If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... Of course half the marital assets should be yours--but not more than half. And that happens far more often than you might imagine. As long as you are careful to take responsibility for every step you take (or agree to take), and don't hide behind the "but my lawyer made me do it" excuse, you should not find yourself falling into that trap. Also, don't try to make him pay your lawyer's bills, so you remain aware of how much it costs to do the whole court thing. The burden is on *you* to keep things fair. Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair? You know doggone well why, Moon. Once the system starts rolling, HE will simply be an ATM. She will be in the driver's seat. How do you propose that he keep things fair? Sign over every pay check to her, and live on what she deigns to throw back to him? I propose that *BOTH* adults act like adults, and try to keep things fair. Like I said, right above - "Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair?" And as I said right above, only she has the power to decide to be fair. He will have to do as ordered by the court. Which you know perfectly well. Here, Teach - let's try this. 2 parents, both working. Only 1 is providing health insurance. Who should be paying for the health insurance? The person providing it, the person who earns more money, or should they both try to be fair and split the cost? 2 parents, both working. 1 Parent has the children every weekend. Should the child support reflect this? 2 parents, both working. 2 tax exemptions, 1 for each child. Who should get the tax exemptions? Let's see what your idea of fair is. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... Of course half the marital assets should be yours--but not more than half. And that happens far more often than you might imagine. As long as you are careful to take responsibility for every step you take (or agree to take), and don't hide behind the "but my lawyer made me do it" excuse, you should not find yourself falling into that trap. Also, don't try to make him pay your lawyer's bills, so you remain aware of how much it costs to do the whole court thing. The burden is on *you* to keep things fair. Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair? You know doggone well why, Moon. Once the system starts rolling, HE will simply be an ATM. She will be in the driver's seat. How do you propose that he keep things fair? Sign over every pay check to her, and live on what she deigns to throw back to him? I propose that *BOTH* adults act like adults, and try to keep things fair. Like I said, right above - "Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair?" And as I said right above, only she has the power to decide to be fair. He will have to do as ordered by the court. Which you know perfectly well. Well, if you truly don't understand that the father can work real hard to be unfair, and should have the same expectation for him to try to keep things fair, so be it. Just shows that you seem to have a mindset that women=bad, men=good. All one has to do is look at the outcomes from family law court to recognize there is no fairness. In all other areas of the law there is the concept of courts being just and fair. With the disproportionate outcomes favoring women in family law there is no fairness and justice is a joke. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Moon Shyne" wrote in And as I said right above, only she has the power to decide to be fair. He will have to do as ordered by the court. Which you know perfectly well. Well, if you truly don't understand that the father can work real hard to be unfair, and should have the same expectation for him to try to keep things fair, so be it. Just shows that you seem to have a mindset that women=bad, men=good. Even a Numpty like you can understand that men have no chance in Family kourt once custody is awarded to the mother. Women pay zero, Men pay everything! |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... Of course half the marital assets should be yours--but not more than half. And that happens far more often than you might imagine. As long as you are careful to take responsibility for every step you take (or agree to take), and don't hide behind the "but my lawyer made me do it" excuse, you should not find yourself falling into that trap. Also, don't try to make him pay your lawyer's bills, so you remain aware of how much it costs to do the whole court thing. The burden is on *you* to keep things fair. Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair? You know doggone well why, Moon. Once the system starts rolling, HE will simply be an ATM. She will be in the driver's seat. How do you propose that he keep things fair? Sign over every pay check to her, and live on what she deigns to throw back to him? I propose that *BOTH* adults act like adults, and try to keep things fair. Like I said, right above - "Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair?" And as I said right above, only she has the power to decide to be fair. He will have to do as ordered by the court. Which you know perfectly well. Here, Teach - let's try this. 2 parents, both working. Only 1 is providing health insurance. Who should be paying for the health insurance? The person providing it, the person who earns more money, or should they both try to be fair and split the cost? In my state healthcare insurance is at the discretion of the CP. They can select the NCP's coverage or provide their own coverage. In either case, the premiums are pro-rated based on their relative incomes and any unreimbursed healthcare expenses are pro-rated too. So the higher income parent pays more for premiums and for unreimbursed expenses. 2 parents, both working. 1 Parent has the children every weekend. Should the child support reflect this? It already does. Right now CS is calculated based on one parent having the children 100% of the time. CS would not change for the parent having the chidlren 100% of the time, but it should be reduced when the other parent has visitations becasue the costs of NCP children expenses are not included in any CS award that is not based on a parenting agreement. 2 parents, both working. 2 tax exemptions, 1 for each child. Who should get the tax exemptions? By default the CP gets both child exemptions. Fairness would be to give one up, but that only happens when the CP decides to share the financial benefit. Let's see what your idea of fair is. Now let's test your concept of fairness. A mother has an affair and decides to leave husband for her new main squeeze. Should the husband be removed from the family home by restaining order? Should the husband pay CS and alimony to support her transition to her new lover? Should the mother get half his assets to take into her new relationship? Should the mother be allowed to shack up using the CS to pay for her and her new lovers expenses? Should the children be exposed to the shacking up scenario with their "new daddy"? |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
..
