It’s a while back now. But the same anti-man forces that say men are not good child care givers are around today.

Basically, back in my divorce the court system dismissed my being a good caregiver to my own children. My to-be ex-wife’s newly hired housekeeper was given nearly equal standing –indeed preference – with me. My lawyer was so stunned by the ruling that he blurted out: “My God, the housekeeper won custody.”

The circumstances were that I had been the at-home caregiver to my two young children for two years when the divorce started. My wife had a well-paid Wall Street job that had a long commute. The trigger for the divorce was when I found out about her years of affairs.

If I had been an at-home MOM the custody ruling (more fully explained below) would have been inconceivable. Can you imagine someone ruling that an at-home mom should lose large amounts of custody time to her philandering husband’s newly hired housekeeper? Of course not. But an at-home DAD is seen differently. The stereotype is that an at-home dad is an oddball.

But I over simplify. After the divorce I still at least had joint custody with my children. But I had wanted to have custody of my kids when my wife was away from her house for long stretches of time and her housekeeper was looking after the kids instead of her. I was fine with her having the children on more weekends to make up for my having more time with the children during the week. My biggest concern for “during the week” time was during the summer when the kids were home from school. Each day during the summer entailed some 12 hours the kids could be with me instead of a housekeeper.

My lawyer had pushed for child custody to be resolved in binding arbitration. As he said, what person (arbitrator) in their right mind is going to say that the children should be with a housekeeper (and a newly hired one no less) when they could be with a parent (and a parent who had been the at-home care giving parent no less).

Well, my lawyer was wrong. It helps to understand that my then to-be-ex was a top sales person. She sold her custody stance well to the arbitrator (an old retired guy lawyer). I’m not even sure why she took the position she did. Did she truly think it was best for the children? Perhaps. I think a bigger part of her “thinking” was that by her having equal HOUSE time with the children (as opposed to having the kids be with a parent) helped save face for her. Also, her “winning” added to her augment that I was such a worthless person that even the court system agreed with her.

Well, this custody ruling was some 20 years ago. To the good, both of our kids grew up to be wonderful young adults. I still got to have some real input to their lives and love them dearly.

Also to the good (on balance) is that the housekeeper became quite close to my kids. (The more love one has the better.) She even helped my daughter become fluent in Spanish.

But I have to confess that when my kids speak so lovingly of their mom’s housekeeper I wince a bit inside. I’d like to have had more of that closeness for me. I'll admit it. I feel jealous. And I wonder how much of the love and closeness I have to my (now grown) children would be that much more.

What also bothers me is the whole “housekeeper won custody” bit played into the story line on the divorce my wife put out that I was the “bad guy” in the divorce. I was “bad” because I had asked for the divorce. And I was enough of a poor excuse as a parent that an arbitrator even gave preference for custody to a housekeeper over me (for some of the time).

So I keep a stiff upper lip and focus on the positive of the closeness my kids have had with their mom’s housekeeper. But sometimes I just want to let out a scream about it all. But I guess I'll do this post instead.