Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Your perspective on no child support.

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Links17 View Post
    Is the answer that the poor parent's house is pimped out by the rich parent's wealth?

    So in reality the rich parent never really gets fully divorced because entitlement to their wealth by the poor parent flows through the children...
    The poor parent still lives almost like they were married to the richer parent
    due to CS?
    I believe this happens often, especially when the amounts of cs are large. For example, look at pro sports players when they divorce, they are still paying exorbant amounts of cs and the ex who has barely a grade 12 education is still living the life. I'll use Mike Vick as an example only because I was watching something about him recently. He went bankrupt, no one wanted to hire him, yet he was still having to pay cs in the amount of $100, 000 each month as the judge would not agree to lower it. At 100 grand of course his ex was profitting from it.

    I have soul custody, I receive no cs. Is it fair to my child? No. But at the end of the day, I decided life is too short to spend it in court.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by rockscan View Post
      So what youre saying is he should have left his wife and child because there were no opportunities for him? Or it was ok that she overspent both the salaries they were earning during the marriage?

      He tried saying no. He tried stopping her. He tried doing what was best. He made the only choice left to him which was get divorced and it still goes on. He can say no now because they both cant afford it, she still does it and it becomes a case of "dad wont let you do this" or "dad doesnt pay enough child support".

      Youre absolutely right about teaching responsibility but its hard to do when both parents arent on the same page.
      Didn't they end up splitting up anyway?

      I didn't say he should have left his wife because there were no opportunities for him (which, btw, is very different than what you originally stated which was that his wife prevented him from securing different opportunities and advancing his career).

      What I said was - HE made the decision - as ill-guided as it was. Not his wife. Unless she put a dog collar on him daily and led him to the place she chose for him to work, bolted him to the desk and then picked him back up with the same leash - these are decisions HE made.

      Hindsight is a truly wonderful thing. Yes, he should have left when it became clear that he would have no choice on his future career, his money, his spending, her spending, etc, etc, etc.

      Comment


      • #18
        I may not have worded that correctly. Before they married they made all kinds of grand plans (which most engaged loving couples do) but after they got married things changed. It became a case of "we're not moving so you find any job you can that pays enough money for us to live here" (paraphrasing of course and 'here' was a very expensive town with very wealthy people, that was where she wanted to live and there was never an opportunity to discuss it, if he wanted to stay married, that was where they lived) and then proceeded to spend regardless of his input. When the kids came along it got worse. They had to keep up with all the other families in town. He had opportunities to advance or improve his skill set but there was no discussion about moving the family or using any money for designations--it was a non-starter. He had to do what he could to earn a specific level of money in that area. That was the bulk of their disagreements. He couldn't find a job that paid more than a certain amount because of the field he was in and his education/experience, and she refused to live within their means. I know this because of the way he acts with me regarding how we spend money, where we live, and how we save. He assumes I'll be like that and stresses about our future if I'm going to spend money we don't have (I'm a pretty frugal person so it's not going to happen). He did what he could to keep his marriage intact including working for an ex family member. Money and spending was one of the big reasons for the split and it continues to be an issue now with cs and other costs. He can finally say no, but it's not an answer the ex likes to hear and the kids have fallen in line with that attitude.

        I get that there are give and takes in marriage but there seemed to be no give in this case. I make more money than he does but have a broader skill set. So while we're discussing looking for other opportunities elsewhere because we both have no options in the city we're in, we are considering both careers and where we can both do best. This was never a discussion between the two of them. Then it became a case of resentment over his meager income and how if he made more money they could afford more. Now with the divorce it's a case of "we have no money because you don't pay enough and took all our money". Maybe it's easier for us because we have no kids, or maybe it's just because we both know how to discuss concerns and be reasonable.

        I believe in CS and SS. I was raised by a single mother who gave up her career to raise us and support my father in his career and went back to school after the divorce to get a job. Granted now my father has to continue working at 78 because a portion of his OAS is paid to my mother as part of the SS and he has serious heart problems--he made choices too, now he suffers the consequences. But I don't agree with the attitude of being "owed". My partner and his ex wife both made choices in their marriage. She knew he was limited in his career and still chose to marry him. He knew he was going to be tied to that area. They both made decisions after the divorce. He's meeting his responsibilities and trying to teach his kids that life isn't just handed to you, sometimes bad things happen, sometimes you make mistakes, sometimes you have to work for things. It's hard to go against the misaligned arguments they get fed that he took everything from them and doesn't pay enough.