A mother has an affair and decides to leave husband for her new main squeeze. Should the husband be removed from the family home by restaining order? I was Should the husband pay CS and alimony to support her transition to her new lover? I did. $4800 a month, plus college for her. Should the mother get half his assets to take into her new relationship? She got everything Should the mother be allowed to shack up using the CS to pay for her and her new lovers expenses? She and he did. He still hasn't worked, Should the children be exposed to the shacking up scenario with their "new daddy"? They were. And that is only the first marriage. The second was where I really got screwed. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Bob Whiteside" wrote ........................ A mother has an affair and decides to leave husband for her new main squeeze. Should the husband be removed from the family home by restaining order? Should the husband pay CS and alimony to support her transition to her new lover? == Only if the wife was pregnant with her lover's child while still married. Then hubby has to pay CS for the lover's child. (You forgot that part |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... Of course half the marital assets should be yours--but not more than half. And that happens far more often than you might imagine. As long as you are careful to take responsibility for every step you take (or agree to take), and don't hide behind the "but my lawyer made me do it" excuse, you should not find yourself falling into that trap. Also, don't try to make him pay your lawyer's bills, so you remain aware of how much it costs to do the whole court thing. The burden is on *you* to keep things fair. Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair? You know doggone well why, Moon. Once the system starts rolling, HE will simply be an ATM. She will be in the driver's seat. How do you propose that he keep things fair? Sign over every pay check to her, and live on what she deigns to throw back to him? I propose that *BOTH* adults act like adults, and try to keep things fair. Like I said, right above - "Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair?" And as I said right above, only she has the power to decide to be fair. He will have to do as ordered by the court. Which you know perfectly well. Here, Teach - let's try this. 2 parents, both working. Only 1 is providing health insurance. Who should be paying for the health insurance? The person providing it, the person who earns more money, or should they both try to be fair and split the cost? In my state healthcare insurance is at the discretion of the CP. They can select the NCP's coverage or provide their own coverage. In either case, the premiums are pro-rated based on their relative incomes and any unreimbursed healthcare expenses are pro-rated too. So the higher income parent pays more for premiums and for unreimbursed expenses. 2 parents, both working. 1 Parent has the children every weekend. Should the child support reflect this? It already does. Right now CS is calculated based on one parent having the children 100% of the time. CS would not change for the parent having the chidlren 100% of the time, but it should be reduced when the other parent has visitations becasue the costs of NCP children expenses are not included in any CS award that is not based on a parenting agreement. 2 parents, both working. 2 tax exemptions, 1 for each child. Who should get the tax exemptions? By default the CP gets both child exemptions. Fairness would be to give one up, but that only happens when the CP decides to share the financial benefit. Let's see what your idea of fair is. Now let's test your concept of fairness. A mother has an affair and decides to leave husband for her new main squeeze. Should the husband be removed from the family home by restaining order? No Should the husband pay CS and alimony to support her transition to her new lover? No, though he should be contributing to the support of the children. Should the mother get half his assets to take into her new relationship? If she contributed to the financing of the assets, she's entitled to her half. Should the mother be allowed to shack up using the CS to pay for her and her new lovers expenses? I think this is particularly intrusive - are you saying that any woman who received CS should never be permitted to share her home with her significant other? (like, isn't she allowed to have a relationship post divorce?) Should the children be exposed to the shacking up scenario with their "new daddy"? How biased are you going to be, Bob? If dad can "shack up", then mom should have the same privilege, don't you think? And who says that mom's significant is "new daddy"? Don't the children already HAVE a dad? