I still think if they had lived differently in marriage they would have had a better chance at equity in child support, alimony and visitation. Divorce and subsequent life probably would have gone better overall. If the courts make decisions based on how the
couple/ family/children actually lived I can’t blame them.[/quote]
Russel, what the hell are you talking about? “if they had lived differently”? You are simply taking sides and assuming that any divorce is the man’s fault! And by the way, that is the same approach the courts are taking. No matter who did what!
Phew.[/quote]
No I am not saying that men are always at fault. This is a no fault state I believe. However, if the career/bread winning vs. nurturing/home making are out of balance, I think it should not come as a surprise that alimony and child support are forth coming. If a man can prove that there was a mutually cooperative balance in those things and he also wants and can make a good case for 50/50 custody which actually resembles how things were before the divorce , then I think there is a smaller chance of getting “screwed”.Better if he can show that he actually facilitated the advancement of his wife’s career through child care and homemaking and other sacrifice as much as she did his. The price to pay for this may be having a mediocre career but that too does add evidence to the argument that you had kids to raise them not just to pay your wife to do it. It also establishes that she can support herself as well as you can.
