My girlfriend wants to get married - I don't...

[realitychick]

Originally Posted by ddol1

I would be willing to take that risk of being "complete" once again.

I saw a good one the other day:

People say there is no difference between COMPLETE & FINISHED... But there is.

When you marry the right one, you are COMPLETE...

And when you marry the wrong one, you are FINISHED...

And when the right one catches you with the wrong one, you are...COMPLETELY FINISHED

[Mess]

Originally Posted by LostFather

Sorry Mess I disagree. Shared parenting is not as automatic as you seem to imply, suggesting that if they were sharing parenting while in the relationship. In fact most of us that have even through the system and are great dads can certainly prove otherwise the system is biased and men get screwed not only by their ex's but by the multibillion dollar industry that thrives on adversarial parents. The chance you mention should be ideal but is far from it in my opinion. I would close by saying that things seem to be changing for the better towards men, it has a long, long way to go before its 'fair'.

I had no problem achieving shared parenting, I experienced no bias in the court system. My ex earned a bit more than me and had to pay CS under the setoff and fought that, the judge's exact words were, "If we flipped the genders around, we wouldn't even be having this conversation."

If you've had bad experiences I sympathize, but if there is bias it is not in the SYSTEM, it may be in the personal attitudes of some judges. The law is weighted towarded a stay-at-home parent but the law is not weighted either way if both parents work out of the home.

[LostFather]

Originally Posted by Mess

I had no problem achieving shared parenting, I experienced no bias in the court system. My ex earned a bit more than me and had to pay CS under the setoff and fought that, the judge's exact words were, "If we flipped the genders around, we wouldn't even be having this conversation."

If you've had bad experiences I sympathize, but if there is bias it is not in the SYSTEM, it may be in the personal attitudes of some judges. The law is weighted towarded a stay-at-home parent but the law is not weighted either way if both parents work out of the home.

Unfortunately Mess, judges are the system. Things may of worked out for you...for men, many thousands of men, fathers across this Country it is the exception and not the rule. If i was the lonely dad in here bitchin or anywhere across this great land, I would agree with you...but unfortunately my plights with the family law industry, judges if you will, are the norm for fathers.

I will concede that things maybe are getting better, at a snails pace...one day I hope and though too late for me, but for other fathers in the future, that a dad can go into a courtroom and be treated as an equal. What I find kind of funny though...and it doesn't happen that often...the very first mom or woman that sees the opposite end of having to pay cs or ss, they're also screaming bloody blue murder in here crying about why should she have to pay him?? And i agree...why should anyone have to pay someone?

Yes there are cases where it is needed...but it has gone way too far as if a blanket was just thrown out, there are lots of variables that need to be considered and are not. When money and control are involved, in my opinion it just sets the stage for greed and revenge, not what is right or just.

I mean really the law is already there now...its just needs to be applied equally. That will be a great day. Maybe if that happened then there won't be these questions/concerns raised from the op. People will be free to marry without worry that someone is gonna pay, that this 'system' would be used as a tool for fairness not as weapon to make the other pay, whether it be cs or ss. The system needs to be over hauled, like yesterday!

[LostFather]

Originally Posted by shellshocked22

Sorry, just realized that you're not YET receiving support. Looks like the kids are overage for CS BUT that you're going for SS.

Doesn't that disqualify you somewhat on being impartial since you're the "victor" under Family Law. You imply your spouse "owes" you since you changed jobs/were out of the work force for a bit. Well, didn't you benefit from your spouse's income while you were together ?

It kills me that the lower earning spouse has "he owes me" mentality especially if no kids involved who are young.

You obviously are intelligent and can work. Why can't you just "move on" and earn your OWN money WITHOUT siphoning it from your ex ? For someone who claims they are strong and independent, funny why you "need" SS. Why not just show your independence and work your tail off ? Yes, I know the govt says "you're entitled", but I still don't think its fair. I suspect if the shoe was reversed, you wouldn't be such a cheerleader for Family Law !

I also disagree that the "lower wage earner" is worse off in every case. What about the case where that person basically takes 50% of the other spouse's income. She/he gets big bucks before they even wake up. IF they decide to work, they get even more. Especially in a case where they would not have enjoyed the "married" lifestyle had they not hooked up with a high wage earner.

Yes 'yet' indeed! While pursuing our happiness, we get married again...failure being a good chance. Gives hope to a whole new 'yet in waiting'. We're left with forever pursuing happiness.