Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > General Chat

General Chat This forum is for discussing anything that doesn't fit into another forum, or for discussing things that are off topic, or just for general venting.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 02:30 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 324
got2bkid is on a distinguished road
Default 2nd wives need to band together

Are there any other 2nd wives out there who have seen the injustice of the Federal Child Support Guidelines at work? Have seen their husbands lose access to their kids, have seen them live in poverty, trying to keep up with CS payments and "extra-ordinary" expenses that are not based in reality?

Have seen the ex wife move the kids accross the country, taking his kids away becasue she has some sob story about how she wants to move "home"? Have seen your husband pay thousands and thousands in flights just to visit his children, without any monetary input from the ex who moved away?

How there is no accoutability for the CP to provide where or how she spends the money sent for the kids? How (as in our case) she can go to "school" for over 5 years, using all the CS sent for the kids, all the Canadian Child Tax benefits and all the other "low income" subsidies available to her, simply because she doesn't WANT to work?

And how about the second children, that are not entitled to any support from their father, just whatever is "left-over" after the first kids get (in our case) 1/2 their fathers net salary? And what about when your husband does "better" financially, the first kids get to benefit from this, but when your husband isn't doing so well, she will impute him a higher income, so her kids don't have to share in the misfortunes, only the good times.

What about the tax consequenses? The second family bears the brunt of the taxes, but when any gov't benefits or programs are calculated for the "second" children, they do not even take off the money paid to the first children when assessing any needs the second kids might have.

How many second wives are tired of first wives saying "I need the money to keep us the home for the child?" Do they forget that the NCP must also have a home for their children? How many second wives are tired of their husbands paying the ex CS for the children for two months in the summer, when the children live with them? So now the ex gets a 2 month paid holiday without her kids? Oh right, they NEED the money those 2 months, to keep up the "family" home.

Men (and NCP's in general) are getting bashed around by the system. If the so-called feminists could influence the system so much, maybe they only listen to womens voices? Maybe they will listen to women who want a fair system, where a man can support his CHILDREN fairly, but his ex wife can support HERSELF.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 08:11 AM
FL_Needs_To_Change's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern Ontario
Posts: 1,261
FL_Needs_To_Change has a spectacular aura aboutFL_Needs_To_Change has a spectacular aura about
Default

YES, I have.

I am the "second wife". We have two beautiful children.
Dad has jumped though flaming hoops for his first family.
She went back to school too, then had two subsequent marriages, and is earning more than the both of us together (and we have relatively good incomes). Yet she has been permitted by the courts to make unrealistic requests that were granted on no evidence, and even if we had clear documentation to show her totally out to lunch, status quo prevailed.

She moved literally thousands of miles away, denied access until it was emotionally and financially impossible to go on.
It was literally a case of do we bankrupt and impoverish our family for a mere day of visitation each month?
How do we tell the children they cannot get new shoes because Dad needs to put fuel in the car to go and see X? We thought long and hard, and attended councilling to help us with our decision that we could not sacrifice the second for the first. The first is not wanting for anything, in fact the one child has more then enough for half a dozen children since mom has enough to give the child all and more then the child could ever "need" or want. Some day (hopfull) will come back and ask WHY? As hard as it was to make the decision, and how much we hate to have made it, and we suffer each and every day for it, it was the "best intersts of "ALL" the children.

Its heart breaking, but the courts turned a blind eye on these children. They are not less deserving, Dad is not reneging on his obligation to his first family, he just wanted a break, a break that would allow him the opportunity to love “ALL” of his children, and not just the first ones. The courts have not caught up to society and the fact that most relationships are the second time around, and for some, the third.
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 01:11 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 108
phoenix is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid
how about the second children, that are not entitled to any support from their father, just whatever is "left-over" after the first kids get
Creating a child is not a right... it is an ominous 25-year (and beyond that) emotional and FINANCIAL responsibility and obligation. Unless your husband kept his first children a deep-dark secret from you until you were already pregnant, you knew what you were signing up for when you married him and created a baby with him. I don't mean to sound harsh... but your children have TWO parents too. If your husband can't afford all the children he has created, perhaps you should get a better job in order to support your own children better.

I've said it before, but I believe it is true: if someone (ANYONE -- second marriage or even FIRST marriage or NO marriage) can't afford another baby, they shouldn't be making another baby. It sounds as though your husband couldn't afford to have another baby. I'm sorry for your tight financial situation.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 03:30 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 324
got2bkid is on a distinguished road
Default

Typical reply from a woman CP. That her ex has no "right" to have more children, that we should have "known better" than to have a family of our own, because he has other children to support. I am sorry, but this argument is a lame cop-out.

