| Good grief. You chose this guy to be the father of your child. You would not have a child if not for his contribution. WHY should a father not be able to have extensive visitation with his child from day 1, at the earliest stages of a child's bonding and attachment development?
Being a principal caregiver is important in the bonding processs, and one does a diservice to the process by disrupting that cycle (there is a great deal of resource material out there on bonding and attachment studies in infants and the importance of each parent being there on a regular basis to meet their daily needs. That is why post institutionalized children experience difficulties with bonding). If you were marrierd to the father when the child was born, the father would be involved in everyday care. Why should your child be denied their father in everyday care just because you are not able to be together with him as a couple? This IS still their father. I don't get why a mother would think that a father should only be entitled to spend time with their child after they get past baby stage. And why a mother should need to wait for the court to tell the father he can see his kid. IF this is his child and you know that is the case, why should you want to wait for a court order and not feel he is just as entitled to be with his child as you are? That he should get the same chance to have all those special early moments with his child as you do? If you want him to have the legal responsibility of being the father, then don't deny him the benefit of being a father, which equates to being able to spend his own time with his child.
__________________
Adoptive parents ARE "real" parents. Sharing genes is not what makes you a "parent"!
|