I currently have joint/joint. I am expecting another baby (that the kids have been asking for). I am not moving in with the new father and we are planning to get married in time (we like our lives this way), we are both professionals. So, the kids would just have a new sibling but not a new step-parent. Would any of you think of any reasons I would lose my current custody arrangement?

I can see that the Court could be concerned that you will be raising this "new" child as a single mother. I have never seen a Court take a stance against a step parent arrangement (unless the "step" is somehow abusive).

I don't know why you would lose your custody arrangement unless for whatever reason your "ex" finds the situation dangerous. For example, do you have the financial resources, time, will your joint children be sort of shuffled aside to make room for the baby.

1. Not at all, I have time and money to raise plenty of children, I own my own business and can hire a nanny or even a live-in nanny/relative. The custody arrangement is Thurs-Monday for my custody time, and since that is a non-school time, we can all do all kinds of fun things together.
2. I don't want to uproot the children once again, I tried a relationship that backfired; they like my current partner and in time we might move in, but for at least a few years, this will be the chosen arrangement.

BTW- many thanks for the reply :)

Oh, the father of the new baby will be very involved both time-wise and financially, we have agreed on parenting time, money, etc, we are both older and with our own lives and businesses, so I would not be raising it as a single mom, I just don't want to introduce a step-dad to my current children.

If you didn't go through the courts then agreeing to something doesn't mean anything. It needs to be through court order. Also having another child is grounds for a change in custody. It represents a substantial change. I find it sad you treat children like possesions and not living beings. You refer to your child as it is disturbing to me.

I don't understand your reply-which part needs to be Court Ordered? Also, I do not yet know the sex of the baby, so what would you call it? He? She? He-she? PS: You don't know me, you cannot judge what kind of parent I am, my children are much better adjusted and emotionally and physically and cognitively advanced that most children their age, everyone from their pediatrician to their therapist to their coaches mention these facts repeatedly. If you knew my life story, you would understand. Can't blame you, you only read two lines, and I have expressed myself very curtly on purpose as to hide my identity, but there is only one thing that matters to me: that my children will learn to love the world as God and I love them.

What I can see is the father of your children trying to make a case that you are presenting a questionable role model for his children by having sex and a baby with a person you are not married to or living with.

Fifty years ago, that argument probably would have lost you custody. In today's world, it's a toss up. Depends on the judge.

Thanks for all the replies, very kind of you all. I talked to the top attny in the area and he said that having another baby and moving on with your life after divorce is definitely a non-issue. PS: We live in a world where a Black man from a single parent household is the leader of the New World, so I can make the argument that my children are all going to turn out better that children from married households ;)

Thanks for all the replies, very kind of you all. I talked to the top attny in the area and he said that having another baby and moving on with your life after divorce is definitely a non-issue. PS: We live in a world where a Black man from a single parent household is the leader of the New World, so I can make the argument that my children are all going to turn out better that children from married households ;)


I've stayed out of this until now because you've chosen to take a defensive posture and I wasn't going to further fuel the argument - I fail to see how a Black man from a single parent household leading the new World and your decision to be an unmarried mother are related. Maybe if you hadn't thrown the word "Black" into the mix this would hold more weight.

Your children are seeing a therapist?

Once again - people post all the time and when they don't like the answer they turn defensive and/or argumentative. I don't understand why you are even here, asking this question, when a top Attorney has given you legal advice - you are double checking that advice?

Scott is right - the father of your children can make any argument ranging from your morals to your ability to raise another child to just about anything else. Whether he'll win depends on whether his top Attorney trumps your top Attorney.

PS: We live in a world where a Black man from a single parent household is the leader of the New World

Bah!! And it is about what??

I also have to agree that your argument is mixing apples and oranges. Like I said 50 or so years ago, the father of your children would probably win custody on the argument that your morals are not a good role model. In today's world with children being born to unmarried couples a much more commonplace event, it is not the slam dunk it was in the past. But a judge certainly could rule against you on that basis. If you go into court with the attitude that this is your life and you are entitled to make your own decisions you will probably alienate the judge.

