On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:20:35 -0800, "Chris" wrote:


"Beverly" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005 10:23:32 GMT, "Moon Shyne"
wrote:


"Beverly" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 20:15:43 -0800, "Chris" wrote:


"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
news:cmQif.10354$dv.9601@fed1read02...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Chris" wrote in message
news:9tqif.10173$dv.2684@fed1read02...

"Moon Shyne" wrote in message
...

"Gini" wrote in message
news:0f7if.118$gi3.46@trndny09...

"Moon Shyne" wrote
"Beverly" wrote
.......................................

Were particular weekends specified in your visitation?

By date? No, aside from his b'day and father's day - it was
wide
open,
anytime he wanted to see them.
====
Didn't you take him to court to require him to stick with the
visitation
times or give you advanced notice
of time changes?

Only after he had repeatedly cancelled at the last minute any
number
of
weekends - like a year's worth of last minute cancellations?
And even then, the only specifications were every other
weekend,
and
other
times as requested -

Do you believe that a child should spend an equal amount of time
with
both
parents? If not, why not?

There is no blanket answer to that one - in the case of one parent
who
simply refuses to take part in the children's lives, for example,
then
equal
time simply isn't available. In the case of one parent who is
abusive,
for
example, equal time isn't reasonable or safe.

In that case, NO time is reasonable or safe, no?

Which case? More than one was mentioned.

In the case of the one immediately before my question; "In the case of
one
parent who is abusive, for example, equal time isn't reasonable or
safe.".

Wouldn't that depend on the type of abuse (child vs. spousal)?

I dunno - when it comes to children, just what sort of, or how much,
abuse
is acceptable?

Absolutely no type of abuse is ever acceptable, but I was agreeing
with you and responding to Chris's comment "In that case, NO time is
reasonable or safe, no?"

It simply isn't as black and white as Chris's comment.

Either time is reasonable/safe or it is NOT reasonable/safe. What's not
black and white about that?

Sometimes an abusive parent can spend a limited amount of time with
their child with supervision. That would be SOME time that is
reasonable and safe. It would be UNREASONABLE to have equal time if
one of the parents needs supervision.

Other times, there may be situations in which the parent abused the
spouse but may be perfectly okay with the children in small doses of
time.


Some people
who have been abusive seek treatment when their behavior causes them
to lose the most precious thing in their life, like a family.

Alcoholics, for instance, can be abusive; however, once clean and
sober through treatment, can be very safe to allow children to be
with. A pedophile, on the other hand, cannot be treated in a way that
makes them safe with children.

"Safe" being a matter of opinion.

"Safe" is almost always a matter of opinion. Chances are, if a parent
is abusive and the children are at risk, child protection is involved
and will make a determination regarding "safe."


Both conditions are considered
incurable and both can be treated, but whereas an alcoholic's
treatment consists of avoiding alcohol, a pedophile's treatment
consists of avoiding children. These are just examples.

Wouldn't that be more accurately stated "an alcoholic's treatment consists
of avoiding (the abuse of) alcohol, a pedophile's treatment consists of
avoiding (the abuse of) children"?

Actually no. Alcoholics are taught to avoid situations where alcohol
is even around to avoid the temptation. Alcoholics cannot drink a
little, avoiding the abuse, and remain "on the wagon." Pedophiles in
treatment are taught to avoid situations where children will be for
the same reasons. This is exactly why convicted pedophiles have such
stringent rules on where they may live post incarceration such as a
certain distance from any school or other places where children are
likely to be. They may never be employed in a place that caters to
children. The goal is no contact with children whatsoever, but it is
certainly harder to avoid children than it is to avoid alcohol.



Or
whether or not the abusive person has a mental illness which can be
controlled (anger issues vs. pedophilia)?




It would have to be on a case
by case basis.

And who would be the judge?

By whomever is determing the amount of time spent with each parent, I
suppose - with the general theory that if the parents can agree,
great,
and
if they can't or won't agree, then it goes through the legal paces.

I'm sure you can work out your own ideas on this one, Chris.





I don't think I ever said no to any request to see the
kids, with the exception of one mother's day when he called
just
before
lunch, and we were heading out, having already made plans for
the
day.

====