Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is your opinion??

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by arabian View Post
    Lets say I am a young mother who stays at home with the kids. I am busy schlepping kids around to school and to their medical appointments and activities. I only have enough money to buy some basic groceries. It was determined early on in our relationship that my husband pays all the bills. I get money for personal things only when I ask for it.
    Nobody forced you to this, your kids can, a so many other kids go to daycare, and both parents can take them to activities, so nobody but yourself did this. Especially, if it is a case of common law relationship, where both parties made a decision not to get married, well in that case you make sure that you are able to support yourself.

    In my opinion, in cases like the exemple you provided, there should be some ss paid, but it should be for a very limited time. However, this is really far of the situation described by original poster.

    Comment


    • #62
      My point is that marriages evolve. Often people start out with the best of intentions, working together the common good of the family. In the example I provided the young woman has no money to pay for anything. She can't just put her kids in daycare because husband controls the money. She is in a disadvantaged situation and the courts recognize that when people leave marriages they should do so on equal footing. In this case the woman has two choices - stay in the marriage or get a lawyer to go to court on her behalf and request interim financial support so she can get her life on track. Getting a lawyer to assist her will present many challenges as well.

      I think you get the picture.

      Until you have walked in someone else's shoes it is unfair to assume they can instantly become self-sufficient. That is all I am saying.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by arabian View Post
        My point is that marriages evolve. Often people start out with the best of intentions, working together the common good of the family. In the example I provided the young woman has no money to pay for anything. She can't just put her kids in daycare because husband controls the money. She is in a disadvantaged situation and the courts recognize that when people leave marriages they should do so on equal footing. In this case the woman has two choices - stay in the marriage or get a lawyer to go to court on her behalf and request interim financial support so she can get her life on track. Getting a lawyer to assist her will present many challenges as well.

        I think you get the picture.

        Until you have walked in someone else's shoes it is unfair to assume they can instantly become self-sufficient. That is all I am saying.

        I am wondering though, how long after leaving the marriage does it "normally" take for any interm spousal support to be ordered? Would this really be helpful when actually leaving the marriage or would it be helpful months after you left?

        Also, as I brought up before. When there was 1 household money was made and the house was cleaned and cooking was done. Now you have 2 households. The person making the money just financially support both houses, but the person cleaning is not required to keep 2 households clean and fed. If in the family unit one person worked outside and one inside, why is it when they break up only one persons family duties (making and paying money) get broken up. The other person would cook and clean for their household only while still making money from the other party. The other party has to work and do all the housework now and cooking or pay someone to do it.

        Comment


        • #64
          I applied for, and received, Interim Support order one month after I filed for divorce. The sooner it is applied for the sooner one gets it. Everyone's circumstances are different. In my case my ex had removed all of the money and put under family/g/f's name and I was left with no money whatsoever.

          So if your wife wants to leave and you try to freeze her out financially you may pay dearly for that.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by soonfree!! View Post
            Why should it be incumbent upon the person who doesn't want to pay spousal support? Why not be incumbent on the one who wishes to get support? If they have been providing services and they expect to get paid why didn't they establish that in the first place? Especially, when the law is allowing financial support. The services do not continue do they?
            Why didn't you make the arrangement and pay the other person for their services and keep all the finances separate?

            She didn't think much of the future possibilities while cleaning house and making dinner - but it doesn't sound like you did either?

            Being in a relationship is not equivalent to being employed ... even if it feels like that sometimes. But, if you want to think of it in those terms, the spousal support is like severance and EI. She's entitled to one week severance for each year she was employed. EI would continue on past that, for a minimum of one year.

            We all have regret at the end of a relationship, this is yours.

            Comment


            • #66
              I really want my ex to come clean my house and cook my meals while I pay spousal then I'd be happy - going to need to hire a poison tester though but still....

              Comment


              • #67
                I'm sure she's just dying to come and cook and clean for you. She probably misses this part of her life with you and can't possibly conceive of a life without servitude to you.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by arabian View Post
                  I'm sure she's just dying to come and cook and clean for you. She probably misses this part of her life with you and can't possibly conceive of a life without servitude to you.
                  There were 2 parts to the family contract though.

                  1 to pay the bills to support the family financially
                  1 to stay home and support the family non financially (cooking and cleaning and running errands)

                  Why is it after breakup the only one of the parties is responsible to continue with the family contract?
                  So you quit your family job and want to continue to get paid?

                  Now if you are fired, for sure some sort of severance (SS) should be awarded. But if you quit.

                  What happens if the person working just quits....

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Aha - but you must remember that in Canada there are no-fault divorces. Reason for terminating the contract isn't supposed to matter, although I personally think it comes into play much more than people realize.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      I think that every support payor would more then happy to pay support the same way as EI, for every year of the relationship/marriage, one week (or even a month) of spousal support! Now it more like, 6 months or a year for every year for the relationship.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by fireweb13 View Post
                        There were 2 parts to the family contract though.