1. My children will always see a therapist and so should everyone and their children, we go to the dentist and the physician, and why not a therapist?

2. I mentioned the word 'Black' because naysayers would have never believed that it could have ever been possible, just like naysayers that speak against the successful upbringing of children that have divorced parents; at least the fathers of my children are involved 50-50% every day, with money and time and love (and I would not have it any other way!)

3. Yes, I do have a top attorney, and I regret ever entering this site where people obviously are eager to make emotional and hurtful statements rather than rational, helpful ones backed up by evidence, research, previous cases; I thought this is a 'legal' site, not a 'burning on the stake' site. My bad.

Well, I am moving on to other sites, you guys have fun, but I appreciate the feedback, it's been entertaining to say the least LOL

How adult is "LOL"? That alone raises flags for me.

I don't think the average American (raised by a single parent or not) is in therapy. I could be wrong - I'm sure someone will look up the stastics. Dentists/Physicians do semi-annual or annual checkups. The therapist? I trust you are also going - ?

Sorry, mentioning that Obama is Black (which I think we all recognized before you told us) has nothing to do with your situation and is offensive - the fatherS of your children? More than one?

Why are you here, second guessing your top Attorney?

Bye.

I currently have joint/joint. I am expecting another baby (that the kids have been asking for). I am not moving in with the new father and we are planning to get married in time (we like our lives this way), we are both professionals. So, the kids would just have a new sibling but not a new step-parent. Would any of you think of any reasons why I would lose my current custody arrangement?

As Scott already said, this depends on the judge. I've seen mothers lose primary placement(physical custody) of young children because of the exact situation you're putting yourself in - in a relationship, no plans to marry, having a child together. The judge ruled that the father had a more stable living environment and granted him primary placement of the baby. The mother appealed the decision, citing that the judge had used inappropriate means to determine that her living situation was unstable - the court upheld the judge's ruling.

I also am concerned that you threw in that your kids "have been asking for a baby." Kids ask for a lot of things; being a good parent means saying no sometimes.

Also, your comment that you "can hire a nanny" isn't going to bode well with the courts. They like parent-child interaction, not nanny-child interaction. If the father(s) of the child(ren) are able to provide personal care or have a family member do so, that's also going to be a strike against you.

No, I do not believe that the "average" family attends therapy. My stepchildren see therapists because they have been getting lied to for the past five years and are so beaten down and confused from seeing one thing and being told to lie about it. You absolutely cannot compare seeing a therapist to a bi-annual trip to the dentist - absolutely not.

And the argument wasn't about divorced families, it was about single parenting. If you are divorced, the child's other parent is still involved in their life. What if your new guy decides to up and split one day? Then your two oldest children will have both parents, while the baby is going to be raised in a single parent household.

And just as everyone else is, I'm still trying to figure out what Obama has to do with your custody case.

1. You go to the dentist to treat your teeth. You go to a physician to treat an illness. You go to a therapist to treat a problem. If no problem exists, then why need a therapist? I don't know what world you were brought up in, but seeing a therapist is not the norm.

2. The problem was your use of an example that had no bearing on the issue you raised. No one spoke against the successful upbringing of children of divorced parents. You asked a question about whether your having another child, out of wedlock would affect your custody. That question was answered with the reality.

3. No one was "eager" to make statements of any kind except to deal with the issues you raised. Again your question was answered. The people who answer questions here volunteer their time and expertise. Why should we spend the time doing research, providing evidence, previous cases for you for free? Even if we wanted to do such research you didn't give us enough info (i.e. your general location) to do the research.

Bottom line is that your question was answered. I doubt if you will get any different answer on any other site. And I wonder why you would be continuing the research since you have a "top attorney's" opinion.

