to hear that your a teacher, what with so many teachers these days
>trying
>> to saddle their values onto their students. IF you're a teacher, that's
>the
>> only thing you and Teach have in common - SHE seems to be concerned about
>> children's needs while you seem only to be concerned about YOURS.
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>>
>> >Regards,
>> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>> >God Bless America and her friends!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> : ) : ) : )
>> >>
>> >> Look at her handle, stupid...
>> >>
>> >> ... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more
>about
>> >such
>> >> things than you do....
>> >>
>> >> Mel Gamble
Mel Gamble
August 27th 03, 06:36 PM
Whined????
>At least I haven't whined about how noble my sacrifices were.
Where do you come up with "whined"? I *L*I*K*E* not having to wait months to
spend time with MY child. I complain about the things her mother does - same
as you might have done for a year at a time...if it'd been more important to
you than your own convenience.
>It seems that
>you
>are angry about something.
Why? Because I respond to you the way I do? I've stated before, I assume
there are lots of people out there reading what's posted here. I think some of
them, to some extent, are using it to help them make sense out of the family
disasters that are occuring in their own lives. I'd hate to have somebody new
to this crap read your drivel and think you had a good idea and end up putting
more kids in the kind of blowing-up-yearly lifestyle you forced on your
daughter.
>I can only guess from your statements what it is.
Aw, but by your own statements you should "stick to the facts"... YOU aren't
allowed to guess. Oh, I forgot - life isn't allowed to inconvenience you so
you can make guesses even if the rest of us can't.
>All you have to go on is what I've stated here.
That's right...and the logical conclusions that come from your statements.
>You don't seem to believe in
>equality where parents are concerned.
Not at the expense of their kids I don't. Having things good for the parents
is fine as long as it doesn't require that the kids make sacrifices that will
affect them throughout their lives.
>I just want you to know that I will probably follow this ng and will probably
>comment where applicable.
If you promise to only comment where your comments are applicable we won't be
hearing much from you. Feel free.
Mel Gamble
>Regards,
>Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>God Bless America and her friends!
>
>
>
>"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
>> You don't debate...you just insist you're right because your solution
>didn't
>> inconvenience YOU and your daughters life didn't turn out as poorly as it
>might
>> have.
>>
>> >I'm well aware that she's a teacher. So am I. That may be why we can
>debate
>> >without name calling.
>>
>> Sorry to hear that your a teacher, what with so many teachers these days
>trying
>> to saddle their values onto their students. IF you're a teacher, that's
>the
>> only thing you and Teach have in common - SHE seems to be concerned about
>> children's needs while you seem only to be concerned about YOURS.
>>
>> Mel Gamble
>>
>> >Regards,
>> >Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
>> >http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
>> >http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
>> >God Bless America and her friends!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> : ) : ) : )
>> >>
>> >> Look at her handle, stupid...
>> >>
>> >> ... Guess what "teachr" stands for..... Maybe she knows a bit more
>about
>> >such
>> >> things than you do....
>> >>
>> >> Mel Gamble
Clark Simmons
August 27th 03, 07:53 PM
It's becoming evident that you only want to hurl insults at someone has done
something positive to ease the the restrictions that could have been placed on
him and his child.
You have indicated that you have on experience with this form of custody so you
can't write from experience.
Yes, I hope lots of fathers are reading this thread so they'll be able to avoid
some of the pitfalls associated with divorce.
And yes, there was one hitch. I paid monthly $400 CS and she paid $250 as NCP.
It would have been far easier had I sinply paid the difference of $150 as NCP.
The decree was written by her attorney. I suspect he was looking for future
business.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Whined????
>
> >At least I haven't whined about how noble my sacrifices were.
>
> Where do you come up with "whined"? I *L*I*K*E* not having to wait months to
> spend time with MY child. I complain about the things her mother does - same
> as you might have done for a year at a time...if it'd been more important to
> you than your own convenience.
>
> >It seems that
> >you
> >are angry about something.
>
> Why? Because I respond to you the way I do? I've stated before, I assume
> there are lots of people out there reading what's posted here. I think some
of
> them, to some extent, are using it to help them make sense out of the family
> disasters that are occuring in their own lives. I'd hate to have somebody new
> to this crap read your drivel and think you had a good idea and end up putting
> more kids in the kind of blowing-up-yearly lifestyle you forced on your
> daughter.
>
> >I can only guess from your statements what it is.
>
> Aw, but by your own statements you should "stick to the facts"... YOU aren't
> allowed to guess. Oh, I forgot - life isn't allowed to inconvenience you so
> you can make guesses even if the rest of us can't.
>
> >All you have to go on is what I've stated here.
>
> That's right...and the logical conclusions that come from your statements.
>
> >You don't seem to believe in
> >equality where parents are concerned.
>
> Not at the expense of their kids I don't. Having things good for the parents
> is fine as long as it doesn't require that the kids make sacrifices that will
> affect them throughout their lives.
>
> >I just want you to know that I will probably follow this ng and will probably
> >comment where applicable.
>
> If you promise to only comment where your comments are applicable we won't be
> hearing much from you. Feel free.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/23/2003
Clark Simmons
August 27th 03, 07:53 PM
It's becoming evident that you only want to hurl insults at someone has done
something positive to ease the the restrictions that could have been placed on
him and his child.
You have indicated that you have on experience with this form of custody so you
can't write from experience.
Yes, I hope lots of fathers are reading this thread so they'll be able to avoid
some of the pitfalls associated with divorce.
And yes, there was one hitch. I paid monthly $400 CS and she paid $250 as NCP.
