[justme]

[quote=Russell][quote=justme][quote=Russell]

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.[/quote]

1. not always at fault, no-fault divorce

You understand what no-fault means, right? It means that your wife can divorce you *even if you did nothing wrong to the marriage* (and do not forget that 70% of the time the wife is the initiator).

2. custody according to previous % childcare:

Oh, so the MAN has to PROVE that the did 50% of the childcare in order to get 50% custody? Don’t you grasp how ridiculous a demand this is? He was busy making money for the family, how could he? It is the *wife* that demands that he sacrifices himself for his career. He does not have a choice. What planet are you on??

3. helping the wifes career: what if she refuses to work? Can he force her to take job an forcibly “support” her career advancement. Have you seen how many women just fluff out as soon as they get married. Some of them don;t even have children, bu they still want to stay at home. Does the man have a say? Hell no.

Russel, you are either a woman or a very blinded man that lacks insight into real world marriages.

[justme]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men.
[/quote]

I can totally agree with the above. It is very common.
But the tables cannot be turned as long as the courts favor women. Not that I want the table to be turned. All I want is fairness for men.

[justme]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men.
[/quote]

I can totally agree with the above. It is very common.
But the tables cannot be turned as long as the courts favor women. Not that I want the table to be turned. All I want is fairness for men.

[justme]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men.
[/quote]

I can totally agree with the above. It is very common.
But the tables cannot be turned as long as the courts favor women. Not that I want the table to be turned. All I want is fairness for men.

[justme]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men.
[/quote]

I can totally agree with the above. It is very common.
But the tables cannot be turned as long as the courts favor women. Not that I want the table to be turned. All I want is fairness for men.

[justme]

[quote=scaredycat]re; emotional damage; I wasn’t advocating one side or the other. I was just observing that women sometimes withhold child visitation or extract a price for compliance with visitation from men.
[/quote]

I can totally agree with the above. It is very common.
But the tables cannot be turned as long as the courts favor women. Not that I want the table to be turned. All I want is fairness for men.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

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.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

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.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

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.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

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.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

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.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

The alimony and child support doesn’t scare everybody to the same extent.

[/quote]

Oh, yeah, the old just-be-a-man-about-it argument.

Alimony and child support is not about being “scared”. It is about the real damage that divorce court does to men.

It is the same tactic used when women say that men are “afraid” of commitment. What nonsense. It is just a cheap-trick tactic designed to manipulate men into making a commitment even when it is a bad deal for them.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

The alimony and child support doesn’t scare everybody to the same extent.

[/quote]

Oh, yeah, the old just-be-a-man-about-it argument.

Alimony and child support is not about being “scared”. It is about the real damage that divorce court does to men.

It is the same tactic used when women say that men are “afraid” of commitment. What nonsense. It is just a cheap-trick tactic designed to manipulate men into making a commitment even when it is a bad deal for them.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

The alimony and child support doesn’t scare everybody to the same extent.

[/quote]

Oh, yeah, the old just-be-a-man-about-it argument.

Alimony and child support is not about being “scared”. It is about the real damage that divorce court does to men.

It is the same tactic used when women say that men are “afraid” of commitment. What nonsense. It is just a cheap-trick tactic designed to manipulate men into making a commitment even when it is a bad deal for them.

[justme]

[quote=Russell]

The alimony and child support doesn’t scare everybody to the same extent.

[/quote]

Oh, yeah, the old just-be-a-man-about-it argument.

Alimony and child support is not about being “scared”. It is about the real damage that divorce court does to men.

It is the same tactic used when women say that men are “afraid” of commitment. What nonsense. It is just a cheap-trick tactic designed to manipulate men into making a commitment even when it is a bad deal for them.

[Author]

Posts