Runnin from Custodial Parent

On Nov 12, 1:20 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message

...







--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
.. .
Chris wrote:
Sarah Gray wrote:
Can you tell me a
way to do that without money changing hands that *doesn't*
involve
50/50
physical custody (since that is not always possible)?
Unless one parent is dead it is ALWAYS possible.

That is simply not true. A school-age child cannot move back and
forth
between two households in different states during the school year.
Also,
some parents cannot provide a safe environment for their children.

Chris doesn't feel that schools are important enough to separate
parent
fro,
child. They teach too many things that he does not approve of, and
the
parent/child bond is more important. So using school as an excuse is
simply
furthering YOUR agenda, not your child's. chuckle

Non sequitur. Not to mention, I made absolutely NO claim regarding
"schools"
in general. But thanks for reading my mind and speaking on my behalf.
Now,
tell me that you believe attending a school trumps having a
relationship
with one's parent; more specifically, one's father.

If the father moved away, then it is HIS responsibility to make sure he
has
a relationship with his child.

Excuse me, but a responsibility is an undesirable consequence (price) in
exchange for a right. Last I checked, having a relationship with a child
is
the right, not the responsibility.

chuckle You can be so foolish, Chris. Do you really think that a father
that moves away from his child has a right to be catered to by the mother?
That the mother has the responsibility of making sure that the child is
taken to the FATHER WHO MOVED AWAY FROM THE CHILD?



If he truly believes that a relationship
with his child is important, he will make the effort--not expect his
child
to give up her education to "have a relationship" with dad.

Red herring. So tell me, do you believe attending a school trumps having a
relationship with one's parent; more specifically, one's father?

I believe that a father who wants a relationship with the child he moved
away from will have to take the responsibility for facilitating that
relationship himself without demanding that the child's education be put in
second place due to HIS choice to move away.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thank you , teachermama..very well put!
and if the mom decided to follow him wherever he moved away too, for
the sake of the realtionship? now she is harrassing him, right. Now
the excuse is because she still yearns for him and is using the
child...and now she is an unfit mother because she is trying to
facillitate a relationship with the father and he keeps moving from
place to place and now the daughter has no education because it was
more important to facillitate a relationship with a father that wanted
no part. Maybe it was wiser to educate the child...

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Illiana via FamilyKB.com" u38194@uwe wrote in message
news:7b1c003e1434a@uwe...
Sarah Gray wrote:
Can you tell me a
way to do that without money changing hands that *doesn't* involve
50/50
physical custody (since that is not always possible)?
Unless one parent is dead it is ALWAYS possible.

That is simply not true. A school-age child cannot move back and forth
between two households in different states during the school year. Also,
some parents cannot provide a safe environment for their children.

It costs money to raise a child. Both parents should provide equally
towards basic expenses. If my daughter's father still lived in Detroit,
I would be happy to agree on something where he bought a portion of
groceries, some of her school clothes, paid directly for his share of
the cost of latchkey; i.e. did not give me money directly. Then again,
if he lived here, we'd still have 50/50 physical custody...

On another note, when I try to reply to your messages, my newsreader
won't quote any of what you said and I have to cut-and-paste. I am not
sure why...
Do you know a woman that lives at 6321 Frontenac St? She is a prostitute,
and
a crack user. She is not fit to care for her daughter.

You shouldn't be giving your address out over the internet. It's not safe.



--
Message posted via FamilyKB.com
http://www.familykb.com/Uwe/Forums.a...nting/200711/1

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
Sarah Gray wrote:
Can you tell me a
way to do that without money changing hands that *doesn't*
involve
50/50
physical custody (since that is not always possible)?
Unless one parent is dead it is ALWAYS possible.

That is simply not true. A school-age child cannot move back and
forth
between two households in different states during the school year.
Also,
some parents cannot provide a safe environment for their children.

Chris doesn't feel that schools are important enough to separate
parent
fro,
child. They teach too many things that he does not approve of, and
the
parent/child bond is more important. So using school as an excuse
is
simply
furthering YOUR agenda, not your child's. chuckle

Non sequitur. Not to mention, I made absolutely NO claim regarding
"schools"
in general. But thanks for reading my mind and speaking on my behalf.
Now,
tell me that you believe attending a school trumps having a
relationship
with one's parent; more specifically, one's father.

If the father moved away, then it is HIS responsibility to make sure he
has
a relationship with his child.

Excuse me, but a responsibility is an undesirable consequence (price) in
exchange for a right. Last I checked, having a relationship with a child
is
the right, not the responsibility.

chuckle You can be so foolish, Chris.

For instance?

Do you really think that a father
that moves away from his child has a right to be catered to by the mother?

No.

That the mother has the responsibility of making sure that the child is
taken to the FATHER WHO MOVED AWAY FROM THE CHILD?

No.



If he truly believes that a relationship
with his child is important, he will make the effort--not expect his
child
to give up her education to "have a relationship" with dad.

Red herring. So tell me, do you believe attending a school trumps having
a
relationship with one's parent; more specifically, one's father?

I believe that a father who wants a relationship with the child he moved
away from will have to take the responsibility for facilitating that
relationship himself without demanding that the child's education be put
in
second place due to HIS choice to move away.

I'm sorry, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

"Chris" wrote in message
news


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
...


--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to
have
custody of such child]
"teachrmama" wrote in message
...

"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
Sarah Gray wrote:
Can you tell me a
way to do that without money changing hands that *doesn't*
involve
50/50
physical custody (since that is not always possible)?
Unless one parent is dead it is ALWAYS possible.