        Comment


        • #19
          In any long-term marriage, I think it's impossible to say that decisions about family life were completely made by one spouse, with no responsibility borne by the other one. We see quite a few people turning up here complaining about how their ex "insisted" on staying home with the kids for years, and now that the marriage Is over wants spousal support; or "insisted" on spending lots of money and now they have very few assets to divide. I'm really suspicious of this kind of 20/20 hindsight. Did these people really have absolutely no input into a situation that went on for years? Were they really objecting strenuously the whole time, while their ex just went ahead with his/her own plans? I have more respect for people who take responsibility and own their decisions, whether those decision turned out good or bad in the long run.

          My bf is in a similar situation - his ex quit work when kids were born and had tremendous spending habits. The end result is that there weren't a whole lot of assets to equalize when the divorce happened, and bf ended up on the hook for a lot of SS (time-limited, fortunately, and now almost done). But he recognizes his own complicity in letting the situation go on and on, and owns it (in his words, "I should have pulled my head out of my a$$ a lot sooner"). He's paying for his mistakes now - and it would be easy to pin all of this of his ex, but it takes two to screw up a marriage.

          Comment


          • #20
            I also caution people on believing they know the "whole truth" when in reality, they have one side of the story, which came from someone they want to believe, want to trust, want to empathize with.

            One of my ex's girlfriends also thought she knew the whole truth- from him. And now, as the mother of his second child (whom he doesn't see at all), she now realizes that -perhaps the "whole truth and nothing but the truth" wasn't the truth at all. She has actually apologized to me for all the grief that he caused (and she selflessly supported and encouraged based on the version of the truth she had).

            Comment


            • #21
              Thanks Stripes for basically summing up my and my husband's position. We pay CS and SS (and full CS plus, plus, plus) despite having children over 40 percent of time. We are fine in that decision and offered it long before/if it were ever ordered....

              But fundamentally and now - we believe that each person should be independent and be financially for themselves. Stay at home if you want. But make no mistake - your employer doesn't take your husband's resignation from work - your employer takes your resignation. Just as if you drop out of school you drop out of school....all that to say, your spouse may have an influence but not the ultimate say.

              I am certain that if more people were financially independent then a lot of the BS between divorced parents would be eradicated.

              Comment


              • #22
                In any long-term marriage, I think it's impossible to say that decisions about family life were completely made by one spouse, with no responsibility borne by the other one. We see quite a few people turning up here complaining about how their ex "insisted" on staying home with the kids for years, and now that the marriage Is over wants spousal support; or "insisted" on spending lots of money and now they have very few assets to divide. I'm really suspicious of this kind of 20/20 hindsight. Did these people really have absolutely no input into a situation that went on for years? Were they really objecting strenuously the whole time, while their ex just went ahead with his/her own plans? I have more respect for people who take responsibility and own their decisions, whether those decision turned out good or bad in the long run.
                I think its more subtle than that. My ex's job future is a cashier at a grocery store a marrying rich. When she asked me to stay home with the kids the answer was sure go ahead.

                The detailed answer is more like, "Well you're not going anywhere anyways and childcare is more than you bring in and I love you so I'm ok taking the financial responsibility for YOUR sake and the kids sake."

                Fast Forward to divorce court
                It turns into stupidities like:
                -"She didn't work to support my career"
                -"You stopped her from working"
                -"You benefittted from her staying home"
                blah blah blah
                While all that time I thought I Was being nice to her and the kids agreeing to her stay home.

                At the end I accepted she stayed home but nobody told me if the tramp slept with everybody on the block while she was "Staying home" for the kids that i'd be paying her for it for at least half the length of the marriage AFTER i figured it out.

                But back, to the CS discussion -
                2 things I retained
                1. Accountability is more palatable
                2. If both households can afford the basics then no CS?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Serene View Post
                  Thanks Stripes for basically summing up my and my husband's position. We pay CS and SS (and full CS plus, plus, plus) despite having children over 40 percent of time. We are fine in that decision and offered it long before/if it were ever ordered....

                  But fundamentally and now - we believe that each person should be independent and be financially for themselves. Stay at home if you want. But make no mistake - your employer doesn't take your husband's resignation from work - your employer takes your resignation. Just as if you drop out of school you drop out of school....all that to say, your spouse may have an influence but not the ultimate say.

                  I am certain that if more people were financially independent then a lot of the BS between divorced parents would be eradicated.

                  I think it works the other way too Serene. I'd be much more financially independent if it weren't for the BS in family court.

                  I've actually spent more money on legal fees in the last few years than I have received in child support.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I took a lot of info with a grain of salt until I saw the financials from the divorce, the list of projected s7 for that year, and then saw the email requests for more and more. And ive heard the kids screaming at him about how they have no money because of him and how they should be allowed to not worry about the consequences of spending money. Im more inclined to believe when I ask why they didnt move somewhere else.

                    Hes all for cs and reasonable s7. Its the "if you loved us you wouldnt have taken moms money/pay us more" argument. There almost needs to be divorce classes on what the law means. Equalization of assets is because of this, cs is this portion of income for that etc.

                    Links17 whats basic for one house may not be basic for others.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Yes, I can understand that MS Mom. But for some, not all, it's a choice to go to court. I am owed over 60-80K in CS. I've never set foot in court to collect it...its my choice indeed. But not worth my effort.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Court isn't always about money - it can be custody/access related. Which sucks even more - those legal fees are not tax deductible!

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                          I took a lot of info with a grain of salt until I saw the financials from the divorce, the list of projected s7 for that year, and then saw the email requests for more and more. And ive heard the kids screaming at him about how they have no money because of him and how they should be allowed to not worry about the consequences of spending money. Im more inclined to believe when I ask why they didnt move somewhere else.

                          Hes all for cs and reasonable s7. Its the "if you loved us you wouldnt have taken moms money/pay us more" argument. There almost needs to be divorce classes on what the law means. Equalization of assets is because of this, cs is this portion of income for that etc.

                          Links17 whats basic for one house may not be basic for others.
                          The financials from the divorce don't tell the story of how they got there - just the story of where they currently are. It's all to easy to blame someone else (who isn't there anymore) for the mistakes they made.

                          I think the bigger concern there is the level of detail the children have (or perceive to have) of the financials in the divorce. The children can't fully understand it all, nor should they.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Oh we know it! (all too well!).

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              I don't buy the staying home with the kids excuse in today's day and age where you can keep yourself educated on line.

                              If you get half of the assets form the marriage while at home being this is your payout for the work you did during that time.

                              CS should be based on cost to raise a child and time each parent has child.

                              So what if one parent makes more they should have this in their home as extra support for child on their time. Other party wants to do more then work for it.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I had a thought about this - here goes. Throughout our life we make mistakes and bad decisions - I should have stayed in school, shouldn't have bought that expensive car, should have visited my parents more before they passed away, shouldn't have settled for a boring job, etc. We carry the results of these mistakes for a long time. With most of these bad decisions, we have no one to blame but ourselves, because it's clear that we are the ones responsible (of course there are some people who play "poor me", and who think of themselves as eternal victims, but most reasonable people can see that they have a part in whatever happens in their lives.

                                However, divorce is different. For all the negative outcomes of divorce - financial struggles, difficulties with kids, stigma, etc - there's someone close at hand to blame - the ex! And it's easy to blame the ex because we are already really ticked off at him or her, or we wouldn't be divorcing. So people tend to lump all kinds of blame on their ex, rewriting history in the process. It's all his fault the kids are unhappy; she tricked me into supporting her while she stayed home and now she wants SS; I'm lonely on the holidays because he insists on having the kids; I can't go on vacation because she's demanding more child support; I'm living in a crappy apartment because he kept the house, etc. Divorce just sucks, and there are so many negative outcomes.

                                It's easier to blame the ex than to regard these circumstances as the outcomes of mistakes or bad decisions we ourselves made. We made a mistake when we married the other person; we made a mistake when we allowed a status quo to develop in which one parent didn't work; we made a mistake when we ignored signs all was not well in the marriage; we made a mistake when we gave in to what the ex wanted all the time, et cetera. Accepting that we ourselves have screwed up doesn't mean letting the ex off the hook completely, but it means understanding that there's plenty of responsibility to go around.

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X