Thank you, this8384, now this is an educated answer. Like I said, I have already consulted with Top Shark, but sounds like you are well qualified, as well. It doesn't hurt to have different perspectives. Many thanks, and I would recommend YOU to anyone as their attorney.

Thank you, this8384, now this is an educated answer. Like I said, I have already consulted with Top Shark, but sounds like you are well qualified, as well. It doesn't hurt to have different perspectives. Many thanks, and I would recommend YOU to anyone as their attorney.


Apparently you agreed with OP - have to laugh. Put out your shingle and start practicing.

Can I come to work for you? Maybe Scott, too?

Apparently you agreed with OP - have to laugh. Put out your shingle and start practicing.

Can I come to work for you? Maybe Scott, too?

Of course, I'll hire you all :D

In fact, my attorney told me on Sunday to open my own detective agency. Care to open a Wisconsin branch? ;)

Thank you, this8384, now this is an educated answer. Like I said, I have already consulted with Top Shark, but sounds like you are well qualified, as well. It doesn't hurt to have different perspectives. Many thanks, and I would recommend YOU to anyone as their attorney.

While I appreciate the compliment, I have to say that the other advice you've gotten is very sound. I've turned to every one of these people when I needed personal legal advice.

I have nowhere near some of the training that some of these individuals have; I just like to share what I know.

1. You go to the dentist to treat your teeth. You go to a physician to treat an illness. You go to a therapist to treat a problem. If no problem exists, then why need a therapist? I don't know what world you were brought up in, but seeing a therapist is not the norm.

* because they went through the War of the Roses and we all needed skills in how to efficiently communicate with the children and with each other;

2. The problem was your use of an example that had no bearing on the issue you raised. No one spoke against the successful upbringing of children of divorced parents. You asked a question about whether your having another child, out of wedlock would affect your custody. That question was answered with the reality.

* please clarify-what do you mean by reality?

3. No one was "eager" to make statements of any kind except to deal with the issues you raised. Again your question was answered. The people who answer questions here volunteer their time and expertise. Why should we spend the time doing research, providing evidence, previous cases for you for free? Even if we wanted to do such research you didn't give us enough info (i.e. your general location) to do the research.

* please do not advertise as 'free' if you are not willing to do so- I am a professional, and if I take on a client 'for free' then I treat them just as the clients that pay top $

Bottom line is that your question was answered. I doubt if you will get any different answer on any other site. And I wonder why you would be continuing the research since you have a "top attorney's" opinion.

* I asked the question yesterday, and I spoke with my attorney today, so, in the meantime, I got an answer.
__________________

While I appreciate the compliment, I have to say that the other advice you've gotten is very sound. I've turned to each and every one of these people when I needed personal legal advice.

I have nowhere near some of the training that some of these individuals have; I just like to share what I know.

Its always amazed me how people fail to understand that the answers they get here are by VOLUNTEERS. That the people answering their questions have generously given of their time and accumulated knowledge to help others.

Even if the answer is not to their liking, they should appreciate the fact that an attempt was made to help them and act accordingly. They don't have to follow the advice, but take it in the spirit it was intended.

Fortunately, some people do realize and understand this. But there will always be the others who don't.

1. I didn't say they didn't need therapy, Going through a divorce can be very hard on kids and you probably did the right thing by helping them cope. But, like I said, you go to a therapist to treat a problem. Not everyone needs therapy.

2. I thought I was clear. The reality is that the father(s) of your children can bring a petition for a change in custody based on your actions not being a fit role model. That it would depend on the judge whether he agreed with that premise. That in the past the likelihood is that a judge would see it that way, but in these times it could go either way.

3. Excuse me? Who is advertising what? This site advertises free answers to questions. You were provided with such answers. We do not advertise that you get for free, the same level of service that you would get from a professional on a fee basis. I've done work for charities and others and do give them the same level of service I would give a paying client. But you appear to be expecting too much from a service like this. Nor would you get anything more from any similar site.