That is simply not true. A school-age child cannot move back and
forth
between two households in different states during the school
year.
Also,
some parents cannot provide a safe environment for their
children.

Chris doesn't feel that schools are important enough to separate
parent
fro,
child. They teach too many things that he does not approve of, and
the
parent/child bond is more important. So using school as an excuse
is
simply
furthering YOUR agenda, not your child's. chuckle

Non sequitur. Not to mention, I made absolutely NO claim regarding
"schools"
in general. But thanks for reading my mind and speaking on my
behalf.
Now,
tell me that you believe attending a school trumps having a
relationship
with one's parent; more specifically, one's father.

If the father moved away, then it is HIS responsibility to make sure
he
has
a relationship with his child.

Excuse me, but a responsibility is an undesirable consequence (price)
in
exchange for a right. Last I checked, having a relationship with a
child
is
the right, not the responsibility.

chuckle You can be so foolish, Chris.

For instance?

Do you really think that a father
that moves away from his child has a right to be catered to by the
mother?

No.

That the mother has the responsibility of making sure that the child is
taken to the FATHER WHO MOVED AWAY FROM THE CHILD?

No.



If he truly believes that a relationship
with his child is important, he will make the effort--not expect his
child
to give up her education to "have a relationship" with dad.

Red herring. So tell me, do you believe attending a school trumps
having
a
relationship with one's parent; more specifically, one's father?

I believe that a father who wants a relationship with the child he moved
away from will have to take the responsibility for facilitating that
relationship himself without demanding that the child's education be put
in
second place due to HIS choice to move away.

I'm sorry, was that a "yes" or a "no"?

Your question is one of those "when did you stop beating your wife"
questions, Chris. The answer is IF THE FATHER CHOOSES TO MOVE AWAY FROM HIS
CHILD, THE FATHER HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY TO WORK TO MAINTAIN THE
RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS CHILD, just as he does if he does not move away.

Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. net...
Chris wrote:
Unoless you are being physically restrained by someone, you can. Move
to
where your ex is. Then your daughter can attend the SAME school
AND be
with
her father too; just what you want. Unless, of course, where he lives
is
just as bad. But even so, for the sake of your child, she would be
with BOTH
of you!

He *chose* to move. I have no desire to move to Nashville;
Thus, your claims about how you desire to move and to have your child be
with her father are false.

I never said I would move to facilitate that. Why should I quit my job
to follow my ex-husband to another state just because his parents moved
there? If he wants to see his daughter more, he could move back here.
He's the one who insisted in court last summer, that we switch off
parenting time every few days, because she was so young and should see
each of us often. Funny how things change in a year.

--

Sarah Gray

Chris wrote:
Red herring. So tell me, do you believe attending a school trumps having
a
relationship with one's parent; more specifically, one's father?

Do you think that a child spending time in the home of their father on a
regular basis trumps any chance of them succeeding in life?

--

Sarah Gray

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
Red herring. So tell me, do you believe attending a school trumps
having
a
relationship with one's parent; more specifically, one's father?

Do you think that a child spending time in the home of their father on a
regular basis trumps any chance of them succeeding in life?

Do you always answer a question with a question?


--

Sarah Gray

I know a lot of things.

DB wrote:
"Illiana via FamilyKB.com" u38194@uwe wrote in

Do you know a woman that lives at 6321 Frontenac St? She is a prostitute,
and
a crack user. She is not fit to care for her daughter.

And you would know this how?

--
Message posted via http://www.familykb.com

--
[Any man that's good enough to support a child is good enough to have
custody of such child]
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:
"Sarah Gray" wrote in message
. net...
Chris wrote:
Unoless you are being physically restrained by someone, you can.
Move
to
where your ex is. Then your daughter can attend the SAME school
AND be
with
her father too; just what you want. Unless, of course, where he
lives
is
just as bad. But even so, for the sake of your child, she would be
with BOTH
of you!

He *chose* to move. I have no desire to move to Nashville;
Thus, your claims about how you desire to move and to have your child
be
with her father are false.

I never said I would move to facilitate that.

Nor did I say you did. But you DID say that you would like to move.

Why should I quit my job
to follow my ex-husband to another state just because his parents moved
there?

Who knows?

If he wants to see his daughter more, he could move back here.

And if you want him to see her, you could move there or send her there.
That's TWO options for you. How many are you giving him? Last I checked,
it's not a one way street. Unless, of course, you're the one calling the
shots.


He's the one who insisted in court last summer, that we switch off
parenting time every few days, because she was so young and should see
each of us often. Funny how things change in a year.

Yup, things certainly do change in time. That is the result of living in a
fluid world. I have NO intention of killing my neighbor. But let him invade
my home and all bets are off.


--

Sarah Gray

Illiana via FamilyKB.com wrote:
I know a lot of things.


apparently, how to stalk someone on the internet properly is not one of
them. I don't live in the city, I live in the suburbs, and I'm unlisted.

If you possessed even a microgram of creativity, you would have been
able to dig up actual dirt on me available online, but no, you had to be
a jackass and libel someone who has nothing to do with this newsgroup.


DB wrote:
"Illiana via FamilyKB.com" u38194@uwe wrote in

Do you know a woman that lives at 6321 Frontenac St? She is a prostitute,
and
a crack user. She is not fit to care for her daughter.
And you would know this how?



--

Sarah Gray