How can single mothers prove to the courts that they are the better parent when they are being forced to work hard to provide for their kids?
Single mother Kate Gosselin is sweating it out working on “Dancing with the Stars” and her husband, Jon, has filed for full custody of the kids saying she is working too much and not available for her children. Never mind that he has gone weeks at a go himself, not seeing his kids while he shacks up with a morphing string of girlfriends.
This tragic story reminds me attorney Marsha Clark’s similar crisis while she was working on the prosecution side during the OJ Simpson trial. Even through she had custody of her two boys, her husband used the demands of the trial as an opportunity to try to attain custody himself. So, what’s a single mother to do? Stay home and lose her kids because they are starving to death? This is a double bind where a mother is damned if she does and damed if she doesn’t.
The saddest part of this bind is that it is also a double standard. Tell me the last time you heard anyone admonish a divorced Dad for working too hard!
The problem is that changes in family law have all but eliminated alimony for ex-wives. And child support payments to her are based on a ratio of child custody. So, all single mothers are expected to at least support themselves and they rarely get a full 100% of child support if the kids bunk at Dads some of the time. Funny thing is, even though kids of divorce may sleep at their Dad’s every other weekend, Mom must still pay the rent for the entire month.
While I am a professional who specializes in attachment issues and my heart breaks for the Kate’s kids who may be suffering attachment injuries while she spends weeks in Los Angeles training and competing for “Dancing with the Stars,” I believe that she is fortunate to have this choice available to her. Only the entertainment industry pays the kind of money that could keep a single mother of eight out of poverty. I mean, really, would people rather see her working for $12 an hour somewhere?
In fact, she recently told Access Hollywood:
“Maybe because I’m in front of the camera so much and people see where I am – I’m in LA. I’m in New York. I’m here or there – the bottom line is I’m just doing what every other mom is doing. They just don’t have cameras following them so people can’t keep tabs on how many hours a day they spend with their kids,” Kate told Billy. “I have to do it. I have eight kids. It’s not a joke, it’s the truth. I have to provide for them.”
You go girl! Dance your butt off for those babies. And then head on home to bond and repair.
Tags: Attachment. Romantic Attachment, Jon and Kate, Jon Gosselin, Kate Gosselin
Trail? Don’t you mean TRIAL?
Always such a hard topic for me to tackle. Dad’s are slighted so much based on a an antiquated social attitude towards fathers indiscretions and not with their relationships with the kids. I don’t condon disregarding the sanctity of a relationship for any purpose, nor am i blind to the destruction it causes to the family unit. I equally believe indiscretions aren’t only linked to the father in all relationships. I do, however believe that there is a middle ground where, if it’s deemed that both parents are capable of providing love and support, they should both be allowed to do so based on the court findings..Except in child abuse cases. I also believe that work is a necessary evil in many cases. If a family member working too much for the right reasons, bring your family on the road for christ sakes. I have no choice. i work for three children as a single dad and explain my position to them often. I doesn’t make me happy to not have a pot of gold to retire on, but i have never expected their mother to give me a shinny penny towards them, nor has she thank God. My kids are safer and whole, not having a severely challenged person claiming rights based on financial contribution and not love.
Excellent article Dr. Walsh. Personally find the double bind/double standard more infuriating than sad – thanks for pointing and naming again!
Thanks! Changed it.
As with any situation, trying to generalize on any example is downright wrong. First, in my opinion, anyone who gets involved in reality TV as a way to provide income for their children is focused on the wrong thing. As I told many of my employees, children would much rather have you available than all of the things all your working overtime in a factory could provide. Secondly, anyone who decides to take advantage of their spouses efforts to provide for the children is not really looking out for the children’s best interests, rather trying to take advantage of a circumstance just because they can. Finally, bemoaning the loss of alimony in any circumstance is a waste of time. The current situation evolved from the wrongs with prior situations and it is what we must deal with. Yes it means that mothers with custody must provide for their children, but that would never even once raise a single “aww” if someone said a father with custody must provide for their children. Buck up.
Good for you Wendy defending Kate. She is doing the right thing. I admire her.