We take 'em however we can get them and being that we have five altogether, there is never a time when at least one kid - usually one of my skids - is not sick with something or other. Not making a judgment or anything, it's just that if we said no anytime a kid was sick, we'd never have gotten to see them. I'm not kidding you, there has NEVER been ONE visit in almost six years when at least one kid was not sick.

I guess I look at it this way... we have two children together and when they get sick, we take care of them together. I don't do all of the care-taking... we take turns getting up with them in the night, giving them medicine, rocking them, etc. So why would that be any different if the parents are divorced? Why should mom have to deal with the sick kids each and every time they are sick? Why shouldn't dads have to shoulder some of that burden?

Let me tell you, my husband is the Vomit King. I've cleaned up a lot of messes in my day and taken care of kids and skids during oodles of illnesses of varying types and degrees, but he's the one in charge of vomit. I'll hold their heads while they are puking into the toilet and take care of the kids themselves, but any vomit that doesn't land in the toilet is taken care of by my hubby. That's just how we do it. But the point is, I'm the mom, but that doesn't mean I get 100% of the sick kid duty. He does his fair share. I think that if there's a divorce situation, dad's can still do their fair share.

We do take a lot of extra precautions against spreading germs, though. When someone is sick, I'm a fanatic with the germ-killing sprays, cleaners, hand soaps, etc. My son is 9 and has been getting LOTS of throat infections lately, so we had him tested and discovered that he needed some kind of booster shot because his immune system wasn't effectively fighting these bugs that go around. We get flu shots and I do keep the kids separated when they are sick. There's always something going around... hubby brings it home from work, son brings it home from school, I probably bring it home from the handle on the shopping cart when I do the grocery shopping. Sometimes, there's just no escape!!!!

I think it's a little different for you, though, if BM doesn't work and there aren't any other kids at her home. But for us, we don't get them enough as it is, so we'll take them sick or healthy.

~ Anne ~

Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice: Pull down your pants and slide on the ice! -M*A*S*H (Sidney Freedman to the OR staff on dealing with stress)

My skids come over rain or shine, sick or not. Having Joint Legal and Physical custody means we get to share the germs. If we refused to take them when they are sick BM would bring it up in court. She would tell the judge or mediator that we refused care/custody/control of them and in the end we could lose valuable time with them. Maybe BF can take off from work instead of you having to or BM could watch her while you work?

Every time my SS went home to his mom's, the next time he came back to us, he'd come down with a cold, or the flu, or stomach ache, you name it... he got it. His mother had to put her other kids into daycare, so naturally, they were in day diseases, and would get sick. And she would never say anything to us about it, but the moment that we pick him up... Oh, by the way, so-n-so was sick last week, and I think SS is coming down with it now.

Thanks.

Now, just recently, she did actually call one time because her other kids were sick, and she was so beside herself with a decision. At the time, we had him during the week, she picked him up for the weekend. But, amazingly she actually called concerned because everyone was sick and SS's SF suggested to her that we should just keep him so he won't get sick. Amazingly, she had us keep him... but it only lasted for one night. Naturally, the next day, she was in a panic, wanted us to drop him off. So, I pumped him up full of vitamins, and airborne hoping that will at least help. I didn't want him to get sick. It's no fun for anyone. She kept him for one night, we picked him up the next day, and naturally three days later, he came down with a cold- but at least it wasn't that bad for him as it was for everyone else. Whew! Airborne works!

I'm on the belief that if it's easier and more convenient for one parent to just keep a sick child so as not to contaminate others, then why not? If you don't have to worry about other children, then it may not be a big deal. It all depends on availability and if you're not available, then your BF should be the one to take care of her anyway. Otherwise, maybe arrange a swap? I actually loved having my dad take care of me, instead of my mom when I was sick.

It always irritated me that BM, knowing that her other kids were sick, would subject SS to it, knowing that he will get sick in a few days time. And it meant that when he came down with it finally, it happened on our watch and we were the ones that ultimately had to take care of him... which then meant that we got sick. (Sometimes I wondered if she did it on purpose! LOL) It was very very rare that SS ever got sick at our home, that she had to take care of him. Very rare. Probably because both DH and I get flu shots every year, and we don't have any other little ones bring something home.

It's harder on me, because I have a heart issue, so when I get sick, I get SICK. There has been a couple of scary times when DH wanted to take me to the hospital, but I managed to pull through it, all because SS got sick from his brother or sister, who got sick from daycare the week before, etc... the natural chain reaction. Now he's older, and since he got sick so much at a young age, I think his immune system is much stronger, because he doesn't get sick much anymore. So, in a way, it could be a good thing and you may not have to deal with it much more.

StepMom

Man has the intelligence to change his life,
Sometimes, he just fails to use it...

I agree that dad's should share the time of sickness but I also think that they want their mum when they are sick. SS just has to cut himself and he want s to go home to mum, so I assume the same when he is sick, he never has been sick here though.

I think it really depends on the situation, being a BM as well as a SM I would prefer my son stayed with me if he was sick and I know he would prefer it, but I guess if I had to work his dad would care for him sick without a drama.

So I am just going to say it isn't a black and white topic but a bit of a grey area, depending on the circumstances at the time. But being in your situation of not being able to take sickies and she doesn't work, I would probably expect the same.

Catch xx

It depends on your custody situation. Some people don't get to see their children enough to refuse them for any reason.

Just a side note though, my youngest was premature, had surgery on his skull when he was 4 months old AND was a daycare baby (I don't know which of those contributed to his low tolerance for germs) but his first year he was sick from November until May. I started giving him a daily vitamin for children under 3 and he did much better last year so I'm assuming that helped.

It's never late, in fiction or in life, to revies.--Nancy Thayer

I support you 100%. The parents need to do their job.

I never sent my DD to her dad's when she was that ill. She never wanted him anyhow, she wanted me, her mom. He never put up an argument about her not coming for her visitation either. Who wants to deal with that sick of a child?!?! I also used to get ticked off when I sent her and one of his other kids was sick. It meant DD was going to get sick sooner or later so I used to blast him for taking DD when he knowingly was subjecting her to illness.

Now that she's older, her immune system is stronger and I don't fret it as much but I think in extraordinary circumstances like a stomach flu or chicken pox or the like, the children should remain with the custodial. Just my opinion....and I know they're like something else everyone else has!