It would have been far easier had I sinply paid the difference of $150 as NCP.
The decree was written by her attorney. I suspect he was looking for future
business.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Mel Gamble" > wrote in message
...
> Whined????
>
> >At least I haven't whined about how noble my sacrifices were.
>
> Where do you come up with "whined"? I *L*I*K*E* not having to wait months to
> spend time with MY child. I complain about the things her mother does - same
> as you might have done for a year at a time...if it'd been more important to
> you than your own convenience.
>
> >It seems that
> >you
> >are angry about something.
>
> Why? Because I respond to you the way I do? I've stated before, I assume
> there are lots of people out there reading what's posted here. I think some
of
> them, to some extent, are using it to help them make sense out of the family
> disasters that are occuring in their own lives. I'd hate to have somebody new
> to this crap read your drivel and think you had a good idea and end up putting
> more kids in the kind of blowing-up-yearly lifestyle you forced on your
> daughter.
>
> >I can only guess from your statements what it is.
>
> Aw, but by your own statements you should "stick to the facts"... YOU aren't
> allowed to guess. Oh, I forgot - life isn't allowed to inconvenience you so
> you can make guesses even if the rest of us can't.
>
> >All you have to go on is what I've stated here.
>
> That's right...and the logical conclusions that come from your statements.
>
> >You don't seem to believe in
> >equality where parents are concerned.
>
> Not at the expense of their kids I don't. Having things good for the parents
> is fine as long as it doesn't require that the kids make sacrifices that will
> affect them throughout their lives.
>
> >I just want you to know that I will probably follow this ng and will probably
> >comment where applicable.
>
> If you promise to only comment where your comments are applicable we won't be
> hearing much from you. Feel free.
>
> Mel Gamble
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/23/2003
Sunny
August 27th 03, 09:06 PM
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
>
>>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr. Clark
>>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago. He
>>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny, Paul,
>>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people here
>>now.
>
>Never heard of him.
Oh wait... now I remember. I don't know that I ever interacted with
him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
with no posts. I do remember his being here, though. He was the
"Greetings!" guy who had this crazy idea how to solve all the world's
custody disputes. Lives in a dream world....
Sunny
August 27th 03, 09:06 PM
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
wrote:
>On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
>
>>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr. Clark
>>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago. He
>>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny, Paul,
>>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people here
>>now.
>
>Never heard of him.
Oh wait... now I remember. I don't know that I ever interacted with
him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
with no posts. I do remember his being here, though. He was the
"Greetings!" guy who had this crazy idea how to solve all the world's
custody disputes. Lives in a dream world....
gini52
August 27th 03, 09:53 PM
"Sunny" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
> >
> >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr.
Clark
> >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago.
He
> >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny,
Paul,
> >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people
here
> >>now.
> >
> >Never heard of him.
>
> Oh wait... now I remember. I don't know that I ever interacted with
> him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> with no posts. I do remember his being here, though. He was the
> "Greetings!" guy who had this crazy idea how to solve all the world's
> custody disputes. Lives in a dream world....
===
That's a polite way of putting it ;-)
===
===
gini52
August 27th 03, 09:53 PM
"Sunny" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
> >
> >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr.
Clark
> >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago.
He
> >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny,
Paul,
> >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people
here
> >>now.
> >
> >Never heard of him.
>
> Oh wait... now I remember. I don't know that I ever interacted with
> him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> with no posts. I do remember his being here, though. He was the
> "Greetings!" guy who had this crazy idea how to solve all the world's
> custody disputes. Lives in a dream world....
===
That's a polite way of putting it ;-)
===
===
Tracy
August 28th 03, 03:04 AM
"Sunny" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
> >
> >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr.
Clark
> >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago.
He
> >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny,
Paul,
> >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people
here
> >>now.
> >
> >Never heard of him.
???
> Oh wait... now I remember.
I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
others, or sharing ideas.
> I don't know that I ever interacted with
> him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> with no posts.
My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name was
listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised to
see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
Tracy
August 28th 03, 03:04 AM
"Sunny" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
> >
> >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr.
Clark
> >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago.
He
> >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny,
Paul,
> >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people
here
> >>now.
> >
> >Never heard of him.
???
> Oh wait... now I remember.
I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
others, or sharing ideas.
> I don't know that I ever interacted with
> him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> with no posts.
My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name was
listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised to
see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
Kenneth S.
August 28th 03, 03:38 AM
With regard to your comment about me below, you'll have to put it down
to my eroding mental capacity, Tracy. I had no recollection of seeing
this Clark Simmons person before. And here I thought I remembered most
of the notably obnoxious characters from the long period that I have
been participating in this news group.
Where ARE they all now? . . . I think of Purity, the woman who made
table decorations for a living, and who invariably argued that men
should be denied the post-conception reproductive choices that women in
the U.S. have had for decades (and who, I told ACSers, was not nearly so
much fun as her sister Impurity) . . . Toronto's R. Kirby Inwood (known
to me as R. Kirby Insane), with his violent tirades . . . Liz, the woman
who never wearied of dreaming up comments that she thought would bait
the men of the group.
Yes, it's about time that every participants should be required to send
in a photo and a resume, so feeble-minded people like me can keep them
all straight. (I see Clark in a phone booth, changing his clothes --
but wait, maybe I'm still muddled.)
Tracy wrote:
>
> "Sunny" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
> > >
> > >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr.
> Clark
> > >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago.
> He
> > >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny,
> Paul,
> > >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people
> here
> > >>now.
> > >
> > >Never heard of him.
>
> ???
