Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do you think that woman receive preferential treatment

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by billiechic View Post
    do the forms ask you for details about WHY CS is current or not?

    IMHO a parent who does not make some sort of arrangement to pay does not show much interest in what's best for their kids. Whether you can pay all of it or have to play catch up is a moot point. If you are not adult enough to acknowledge the NEEDS of your kids, then you are not RESPOSIBLE enough to be caring for them.

    While support is not directly related to access, one's commitment to their kids is VERY relevant. One way of evaluating this is to make sure they are meeting financial obligations to their children.
    Couldn't disagree more. It's simple - access should NOT be related to support in ANY way. Two wrongs don't make a right as they say. Denying access to ones parent for financial reasons is simply wrong.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by billm View Post
      Couldn't disagree more. It's simple - access should NOT be related to support in ANY way. Two wrongs don't make a right as they say. Denying access to ones parent for financial reasons is simply wrong.
      Agreed, and if you did link the two, you would create a vicous cycle that would only harm the children in the long run.

      How about this scenario - CP denies access to NCP. NCP says "screw you, if you're not letting me see my kids, I am not paying you". CP turns around and says "hey, you're not paying your support. Now I have reason to deny access!!!" Now you've got two people pointing the finger at the other saying they started it and looking like the children they are supposed to be raising, and ignoring their obligation to support the children's best interests.

      And what should happen to the NCP that loses their job and can no longer afford to pay the previous guideline amount or afford a lawyer to have it changed? Should they be deemed time with their kids?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by billiechic View Post
        do the forms ask you for details about WHY CS is current or not?

        IMHO a parent who does not make some sort of arrangement to pay does not show much interest in what's best for their kids. Whether you can pay all of it or have to play catch up is a moot point. If you are not adult enough to acknowledge the NEEDS of your kids, then you are not RESPOSIBLE enough to be caring for them.

        While support is not directly related to access, one's commitment to their kids is VERY relevant. One way of evaluating this is to make sure they are meeting financial obligations to their children.
        No, the new forms do not ask WHY it is not current. It simply asks the amount owing and the steps to pay. I did not make the observation to discuss the responsibility of the parent(s), but to point out the leanings of the courts lately. You have a better chance on custody and access if your support payments are current. I am the mom, whose child support was never received for over 6 years...and not once did I use that to hinder or halt access...and in fact even transport my child to see his father every time, at my cost...but in so many cases, I have seen the custodial parent, and the courts, use arrears as a reason to limit access...and that is what sickens me

        Comment


        • The gov't put the knife in...she just keeps twisting it! And don't forget to pay or your wages will be garnished!!!(another twist!)

          Comment


          • Good Morning Everyone,

            This is my first post and I will give it a go.
            Question was "Do you think women get preferential treatment"
            I would have to say it depends a lot on the length of the marriage. I'm a 61 year old female. My husband and I are splitting up. I have worked in health care for 25 years and contributed to a pension all those years. My husband also worked during out marriage but didn't contribute.
            As it stands right now he's entitled to my pension, my CPP, and I have to keep him on my health plan.
            In order for me to not have him claim all he can, I have to sell the house and give him ALL the profits, half of everything in the house and our vehicle, then and only then will he not go after my pension. As it stands I won't even have any money put get an apartment as I will need first and lasts months rent. My lawyer told me he is entitled to all of these things. When women started demanding equal rights for everything...that's what we got...so I would say sometimes be careful what you ask for...this is the result. I can empathize with all the men who are going through this (and women) although I personally don't know of any woman going through this not to say there aren't any. He said if I stay until the house is sold he will pay half of everything, that would of been wonderful had he just offered the equal share of paying when we were a couple. Right now my head is screwed on so backwards I have a hard time remembering my name.

            Good luck to everyone
            lorac

            Comment


            • Lorac, the question was not whether the law is gender biased. It's not.

              It was whether the application of the law favours women.

              Comment


              • Absolutely, 100%. Here and in New Brunswick, but I am betting it is everywhere in Canada.

                Comment


                • So naive...if the law 100% favours women, then NO father would get custody!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by billiechic View Post
                    So naive...if the law 100% favours women, then NO father would get custody!
                    This statement does not make sense

                    Comment


                    • I am not saying that custody is 100%, just that the favour is toward women. Just look at the ISO forms, deal with FRO or look often at the publicity by the government and their supported agencies.

                      Naivety is not the case here, but experience is!

                      Comment


                      • As it stands right now he's entitled to my pension, my CPP, and I have to keep him on my health plan.
                        In order for me to not have him claim all he can, I have to sell the house and give him ALL the profits, half of everything in the house and our vehicle, then and only then will he not go after my pension. - I believe as far as the law is concerned this is how it is supposed to be applied - in a marriage half of everything goes to each person which includes assets and debts no matter who contributed to what - you use your assets to pay off the debts and the remainder gets split equally pension is split, CPP is split, etc; health plans usually have a stipulation regarding divorcing couples, you may want to ask your service provider about this.

                        Of course, if you both can agree on other options that is doable as well but bottom line the financial part of divorce should be the same for both - especially in court, gender does not matter.

                        http://www.canadiandivorcelaws.com/p...-divorce-laws/
                        Last edited by first timer; 03-16-2011, 12:12 PM. Reason: update

                        Comment


                        • There are so many woman who take advantage of that role in society and actually stunt their children's ability to do well and experience the outside world the way it really is for the other 80% of their time on this earth.
                          Its an equal world now (so they say) there's woman construction workers , male nurses and gay and lesbians can marry in most places now therefore your so called nuclear family isn't so nuclear anymore.
                          Its time many mothers stop hiding behind the "stay at home mom, take care of me role" and get off their duffs and serve other roles in society.
                          If your a stay at home mom your not doing your kids , self or society any favours what so ever.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by #1StepMom View Post
                            NO DOUBT ABOUT IT

                            (Based on personal experience, experiences of relatives/friends, and experiences of acquaintances who have had dealings with the Ontario family court system... and - not surprisingly - any family court system. Some have called it the "golden uterus syndrome" where women/mothers get preferential treatment because they are just that... women/mothers. We still live in a society that associates femininity with mothering/parenting and masculinity with being the $$$ provider.)
                            Cripes, are all your relatives/friends just bitter folk who made poor marital choices?
                            I guess these guys were just model dudes who had wicked, wicked women take them to the cleaners?

                            Oh, I guess they and you haven't been on the RECEIVING end of getting NOTHING... NO child support because "Daddy" skipped the province.
                            Women have it SO easy, I forgot.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by neonguy View Post
                              There are so many woman who take advantage of that role in society and actually stunt their children's ability to do well and experience the outside world the way it really is for the other 80% of their time on this earth.
                              Its an equal world now (so they say) there's woman construction workers , male nurses and gay and lesbians can marry in most places now therefore your so called nuclear family isn't so nuclear anymore.
                              Its time many mothers stop hiding behind the "stay at home mom, take care of me role" and get off their duffs and serve other roles in society.
                              If your a stay at home mom your not doing your kids , self or society any favours what so ever.
                              So many people don't take advantage of the opportunities afforded them in...school?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by dadtotheend View Post
                                So her deep pockets sunk you. That's not gender bias.

                                Did you go to trial? If you did, and presented your evidence well, and had a good case then I would like to hear about it.

                                I'll support you. Just stop being a patsy to gender bias.
                                Sink the rich, I say.

                                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