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... Of course half the marital assets should be yours--but not more than half. And that happens far more often than you might imagine. As long as you are careful to take responsibility for every step you take (or agree to take), and don't hide behind the "but my lawyer made me do it" excuse, you should not find yourself falling into that trap. Also, don't try to make him pay your lawyer's bills, so you remain aware of how much it costs to do the whole court thing. The burden is on *you* to keep things fair. Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair? You know doggone well why, Moon. Once the system starts rolling, HE will simply be an ATM. She will be in the driver's seat. How do you propose that he keep things fair? Sign over every pay check to her, and live on what she deigns to throw back to him? I propose that *BOTH* adults act like adults, and try to keep things fair. Like I said, right above - "Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair?" And as I said right above, only she has the power to decide to be fair. He will have to do as ordered by the court. Which you know perfectly well. Here, Teach - let's try this. 2 parents, both working. Only 1 is providing health insurance. Who should be paying for the health insurance? The person providing it, the person who earns more money, or should they both try to be fair and split the cost? 2 parents, both working. 1 Parent has the children every weekend. Should the child support reflect this? 2 parents, both working. 2 tax exemptions, 1 for each child. Who should get the tax exemptions? Let's see what your idea of fair is. Ok, Moon, let's discuss fair. In our family court system, the vast majority of the time, mom gets custody. She can then take dad for 17%+ of his income without raising a finger. She can have the children 60% of the time, and he will get no financial credit for his 40%--she can keep sucking up that 17% as her right and due. HE can be forced to provide health insurance and child care costs even if her job has better insurance trhat doesn't cost a penny, and her best friend provides her with half price child care but sends dad a bill for 100%. She can be totally, completely UNFAIR, and the courts will support her every whimper. THAT is what I mean by not being unfair--by making sure the poster chooses to be fair in spite of the temptation to let the system screw the dad blue and get for her what she may be entitled to under the law, but may not really need. And what can he do about it? He's just along for the ride. As for your situations, this is where cooperation comes in--not fairness on his part. If she is fair, he will probably be more cooperative. I did ask you before what you think HE should be doing to be fair--but you didn't answer that part. So, Moon, what do YOU think the dad in the case we are discussing should do to be fair? How would you work out your little scenarios? Personally, I think that if she is not going for the throat, and both are half way decent human beings, they should be able to sit down and discuss the issues. And if either is a jerk, then both will suffer--but she will probably suffer the least because the courts are on her side. But, then, you probably know if your mate is a jerk long before the divorce--but you picked 'em. You can't expect 'em to just change to make things more convenient for you. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Bob Whiteside" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "teachrmama" wrote in message ... Of course half the marital assets should be yours--but not more than half. And that happens far more often than you might imagine. As long as you are careful to take responsibility for every step you take (or agree to take), and don't hide behind the "but my lawyer made me do it" excuse, you should not find yourself falling into that trap. Also, don't try to make him pay your lawyer's bills, so you remain aware of how much it costs to do the whole court thing. The burden is on *you* to keep things fair. Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair? You know doggone well why, Moon. Once the system starts rolling, HE will simply be an ATM. She will be in the driver's seat. How do you propose that he keep things fair? Sign over every pay check to her, and live on what she deigns to throw back to him? I propose that *BOTH* adults act like adults, and try to keep things fair. Like I said, right above - "Why isn't the burden on *BOTH* of them to keep things fair?" And as I said right above, only she has the power to decide to be fair. He will have to do as ordered by the court. Which you know perfectly well. Here, Teach - let's try this. 2 parents, both working. Only 1 is providing health insurance. Who should be paying for the health insurance? The person providing it, the person who earns more money, or should they both try to be fair and split the cost? In my state healthcare insurance is at the discretion of the CP. They can select the NCP's coverage or provide their own coverage. In either case, the premiums are pro-rated based on their relative incomes and any unreimbursed healthcare expenses are pro-rated too. So the higher income parent pays more for premiums and for unreimbursed expenses. 