I'm wondering about a father who would insist on taking a kid out of her home for a month to be with him when the kid was going to hate every minute of it and end up hating him for it.
That may have been the case. OTOH, it may have been that it was the mother who was enabling and encouraging the child, and the child, having to live most of the year with her mother and therefore having to make peace with her mother at any cost, might in fact have found the month quite fun once she got over the initial day or two. We just don't know.
Anybody who's raised teenagers knows that they are mercurial, that they can go from hate to love and back in a matter of moments, let alone days, and that what they say they want isn't always what they really want. So I wouldn't be too hasty to make that assumption, on the facts given.
OTOH, that might be the case, and if it were, well, when she's 40 will she be sorry or glad that she spent time with her father even if she hated it at the time? We just don't know.
It struck me as just awful.
I have yet to see the divorce where the children came out better for it. I'm sure there are some. But not many. It IS awful most of the time. P, who as you probably know teaches first grade, has learned almost unerringly to spot the children of divorced parents pretty much the moment they step into the room on the first day of school. There is just something different about them.
I prefer my approach--people who aren't qualified to raise kids shouldn't produce them. The first qualification is to be an adult.
Yep. And I would prefer world peace, the elmination of all poverty, and the end of all religious strife. I think my preferences will be about as easy, if not easier, to achieve than yours.
Until you find a way to make your preference possible, we're stuck with the realities we have. |
