New Zealand policy is that when the parents separate and both move on to live happily in their own places, that the children are expected to live in two homes – like, one week with Mum and one week with Dad. Because in my culture, often the mother is the main carer and the father the main provider, at least while the children are young, for the children to live in two homes was not the case when the father of my children and I split up. They were in my day-to-day care and had full freedom to visit him, confirmed by a parenting order filed against me giving me “exclusive responsibility” for the children, so I became the main carer and the main provider. [Child support, for me, is a separate topic for another blog.] The rest of the parenting order stating which weekend and which Christmas which child had to spend with which parent, became null and void the moment his legal team got their money having tried to force a parenting style onto a family where the father was, for many years, hardly ever home. I discovered that the Care for Children Act is being practised by judges and lawyers in a way that gives parents rights without responsibility which results in children having to do single parent applications to be eligible for any assistance from the government. Having gone through this sorry saga, I now hold a strong opinion that even though it takes an egg and a sperm to make a baby, that the mother is the creator of the child. Therefore, unless the mother is incapable of raising the child, the child should live in the mother’s house and visit the father. Thinking of my own childhood, my father, though not separated from my mother, did not ‘change my nappies’, and still, I adored him. For parents to divorce and then punishing the children to have to live in two homes, is not wise in my eyes.
|SUSANNA SUSARA KRUGER||
Author, Speaker, Educator & Entrepreneur