2 parents, both working. 1 Parent has the children every weekend. Should the child support reflect this? It already does. Right now CS is calculated based on one parent having the children 100% of the time. CS would not change for the parent having the chidlren 100% of the time, but it should be reduced when the other parent has visitations becasue the costs of NCP children expenses are not included in any CS award that is not based on a parenting agreement. 2 parents, both working. 2 tax exemptions, 1 for each child. Who should get the tax exemptions? By default the CP gets both child exemptions. Fairness would be to give one up, but that only happens when the CP decides to share the financial benefit. Let's see what your idea of fair is. Now let's test your concept of fairness. A mother has an affair and decides to leave husband for her new main squeeze. Should the husband be removed from the family home by restaining order? No Ah, but the mom can get custody anf force this to happen. UNFAIR on her part--but a very normal scenario. What could he do to make it more fair? Should the husband pay CS and alimony to support her transition to her new lover? No, though he should be contributing to the support of the children. Ah, but the mom can get sustody anf force this to happen. UNFAIR on her part--but a very normal scenario. What could he do to make it more fair? Should the mother get half his assets to take into her new relationship? If she contributed to the financing of the assets, she's entitled to her half. And if the courts decide to give her more than half--in the best interests of the children--is this ok, too? Should the mother be allowed to shack up using the CS to pay for her and her new lovers expenses? I think this is particularly intrusive - are you saying that any woman who received CS should never be permitted to share her home with her significant other? (like, isn't she allowed to have a relationship post divorce?) I think he was talking obout her going right from exhubby's still warm bed into the bed of a new guy. You really think this is ok? Should the children be exposed to the shacking up scenario with their "new daddy"? How biased are you going to be, Bob? If dad can "shack up", then mom should have the same privilege, don't you think? Did he mention dad shacking up? I didn't see that part. And who says that mom's significant is "new daddy"? Don't the children already HAVE a dad? Precisely! |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
To ALL fathers Custody
"Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... Should the mother be allowed to shack up using the CS to pay for her and her new lovers expenses? I think this is particularly intrusive - are you saying that any woman who received CS should never be permitted to share her home with her significant other? (like, isn't she allowed to have a relationship post divorce?) No. I'm saying any CP, male or female, should not be shacking up because that is a horrible example to set for young children. I believe you said adults should act like adults. I don't include shacking up as being included in acceptable adult behavior that sets a good example for children. Should the children be exposed to the shacking up scenario with their "new daddy"? How biased are you going to be, Bob? If dad can "shack up", then mom should have the same privilege, don't you think? No. I say if dad shacks up that is a bad example for children. But just because dad shacks up doesn't make it okay for mom to shack up too. And who says that mom's significant is "new daddy"? Don't the children already HAVE a dad? They get to act like a daddy. And if he acts like a daddy, talks like a daddy, and sleeps with mom like a daddy, he is a daddy. Of course, I can guess some moms will explain to their children the shack up squeeze is just a sexual partner who gives her personal satisfaction to fulfill her needs. I'll bet a lot of kids understand that approach. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Intro, and a question, might be long. | Vicki | Single Parents | 13 | October 10th 06 04:20 AM |
NCP ACTION ALERT!!! NY Shared Parenting bill under attack!! | Dusty | Child Support | 4 | March 8th 06 06:45 AM |
Child Support Guidelines are UNFAIR! Lets join together to fight them! | S Myers | Child Support | 115 | September 12th 05 12:37 AM |
AL: Court issues history-making decision in child custody case | Dusty | Child Support | 1 | August 3rd 05 01:07 AM |
Child support alienates fathers from their children | dani | Child Support | 0 | October 15th 03 07:56 AM |