Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Divorce Law are a Joke and Dads are the Punch Line

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

  • #61
    If you look at the Federal Child Support guidelines and tables for each respective province, the amounts are different due primarily to the different amounts of provincial income tax rates.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Grace
      Sasha1,

      $5,300 is not a lot of money to raise a child when you think about food, shelter & clothing. Divide that by 365 day of the year and your talking approx. $14.50 per day. I can tell you, I have teenagers and they eat more than that in a day


      First I would like to say Thanks for your comments Sasha1, Grace & Jeff.

      Sasha1, never expected to wipe any slate clean just because we started a new family. And yes my husband and I did know that when we decided to have a Child that he had other children to support.

      Grace - your right as well, $5,300 is not a lot of money, let's just hope the receiving parent also works and contributes respectivley.

      Sasha1 & Grace - I don't want anyone on here to misunderstand the point and questions that I am trying to make. My husband and I would give anything and everything to ensure that all the children have everything that they need, and we always have. We have had the benefit of always having access to his Children when ever we wanted, spending all holidays with them including getting to have them for Christmas mornings every year with no argument from their mom, she knew they wanted to spend it with their little brother. The one thing I would have to say about the divorce/separation is that all though none of us like each other very much, we have all had the maturity to put those feelings aside because of the kids. Anyways back to the point.

      Sasha1 as you said

      sasha1 Quote:
      Originally Posted by jenibri
      My point is again, What protects the child "financially" when his parents are still together? Nothing....


      You do; you and your husband. You choose how much of your take home income you will spend to raise your child. You can choose to spend the same amount of $5300 per year on that child as you do on Child 1, or you spend more, or you spend less. You have choices to make about the kind of lifestyle you'll have (size/type of living accomodations, whether or not to have car payments and how much, clothing budget, etc.) that directly impact how much of your spendable income will be spent to the benefit of your child.



      It is a choice that we do get to make because we are together. And that is my point it's a choice, the intact family can chose to fund their childrens post seconday education or they can chose not to even if the parents have the "means", its still their choice.. Unlike the separated family, if you have the "means" you probably will be funding a portion of it. The choice is no longer there to make, it is made for you by the law's that we have in place.

      If we are suppose to consider men & women equal, should we not as well be considering all children as equals...

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by jenibri
        ..And that is my point it's a choice, the intact family can chose to fund their childrens post seconday education or they can chose not to even if the parents have the "means", its still their choice.. Unlike the separated family, if you have the "means" you probably will be funding a portion of it. The choice is no longer there to make, it is made for you by the law's that we have in place. ...
        I agree with you there, Jenibri.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by jenibri
          Decent Dad

          Thank you for mentioning the topic of new children.
          As I sit here and read all of these posts I keep thinking to me self what about my son. My husband has two children from his first marriage, one of which he still is required to pay CS for. We also have a son together, and every day I wonder where is the law that protects his SOL. Our son does have the benefit have having both of us together, but at the same time because we are together he has no rights as to his SOL. Nothing against the children, they do not get to decide if they are born into the first or second relationship, but the law needs to treat them all as equals. The child support is based on my husbands GROSS INCOME before deductions. 446/per month for 1. His yearly deductions for last year, taxes, ei, cpp came to about $15,000.00 CS for the year is about 5300.00. So right off the top $20,000.00 is coming off, that he never see's .
          Child 1 - benefit of parent earning $52000,00 year
          Child 2 - 32,000.00 per year is what this Childs SOL is based on.
          I'm curious to hear what other people think about this?
          Does anyone think that the current CS law should factor in other children?
          yes or no?
          The child support guidelines do not factor in new children. And as Jeff pointed out, there have been Charter challenges regarding this... and they failed.

          Yet, if the new family were to divorce, the children would get rights equal to that of the previous children. Welcome once again to the Wally World of Canadian Law.

          I just wonder, as a society, what is the thinking here? The entire guidelines were based around providing a lifestyle to children, yet not ALL children. Even a Charcter challenge failed which is to protect rights and make everyone equal.

          it reminds me of Animal Farm.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by jenibri
            I don't want anyone on here to misunderstand the point and questions that I am trying to make. My husband and I would give anything and everything to ensure that all the children have everything that they need, and we always have.
            Hey, don't worry.Unfortunately some people interpret frustration with laws and the injustices of the system as a slag towards their children. For example, just because I want child support reform, does not mean I won't support my children.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by jenibri
              It is a choice that we do get to make because we are together. And that is my point it's a choice, the intact family can chose to fund their childrens post seconday education or they can chose not to even if the parents have the "means", its still their choice.. Unlike the separated family, if you have the "means" you probably will be funding a portion of it. The choice is no longer there to make, it is made for you by the law's that we have in place.

              If we are suppose to consider men & women equal, should we not as well be considering all children as equals...
              This is what gets most fathers (or paying parent) going. The entire process basically eliminates any choice, common sense, style of upbringing or means into the equation. It basically move money from A to B like drones, and then everyone can go home and pat each other on the back for a job well done.

