A: Don't worry. Your situation is one of the reasons for having The Women's Charter, to recognise the sacrifices made by full-time housewives to take care of the entire family, especially the young children. Singapore law recognises these efforts by:

1. making it compulsory for the husband to provide for the financial needs of his wife and their child - even if the wife has a job;
2. giving the wife a share of any property owned by thehusband during the marriage- even if all the money used to buy that property/s only came from the husband.

As to getting to keep the children and having the legal right to make decisions regarding their education, housing, clothing, transportation etc. (which is called "having custody of the children"), the courts will decide on what they think is best for the children's welfare. This decision is independent of who is more to blame for the breakdown of the marriage.

In normal cases, the courts- and I myself - commonly believe that the mother is more suitable to take care of very young children below 12 years old. Naturally, I do not consider that a mother who is a drug user or a danger to herself or other persons to be a "normal" case. There are cases where the father takes custody of the children instead of the mother.

Furthermore, as the children grow older and are better able to express themselvesand reason on their own, I believe that both parentsshould consult them and considertheir wishes more carefully. Courts have listened to evidence from older children in cases where both parents fight over custody of the children.

No responsible parent should use custody as a "weapon" against the other. Usually, no single father or mother can be both the maleand female role-models for the children. This is why the law gives the other parent - who does not have custody of the children-a right to see the children. This is called "reasonable access". To make such a right "reasonable", the courts expect both parents to be reasonable about these situations.