Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Advise

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by rockscan View Post
    To you, another wanna be deadbeat who fancies himself a hero.
    I am not a HERO but Hans Mills is, who has shown the path to freedom for hundreds of men ,to free themselves of the shackles of a biased family court .
    The real heroes are here on this website which is a manual as to how to beat the system when its unfair to men. May the brotherhood always prevail.

    https://jetsettersoption.wordpress.c...ty-and-assets/

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by AlexLitty View Post
      I am not a HERO but Hans Mills is, who has shown the path to freedom for hundreds of men ,to free themselves of the shackles of a biased family court .
      The real heroes are here on this website which is a manual as to how to beat the system when its unfair to men. May the brotherhood always prevail.

      https://jetsettersoption.wordpress.c...ty-and-assets/

      Wow. You are truly pathetic.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Bogdan View Post
        Just because a court ruled in certain way, or just because a law or legislation says so ... doesn't make it morally right.

        What percent should do the father be paying of his disposable income ? 60% ? 100% ? More than 100%?

        https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chr...him-to-suicide

        Why is it so much lower in certain European countries ? Because kids some how have less financial needs?

        Where's the responsibility from the mother ? She signed a binding contract ... reneged on it when it no longer suited her, pleaded ignorance, played the victim and disability card, and demanded even money.

        Statistically she probably broke up the family unit in the first place too, likely citing the same old tired cliche of "my emotional needs weren't being met"..

        .. but sure blame the dad.

        I never said everything is fair in family court. However, the number of “unfair” situations is not as large as many make out. There are hundreds of cases that don’t make it on to canlii and settle out of court. There are significantly higher numbers of unreasonable people who refuse to do what is best for their kids and unfortunately the kids suffer as a result.

        As for paying for kids…offset means shared cs and long term spousal means a long marriage where one person sacrificed. The opposite could also be true. Why should kids suffer because one parent wants to cry foul at having to support them.

        If you don’t like it, work on your marriage, figure out a way to have both spouses working, be a better partner. And if that fails, lobby your local MP for changes to the system. Bitching about it in online forums isn’t solving the problem. Neither is running away and abandoning your kids.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Bogdan View Post
          Stats please ? I would expect the percentage of cases where the mom gets custody to be much higher then the percentage of cases where the dad isn't fully paying support.



          So it's ok for the mother to push the father out of the kids life by refusing 50/50. But if the dad takes off (for the few days he has ) because he's stuck on EOW, gets alienated, can't make difference in the kids life ... that's bad. Makes perfect sense to me.

          You first. An online venting forum of men who are angry is not statistical.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by rockscan View Post
            She instructs her lawyer.
            And how am I to be amicable in such case? It takes two to agree, not just one.


            I suspect she complains to lawyer how horrible I was but that's where it ends.

            It is her lawyer who instructs her to run off with kids, and delay the shared custody for years and to use kids as cash.

            It is 100% her lawyer who tells her "don't worry, just lie in affidavit you are unemployed, as courts are so stupid and biased that even if your ex will bring concrete proof you lied, they still won't do anything to mother" (and even if they do, it won't be lawyer's problem, lol)

            It is her lawyer who tells "call cops and tell he hit you", so he will have both family and criminal courts in parallel. Sure, there are cases of real abuse where we want police to protect victims, but there is alarming number of fake claims just to get litigation advantage without any consequences when prosecutor figures out claims where fake. If there was a mandatory jail sentence if you lied, or fine, or even mandatory volunteering the number of fake claims would reduce.


            And then after all this happens and they take 80% of man income, and give him 38% of custody, as there is no way he capable handling 40% (solid logic), they are surprised when some are leaving the country or even this world. How many men should commit suicide for judges to become accountable? For country to change the Family Law?

            Canada promotes slogan "In best interest of a child", but children are victims of this family court and tool of greedy mothers. The custody should start with 50/50, with very rare exceptions, not the other way round, then things could change.
            Last edited by respondent; 08-10-2022, 10:16 PM.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by rockscan View Post
              I never said everything is fair in family court. However, the number of �unfair� situations is not as large as many make out. There are hundreds of cases that don�t make it on to canlii and settle out of court. There are significantly higher numbers of unreasonable people who refuse to do what is best for their kids and unfortunately the kids suffer as a result.

              As for paying for kids�offset means shared cs and long term spousal means a long marriage where one person sacrificed. The opposite could also be true. Why should kids suffer because one parent wants to cry foul at having to support them.