>
> > Oh wait... now I remember.
>
> I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> others, or sharing ideas.
>
> > I don't know that I ever interacted with
> > him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> > with no posts.
>
> My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name was
> listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
> Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised to
> see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
>
> Tracy
> ~~~~~~~
> http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> "You can't solve problems with the same
> type of thinking that created them."
> Albert Einstein
>
> *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
Kenneth S.
August 28th 03, 03:38 AM
With regard to your comment about me below, you'll have to put it down
to my eroding mental capacity, Tracy. I had no recollection of seeing
this Clark Simmons person before. And here I thought I remembered most
of the notably obnoxious characters from the long period that I have
been participating in this news group.
Where ARE they all now? . . . I think of Purity, the woman who made
table decorations for a living, and who invariably argued that men
should be denied the post-conception reproductive choices that women in
the U.S. have had for decades (and who, I told ACSers, was not nearly so
much fun as her sister Impurity) . . . Toronto's R. Kirby Inwood (known
to me as R. Kirby Insane), with his violent tirades . . . Liz, the woman
who never wearied of dreaming up comments that she thought would bait
the men of the group.
Yes, it's about time that every participants should be required to send
in a photo and a resume, so feeble-minded people like me can keep them
all straight. (I see Clark in a phone booth, changing his clothes --
but wait, maybe I'm still muddled.)
Tracy wrote:
>
> "Sunny" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" > wrote:
> > >
> > >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to Mr.
> Clark
> > >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years ago.
> He
> > >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here (Sunny,
> Paul,
> > >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with people
> here
> > >>now.
> > >
> > >Never heard of him.
>
> ???
>
> > Oh wait... now I remember.
>
> I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> others, or sharing ideas.
>
> > I don't know that I ever interacted with
> > him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> > with no posts.
>
> My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name was
> listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
> Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised to
> see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
>
> Tracy
> ~~~~~~~
> http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> "You can't solve problems with the same
> type of thinking that created them."
> Albert Einstein
>
> *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
Clark Simmons
August 28th 03, 03:53 AM
I'm here to interact with others and to share ideas. That's exactly what I'm
doing.
At least I show respect for others. Some don't.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Tracy" > wrote in message
et...
>
> I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> others, or sharing ideas.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/23/2003
Clark Simmons
August 28th 03, 03:53 AM
I'm here to interact with others and to share ideas. That's exactly what I'm
doing.
At least I show respect for others. Some don't.
--
Regards,
Clark, Still Free in Round Rock Texas USA
http://xld.com - Freedom's Home Page
http://xld.com/public/xldata/net.htm - ISP Service
God Bless America and her friends!
"Tracy" > wrote in message
et...
>
> I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> others, or sharing ideas.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/23/2003
Tracy
August 28th 03, 04:26 AM
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
> With regard to your comment about me below, you'll have to put it down
> to my eroding mental capacity, Tracy. I had no recollection of seeing
> this Clark Simmons person before. And here I thought I remembered most
> of the notably obnoxious characters from the long period that I have
> been participating in this news group.
*snicker* I'm really surprised that I seem to be the only person who
remembers him - honestly.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=39ABAB41.111E%40erols.com&oe=UTF-8&outp
ut=gplain
> Where ARE they all now? . . . I think of Purity, the woman who made
> table decorations for a living, and who invariably argued that men
> should be denied the post-conception reproductive choices that women in
> the U.S. have had for decades (and who, I told ACSers, was not nearly so
> much fun as her sister Impurity) . . . Toronto's R. Kirby Inwood (known
> to me as R. Kirby Insane), with his violent tirades . . . Liz, the woman
> who never wearied of dreaming up comments that she thought would bait
> the men of the group.
Let's not bring up Kirby. That man was a real nut case.
> Yes, it's about time that every participants should be required to send
> in a photo and a resume, so feeble-minded people like me can keep them
> all straight. (I see Clark in a phone booth, changing his clothes --
> but wait, maybe I'm still muddled.)
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
>
>
>
> Tracy wrote:
> >
> > "Sunny" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" >
wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to
Mr.
> > Clark
> > > >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years
ago.
> > He
> > > >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here
(Sunny,
> > Paul,
> > > >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with
people
> > here
> > > >>now.
> > > >
> > > >Never heard of him.
> >
> > ???
> >
> > > Oh wait... now I remember.
> >
> > I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> > others, or sharing ideas.
> >
> > > I don't know that I ever interacted with
> > > him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> > > with no posts.
> >
> > My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name
was
> > listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
> > Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised
to
> > see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
> >
> > Tracy
> > ~~~~~~~
> > http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> > "You can't solve problems with the same
> > type of thinking that created them."
> > Albert Einstein
> >
> > *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
Tracy
August 28th 03, 04:26 AM
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
> With regard to your comment about me below, you'll have to put it down
> to my eroding mental capacity, Tracy. I had no recollection of seeing
> this Clark Simmons person before. And here I thought I remembered most
> of the notably obnoxious characters from the long period that I have
> been participating in this news group.
*snicker* I'm really surprised that I seem to be the only person who
remembers him - honestly.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=39ABAB41.111E%40erols.com&oe=UTF-8&outp
ut=gplain
> Where ARE they all now? . . . I think of Purity, the woman who made
> table decorations for a living, and who invariably argued that men
> should be denied the post-conception reproductive choices that women in
> the U.S. have had for decades (and who, I told ACSers, was not nearly so
> much fun as her sister Impurity) . . . Toronto's R. Kirby Inwood (known
> to me as R. Kirby Insane), with his violent tirades . . . Liz, the woman
> who never wearied of dreaming up comments that she thought would bait
> the men of the group.