                        1 to pay the bills to support the family financially
                        1 to stay home and support the family non financially (cooking and cleaning and running errands)

                        Why is it after breakup the only one of the parties is responsible to continue with the family contract?
                        So you quit your family job and want to continue to get paid?

                        Now if you are fired, for sure some sort of severance (SS) should be awarded. But if you quit.

                        What happens if the person working just quits....
                        Exactly!

                        It's enough to make you want to get rid of no fault divorce. One person breaks the contract, and the other person still has to uphold their end??

                        Marriage is a partnership, and when it ends, each former partner has to pick up the slack and go it alone, taking on the roles that the other person used to do. For some, that means finding a job, and for others, that means doing their own housework.

                        The problem is that it's a lot easier to start cleaning and cooking for yourself (or hire someone or get takeout) than it is to get a job instantly, especially if someone has been out of the workforce for many years.

                        Spousal support is leftover from an era in which women had way less earning potential and were generally expected to not work outside the home. As a result, their ability to support themselves after a divorce was minimal, and spousal support was meant to address this problem. Many women stayed in miserable marriages because they didn't see any alternative except homelessness and starvation. That's not the case anymore. The problem now is that many attitudes are still lingering from that era, as are many lawyers and judges.

                        Here's a novel idea...maybe single income families should have to pay double into EI, and then if they split up, the jobless person gets EI instead of spousal support, with all the attendant rules governing EI's duration and retraining systems. Then it's just a simple tax matter instead of a family court nightmare.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          and everybody knows being a SAHM is not a real job anymore with the amount that most fathers help out....

                          The reason its not 1week/year is because this isn't the government's money, its your money and they don't give a crap if your budget isn't balanced (they barely care about their budgets....)

                          All that matters is that women and children don't starve no matter how lazy the payees are

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Toutou View Post
                            I think that every support payor would more then happy to pay support the same way as EI, for every year of the relationship/marriage, one week (or even a month) of spousal support! Now it more like, 6 months or a year for every year for the relationship.
                            But the person on EI was employed and is able to re-enter the workforce without much hassle.

                            The person who stayed at home for any length of time will have a much more difficult time finding that employment.

                            And, when entering an employment agreement you can negotiate the terms upon which your agreement may end. Ie. Minimum of one year severance... etc.

                            EI will also fund training programs of varying lengths at varying costs.

                            You guys want this to be a "contract" when it suits. ie. I'm still paying her, but she isn't cleaning my house anymore. Well, you fired her (or she fired herself, or whatever) and she no longer holds that job anymore, so why would she clean? I know when I got laid off from my full time job, the last place I planned on going the next day was work - even though I was getting severance, then EI, etc.

                            People are screaming for accountability for those funds, why isn't she required to work, why isn't she being forced to work, etc, etc. But there's no accountability on behalf of the working person who allowed, lived with, tolerated or, perhaps even wanted the "traditional" one person stay at home relationship. You helped create the beast that is her financial dependency, but don't want to accept the reality it brings.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              [QUOTE... But there's no accountability on behalf of the working person who allowed, lived with, tolerated or, perhaps even wanted the "traditional" one person stay at home relationship. You helped create the beast that is her financial dependency, but don't want to accept the reality it brings.[/QUOTE]

                              I concur and I believe this is taken into consideration when determining eligibility for SS. The agreement that one party would stay at home was mutual. If the payor didn't agree then why was the contract not terminated immediately?

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                and everybody knows being a SAHM is not a real job anymore with the amount that most fathers help out....
                                This is such a dbag statement...and no, I've never been a SAHM except for maternity leave (I worked in the US and lived in Canada...so very short maternity leaves). I actually worked full-time and managed the household, hence my being divorced today...and I had an ex that used to constantly tell me that cooking and cleaning was "no big deal" while he sat on his ass doing nothing in the beautiful home that I provided. The truth is that these roles are essential to a working family.

                                The parent that stays at home is relied upon to provide services and generally the hours of those services are longer than any normal, full-time job. I have a real issue with anyone who demeans the role that stay-at-home parents play. I think its exactly why there's so many families in chaos these days. The role of keeping and maintaining a home, having family meals and providing a parental focus for the children is extremely important. Its great if both parents share in that role but that isn't feasible for all families...generally one parent has to scale back on their career and provide those services.

                                My new partner plays a large amount of SS to his ex-wife, however, he thinks she deserves it. Although she's a nurse, she mostly stayed home to raise their children and maintain their home. He considered those services extremely valuable and she had to cut back on her career to do it while he was able to excel at his. Consequently, although she's re-entered the workforce, he makes 5 times what she makes and always will. He'll also be able to retire early since he's been able to stay at the same career the whole time. If I had ever heard him demean the role she played in raising their lovely children or keeping a beautiful home for them or making his meals everyday...I wouldn't be with him. Not all men are like you Links....and thank goodness for that.

                                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