The question we raise in today’s post title is in reaction to a recent story in the Huffington Post. Some of our readers here in Minnesota may be familiar with the article of which we speak, which talks about the recent criticism actress Kate Winslet has taken from a fathers’ rights group for her parenting style. But some of our readers might be wondering: is the criticism grounded in any real injustice or is the fathers’ rights group making judgments based on only half of the facts?
For those who may not know, the criticism stems from a series of comments Winslet made in the November issue of Vogue where she explained that her children live with her and that she does not allow the 50/50 time sharing that most divorced families have to endure. Recently though, a U.K.-based fathers’ rights group used the comments made in this issue as cannon fodder for an advertisement promoting shared parenting during the holiday season.
But does being a parent with full custody of your children mean that you’re against fathers’ rights? Many of our readers would probably say no because they realize that every family situation is different and that in Winslet’s case, it might be a more beneficial custody arrangement for the children to be in her full custody versus the alternative, which requires extensive travel to two separate households. As Winslet’s lawyers have already pointed out, the advertisement is misleading because it presumes that Winslet does not allow her children’s fathers their visitation rights, which is likely not the case at all.
What this case demonstrates to readers of our blog here in Minnesota is that good intentions can cause problems, especially when information that is presented is actually taken out of context. It also demonstrates that just because you have full custody of your children does not necessarily mean that you are opposed to fathers’ rights.
Source: The Huffington Post, "Kate Winslet Targeted By Fathers' Rights Group Over Parenting Arrangements," Cavan Sieczkowski, Dec. 19, 2013