1. I didn't say they didn't need therapy, Going through a divorce can be very hard on kids and you probably did the right thing by helping them cope. But, like I said, you go to a therapist to treat a problem. Not everyone needs therapy.
*as any good therapist would tell you, you go to a therapist to PREVENT a problem, once it's there, it's too late; my children, my ex and I have learned to communicate politely with each other and it is working very well for all of us.

2. I thought I was clear. The reality is that the father(s) of your children can bring a petition for a change in custody based on your actions not being a fit role model. That it would depend on the judge whether he agreed with that premise. That in the past the likelihood is that a judge would see it that way, but in these times it could go either way.
*this answer would have sufficed

3. Excuse me? Who is advertising what? This site advertises free answers to questions. You were provided with such answers. We do not advertise that you get for free, the same level of service that you would get from a professional on a fee basis. I've done work for charities and others and do give them the same level of service I would give a paying client. But you appear to be expecting too much from a service like this. Nor would you get anything more from any similar site.
*you were doing great until now. I guess you get what you pay for...

As Scott already said, this depends on the judge. I've seen mothers lose primary placement(physical custody) of young children because of the exact situation you're putting yourself in - in a relationship, no plans to marry, having a child together.
*I mentioned in my initial post that we are planning on exchanging prenups (aka "marriage" for most people).

The judge ruled that the father had a more stable living environment and granted him primary placement of the baby. The mother appealed the decision, citing that the judge had used inappropriate means to determine that her living situation was unstable - the court upheld the judge's ruling.

I also am concerned that you threw in that your kids "have been asking for a baby." Kids ask for a lot of things; being a good parent means saying no sometimes.
* ha, if you knew my kids, they are like little adults (maybe even more advanced), they are little savants, they know exactly what they want in life and since we are all old parents, this might be their only chance to one more sibling

Also, your comment that you "can hire a nanny" isn't going to bode well with the courts. They like parent-child interaction, not nanny-child interaction. If the father(s) of the child(ren) are able to provide personal care or have a family member do so, that's also going to be a strike against you.
*as I mentioned before, we never even use a nanny/babysitter/daycare (God forbid!! )/relatives, we call each other and the other parent spends time when the other one cannot, that is why they are very nurtured and advanced; I meant, a nanny to help in my presence, not absence, for safety reasons and trips.

No, I do not believe that the "average" family attends therapy. My stepchildren see therapists because they have been getting lied to for the past five years and are so beaten down and confused from seeing one thing and being told to lie about it. You absolutely cannot compare seeing a therapist to a bi-annual trip to the dentist - absolutely not.
*lie is a strong statement-the father of the children has his own view of things, and I have learned to respect his view, despite of the fact that his view might be a self-reinforced delusion-and that, my friend, is what therapy teaches us, how to respect the other person's view of things and try to respectfully interact with him for the benefit of the children;

And the argument wasn't about divorced families, it was about single parenting. If you are divorced, the child's other parent is still involved in their life. What if your new guy decides to up and split one day? Then your two oldest children will have both parents, while the baby is going to be raised in a single parent household.
*I am 100% certain that none of the parents up and split in my world, we are all committed to each other but foremost to our children; we all have businesses in the area and cannot and do not just up and split. In addition, these are both amazing fathers, and I am very blessed to have them in my childrens' lives; unfortunately, one turned out to not like women, so that is water under the bridge...
*and yes, since we are all older, the other parent can also die. I explain to my children every aspect of reality and guide them to understand and cope with it. We are all transient in this world, our only certainty is God in our lives (if we are fortunate to know Him, and my children all do)

And just as everyone else is, I'm still trying to figure out what Obama has to do with your custody case.
*what I meant to say is that Obama- as he himself emphasizes in every speech-was raised in a single parent household, so I fail to see the short-comings of the single parent household, please enlighten me :) And, BTW, Black is a very acceptable term, a lot of my best friends are Black and proud of it and they look at you like a freak calling the African-American... I never meant it in a derogatory way, my generation does not see colors or gender, I don't even understand people that do...

