Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Naming a co-respondent?

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

  • #16
    Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. I actually have no desire to air the dirty laundry, just a bunch of false allegations to respond to and a custody battle. I had offered to settle out of court and do a joint divorce to avoid the blame game as I knew that's what it was about for him. It's not really about divorce, it's about getting even. I just want to move forward peacefully but no can do. Gotta be a winner/loser with him.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by fairlight View Post
      if the word "mistress" was so out of style nowadays, as you say "it is 2018", then how come it's plastered all over the news in reference to the Chris Watts case?
      Using journalists to deduce the type of language suitable for a legal application is not necessarily the best plan ever.

      Comment


      • #18
        ^ Ha ha! Point taken.

        Ok, what's the appropriate legal word then? I do cringe a bit at using a word like "girlfriend" or "partner". The first implies that he is single or already divorced which he is not. The second implies that there is a long-term stable relationship similar to a marriage, which there is not. I'd rather not use a loaded word like mistress but I would at least like an accurate word! As neutral and factual as possible. He's thrown out enough drama already for the both of us, ha ha!

        I have nothing against her personally - but I do want my husband to show a little respect for the marriage and family he created with me and wait until the divorce is final before throwing a third party at the kids. That seems fair, and I am willing to be fair in return toward him and make the process as quick and painless as possible. But he doesn't play fair.

        Comment


        • #19
          "Sugar mama" would probably be most accurate. Ha ha! But definitely not a very dignified term.

          Comment


          • #20
            You really have no need to refer to his 'friend' in any way. From the time he moved out you are on your own and any and all dealings regarding the divorce and child custody are between you and him. Who he decides to keep company with is totally beyond your influence or control.

            I'd recommend keeping ALL of your communication with your STBX child-focused.

            Probably a good idea to not acknowledge or refer to 'the other woman' at all.

            Whatever you do, DO NOT get into a text mode of communication with him. Texting is too instant and often people get themselves into deep trouble blurting things before thinking. What is regularly recommended on here is that you send and receive emails and do not always respond right away. Sometimes it is best to wait until the next day to respond. Respect his right to do the same.

            Comment


            • #21
              I feel your pain, my ex did the exact same thing. And to be honest, it drove me nuts the first year. I think you will eventually be able to say both "girlfriend" or "partner", or simply refer to her by her given name. What till your kids start calling her Mom, that's a kicker!!!

              I was pissed my ex introduced the "new Mom" within weeks of us separating. I felt it was too much for the children, he did not. Its two different parenting styles.

              Fasten your seat belt, if you think this process is quick and painless, it can takes years with a stubborn ex.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by fairlight View Post
                Ok, what's the appropriate legal word then? I do cringe a bit at using a word like "girlfriend" or "partner".
                Just to reiterate what Arabian said, the appropriate word is to not refer to her at all. She is not a party to the dispute. She is completely and utterly irrelevant.

                I have nothing against her personally
                You have nothing personally against the women who wrecked your marriage and screwed up the lives of your children? I assume it was totally his fault of course.

                but I do want my husband to show a little respect for the marriage and family he created with me and wait until the divorce is final before throwing a third party at the kids.
                That might be nice, but a dirty secret of divorce is that you essentially lose a lot of control over your ex spouse. You have no leverage. Your kids will meet the girlfriend, and it is likely that the more you kick and scream, the more he will push to include her in his life.

                That seems fair, and I am willing to be fair in return toward him and make the process as quick and painless as possible. But he doesn't play fair.
                So, your plan is that, in retaliation for him introducing his mistress to the kids, you're going to go to court and wreck your finances?

                It is likely that he is telling everyone how unfair you are being. He just wants to move on with his life and you have decided to throw a temper tantrum and spend the kid's university money on lawyers.

                Forget the new girlfriend. Trust me, we get it, it sucks. However, court doesn't help heal hurt feelings. You win by living a better life. Make an offer to settle and move on with your life.

                Comment


                • #23
                  We're in court already. I'm the respondent, not the applicant, defending against his false allegations. I have never taken him to court over any issue.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    What exactly are the allegations? Unless he is saying you are withholding access, the rest can be ignored.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Would naming her help me and the children out financially, since she is the sole provider at their house?
                      No. Adultery is related to the claim for divorce, not any of the financial claims.

                      You can show that he is being supported by her as part of a claim for imputing an income to him without claiming adultery as grounds for divorce.

                      Depending on when he acquired the debt, you could be on the hook for 1/2 of it, if it was during the marriage.
                      That is not entirely accurate. It depends on net family property. You do not share debt; one person owes the other an equalization payment (which will be impacted by the debt). NFP cannot be negative, however.

                      You actually can't name the "mistress" as a party to the matter as they are not a party to the matter.
                      While correct that you do not name the other party as a co-Respondent, if you name someone as having committed adultery with your spouse then you must serve that person as well as the responding party.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        LOL....I prefer " skank".......thanks for the chuckle!!!!!

                        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