Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Stepmom Central Stepmom Central

What about the siblings?

Posted by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 9:41 PM
  • 30 Replies

 

Poll

Question: Shouldn't both sets of siblings have equal time with their sister/brother?

Options:

Yes

No

Other, please explain


Only group members can vote in this poll.

Total Votes: 18

View Results

I was reading the 50/50 post and it got me thinking about something.

Some women were saying that if the child would be spending more time with Sm than Dh, that Dh did not deserve 50/50 because the child should be with Bm.

What about when that child has a sibling/siblings from both Bm and Bf. Shouldn't both sets of siblings have equal time with their sister/brother?

by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 9:41 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
DDDaysh
by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 10:15 PM

Just because there are siblings does not change the fact that 50/50 is not good for most kids.  

I do think siblings should have more protected legal rights, I think it's kind of crappy that they don't have any rights to even see or communicate with eachother AT ALL unless they are in the foster systems, but there's no reason that would need to even be over night visitation for the kids.  Using siblings as an excuse for 50/50, when the instability often isn't good for the child having to change homes so often, is prety flimsy.  

momof2ex1
by Ruby Member on Feb. 25, 2013 at 10:37 PM
Are we talking about step siblings or half siblings?
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
momof2ex1
by Ruby Member on Feb. 25, 2013 at 10:41 PM
1 mom liked this
Yep. I have a child that is a half brother to my daughter. He goes weeks during the summer without seeing her. We don't play the 'its not fair card'. This is the life we have. We chose to be divorced. It's not dad's problem that I chose to have another child with another man. His rights to his daughter far out weigh my son's right to his sister.
I've raised my children to be grateful for the time they do get with each other. When they are apart, that gives them time to miss each other. We don't have sibling rivalry and the same annoyances that most families have. Why? Because they get breaks from each other and have time to miss each other. Besides, I enjoy the one on one time I get with my little man when dd is at her dad's. I was home with her for 5 years. She was an only child for 7 years. My son has never been home with me and he has never been the only child. That time away gives him the time to be the only child and allows me to focus on him only for once. We have very healthy relationships because of it.


Quoting DDDaysh:

Just because there are siblings does not change the fact that 50/50 is not good for most kids.  

I do think siblings should have more protected legal rights, I think it's kind of crappy that they don't have any rights to even see or communicate with eachother AT ALL unless they are in the foster systems, but there's no reason that would need to even be over night visitation for the kids.  Using siblings as an excuse for 50/50, when the instability often isn't good for the child having to change homes so often, is prety flimsy.  


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
leegirl_jm
by Ruby Member on Feb. 25, 2013 at 10:52 PM
3 moms liked this

I don't think siblings should matter, visitation and custody is about the parent/child relationship. It would be unfair to reduce a parent's visitation because the other home has a half-sibling.

shanlee42
by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 10:58 PM
2 moms liked this
Any situation where a child has two homes and shares time is sad. We bought SS an iPod Touch so we and BM can FaceTime him when he's at the other house. It is great and he loves calling the parent he isn't with.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
progressandjoy
by Silver Member on Feb. 25, 2013 at 11:05 PM
In DH's CO it mentions not wanting to separate the child from siblings, pets, or other relatives. Those are all considered when deciding placement.

As of yet, SS doesn't have siblings (DH has 50%). However, the second we bought a cat, BM made sure to match it with a puppy.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
abigailsmommy11
by Kelli on Feb. 25, 2013 at 11:16 PM

That's awesome, when we finally go to court, I'll have to make sure Dh puts that in his =]


Quoting progressandjoy:

In DH's CO it mentions not wanting to separate the child from siblings, pets, or other relatives. Those are all considered when deciding placement.

As of yet, SS doesn't have siblings (DH has 50%). However, the second we bought a cat, BM made sure to match it with a puppy.



kristinbugg
by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 11:20 PM

No.  Visitation is not for the child to spend quality time with SM and any half/step siblings.  It is for the child to spend time with NCP.  Neither BP is required or obligated to agree to 50/50 custody, just so the child can spend time with anyone but the other BP.