* please do not advertise as 'free' if you are not willing to do so- I am a professional, and if I take on a client 'for free' then i treat them just as the clients that pay top $


You misunderstand this site and what it is about. What we offer is free advice as to broad based situations. It is in no way a legal consultation. That would be very different and much more involved. Like when people come in asking what to do or how something may happen. We stick with the laws of the given states or countries. But we can not predict what exactly will happen because there is no true way of knowing. We can only point to laws that apply etc. If you give your work away to someone that is very different then what we provide here. It doesn't even come close. So if your just looking for someone to agree with whatever statements your making you can try sites like Yahoo answers but there you truly get what your asking for. They don't have a clue nor the dedication that posters on these boards have to the subjects they have chosen. So good luck with your research. And so you know I never during my wife's pregnancies called any of my expectant children "it". Most I know use the term of baby or child. Might want to ask your therapist about that.

You misunderstand this site and what it is about. What we offer is free advice as to broad based situations. It is in no way a legal consultation. That would be very different and much more involved. Like when people come in asking what to do or how something may happen. We stick with the laws of the given states or countries. But we can not predict what exactly will happen because there is no true way of knowing. We can only point to laws that apply etc. If you give your work away to someone that is very different then what we provide here. It doesnt even come close. So if your just looking for someone to agree with whatever statements your making you can try sites like yahoo answers but there you truely get what your asking for. They dont have a clue nor the dedication that posters on these boards have to the subjects they have chosen. So good luck with your research. And so you know I never during my wifes pregnancies called any of my expectant children "it". Most I know use the term of baby or child. Might want to ask your therapist about that.

*have you ever heard of "it's a boy/girl"? "It"=baby Q. E.D.

* my initial question lead to a possible yes/no answer; then, people got all emotional and accusatory. I am sorry if I do not get caught up in that. I come from a long line of attorneys and was raised with concise, well-researched answers, not accusations and emotional mud-slinging; I have had great experience with other legal sites and thought this was one of them... Boy, was I wrong! There are a couple of great answers here, the rest is Facebook-like commentary...

* I don't want anyone to agree with me, life has dealt me some tough cards, and I have the highest EQ possible, as do my children; I thought this was an interactive site, and thus I am presenting my point of view, but, once again, I was wrong about this site, although I have enjoyed today's debate :)

If any of you would care to continue, I welcome it, if you'd like to bring case histories, I appreciate it, if you'd like to become combative, well, maybe I'll humor that person ;) I live in a small town, life gets a little stale intellectually around here, so... what the heck, I'll join you guys. If you would know me, you would get a kick out of my company, but since I have to be 007 and still somehow get an answer that is relevant to my case, we are all missing out on the fact that we are all pros at what we do and I am sure every one here sounds like a great person.

Like Trump says: "It's not personal, it's business" ;)

*I mentioned in my initial post that we are planning on exchanging prenups (aka "marriage" for most people).
If you say that in court, I guarantee the judge will laugh at you. A pre-nuptual agreement is nowhere NEAR a marriage.


* ha, if you knew my kids, they are like little adults (maybe even more advanced), they are little savants, they know exactly what they want in life and since we are all old parents, this might be their only chance to one more sibling
Again - if you bring this up, it's going to reflect negatively on you. I'm not being mean, I'm being honest - the judge doesn't want to hear that you got pregnant "because my kids wanted it." That is a terrible reason to bring a child into this world.


*as I mentioned before, we never even use a nanny/babysitter/daycare (God forbid!!!)/relatives, we call each other and the other parent spends time when the other one cannot, that is why they are very nurtured and advanced; I meant, a nanny to help in my presence, not absence, for safety reasons and trips.
And that's fine. Go back and read what I wrote: if the other parent is more available than you are or if they have family members who are more available(grandparents, aunts, uncles, siblings, etc.), the court would rather place the child(ren) with family than a stranger. That was my only point.