              I think a mistake you are making, is that this should all make sense. It donesn't. The entire system must be stripped down and rebuilt from the ground up.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by sasha1
                In actuality, the money to support each child comes out of your husband's income after his deductions come off his income.
                Although that statement is theoretically correct, many payers fall behind in their taxes. It will just come down to a fight with the FRO and CRA. Then it becomes income, child support, taxes. Either way, it is not like each child has the same chance to receive equal money. And I think that is what the original poster was getting at. Actually, its more like:

                Gross Income
                Less Tax Deduction
                Less Child Support to Child 1
                Less Necessities of Life
                Left Over Cash for Child 2

                Child support payers can juggle the bottom two - but that's it.

                Comment


                • #68
                  My ex-spouse and I together decided to have 2 children and support and raise them.

                  Our marriage didn't work out.

                  He decided to marry a single mom of 2.

                  Why should my kids suffer because he now has 2 more children to support. Obviously they were being supported before by their mother. (and presumably a father somewhere)

                  I get what you are trying to say, but he married into 2 more responsibilities KNOWING his existing responsibility to his own children. Why should he get a break on CS?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Oh - but I do agree with the University thing - my parents didn't pay for my education and my children are being told to expect to pay for their own. Just because we are divorced doesn't give them a free ride.

                    (which is not to say that I will not help them, and I would hope their father will too)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Thats perfectly right. I cant stand parents who pay for every cent of their childs life once the child has left school.
                      They buy them cars and hand everything on a silver platter.

                      The kids need to learn to look after themselves.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        At this stage in my life I'd be content if someone just gave me the silver platter!!!!!!!!ha

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Decent Dad

                          I agree with you 100%....the Divorce Laws are a joke. And Dads are the punch line.

                          Actually, after paying $950 supports in total I have only $350 left (per month) for my groceries after my bills, but her life changed and she is buying third house for close to half a million. I can’t even afford to claim anything!!! - I can only place this post here and nothing else!!!

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            I could only wish I got any support. My ex needs his $$$ to support his second wife and son, and I am on welfare and digging myself out to be self sufficient.

                            FRO is going after him for 1/2 of the 6,000 he owes me, which could mean $3,000 to me, which I would have to turn over to Welfare to cover our living costs.

                            God Bless the fathers out there that support "all" their children.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              In my case, had my ex at least not only offered, by stuck to paying something to help with the kids, or at least bought them clothes, or school lunch items - just something to help raise them, I would have only requested a final determination for custody. His avoidance of not only financially supporting the kids, but avoiding even contacting the kids brought things to the boiling point in the first place.
                              Even more angering is that I can guarantee that the new lawyer he retained knows little to nothing more than the fact that I have started a court action for custody & support.
                              And the cherry on the top is that in the lawyer's letter, the only thing mentioned is money money money, not a thing about the fact that he's avoided his kids as much as possible.
                              From my side of the fence - the court system could care less about the 'best interests of the child' when they are just as willing to allow a parent to stall and drag out procedures which should be simple matters - are they his/her kids? Who have the kids lived with during this time? How much contact has the non-CP had with the children? How well are they able to communicate in regards to the children? Does the non-CP have the accommodations for the children for extended visits? - Just to name a few things.
                              If a parent legally shows to be blameworthy and/or there are abandonment issues, then the court needs to address those things straight away - not constantly allow adjournments or petty crap to drag the kids needs through the system.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Loved reading this thread

                                I love the passon and the maturity from both sides, and how well spoken everyone is... and the interesting points made that aren't just on the surface.

                                I truly believe that my husband is living the "poor sap" existence. He pays a decent amount of child support every month (800$) for 2 children. He is also able to see them liberally, without much structure, 4x a week. I have a daughter, and all of our girls are close in age. (9, 9, 7) His ex does not work. She has a much higher standard of living than we do and the kids expect that we can provide that as well, which we can't. We don't eat out every night, go shopping every weekend, go on vacations, stay at hotels, buy clothes, go to movies, etc.

                                He's happy to pay half for things that should be included in CS like snowsuits, skates, bikes, birthday parties at "locations", but it's hard when she insists on 400$ snowsuits. A phone call that says "I bought her a new bike, pay half" and he does, but it stays at her house and is a 300$ bike for a 7 year old.

                                We argue constantly about "things that are bought for this house stay at this house" but how fair is that to the kids? Clothes, cds, movies, toys all end up at mom's and we never see them again.

                                Milk money, lunch money, book orders... Mom would never pay for these things because she will gladly say "Dad will pay" and the kids because of their ages don't understand... nevermind that Dad just wrote a cheque yesterday for 800$.

                                It's different if the recipient is using the money as extra- but in our case, she will easily say no to lessons "If you want ballet, Dad will have to pay for it".

                                If they had remained a family of 4 living on a certain income they would have had sacrifices to make. As it is, she can choose how she wants to live and make as much money as she wants to, and still receive the same amount, setting the precedent for a certain lifestyle. Dad is paying for the lifestyle that he "would have" had as well as the lifestyle they want to have while they are with him.

                                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