posted
Sorry, that was insensitive of me. I didn't think of it that way. I was mostly trying to be funny, maybe look at the positive side....
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I have it much easier now, rivka. My ex (oh, s'cuse me, "former" spouse) cleaned up his act well enough to take Nathan on a regular basis - which so far has been limited to a very occasional overnight (maybe once per month) and a couple of times a week afterschool.
Oh, yay! Good for him! Wonderful for your son (kids need both parents, whenever that is at all feasible)! And a bit of a break for you, which is good. Almost all moms of small kids do the non-stop-without-a-break thing; single moms too often get to do it without backup.
(And if we're not supposed to refer to 'em as "ex"es, I have some other choice phrases . . . )
quote: Next week, we are trying a small summer vacation for four nights and five days with Nathan and Dad.
Wish me luck.
A very sincere good luck to all the parties.
quote: Thanks, Rivka. I was kind of uncomfortable with Beverly's "no fair" comment too, although I understood the feeling.
Not being with your children sucks in a big way, even though there are some short term benefits.
And divorce sucks even more.
So true. And I've been on the other side. I remember, about six years ago, when a friend of mine got divorced and lost custody of her son (after a long and ugly battle), with only visitation a couple times a week. I was very sympathetic to her anguish -- but also a tiny bit jealous that she could easily attend evening classes that I couldn't find a sitter for.
And on a tangentially related note, I have chosen my current soundtrack: Reba McEntire's I'm a Survivor
quote: The one who oughta give up But she`s just too hard headed A single mom who works two jobs who loves her kids and never stops With gentle hands and a heart of a fighter I`m a survivor