Let's not bring up Kirby. That man was a real nut case.
> Yes, it's about time that every participants should be required to send
> in a photo and a resume, so feeble-minded people like me can keep them
> all straight. (I see Clark in a phone booth, changing his clothes --
> but wait, maybe I'm still muddled.)
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
>
>
>
> Tracy wrote:
> >
> > "Sunny" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" >
wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to
Mr.
> > Clark
> > > >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years
ago.
> > He
> > > >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here
(Sunny,
> > Paul,
> > > >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with
people
> > here
> > > >>now.
> > > >
> > > >Never heard of him.
> >
> > ???
> >
> > > Oh wait... now I remember.
> >
> > I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> > others, or sharing ideas.
> >
> > > I don't know that I ever interacted with
> > > him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> > > with no posts.
> >
> > My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name
was
> > listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
> > Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised
to
> > see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
> >
> > Tracy
> > ~~~~~~~
> > http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> > "You can't solve problems with the same
> > type of thinking that created them."
> > Albert Einstein
> >
> > *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
Moon Shyne
August 28th 03, 10:32 AM
"Tracy" > wrote in message
news:HDe3b.214300$cF.69222@rwcrnsc53...
> "Kenneth S." > wrote in message
> ...
> > With regard to your comment about me below, you'll have to put it down
> > to my eroding mental capacity, Tracy. I had no recollection of seeing
> > this Clark Simmons person before. And here I thought I remembered most
> > of the notably obnoxious characters from the long period that I have
> > been participating in this news group.
>
> *snicker* I'm really surprised that I seem to be the only person who
> remembers him - honestly.
You weren't the only one - and his 'idea' here wasn't met with any better
success the last time he trotted it out.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=39ABAB41.111E%40erols.com&oe=UTF-8&outp
> ut=gplain
>
>
> > Where ARE they all now? . . . I think of Purity, the woman who made
> > table decorations for a living, and who invariably argued that men
> > should be denied the post-conception reproductive choices that women in
> > the U.S. have had for decades (and who, I told ACSers, was not nearly so
> > much fun as her sister Impurity) . . . Toronto's R. Kirby Inwood (known
> > to me as R. Kirby Insane), with his violent tirades . . . Liz, the woman
> > who never wearied of dreaming up comments that she thought would bait
> > the men of the group.
>
> Let's not bring up Kirby. That man was a real nut case.
>
>
> > Yes, it's about time that every participants should be required to send
> > in a photo and a resume, so feeble-minded people like me can keep them
> > all straight. (I see Clark in a phone booth, changing his clothes --
> > but wait, maybe I'm still muddled.)
>
>
> Tracy
> ~~~~~~~
> http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> "You can't solve problems with the same
> type of thinking that created them."
> Albert Einstein
>
> *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Tracy wrote:
> > >
> > > "Sunny" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" >
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to
> Mr.
> > > Clark
> > > > >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years
> ago.
> > > He
> > > > >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here
> (Sunny,
> > > Paul,
> > > > >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with
> people
> > > here
> > > > >>now.
> > > > >
> > > > >Never heard of him.
> > >
> > > ???
> > >
> > > > Oh wait... now I remember.
> > >
> > > I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> > > others, or sharing ideas.
> > >
> > > > I don't know that I ever interacted with
> > > > him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> > > > with no posts.
> > >
> > > My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name
> was
> > > listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
> > > Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised
> to
> > > see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
> > >
> > > Tracy
> > > ~~~~~~~
> > > http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> > > "You can't solve problems with the same
> > > type of thinking that created them."
> > > Albert Einstein
> > >
> > > *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
>
Moon Shyne
August 28th 03, 10:32 AM
"Tracy" > wrote in message
news:HDe3b.214300$cF.69222@rwcrnsc53...
> "Kenneth S." > wrote in message
> ...
> > With regard to your comment about me below, you'll have to put it down
> > to my eroding mental capacity, Tracy. I had no recollection of seeing
> > this Clark Simmons person before. And here I thought I remembered most
> > of the notably obnoxious characters from the long period that I have
> > been participating in this news group.
>
> *snicker* I'm really surprised that I seem to be the only person who
> remembers him - honestly.
You weren't the only one - and his 'idea' here wasn't met with any better
success the last time he trotted it out.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=39ABAB41.111E%40erols.com&oe=UTF-8&outp
> ut=gplain
>
>
> > Where ARE they all now? . . . I think of Purity, the woman who made
> > table decorations for a living, and who invariably argued that men
> > should be denied the post-conception reproductive choices that women in
> > the U.S. have had for decades (and who, I told ACSers, was not nearly so
> > much fun as her sister Impurity) . . . Toronto's R. Kirby Inwood (known
> > to me as R. Kirby Insane), with his violent tirades . . . Liz, the woman
> > who never wearied of dreaming up comments that she thought would bait
> > the men of the group.
>
> Let's not bring up Kirby. That man was a real nut case.
>
>
> > Yes, it's about time that every participants should be required to send
> > in a photo and a resume, so feeble-minded people like me can keep them
> > all straight. (I see Clark in a phone booth, changing his clothes --
> > but wait, maybe I'm still muddled.)
>
>
> Tracy
> ~~~~~~~
> http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> "You can't solve problems with the same
> type of thinking that created them."
> Albert Einstein
>
> *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Tracy wrote:
> > >
> > > "Sunny" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:24:07 -0500, Sunny >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 05:02:51 GMT, "Tracy" >
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>I'm totally surprised there are people in this group responding to
> Mr.