DDDaysh
by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 11:21 PM

Well, I really wish sibs did have some rights, because it hurts my DS so badly to NEVER get to see his sister.  Even if it was only 3 hour sessions at a supervised center every few months or a skype session once a week...  But obviously anything like 50/50 or parental visitation just isn't reasonable for "sibling" reasons.  

But the system isn't set up to recognize sibling visitation at all, s we've learned to deal with it.  That's why it's so far fetched that someone would claim sibling time needed to be 50/50.  

Quoting momof2ex1:

Yep. I have a child that is a half brother to my daughter. He goes weeks during the summer without seeing her. We don't play the 'its not fair card'. This is the life we have. We chose to be divorced. It's not dad's problem that I chose to have another child with another man. His rights to his daughter far out weigh my son's right to his sister.
I've raised my children to be grateful for the time they do get with each other. When they are apart, that gives them time to miss each other. We don't have sibling rivalry and the same annoyances that most families have. Why? Because they get breaks from each other and have time to miss each other. Besides, I enjoy the one on one time I get with my little man when dd is at her dad's. I was home with her for 5 years. She was an only child for 7 years. My son has never been home with me and he has never been the only child. That time away gives him the time to be the only child and allows me to focus on him only for once. We have very healthy relationships because of it.


Quoting DDDaysh:

Just because there are siblings does not change the fact that 50/50 is not good for most kids.  

I do think siblings should have more protected legal rights, I think it's kind of crappy that they don't have any rights to even see or communicate with eachother AT ALL unless they are in the foster systems, but there's no reason that would need to even be over night visitation for the kids.  Using siblings as an excuse for 50/50, when the instability often isn't good for the child having to change homes so often, is prety flimsy.  



abigailsmommy11
by Kelli on Feb. 25, 2013 at 11:26 PM

We don't have any legal CO done yet (lack of funds). So our problem as that we went from getting her 48 every week to 48 hours every other week. It's been really hurting both Sd and Dd to be apart so much more now. It breaks my heart every time Dd asks for her sister in the morning and cries when she checks her bed and she's not there. =[ It's obviously been hurting Sd even more, she's regressed (wetting the bed again) and she's constantly sick. So sad and stressful.

Quoting DDDaysh:

Well, I really wish sibs did have some rights, because it hurts my DS so badly to NEVER get to see his sister.  Even if it was only 3 hour sessions at a supervised center every few months or a skype session once a week...  But obviously anything like 50/50 or parental visitation just isn't reasonable for "sibling" reasons.  

But the system isn't set up to recognize sibling visitation at all, s we've learned to deal with it.  That's why it's so far fetched that someone would claim sibling time needed to be 50/50.  

Quoting momof2ex1:

Yep. I have a child that is a half brother to my daughter. He goes weeks during the summer without seeing her. We don't play the 'its not fair card'. This is the life we have. We chose to be divorced. It's not dad's problem that I chose to have another child with another man. His rights to his daughter far out weigh my son's right to his sister.
I've raised my children to be grateful for the time they do get with each other. When they are apart, that gives them time to miss each other. We don't have sibling rivalry and the same annoyances that most families have. Why? Because they get breaks from each other and have time to miss each other. Besides, I enjoy the one on one time I get with my little man when dd is at her dad's. I was home with her for 5 years. She was an only child for 7 years. My son has never been home with me and he has never been the only child. That time away gives him the time to be the only child and allows me to focus on him only for once. We have very healthy relationships because of it.


Quoting DDDaysh:

Just because there are siblings does not change the fact that 50/50 is not good for most kids.  

I do think siblings should have more protected legal rights, I think it's kind of crappy that they don't have any rights to even see or communicate with eachother AT ALL unless they are in the foster systems, but there's no reason that would need to even be over night visitation for the kids.  Using siblings as an excuse for 50/50, when the instability often isn't good for the child having to change homes so often, is prety flimsy.  





Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN