Should children decide who they want to live with?

I think when parents divorce, the children undergo a major trauma and are in a state of shock and depression, and they require love for them to be able to over come the trauma. All children are close to either one parent when the relationship between father and mother is not good. If the relationship is good theymay be clsoe to both parents. If the courst gives custody of the child to a parent who the child is not comfortable with, no matter who much facilities can be made available by that parent, the child will never be albe to grow up in a normal way. What is required is that the child shoudl be relaxed and happy. Love is more important than physical needs. yers a child can not live alternately with both parents for a month each, but shoudl be permitted to stay with the parent he is comfortable with. The child should not be used as a pawn to settle scores with each other. You have to decide if you want the happiness of yor child or you want physical possession of your child. What if you rchild starts hating you while staying with you? It is better that he stays away but loves you and longs to meet you. You will be albe to hold on to him till he is 18, but what will happen after that? Then the relationship will depend on love and not a court order. Let love prevail an dnot a court order.

Ok this is what i think i am a person from a divorced child hood and i think that if the child thinks that they will have a better life with one of the parents then yes but if they cant decide for themselfs then no and the age that i moved out of one of my parents is 16 that is a good age for some one to decide what they want in life not for it to be pushed on to them

Like you mentioned, children should be able to voice their opinions as to who they would rather live with. Their choices may be based on which parent is more lenient with them etc. Just like you said, it is always to be in the best interest of the child and the judge would make the decision. I a case like your son's, he should be able to see his mother as much as he wants, but moving with her as you said would disrupt his education since you do not live in the same districts. Your explanation to him was very exact and mature. Good luck,

I think this is a really complex issues with several, "What if"s attached to it, and a lot of conditions. I think that the child's opinion should matter to an extent. But I also think that, as long as the parent is stable, they should stick with, or really be encouraged to stick with, the parent that can provide for them the best and will offer them higher education. I know that there are scholarships, but it would be nice to have a solid foundation to fall back on. I think that if both parents could provide for this, and they're both stable, then the child, definitely, should be able to choose. As I said, there are a lot of exceptions that could be applied to this.

Yes, I think that the child's views are very important when it comes to deciding who they want to live with. The child obviously feels happy with that person and so, this is one of the main reasons that they have made this choice. There is the other side of the coin though! Children are very impressionable and so, their minds could have nurtured or programmed in the wrong way! They can be taught to adopt a false kind of belief about a family member. That's a hard situation to be in, I know because my own parents divorced when I was very young and I was forced to choose between one parent or the other. As hard as it is, I think the childs thoughts on the matter need to be taken into consideration. Andrew

Just like what you said, It's indeed a simple question but the answer is serious and complex. I totally agree with you about your opinion: the decision should be based on who is more eligible for the children's development, which includs many factors such as financial conditon, education background and so on. Yet, if the parents both appeal the raising right for the children, the judge will have to consider the children's wish unless the kids is too yong to have the abilty to make their own decision.

i feel its only so much a woman can teach a boy just like it,s only so much a man can teach a girl this is only my opinion but i know in some cases the boy and the girl have to live with mom are dad they do the best they can but it sounds like he misses his mom.but him going every month is going to hard what about every six months.are when school is out.

Hi kindredspirits, this is a hard topic. There are no rights and no wrongs. Your son is in his age of thinking on his own, therefore he is creative thinking about important stuff. However, they do not think of consequences, therefore they are not yet old enough to make big decisions. If for some reason the parents can ot agree about where the children should live, it is a judge who make those decisions. I for one, are divorced. But we tryed to make the divorce as healthy as it can be for the childrens sake. And their father moved to a town way from us, so we decided it was for the kids best interest that I was the only custodian adn that the children was going to live with me. Our kids did not question that, since they did not wanted to move from the town. And we did talk a lot with them. It is not easy, it is hard, it is tuff. There is no right or wrong here, but we as parents and adults need to do the best we can so the kids do not suffer to much bad from a difficult task as a divorce is.

The court system is flawed but in all cases, evidence should be presented and a judge SHOULD decide in favor of what will make the best environment for the child. This takes into account many factors, including trying to figure out which of the parents truly will be a better single parent (some parents are fine together but cannot do it alone), which one will be more responsible, which one is more secure - both emotionally and financially, and sometimes in the end what will cause LESS harm to a child when both options seem to be about equal. I guess it would also take into account which parent really would be better off raising the child, since some parents only fight for custody because they don't want to pay support or they don't want their kid thinking they don't want them - this isn't the same as WANTING to be a parent. Keeping disruption to a minimum is important, going back and forth so often from one house to another does not seem to me for the most part to be a nice easy unstressful thing. There's not just the matter of bouncing from school to school but what about activities? If the child lives with dad most of the time and has not only school but maybe soccer... and music lessons, what if mom cannot keep up with those things because it's too far to drive or at an inconvenient time (work commute or hours)? Whenever I see 50/50 shared custody I figure that the parents must REALLY want to co-parent and do right by the kids, they just don't want to be TOGETHER to do it. My experience has been that what is the best environment and situation for kids is sometimes not what the kids want. My older kids are my husband's kids, and he has had custody of them for a long long time. One of them is all grown up now, the other is a junior in high school. Kids WANT to have their needs met, and they want to have adults who care about them. Kids are also selfish and they want THINGS. They prefer not to have a bunch of rules and restrictions either, and often they will say 'I want to go live with so and so instead because THEY wouldn't make me (insert something here)'. That is exactly the problem if the other parent wouldn't make a child go to school. If they never teach them responsibility through chores. If they never have to explain where they are going or tell you who they are with. I know that kids get mad when you say 'I said no because I love you' or 'I need to know where you are because I care' but honestly, I would never have NO boundaries because that would mean I DIDN'T CARE. I do think that older kids should get a say - but they have to have an actual reason. If a teen wanted to live with a particular parent because it was closer to their school or they had a part time job and it was close to the job - and perhaps they were helping their parent out as well, that would make more sense than a kid the same age griping and saying 'well I want to live with my dad because he wouldn't make me go to bed at 10 pm' etc. See what I mean? As long as there is a well thought out mature decent reason for a request and the parents are not warring or bickering with each other over it, it would be okay. I'm only thinking like 14 on, younger that that would be on a case by case basis.

I think that at a certain age the kid's opinion is important and at his age it is important. Talk to him about it, see why he brought it up in the first place, maybe he wants to see his mother more and spend more time with her. If that is the case then maybe you can schedule time they can spend together.

That's a tough one. I think it depends on the age of the child. The judge should get the opinion of the child, however I agree that the child may not always know what's best. When the musician Ted Nugent got divorced the kids stayed in the house and the parents alternated staying at the house. I thought that was a great idea.

I think that the child's opinion is very important as the child has to be happy with whom he/she is going to grow up with.Since divorce is a huge trauma on the child,this would affect the child's decision,especially if the child is below 10.But whatever the case the child should be brought up in a place where he/she receives the best out of the divorce.

I do think children with the age of 10 and above should decide for themselves. People always think children can decide for themselves. I think that children should be with parent they are comfortable with. But it is better if they make the decision with guide from adults.

I think perhaps what should be considered is which parent could give the child the most quality time spending and love. However can this particular parent also provide the necessary needs of the child as far as good food, shelter, allowance, clothing, entertainment and other necessities. Also I'm not sure what age but when the child comes to a certain age that he knows which parent he would like to have full custody of him/her then I think the child's request should be seriously considered for the well-being and the happiness of the child.

This is a real toughie, I am married with kids and I have thought about what would happen if we were to ever split. My immediate thoughts are that the kids should stay with me, their mum, but, what if they did not want to. I mean if their dad wanted them to live with him and they wanted too what would give me the right to say that they could not choose to go where they wanted too. I would be taking away their choice and possible happiness. I mean if they are old enough to talk the courts usually take the childs request into consideration because they did when my sister in laws partner wanted custody of her kids, the kids did not want to live with their dad and they literally begged the judge not to give him custody of them and in that case the judge went with them. I would purely be going after what would make me happy if we were to split, not what the kids wanted, it would be a horrible thing to have to decide.

I don't think it's best for a child to choose which parent to live with. Not every child is mature enough to make that decision, and may choose the fun parent over the responsible one. One of my husband's co workers was dealing with this awhile back. He had 2 teenage girls who's mother was very irrisponsible. She left them home alone for a whole week without even telling them she was leaving. She went off with a boyfriend. After this the co-worker decided to fight the mom for custody, but the children put up a huge fight. They didn't want to live with their strict father, they wanted to stay with mom who allowed them to be out until 2 in the morning if they wanted.

Children.... As the name suggests are not too capable of choosing the right partner for themselves. I think that there short interaction with someone is misinterpretted by them as love or call it an attraction which compelle them to think and feel more about one another. But, this may not be too stable for a long-term basis. It is generally seen that the love that people discover before marriage is often lost after marriage and they are not able to live with each other. In India, more than 50% of love marriages have turned into divorce or seperation. I think that our parents have seen life more thn us and they are more experienced to choose a person for us who may be able to give us a better life ahead. It is generally seen that arranged marriages are more successful and feuds between families is also minimised as the parents have choosen the mate and they have no ill-will agains them and no prejudice. SO, this would even reduce violation of woman's rights and crime against them. Therefore, i stringly believe and i think i have prooven my point of children not able to choose the right match for them....

To be honest I think each of the cases like this shold be treated individually. Generally it all depends on the age and maturity of the child. But the hild opinion should definitely at leas be taken under consideration. After all, what if the kid wants to live with the father and will be miserable with overworked mommy? A judge, who will take few hours to decide the fate of the child will not be abe t trully understand the dynamics of the family, not like the child knows it.

based on the discussion that i read,mommyboo got the point..the point raised as to who is capable of raising the child in a good environment. But as a child, he's 12 y.o right? he has the right to go to her mother once in a while.he needs mother love and care. he also need to be with her in different aspects. there are things that only a mother can handle. same way as there are also just for fathers..If courts favor you, you should be thankful because they sees that you can raised yur child in a good way. maybe his mother is not that stable. but then again, as i said,there are things that only a mother can do...you said that you are both in good terms(his mom) then you have nothing to worry about.. your child is safe...

well, I think this goes both ways. I mean the child (if young) may not understand whats best for him/her. As a child the parent who raises their child to be polite, kind, honest, ya know all those good things, will seem like the mean parent who doesnt care (in the childs eyes of course) Whenever I punish my son for bad behavior he yells, "I want to live at daddy's, daddy let's me stay up however late i want." I feel that he may mean what he says, but it wouldnt be better for the child. As the child becomes older than maybe the decision making should be more in his/her favor. Once the child knows right from wrong, good from bad, and realizes that responsibility goes a long way in life, then maybe the child should have more of a voice in the matter. Again this could go both ways.... A "good" parent could also be, not so good, when alone with the child. Maybe on the outside the parent looks like a "good" parent but when the child is there alone, the child could be going through some kind of abuse, and told not to tell anyone. I mean there are so many issues with this topic, its hard to choose which side to be on. As a mother with 2 kids, I can relate.