> > > Clark
> > > > >>Simmons. He posted the same stuff in this group some three years
> ago.
> > > He
> > > > >>got into a fairly big arguments with just about everyone here
> (Sunny,
> > > Paul,
> > > > >>Jill, myself, MS, etc) over the same things he is arguing with
> people
> > > here
> > > > >>now.
> > > > >
> > > > >Never heard of him.
> > >
> > > ???
> > >
> > > > Oh wait... now I remember.
> > >
> > > I remembered his same old BS. He isn't interested in interacting with
> > > others, or sharing ideas.
> > >
> > > > I don't know that I ever interacted with
> > > > him at all, though. I did a Google on my name and his, but came up
> > > > with no posts.
> > >
> > > My mistake. I ran a quick search to verify it was him, and your name
> was
> > > listed several times in one of the threads. However - Paul, Kenneth,
> > > Frazil, Pat, and many others did get into with him. So I was surprised
> to
> > > see some of the same people responding to the same BS again.
> > >
> > > Tracy
> > > ~~~~~~~
> > > http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> > > "You can't solve problems with the same
> > > type of thinking that created them."
> > > Albert Einstein
> > >
> > > *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
>
Tracy
August 29th 03, 12:39 AM
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> Well, we are all getting older and more forgetful.....except obviously for
> you, you must be one of those that stopped again at 29 ;-)
no - I have no problem admitting my age of 37. :)
> clark must have lost the election and now he's back spewing the same old
> crap.
you are probably correct. ;-)
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
Tracy
August 29th 03, 12:39 AM
"Paul Fritz" > wrote in message
...
> Well, we are all getting older and more forgetful.....except obviously for
> you, you must be one of those that stopped again at 29 ;-)
no - I have no problem admitting my age of 37. :)
> clark must have lost the election and now he's back spewing the same old
> crap.
you are probably correct. ;-)
Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein
*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
AZ Astrea
October 8th 03, 07:42 AM
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>
-----------------------------
I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child changing
schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather quickly.
Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a longer
period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to different
people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them either.
Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the class
but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't be
in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
that.
I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he and
his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is difficult
enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when they
are able to.
~AZ~
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
the
> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
at the
> > current school.
> >
>
AZ Astrea
October 8th 03, 07:42 AM
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>
-----------------------------
I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child changing
schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather quickly.
Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a longer
period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to different
people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them either.
Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the class
but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't be
in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
that.
I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he and
his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is difficult
enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when they
are able to.
~AZ~
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
the
> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
at the
> > current school.
> >
>
AZ Astrea
October 8th 03, 07:42 AM
"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
> actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>
-----------------------------
I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child changing
schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather quickly.
Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a longer
period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to different
people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them either.
Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the class
but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't be
in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
that.
I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he and
his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is difficult
enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when they
are able to.
~AZ~
> Clark Simmons wrote:
> > As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
something.
> > There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
the
> > school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
at the
> > current school.
> >
>
Virginia
October 8th 03, 07:47 AM
I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
important to a parent, academics or friends.
AZ Astrea wrote:
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
>
>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>
>
> -----------------------------
> I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child changing
> schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
> more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather quickly.
> Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a longer
> period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to different
> people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
> knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
>
> As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them either.
> Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the class
> but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't be
> in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> that.
>
> I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he and
> his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is difficult
> enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
> everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
> would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when they
> are able to.
>
> ~AZ~
>
>
>>Clark Simmons wrote:
>>
>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>
> something.
>
>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>
> the
>
>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
>
> at the
>
>>>current school.
>>>
>>
>
>
Virginia
October 8th 03, 07:47 AM
I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
important to a parent, academics or friends.
AZ Astrea wrote:
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
>
>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>
>
> -----------------------------
> I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child changing
> schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
> more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather quickly.
> Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a longer
> period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to different
> people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
> knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
>
> As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them either.
> Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the class
> but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't be
> in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> that.
>
> I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he and
> his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is difficult
> enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
> everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
> would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when they
> are able to.
>
> ~AZ~
>
>
>>Clark Simmons wrote:
>>
>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>
> something.
>
>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>
> the
>
>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
>
> at the
>
>>>current school.
>>>
>>
>
>
Virginia
October 8th 03, 07:47 AM
I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
important to a parent, academics or friends.
AZ Astrea wrote:
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
>
>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>
>
> -----------------------------
> I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child changing
> schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
> more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather quickly.
> Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a longer
> period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to different
> people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
> knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
>
> As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them either.
> Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the class
> but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't be
> in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> that.
>
> I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he and
> his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is difficult
> enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
> everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
> would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when they
> are able to.
>
> ~AZ~
>
>
>>Clark Simmons wrote:
>>
>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>
> something.
>
>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>
> the
>
>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
>
> at the
>
>>>current school.
>>>
>>
>
>
AZ Astrea
October 9th 03, 07:38 AM
Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all over
Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to them
when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of them.
We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was pretty
sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends. I
went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school and
then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember feeling
uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me in
the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she had)
and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed to
different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them up
easily.
It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of friends
with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make new
friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
~AZ~
"Virginia" > wrote in message
t...
> I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
> and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
> up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
> took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
> science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
> catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
> both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
> friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
> referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
> moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
> the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
> families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
> than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
> important to a parent, academics or friends.
>
> AZ Astrea wrote:
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > et...
> >
> >>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> >>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> >>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> >>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> >>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> >>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> >>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> >>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >>
> >
> > -----------------------------
> > I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
changing
> > schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> > spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> > schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
> > more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
quickly.
> > Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
longer
> > period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
different
> > people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
> > knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
> >
> > As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
either.
> > Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
class
> > but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
be
> > in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> > that.
> >
> > I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
and
> > his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
difficult
> > enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
> > everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
> > would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
they
> > are able to.
> >
> > ~AZ~
> >
> >
> >>Clark Simmons wrote:
> >>
> >>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> >
> > something.
> >
> >>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
> >
> > at the
> >
> >>>current school.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
AZ Astrea
October 9th 03, 07:38 AM
Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all over
Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to them
when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of them.
We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was pretty
sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends. I
went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school and
then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember feeling
uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me in
the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she had)
and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed to
different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them up
easily.
It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of friends
with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make new
friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
~AZ~
"Virginia" > wrote in message
t...
> I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
> and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
> up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
> took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
> science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
> catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
> both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
> friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
> referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
> moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
> the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
> families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
> than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
> important to a parent, academics or friends.
>
> AZ Astrea wrote:
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > et...
> >
> >>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> >>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> >>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> >>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> >>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> >>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> >>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> >>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >>
> >
> > -----------------------------
> > I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
changing
> > schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> > spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> > schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
> > more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
quickly.
> > Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
longer
> > period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
different
> > people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
> > knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
> >
> > As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
either.
> > Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
class
> > but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
be
> > in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> > that.
> >
> > I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
and
> > his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
difficult
> > enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
> > everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
> > would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
they
> > are able to.
> >
> > ~AZ~
> >
> >
> >>Clark Simmons wrote:
> >>
> >>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> >
> > something.
> >
> >>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
> >
> > at the
> >
> >>>current school.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
AZ Astrea
October 9th 03, 07:38 AM
Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all over
Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to them
when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of them.
We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was pretty
sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends. I
went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school and
then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember feeling
uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me in
the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she had)
and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed to
different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them up
easily.
It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of friends
with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make new
friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
~AZ~
"Virginia" > wrote in message
t...
> I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
> and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
> up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
> took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
> science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
> catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
> both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
> friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
> referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
> moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
> the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
> families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
> than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
> important to a parent, academics or friends.
>
> AZ Astrea wrote:
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > et...
> >
> >>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> >>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> >>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
> >>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
> >>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
> >>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> >>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> >>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >>
> >
> > -----------------------------
> > I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
changing
> > schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> > spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> > schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
> > more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
quickly.
> > Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
longer
> > period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
different
> > people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
> > knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
> >
> > As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
either.
> > Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
class
> > but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
be
> > in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> > that.
> >
> > I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
and
> > his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
difficult
> > enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
> > everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
> > would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
they
> > are able to.
> >
> > ~AZ~
> >
> >
> >>Clark Simmons wrote:
> >>
> >>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> >
> > something.
> >
> >>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
> >
> > at the
> >
> >>>current school.
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
Virginia
October 9th 03, 04:56 PM
every couple of years? I went to 8 elementary schools all but 1 before
4th grade.
AZ Astrea wrote:
> Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
> Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all over
> Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to them
> when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of them.
> We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was pretty
> sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
>
> I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends. I
> went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
> school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school and
> then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember feeling
> uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
> I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me in
> the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she had)
> and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed to
> different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them up
> easily.
>
> It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of friends
> with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make new
> friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
>
> ~AZ~
>
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> t...
>
>>I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
>>and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
>>up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
>>took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
>>science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
>>catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
>>both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
>>friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
>>referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
>>moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
>>the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
>>families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
>>than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
>>important to a parent, academics or friends.
>>
>>AZ Astrea wrote:
>>
>>>"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
>>>
>>>
>>>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>>>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>>>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>>>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>>>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>>>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>>>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>>>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>>>
>>>
>>>-----------------------------
>>>I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
>
> changing
>
>>>schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
>>>spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
>>>schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
>>>more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
>
> quickly.
>
>>>Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
>
> longer
>
>>>period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
>
> different
>
>>>people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
>>>knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
>>>
>>>As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
>
> either.
>
>>>Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
>
> class
>
>>>but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
>
> be
>
>>>in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
>>>that.
>>>
>>>I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
>
> and
>
>>>his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
>
> difficult
>
>>>enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
>>>everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
>>>would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
>
> they
>
>>>are able to.
>>>
>>>~AZ~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Clark Simmons wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>>>
>>>something.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
>>>
>>>at the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>current school.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
Virginia
October 9th 03, 04:56 PM
every couple of years? I went to 8 elementary schools all but 1 before
4th grade.
AZ Astrea wrote:
> Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
> Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all over
> Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to them
> when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of them.
> We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was pretty
> sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
>
> I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends. I
> went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
> school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school and
> then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember feeling
> uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
> I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me in
> the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she had)
> and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed to
> different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them up
> easily.
>
> It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of friends
> with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make new
> friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
>
> ~AZ~
>
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> t...
>
>>I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
>>and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
>>up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
>>took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
>>science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
>>catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
>>both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
>>friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
>>referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
>>moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
>>the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
>>families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
>>than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
>>important to a parent, academics or friends.
>>
>>AZ Astrea wrote:
>>
>>>"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
>>>
>>>
>>>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>>>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>>>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>>>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>>>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>>>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>>>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>>>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>>>
>>>
>>>-----------------------------
>>>I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
>
> changing
>
>>>schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
>>>spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
>>>schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
>>>more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
>
> quickly.