*lie is a strong statement-the father of the children has his own view of things, and i have learned to respect his view, despite of the fact that his view might be a self-reinforced delusion-and that, my friend, is what therapy teaches us, how to respect the other person's view of things and try to respectfully interact with him for the benefit of the children;
I didn't say therapy was bad; I just said it's not something that everyone needs or requires.


*I am 100% certain that none of the parents up and split in my world, we are all committed to each other but foremost to our children; we all have businesses in the area and cannot and do not just up and split. In addition, these are both amazing fathers, and I am very blessed to have them in my childrens' lives; unfortunately, one turned out to not like women, so that is water under the bridge...
*and yes, since we are all older, the other parent can also die. I explain to my children every aspect of reality and guide them to understand and cope with it. We are all transient in this world, our only certainty is God in our lives (if we are fortunate to know Him, and my children all do)
Well, I'm glad that everything is working out for you. However, you need to be reasonable and understand that you can't plan for the unexpected - people die, people change, people walk away from their spouses and children. The reason I say that is you need to consider these things because of what you're asking. You want to know what might happen; we're trying to prepare you for it.


*what I meant to say is that Obama- as he himself emphasizes in every speech-was raised in a single parent household, so I fail to see the short-comings of the single parent household, please enlighten me :) And, BTW, Black is a very acceptable term, a lot of my best friends are Black and proud of it and they look at you like a freak calling the African-American... I never meant it in a derogatory way, my generation does not see colors or gender, I don't even understand people that do...
I am white and go to a pre-dominantly black church. Nobody said it was derogatory; they said it was confusing. Let's all drop the Obama topic, myself included.

You are the best! You definitely need to get paid for your advice! Well, I listen and respect the wishes of my children. Long after we are gone, it's going to be them and their siblings, that is reality, so a decision to give them sibs is not only multifactorial, but a 'team effort'. As people that know my children would tell you, they are real prophets-if they tell you something, you better listen. Well, sadly, in my financial bracket, marriage is reduced to a prenup-swap, and guys see mostly $ on my forehead. I lost $1 Mil in my divorce, can you blame me for not getting 'married'? We already function as a family unit 50% of the week. When I have my kids, it is 100% mommy time. My situation will be better than a parent's that is divorced twice with joint custody resulting out of both divorces, with the exception that, the new baby will see us together at least 50% of the time and see their siblings 50% of the time, with myself and the sibs as the common denominator, the other 50%, they see their fathers. Yes, they want to see me all the time, because I am mommy, but their dads are equally loving toward them. I have the schedule worked out to the T, all parent units involved equally, nothing lacking except the unity of one household, but that is not possible for now;iif we all masterminded our lives to perfection, most children would not have been born, but we are here not to be perfect. But to glorify God and make each other's human experiences optimal :)

May I suggest that you learn how to use the quote feature? There is a Quote User button on the bottom of each post. This pastes the text of the post into your reply surrounded by Quote Tags. You can put your own quote tags in as THIS did, to separate the specific points you want to address. This make for a much more readable and understandable response. A Quote tag looks like this:

{QUOTE=username} insert text {/Quote} Only use square brackets [] instead of french brackets {}.

As a side, I was wondering: why is a man that has children with say 2 women and wants to spend 50% of the time with each of the children awarded that privilege and revered as a 'great dad', but a woman is called somehow 'morally unfit'? And why is it that a parent that is marketable to the world and moves on with their life somehow penalized over a hermit that cannot find a new mate, regards their child as an emotional crutch and thus scars that child for life, is rewarded with custody as a 'devoted parent'?Children need both loving parents and a step-wise controlled exposure to the world and coaching to deal with these challenges, not hiding them in some closet until they are adults with no life skills. With close to 70% divorce rate in the US, the ball has already started rolling, kids needs skills to deal with life and the young generation is so much more advanced than our was... Growing up sheltered in a PERFECT family left me open to a quick reality check, and my kids will be very astute and strong and spiritually complex.

I am answering from my phone, but-will do! Thx

OK-your Top Shark should tell you that in custody proceeding the best interest of the child/ren has to be considered first.

The factors considered in custody cases are different in each state.

Courts determine custody based on what is best for the individual child. The parents' needs and feelings always come second to the children's.

A court will look at all the facts presented to determine custody. You may not get the result you want or believe to be right.

Although there is no standard definition of “best interests of the child,” the term generally refers to the deliberation that courts undertake when deciding what type of services, actions, and orders will best serve a child as well as who is best suited to take care of a child. “Best interests” determinations are generally made by considering a number of factors related to the circumstances of the child and the circumstances and capacity of the child's potential caregiver(s), with the child's ultimate safety and well-being as the paramount concern

Approximately 16 States and the District of Columbia list in their statutes specific factors for courts to consider in making determinations regarding the best interests of the child.While the factors vary considerably from State to State, some factors commonly required include:
The emotional ties and relationship between the child and his or her parents, siblings, family and household members, or other caregivers6
The capacity of the parents to provide a safe home and adequate food, clothing, and medical care
The mental and physical health needs of the child
The mental and physical health of the parents
The presence of domestic violence in the home



In six of these States and the District of Columbia, all the factors listed in the statute must be considered.In the remainder of the States whose statutes list best interests factors, courts making best interests determinations are directed to consider all relevant factors, not only those specifically listed in the statute.

Example:
Iowa Code Ann. § 232.104(1)(c)
During the [permanency] hearing, the court shall consider the child's need for a secure and permanent placement in light of any permanency plan or evidence submitted to the court and the reasonable efforts made concerning the child. Upon completion of the hearing, the court shall enter written findings and make a determination based on identifying a primary permanency goal for the child.

* my initial question lead to a possible yes/no answer; I welcome it, if you'd like to bring case histories,
You have already got the answer. It depends on many factors and it depends on the judge.
The laws vary from state to state. A case from California can be not relevant to a case in New York.
The judge may order parental capacity evaluation and child custody evaluation.

my children are much better adjusted and emotionally and physically and cognitively advanced that most children their age, everyone from their pediatrician to their therapist to their coaches mention these facts repeatedly.



1. My children will always see a therapist and so should everyone and their children,



I mentioned in my initial post that we are planning on exchanging prenups (aka "marriage" for most people). * ha, if you knew my kids, they are like little adults (maybe even more advanced), they are little savants, they know exactly what they want in life...
Do not say it in a court.

And finally:No one can predict/i.e. lawyers/ what will happen in a custody proceeding.
Believable or not here are some factors considered by different guardians ad litem and custody evaluators,documented reasons given by guardians . Evaluators or judges in numerous cases where good and fit mothers lost custody: /all from real cases/:

Breastfeeding--the mothers either wanted to and it was determined an alienating behavior, or they did not choose to breastfeed and it was termed child neglect or indifference

Children got head lice during a period of mother's care.

Too many people (all relatives) living in one home (i.e. mom had to return home to family to gain economic and emotional support)

Father remarried and married family deemed superior to single motherhood

Father's job and education deemed superior--sometimes even though mom sacrificed her goals and dreams so father could obtain same.

Not desiring 50/50 custody or other joint custodial arrangements

Not desiring to give up the marital home

Leaving the marital home while fleeing from abuse, especially if she left the children behind.

Going to church

Going to church too often

Not going to church

Having a different religion than the father

Having a different religion than the children

Home schooling your children

Being poor or less well-off than the father and his extended family

Having unprotected sex although no longer living with or married to your former mate

Believing your children when they tell of abuse

Being depressed or sad

Having been diagnosed with PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) caused by the battery/abuse in your relationship with your child's father and having that used to term the mother "unstable"

Crying in front of any court personnel

Being anxious or "hyper-vigilant", even when abuse to self and children are an issue

Dating on occasion and leaving your child with a trusted sitter

Dating someone of another race

Not dating

Having a boyfriend

Not having a boyfriend

Living with a boyfriend

Refusing to marry your boyfriend

Having a social life--women have been penalized for taking occasional evening breaks away from the children for meetings, to meet friends, etc.