              If you don�t like it, work on your marriage, figure out a way to have both spouses working, be a better partner. And if that fails, lobby your local MP for changes to the system. Bitching about it in online forums isn�t solving the problem. Neither is running away and abandoning your kids.
              Now we are speaking facts , I am paying 100% of child support from my income of 300k which is approx 4k tax free a month while the ex eats cheetos off my money . I have prided myself on paying over and above this including paying all extracurricular activies of 25k a year for the kids . Lol ,now the courts say they need to split 50% of my income to share with an ex , who doesnt work and wants minimum wage income imputed to her and have kids only 50% of the time . So in effect , she lives off my hard work and has kids only 50% of the time and gets paid to sit at home/go on vacations to enjoy off my income . Similar case turned around for a man whom I know , he was flipping burders at McDs and had 50% custody while his exwife was an accountant making 150 k a year. The same judge awarded full child support to the guy but spousal support of only 1$ , the judge tells him ,he could work construction( apparently they make 80-100k there) or upgrade his skills to earn more . This is the gender bias , in todays world women often earn more than men but men are viewed as primary breadwinners and penalized . I never disagree with child support ,its the right of the children and duty/responsibility of both the parents to provide equally . Hans Mills paid child support to the dot , but when they asked for spousal support after he gave away his home previously ,thats when he flipped . With these decisions ,no man will ever give the matrimonial home to his ex spouse to provide for his kids. If he was an arsehole he would have asked for partition sale of matrimonial home , thrown his kids out of their safe home and then paid out spousal support . Cases and judgements like this will force more and more men to ask for partition sale of matrimonial homes at divorce . The best solution is to have a foreign passport and twiddle your thumbs at courts to prove and enforce jurisdiction . Lol ,at one of case conferences ,I explicitly told my exs lawyer about the consequences of trying to get a order on my foreign assets , he would be subject to a interpol notice sent from a foreign jurisdiction for violating banking secrecy laws of a foreign jursidiction . If the interpol notice is sent out , the moment the lawyer sets foot in a foreign aiport he is held back and faces a lengthy trial in a foreign country . This is the way to get back at these lawyers ,if they bully you ,you give it back with a threat to start proceedings in a foreign court law where the collateral damage for these guys is not worth fighing a case on legal aid .

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Bogdan View Post
                Stats please ? I would expect the percentage of cases where the mom gets custody to be much higher then the percentage of cases where the dad isn't fully paying support.
                there you go, it is official source from Canadian Government:
                As a man you have under 7% chance of getting sole custody, as a woman you have almost 80% chance.

                https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/...at2000/p4.html

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by respondent View Post
                  there you go, it is official source from Canadian Government:
                  As a man you have under 7% chance of getting sole custody, as a woman you have almost 80% chance.

                  https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/...at2000/p4.html
                  I bet it is quite different last 5 years.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Bogdan View Post
                    Would love to see actual data on this.

                    Maybe it's a bit better in recent years sure ... but I seriously doubt it's anything close to default 50/50 and would take your bet on it.
                    There is unfortunately also no statistic to show how long it takes a father to get to those 50/50. I haven't heard a case yet when it was less than a year - typically 2-3 years, if you are indeed awesome and kids want to be more than with their mom i.e. in cases where father had a chance for solo custody if he fights for few years he may earn 50/50.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by respondent View Post
                      there you go, it is official source from Canadian Government:
                      As a man you have under 7% chance of getting sole custody, as a woman you have almost 80% chance.

                      https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/...at2000/p4.html
                      I think it should be pointed out that the statistical tables you're quoting as a source are from 1994/95 - almost 30 year old data.

                      It's almost like with a bit of effort, current stats could easily be found (literally the first search result) unless you were to purposely search for terms that would find specific results to support your position regardless of the current reality.

                      https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/dail...10928e-eng.htm

                      https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/dail.../t001e-eng.htm

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                        I think it should be pointed out that the statistical tables you're quoting as a source are from 1994/95 - almost 30 year old data.

                        It's almost like with a bit of effort, current stats could easily be found (literally the first search result) unless you were to purposely search for terms that would find specific results to support your position regardless of the current reality.

                        https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/dail...10928e-eng.htm

                        https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/dail.../t001e-eng.htm
                        No, there was no bad intent, and as a matter of fact in this thread above it was said that likely things got better, but not to 50/50. If you check your link it says mother has a chance of sole custody (in 2017) of 50%, father at 10%, 5 times more is far from equal.

                        There are two issues though. One that your source is Statistics Canada - it is not reliable by definition. What they do is they randomly contact some small group of families and ask their opinion, often times recording results with mistakes. My data on the other hand was from court house. There is no room for mistake, it is data at the source. Unfortunately I didn't see later data from courts (and wasn't looking tbh - I used the first link in google).

                        Second and more important issue is not the end result (50/50 custody), but how fast you get there. When child is being taken by mother, it is easy to see that years of child's life with father is stolen. I spent 3 years and insane amount in legal fees to help my children getting a right knowing me, despite they indicated that to OCL from the very start. Practically every father I know had to fight years before he was allowed to see children again.

                        My point is the 50/50 custody and living arrangement should be default option, until mother or father proves in court it should be differently. I would even be fine if child was staying with mother or father, but court would be making decision within 1 month, not 3+ years.

                        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