>
>>>Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
>
> longer
>
>>>period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
>
> different
>
>>>people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
>>>knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
>>>
>>>As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
>
> either.
>
>>>Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
>
> class
>
>>>but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
>
> be
>
>>>in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
>>>that.
>>>
>>>I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
>
> and
>
>>>his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
>
> difficult
>
>>>enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
>>>everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
>>>would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
>
> they
>
>>>are able to.
>>>
>>>~AZ~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Clark Simmons wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>>>
>>>something.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
>>>
>>>at the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>current school.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
Virginia
October 9th 03, 04:56 PM
every couple of years? I went to 8 elementary schools all but 1 before
4th grade.
AZ Astrea wrote:
> Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
> Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all over
> Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to them
> when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of them.
> We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was pretty
> sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
>
> I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends. I
> went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
> school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school and
> then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember feeling
> uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
> I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me in
> the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she had)
> and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed to
> different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them up
> easily.
>
> It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of friends
> with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make new
> friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
>
> ~AZ~
>
> "Virginia" > wrote in message
> t...
>
>>I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
>>and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
>>up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
>>took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
>>science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
>>catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
>>both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
>>friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
>>referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
>>moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
>>the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
>>families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
>>than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
>>important to a parent, academics or friends.
>>
>>AZ Astrea wrote:
>>
>>>"Virginia" > wrote in message
et...
>>>
>>>
>>>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
>>>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
>>>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend next
>>>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's just
>>>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school and
>>>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
>>>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
>>>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
>>>>
>>>
>>>-----------------------------
>>>I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
>
> changing
>
>>>schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
>>>spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
>>>schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to be
>>>more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
>
> quickly.
>
>>>Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
>
> longer
>
>>>period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
>
> different
>
>>>people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty much
>>>knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
>>>
>>>As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
>
> either.
>
>>>Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
>
> class
>
>>>but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
>
> be
>
>>>in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
>>>that.
>>>
>>>I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
>
> and
>
>>>his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
>
> difficult
>
>>>enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid) and
>>>everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the government
>>>would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
>
> they
>
>>>are able to.
>>>
>>>~AZ~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Clark Simmons wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
>>>
>>>something.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning of
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new classroom
>>>
>>>at the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>current school.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>
AZ Astrea
October 14th 03, 11:15 PM
Wow! You went to a different school each year and then again in the middle
of each year?
Ok, I acquiesce, changing schools that frequently can't be good for
learning.
~AZ~
"Virginia" > wrote in message
t...
> every couple of years? I went to 8 elementary schools all but 1 before
> 4th grade.
>
> AZ Astrea wrote:
> > Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
> > Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all
over
> > Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to
them
> > when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of
them.
> > We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was
pretty
> > sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
> >
> > I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends.
I
> > went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
> > school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school
and
> > then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember
feeling
> > uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
> > I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me
in
> > the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she
had)
> > and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed
to
> > different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them
up
> > easily.
> >
> > It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of
friends
> > with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make
new
> > friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
> >
> > ~AZ~
> >
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > t...
> >
> >>I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
> >>and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
> >>up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
> >>took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
> >>science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
> >>catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
> >>both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
> >>friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
> >>referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
> >>moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
> >>the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
> >>families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
> >>than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
> >>important to a parent, academics or friends.
> >>
> >>AZ Astrea wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> >>>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> >>>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend
next
> >>>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's
just
> >>>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school
and
> >>>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> >>>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> >>>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>-----------------------------
> >>>I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
> >
> > changing
> >
> >>>schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> >>>spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> >>>schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to
be
> >>>more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
> >
> > quickly.
> >
> >>>Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
> >
> > longer
> >
> >>>period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
> >
> > different
> >
> >>>people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty
much
> >>>knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
> >>>
> >>>As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
> >
> > either.
> >
> >>>Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
> >
> > class
> >
> >>>but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
> >
> > be
> >
> >>>in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> >>>that.
> >>>
> >>>I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
> >
> > difficult
> >
> >>>enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid)
and
> >>>everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the
government
> >>>would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
> >
> > they
> >
> >>>are able to.
> >>>
> >>>~AZ~
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Clark Simmons wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> >>>
> >>>something.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning
of
> >>>
> >>>the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new
classroom
> >>>
> >>>at the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>current school.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>
AZ Astrea
October 14th 03, 11:15 PM
Wow! You went to a different school each year and then again in the middle
of each year?
Ok, I acquiesce, changing schools that frequently can't be good for
learning.
~AZ~
"Virginia" > wrote in message
t...
> every couple of years? I went to 8 elementary schools all but 1 before
> 4th grade.
>
> AZ Astrea wrote:
> > Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
> > Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all
over
> > Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to
them
> > when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of
them.
> > We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was
pretty
> > sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
> >
> > I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends.
I
> > went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
> > school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school
and
> > then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember
feeling
> > uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
> > I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me
in
> > the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she
had)
> > and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed
to
> > different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them
up
> > easily.
> >
> > It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of
friends
> > with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make
new
> > friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
> >
> > ~AZ~
> >
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > t...
> >
> >>I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
> >>and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
> >>up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
> >>took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
> >>science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
> >>catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
> >>both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
> >>friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
> >>referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
> >>moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
> >>the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
> >>families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
> >>than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
> >>important to a parent, academics or friends.
> >>
> >>AZ Astrea wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> >>>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> >>>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend
next
> >>>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's
just
> >>>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school
and
> >>>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> >>>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> >>>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>-----------------------------
> >>>I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
> >
> > changing
> >
> >>>schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> >>>spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> >>>schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to
be
> >>>more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
> >
> > quickly.