Not having a social life--women were penalized for being "wrapped up" in the kids and not having other interests.

Having a career

Not having a career

Working too much

Not working enough

Using daycare or before/after-school care so you can work to support your kids

Being non-white: a Native American, Black, Asian, etc.

Having your child learn your native language--mothers have been deemed more of a "flight risk" for teaching their child their heritage and language, or deemed to be alienating the child from the father by teaching the child a language the father does not know.

Being white-fathers ethnicity given greater accord because mother supposedly could not provide a racial/ethnic identity for the child.

Being involved in your children's education/volunteering-deemed "over-involved" or enmeshed with her children

Having a close, loving relationship with your child - court personnel seem to love pathologizing mother/child bonds as "enmeshed", "unhealthy"

Wishing to move

Being disorganized

Having a messy home

Being too neat & orderly

Being a lesbian

Being a good role model for your child--a female child in one case was noted by the judge as being "alienated" by the mother because the child looked up to her mother and wanted to follow in her same career path when she grew up.

Not liking your ex

Having been hospitalized for a physical ailment or injury

Thinking negative thoughts about your ex (doesn't matter whether you verbalize them or not)

Being an "unconscious alienator", termed as having the likelihood of alienating sometime in the future

Going back to school and using daycare

Not using daycare--mother deemed too "enmeshed" and "over-involved" with her preschool aged children because she worked at home and used her maternal relatives for occasional childcare and did not want to put her toddler into daycare/preschool.

Being disabled at the hands of your child's father

Being blind or deaf, although adequately being the primary parent of your child for numerous years

Photographing injuries found on your child and identified by the child as having been caused by their father

The evaluator didn't like the mother because she reminded her of someone--in one case, a woman was told she wasn't liked because she reminded the evaluator of her mother

Being protective of your children

Taking your children to the doctor - termed "anxious" parenting, or pathologized further into Munchausen's Syndrome By Proxy

Using your computer

Computer dating

Staying up too late at night to get work done

Sending the kids to summer camp - termed "farming them out"

Following doctors orders in administering prescribed medications

Taking your children to counseling

Children's grades are not high enough

Children missed too much school due to illness

I can't read any of this - don't know what is being quoted, what is being answered.

You are the best! You definitely need to get paid for your advice! Well, I listen and respect the wishes of my children. Long after we are gone, it's going to be them and their siblings, that is reality, so a decision to give them sibs is not only multifactorial, but a 'team effort'. As people that know my children would tell you, they are real prophets-if they tell you something, you better listen. Well, sadly, in my financial bracket, marriage is reduced to a prenup-swap, and guys see mostly $ on my forehead. I lost $1 Mil in my divorce, can you blame me for not getting 'married'? We already function as a family unit 50% of the week. When I have my kids, it is 100% mommy time. My situation will be better than a parent's that is divorced twice with joint custody resulting out of both divorces, with the exception that, the new baby will see us together at least 50% of the time and see their siblings 50% of the time, with myself and the sibs as the common denominator, the other 50%, they see their fathers. Yes, they want to see me all the time, bc I am mommy, but their dads are equally loving toward them. I have the schedule worked out to the T, all parent units involved equally, nothing lacking except the unity of one household, but that is not possible for now;iif we all masterminded our lives to perfection, most children would not have been born, but we are here not to be perfect. But to glorify God and make each other's human experiences optimal :)



You CAN pay her - take a look at the "payment" link.

Let's not bring God into your unwed mother status and lifestyle. What Bible are you reading?

Thank you all for your time and replies, I will no longer be checking this thread. God bless you all :)

Thank you all for your time and replies, I will no longer be checking this thread. God bless you all :)

Hope you understood what we were saying. Feel free to let us know how everything works out!