• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You 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. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Cousin has a divorce hearing on Monday

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #41
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    So, why they consistently screw men, just to look better in eyes of females?

    Judges just follow the law and it's totally stupid in this country when it comes to divorces - if financial skew was removed then I reckon there will be less of divorce cases.
    The decision for one partner - usually the mother - to put their career on hold to raise children is one that is jointly taken by the couple for the benefit of the family. What do you suggest happens when that marriage breaks down?

    Comment


      #42
      Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
      The decision for one partner - usually the mother - to put their career on hold to raise children is one that is jointly taken by the couple for the benefit of the family. What do you suggest happens when that marriage breaks down?
      You are taking a very old-fashioned and simplistic view there. Obviously in a case where significant sacrifice and contribution is made, any settlement ought to take that into account, but that's far from the only factor and it's far from always true.

      Comment


        #43
        I

        I was involved in legal stuff for few years, legal aid practice, and honestly I do not think judges are that bad, most I came across were very clever wise and fair people. They dont have any choice really other than to advise someone to get a lawyer. Obviously a lawyer is going to believe in the value of legal representation.

        Actually I do have sympathy with the view that men get raw deal, saw it happen to a friend of mine. He foolishly had an affair but was a great father. Ex went for revenge. He ended up seeing his kids fortnightly, he was heartbroken and so I suspect were they.

        Comment


          #44
          Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
          What do you suggest happens when that marriage breaks down?
          For the sake of children (if there are children as it's most complicated case) parents should stay together until they grow up, divorce later.

          There are exceptions of course - genuine violence but that should be handled by police and court should rubber stamp divorce after whoever was violent is jailed by the court.

          In this country financially situation is way too skewed in woman's favour and that is the source of most problems I reckon - it's ze money.

          Comment


            #45
            Originally posted by AtW View Post
            For the sake of children (if there are children as it's most complicated case) parents should stay together until they grow up, divorce later.
            If you were the kid of parents who openly hated each other but stayed together for the sake of the kids you wouldn't be saying that.

            Luckily in my case and many of my friends cases they split up so they could continue with their hatred of each other in separate spaces. (There are people who split up and don't hold such hatred.) In most cases they managed to grow out of it within 10 years but I have been to weddings where one sides parents has to be kept away from each other.


            Originally posted by ATW View Post
            In this country financially situation is way too skewed in woman's favour and that is the source of most problems I reckon - it's ze money.
            Housing in the UK is expensive, childcare is expensive and hardly any employment fits around school hours let alone school holidays. If one of those factors were altered then divorce settlements wouldn't be like they are now.
            "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

            Comment


              #46
              Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
              If you were the kid of parents who openly hated each other but stayed together for the sake of the kids you wouldn't be saying that.

              Luckily in my case and many of my friends cases they split up so they could continue with their hatred of each other in separate spaces. (There are people who split up and don't hold such hatred.) In most cases they managed to grow out of it within 10 years but I have been to weddings where one sides parents has to be kept away from each other.



              Housing in the UK is expensive, childcare is expensive and hardly any employment fits around school hours let alone school holidays. If one of those factors were altered then divorce settlements wouldn't be like they are now.
              Even in cases where the couple have no children, the settlement is skewed towards the woman. And when the father keeps the children, still the settlement is unfair; I can think of at least two cases involving people I know well.

              Employment business dad of two. Mum leaves kids and runs off with lover. She gets half of everything but she pays no child maintenance. House is sold; dad and kids move to rented accommodation.

              Contractor dad of two. Mum (never worked but always complaining too much to do) leaves kids and runs off with lover but lover kicks her out. She gets maintenance for life, plus house. Dad buys new house on mortgage. BTW, for the first time in the kids life, the house is tidy, dad gets kids breakfast on time and works full time.

              Brother in law: new wife to be "I love you for yourself, not your money…(not like you former wife) please marry me" Brother in law "OK", Solicitor: "Do you still want your kids to inherit the holiday villa?" Brother in law: "Yes". Fiancé in tears "You don't love me"
              "A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims, but accomplices," George Orwell

              Comment


                #47
                Originally posted by Paddy View Post
                Even in cases where the couple have no children, the settlement is skewed towards the woman. And when the father keeps the children, still the settlement is unfair; I can think of at least two cases involving people I know well.

                Employment business dad of two. Mum leaves kids and runs off with lover. She gets half of everything but she pays no child maintenance. House is sold; dad and kids move to rented accommodation.

                Contractor dad of two. Mum (never worked but always complaining too much to do) leaves kids and runs off with lover but lover kicks her out. She gets maintenance for life, plus house. Dad buys new house on mortgage. BTW, for the first time in the kids life, the house is tidy, dad gets kids breakfast on time and works full time.
                I actually know divorced women due to being richer than the guy they married have had to hand over assets to the guy on divorce. So it does work both ways. However as women tend to have less money and assets than the guy they marry on divorce it's often the guy who loses out. It also doesn't help that it's socially acceptable for women to give up their job on having children. Fix that and you will fix some of the issues with maintenance.

                Originally posted by Paddy View Post
                Brother in law: new wife to be "I love you for yourself, not your money…(not like you former wife) please marry me" Brother in law "OK", Solicitor: "Do you still want your kids to inherit the holiday villa?" Brother in law: "Yes". Fiancé in tears "You don't love me"
                Works both ways. Hence lots of divorcees with children actually want someone else with children as they are more likely to understand children come first.
                "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

                Comment


                  #48
                  Originally posted by mudskipper View Post
                  The decision for one partner - usually the mother - to put their career on hold to raise children is one that is jointly taken by the couple for the benefit of the family. What do you suggest happens when that marriage breaks down?
                  I agree - men work and women raise children. So as men get no rights in the home women should get no rights in the workplace - its about equality.

                  So when anyone reads anything posted here by a female (a real female - not one of AtW's sockies) then just tell them to stick to fluffy kittens.

                  Comment


                    #49
                    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
                    If you were the kid of parents who openly hated each other but stayed together for the sake of the kids you wouldn't be saying that.
                    Obviously for sake of kids the parents would have to keep their hatred of each other confined to their bedroom or some other private place.

                    Parents who are so selfish as to not make such personal sacrifices for their kids should not expect to keep them.

                    Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
                    Housing in the UK is expensive, childcare is expensive and hardly any employment fits around school hours let alone school holidays. If one of those factors were altered then divorce settlements wouldn't be like they are now.
                    That's not unreasonable, but what's unreasonable in UK legal practice is giving one side way too much - more money than that side earned (typically), and presumption that the side is best for kids.

                    Comment


                      #50
                      Originally posted by BrilloPad View Post
                      I agree - men work and women raise children. So as men get no rights in the home women should get no rights in the workplace - its about equality.

                      So when anyone reads anything posted here by a female (a real female - not one of AtW's sockies) then just tell them to stick to fluffy kittens.
                      Still, at least you're not bitter, Brillo.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X