[agent4125]

Hello all.

I will try to keep this short and concise.

My ex-wife and I are recently divorced. We have a 4-year old son. She recently was offered a lateral move within her company for more pay in the Bay Area, California (I am in Oregon, in the Portland area).

Now, for reasons which my ex-wife understands, I can't leave Portland right now. We had a house together and I am trying to get her name off the mortgage. I have a stable job, getting valuable experience, and at which I just received a raise. They also have a tuition benefit which I am using to start my Masters degree next month.

But the sticking point is our son. I want him up here with me and she wants him down there with her.

I talked with my counselor about it, and he said that my son will be OK wherever he goes. He may spend majority time with one parent, but the other can always fly up (or down) to see him, Skype, phone call, etc. He is so young that he will be fine.

But neither of us want to be away from Anthony for that long and only interface with him in those ways for the duration of his childhood.

My ex-wife proposes that the fair thing to do is, after I make appreciable progress towards my Masters degree, and gain more job experience, to move down there. She is willing to leave my son with me during that time, but that is it. After that, she'd want him closer.

My knee-jerk reaction is that we live separate lives now. What if I find a really good paying job up here down the road when I get my Masters, especially considering the cost of living here is cheaper? I'll be able to provide better for my son.

But my ex-wife is trying to do the same. And she isn't a bad mother. And because of that, I feel I have no intrinsic right to keep him with me forever.

Because I don't feel my son's health or welfare is at risk with her, is the fair thing to do to move down there after a few years?

My family has been saying that she had a good job here and it is basically her fault that she is breaking up the 50/50 arrangement we had here in Portland. But as I said, this is a better opportunity for her, and she is only wanting to provide more for her family just like I do.

Basically my question is: What if I can provide for my family better up here than down there? Or is that question irrelevant because she has just as much right to him as I do?

It appears to me that the answer is that I must move eventually. Because I see no threat to my son's welfare, I have no right to perpetuate a one-parent upbringing for my son.

[3leafclover]

Originally Posted by agent4125

I talked with my counselor about it, and he said that my son will be OK wherever he goes. He may spend majority time with one parent, but the other can always fly up (or down) to see him, Skype, phone call, etc. He is so young that he will be fine.

Your counselor is clueless. If by "OK" he means that your son will survive, I suppose he's right. If by "OK" he means your son will thrive and not suffer any serious emotional harm, he's wrong, wrong, wrong. 4 is a horrible age for separation from a parent. I have personal experience with a 50/50 custody schedule being changed to a sole custody schedule with a son who was 4 at the time. He would love to educate your counselor.

Originally Posted by agent4125

My family has been saying that she had a good job here and it is basically her fault that she is breaking up the 50/50 arrangement we had here in Portland. But as I said, this is a better opportunity for her, and she is only wanting to provide more for her family just like I do.

Basically my question is: What if I can provide for my family better up here than down there? Or is that question irrelevant because she has just as much right to him as I do?

She wants to provide more for her family? You say she already had a good job. Exactly what "more" is she going to provide in California? More money and more things will never make up for a lost parent. Moving may be a better opportunity for your ex, but it is not a better opportunity for your son. Far from it. It just strikes me as very selfish. Y'all are only recently divorced. The goal right now should be to give your son as much consistency and security as possible. Sometimes that means sacrificing a "better opportunity".

ETA: The best solution is for your ex to stay, but you can't control her. The second best solution is probably to keep your son with you until you're ready to move to California. He'll still feel like he's lost a parent, but at least he won't be in a totally new, unfamiliar environment with no extended family support. Your ex needs to realize that you may never move to California, but that you'll strongly consider it in the future. I wonder if she'll change her mind about moving if she realizes she may never be closer to him unless she eventually moves back.