My argument is with the fact that people, in this day and age when many families are seconds or thirds, actually think it is OK to impoverish a CS payor to such an exent that he can't AFFORD to have another family!

That attitude is EXACTLY what 2nd wives have to deal with. A system in which their concerns don't count. Where the ex thinks, becasue she's had kids with someone, she now OWNS his life forever and ever. What kind of country do we live in where the 2nd wife has to be 100% financially responsible for her kids, but the first wife is "guaranteed" support from both of them? Who thinks this is OK? Only very greedy people I am afraid.

If you want to use the "shoulda know better" argument, well then mabye the CP's should have known that when they got divorced in the first place and wanted custody, that they would have to share EQUALLY in their kids upbringing.

When they complain that they have a "deadbeat husband", do we say "you should have known better, too bad for you"? No, we try to help them.

Do some CP's really think 2 incomes that used to support one household can now support 2 households at the same level? Who came up with that wisdom the CP's tend to beleive?

I don't want to take away from the first kids. There just needs to be a system where BOTH parents are held accountable for financally raising their kids. I know in our case we pay 25,000/yr for 2 kids, and the ex uses that money to go to school. Why is she not held accountable?

Why don't we just do what Australia is now doing? Change the "tables" so that when a second family is involved, you subtract an amount from the payors income to support the 2nd kids, then base the CS on his salary minus that amount. It is not rocket science, and the CS amounts are still very agreeable.

Why not allow the NCP to get more tax breaks? This doesn't "take away" from the 1st kids. Why not base benefits for the 2nd kids on an income MINUS support sent for the first kids? Why are the second kids "subsidizing" benefits for the first kids?

This knee-jerk reaction "don't have kids if you can't affford them" does nothing to solve REAL problems. It is an easy out. I am not saying "well, don't get divorced and take custody of your kids if you can't support them yourself". I believe that ALL kids should be supported by BOTH their parents, 1st and 2nd.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 03:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 324
got2bkid is on a distinguished road
Default

FL Nedds to Change, I am sorry to hear of the problems you have had too, and what you had to do for the "best interests" of the children. I fear we will be going down that path soon. Paying close to $4000/year in flights, we've spent 20K in the last 5 years for my husband to see his kids, with not one dime from her. When the kids are here for 2 months, we are still paying her 1600 in support.

It broke my husbands heart when she was allowed to move. But what kind of debt should you get into for the first kids? We are paying for orthodontics this year, so this year is bascially costing us 9000/year more than normal.

The argument that "we should have known better" than to have a family with a man who has kids, is cold-hearted and wrong. How could we have predicted all the things that change over the years, ex's moving away, going back to school etc. You can never plan for all these things.

So many families are out here have these issues. Did you know it was basically 2nd wives who changed the system in Australia for the better? I think because women are more verbal (and sometimes more full of drama) they get "listened" to more. We have a beautiful happy family, but my husband and I are getting worried that getting into debt for the 1st kids (we have $10,000 of airfare on credit cards) is not fair to the second.

Maybe second wives can get someone to listen. I am sure there is a better way to make sure ALL kids are fairly treated. Do you think there is hope?
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 06:27 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kitchener Ontario
Posts: 5,202
standing on the sidelines is on a distinguished road
Default

I was a second wife but my ex was not a good father to his first family. When it was figured out what child support he would have to pay he was unemployed so it was not that much. When he got a fairly good paying job do you think the sent extra to his kids, no way. He was paying only 100.00 a month for two kids. When we got together he would figure out his budget for the week and for child support he put the the word "bitch money". He was buying tools, guns etc for his own use instead of sending money to his ex. When she finally found out he was working at a good job she took hiim to court and he was putting all of our expenses down as his own even though I paid half of rent etc. He ended up paying an extra 40.00 a month.

After seeing how he treated his first family there was no way I was having kids with him. Last I heard he had three more kids with three different women after me and never got married again. He is one of these men that give the guys trying to be good fathers a bad name.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 09:08 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 322
today is on a distinguished road
Default

Phoenix,

"if your husband can't afford all the children he has created, perhaps you should get a better job in order to support your own children better"

Do you really believe your own comments, perhaps you may wish to read again, that is a pretty sad comment.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 09:29 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 322
today is on a distinguished road
Default

Phoenix,

Your comments on people not having the right to have children are very confusing, perhaps you may be of the opinion that people should be of a certain income level in order to have a child.

Contrary to you comments If I am not mistaken everyone has the right to have children no matter where they sit on the socio economic ladder. It is our right.