> >
> >>>Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
> >
> > longer
> >
> >>>period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
> >
> > different
> >
> >>>people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty
much
> >>>knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
> >>>
> >>>As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
> >
> > either.
> >
> >>>Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
> >
> > class
> >
> >>>but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
> >
> > be
> >
> >>>in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> >>>that.
> >>>
> >>>I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
> >
> > difficult
> >
> >>>enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid)
and
> >>>everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the
government
> >>>would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
> >
> > they
> >
> >>>are able to.
> >>>
> >>>~AZ~
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Clark Simmons wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> >>>
> >>>something.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning
of
> >>>
> >>>the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new
classroom
> >>>
> >>>at the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>current school.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>
AZ Astrea
October 14th 03, 11:15 PM
Wow! You went to a different school each year and then again in the middle
of each year?
Ok, I acquiesce, changing schools that frequently can't be good for
learning.
~AZ~
"Virginia" > wrote in message
t...
> every couple of years? I went to 8 elementary schools all but 1 before
> 4th grade.
>
> AZ Astrea wrote:
> > Well, perhaps the people I know who were military brats just got lucky.
> > Most of them spent time in other countries/places like Okinawa and all
over
> > Europe. Many of them speak several languages due to being exposed to
them
> > when they were young enough to pick them up. I was always envious of
them.
> > We had a chance to move to Holland when I was about seven but I was
pretty
> > sickly as a kid so we didn't get to go. Darnnit!
> >
> > I did however change schools a lot. More than some of my brat friends.
I
> > went to 1st & 2nd at one school, 3rd at another school, 4th at another
> > school in a different city, 5th at another school, 6th at another school
and
> > then 7th through 12th in the same school. The only one I remember
feeling
> > uncomfortable in was the 3rd grade, but then, they were weird! :)
> > I didn't have much trouble acedemically but then they wanted to put me
in
> > the 5th grade when I was in 3rd, (my Mom wouldn't let them, I wish she
had)
> > and I was reading college level in the 3rd grade. If I had been exposed
to
> > different languages during that time I'm sure I would have picked them
up
> > easily.
> >
> > It's a shame your experience was so negative. I have a couple of
friends
> > with similar experiences to yours and some who just hated having to make
new
> > friends every couple of years. I guess each kid is different.
> >
> > ~AZ~
> >
> > "Virginia" > wrote in message
> > t...
> >
> >>I am a military brat and we moved from the south north back to the south
> >>and back north again. Science and history moved at a faster pace than
> >>up north and math moved more quickly up north. when my dad retired it
> >>took 6 yrs before we learned anything new inscience (thereby making
> >>science a boring class) and had to be tutored for 2 years in math to
> >>catch up. The school actually labeld us as LD in mathematice when we're
> >>both gifted we'd just not been taught yet. We had trouble making
> >>friends and a study referenced in one of my dad's naval magazines
> >>referenced that 48% of navy brats were having educational delays due to
> >>moving schools so often where as only 2% of the civilian population had
> >>the same difficulties. This very study is why over 22% of military
> >>families currently homeschool. Yes we adapted more quickly socially
> >>than most children our age but the question becomes which is more
> >>important to a parent, academics or friends.
> >>
> >>AZ Astrea wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Virginia" > wrote in message
> et...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>actually there are different graduation requirements for different
> >>>>schools, districts and states. WHat if your child was adding in one
> >>>>school while the children in her grade in the school she'll attend
next
> >>>>year are learning to multiply. the second school will assume she's
just
> >>>>lagging behind in mathematics and she'll return to the other school
and
> >>>>by the time she's back at school number two again she's three or four
> >>>>years behind by then. that is my point about the switching schools so
> >>>>often that it leads to academic problems due to a lack of continuity.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>-----------------------------
> >>>I'm not sure that I understand what all the furor is over a child
> >
> > changing
> >
> >>>schools. I have lots and lots of friends who were 'military brats' and
> >>>spent their school years traveling all over the world and going to new
> >>>schools. The one thing they seem to agree on is that they learned to
be
> >>>more outgoing and assertive due to the need to make friends rather
> >
> > quickly.
> >
> >>>Yes, they did like it when they were able to stay at one place for a
> >
> > longer
> >
> >>>period of time, but they still seem to feel that being exposed to
> >
> > different
> >
> >>>people and cultures made up for that. And this is with them pretty
much
> >>>knowing that they wouldn't be returning to the same school again.
> >>>
> >>>As for academics, again that apparantly wasn't a problem for them
> >
> > either.
> >
> >>>Most of them seemed to feel that they were at least a bit ahead of the
> >
> > class
> >
> >>>but these are kids of career military parents. They knew they wouldn't
> >
> > be
> >
> >>>in one place for a long time and so they and their parents prepared for
> >>>that.
> >>>
> >>>I don't know if Clark's custody situation would work for anybody but he
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>his but he's welcome to it. Divorce and all that goes with it is
> >
> > difficult
> >
> >>>enough and if you find something that works for you (and ex and kid)
and
> >>>everybody is 'happy' with it then go for it. I just wish the
government
> >>>would get out of it and let people work it out between themselves when
> >
> > they
> >
> >>>are able to.
> >>>
> >>>~AZ~
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Clark Simmons wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>As another who switched schools frequently, let ME clue YOU in on
> >>>
> >>>something.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>There is no need to change schools more often than at the beginning
of
> >>>
> >>>the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>school year. It's really no different than going into a new
classroom
> >>>
> >>>at the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>>current school.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.