MovieChat Forums > Kramer vs. Kramer (1979) Discussion > Why not just share custody?

Why not just share custody?

posted 11 years ago by alomba1328
12 replies | jump to latest

These people both lived in Manhattan. They both wanted to be involved in the child's life. The kid clearly loved them both. The parents were fairly amicable before the lawyers got involved. Why not save the money, maintain a cordial relationship, not upset the kid, and come to an agreement together? I'm sorry, but I have a hard time with the all or nothing stance that both parents took when it made the most sense to do this:

The kid has a room at mom's and a room at dad's. One week he lives with mom, the next week he lives with dad. They rotate holidays, split vacations, and have joint input in major decisions regarding the child. No child support to either of them because they both earn adequate money and have equal parenting time.

[–] resera 11 years ago

Your idea is what they would've done nowadays. Back in the day of this movie, I believe custody arrangements were not as creative, generally giving full custody to only one parent, instead of the shared 50/50 plans common nowadays.

[–] Lifeguardfan 11 years ago

The arrangement in the movie is exactly how it is today? Before Joanna decided to let their son stay with Ted in the end, the arrangement was primary custody with Joanna, every other weekend with Ted and half vacations. That's how it is with most custody cases now, at least in California.

[–] Kawada_Kira 11 years ago

I was thinking the same thing through the whole movie.

"The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor."
- Voltaire

[–] LovesConfusingJoy 11 years ago

I completely agree.

Every sin is an escape from emptiness.

[–] deborahkerr1992 10 years ago

Exactly! Personally I think this would have been a splendid arrangement. I think couples get caught up in their own emotions and anger and just want to "win." All exacerbated by the lawyers to keep the crap going.

[–] InherentlyYours 10 years ago

' One week he lives with mom, the next week he lives with dad'.
--------------
Do you want to drive the kid crazy? A child needs to feel more stable than that. It's not realistic, but also self-serving of the parents. How would an adult feel living in a different place every other week?

[–] Lifeguardfan 9 years ago

Exactly. Some people do have this crazy arrangement, but most don't. Usually the mother will get primary custody and the father will get weekends or every other weekend. Going back and forth every other week would be hard on the kid, hence why there is usually a primary custodial parent.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] movies789 9 years ago

Spoken like someone who's never been the childhood victim of divorce. "Amicable" or not, it takes a terrible toll on a kid that lasts the rest of his life.

[–] fiatlux-1 9 years ago

I wondered the same.
But I realized that this is something that (VERY sadly) happens in a lot of child custody cases: The parents turn it into a pissing match.
Each parent feels they are the better parent, not thinking much about the child's needs!
In this case, it was even worse because each parent was neglectful in their own ways....yet neither of them realized this until the end of the film.

Happily, both parents also realized they each love their child as well & what was best for him.

I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus.
Didn't he discover America?
Penfold, shush.