Generally speaking there are rsponsibilities that go along with having children, most of us take on these rsponsibilities with pleasure.

It it a proven fact that most parents try and do support thier children to the best of thier abilties.

I have read your prior posts and find these comments suprising, uneducated and insulting to myself and the vast majority of persons who try to support thier children.

Contrary to what it appears you would hope for there is no legislation demanding a certain incomee level for a man to have a child, but the womens movement is extremely strong and politicly connected so lobby hard you may get you wish. Of course this would not apply to women right?

In short your comments were harsh and out of line, very sad indeed.
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 06-23-2008, 11:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 108
phoenix is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by today
Phoenix,

Your comments on people not having the right to have children are very confusing, perhaps you may be of the opinion that people should be of a certain income level in order to have a child.

Contrary to you comments If I am not mistaken everyone has the right to have children no matter where they sit on the socio economic ladder. It is our right.
Most everyone has the ABILITY to procreate, but I will admit, yes, I am of the opinion that not everyone SHOULD be procreating. Yes we do all have the freedom to make babies. However I do respectfully disagree with you about whether or not it is a right... I work too hard 6 days a week, paying taxes through my nose to say that making babies is a 'right'.

As I said before, and I still stand by it: Creating a child is not a right... it is an ominous 25-year (and beyond that) emotional and FINANCIAL responsibility and obligation. Your husband agreed to that obligation and responsiblity before you and your children were part of his life.

As a matter of fact, I AM of the opinion (and it is my OPINION, nothing more) that in an ideal world people should be of a certain income to have a child. Hopefully basically smart people would figure that out themselves. I realize that we can't go around sterilizing the general population, we would end up with a "Handmaid's Tale" kind of world, which is not good. I would hope, however, that people with good solid common sense would consider their financial situation before they add another mouth to feed to their grocery list. That is pretty much what I said in my previous post: don't be procreating if you don't have the income. If you DO procreate (I mean "you" in a generic term, not you literally -- I am educated, contrary to your accusations) and your one income can't provide for the child you made, GET ANOTHER JOB. I did.

I'm not asking anything of anyone else that I haven't done myself. I have been the stay-at-home cookie-baking first-mom (I actually have twins myself.) I have scrambled to make ends meet all on my own while uneducated, I have educated myself (thank you, YES I am quite well educated now, thanks to my ingenuity and tenacious nature) and I am still raising my children almost completely on my own -- my children's "first-father" sends money when he can/does. Not ideal, and not necessarily the norm, but for me it is my situation.

I'm not saying my situation is yours... obviously it is not.

Believe it or not I am also in your shoes now... I am in a second relationship with a wonderful man who has children of his own from a previous marriage. We cannot afford children together. Sadly we will not be having children together. I would dearly love to have his child. I believe, and it is my 'belief', it is not our right to have more children when we can only afford the children we have right now. That is the way it is.

I am not demanding more from you than I expect from myself.

You chose to have children with a man who is financially strapped because of previous commitements he made in another lifetime before you came into his life. Making a baby/ies with him is a choice you made freely and willingly... so what I am saying is: either deal with it, or else one of you, or both of you, needs to get another job. Face it... he has a lot of children. The law is set up to make sure he doesn't bag out on his first commitment. Utter chaos would break out if men could impregnate women here and there and simply walk away from previously made families and commitments. (I'm not saying your husband did that... I'm just making a random statement.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by today
I have read your prior posts and find these comments suprising, uneducated and insulting

Please... I'm just giving my opinion as you have given yours... I am not putting you down, I'm just expressing my side of things. I don't appreciate you calling me "uneducated" -- I have worked too hard as a single mom to better myself to stand back and let you do that. I have always qualified my remarks to be my 'beliefs' or feelings. It doesn't make them right, it simply makes them what I have experienced. Same as yours.

How else can we learn if we don't share with each other and find a common ground?
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 06-24-2008, 07:13 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 322
today is on a distinguished road
Default

Well we will have to agree to disagree, but I do now understand what you trying to get across in a sense. Although your words came across rather harsh to me.

There are many people like your self who are very responsible towards your children, most do the the best they can, regardless of income level and most children turn out just fine regradless of thier parnts financial background, I think we may both agree that money is not the key factor (it sure helps though). It is the time and emotional investment we make towards our children that counts more than anything, this is why I feel money should not be a deciding factor in having children.

Just as a side note I am not in a second relationship, I am a single father of 2who enjoys a week to week regime with my children. Of course I do have strong opinions about what I feel is the injustice to second family children as viewed by the family law system.
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:06 PM.