Very Odd question!

[Links17]

It is semantics...

The reality is that you can't complain you didn't have ILA during a marriage and get the marriage agreement annulled.

You CAN complain you didn't have ILA when getting a divorce and get that divorce agreement annulled.

The difference shows that ignorance does matter it is just ignorance by proxy because of the fact you got ILA or not.

[Links17]

Stop doing this. How she secures a job and what job she does secure are not any of your concern. You are not together anymore. It is not your job to find work for your ex. This is controlling. Controlling people never think they are controlling, they think they are just trying to help. Did she ask for your help? Stop trying to help. It will only further delay a settlement.



You have an income imputed to her. You don't try and find her a job.

As long as he pays SS and CS it IS his concern. That being said its not his place to find her a job but I think unemployed ppl collecting support payments from others should recognize they have a duty to earn as much as possible.

[1ati2de]

Still not reason enough to tell your child.

He doesn't need to hear from you just because you think the mother may say something to paint you in a bad light. If child should ask, you reply with "I made the best decision I could at the time." No need to add details. If you believe you stayed for family values, then why explain it as a mistake? In my opinion, you are trying to justify your choice.

Look he is 17.5 not 7. He can move out, get a job, get married, and have children at his age. He is a man not a child. Regardless of what each parent says he will see it how he wants to and make his assessment on what he feels is right or wrong. He lives in the same house and watches what goes on so I don't understand why you keep beating this to death. I don't need to justify my choice to him because he can make his own conclusion with no help at all.

Stop doing this. How she secures a job and what job she does secure are not any of your concern. You are not together anymore. It is not your job to find work for your ex. This is controlling. Controlling people never think they are controlling, they think they are just trying to help. Did she ask for your help? Stop trying to help. It will only further delay a settlement.

I don't mean to be rude here but are you serious?? Offering anyone a job that they use to do 17 years ago that has 7 years experience is controlling? Doing a job that they are comfortable with?? LMAO! How in the world would I ever make her take this in the first place? She did ask what am I going to do and I told her Ill make a call, when I said I can get you a job she changed her tune. Whatever she does is none of my business now and honestly I don't care at this point, she asked, I offered, then she refused, I'm done!! I couldn't get her to work when we were together so I care even less now.

I don't know about you but I have had job referrals by friends, job offers by family and friends, and this works both ways. I'm pretty sure lots of people reading this have done the same or know people who have done the same thing in their work place. yes referrals never get hired. You are telling me this is a problem?

Try and settle out of court, then you don't need letters. Your offer should be based on imputing an income based on minimum wage. If you want, you can say this is fair because potentially she could be earning more. You don't say how or where she could be working, that is her choice not yours.

Very true but i have custody of my child also. The lawyer stated that in the 4 years you were legally separated knowing that she has to support our son made no effort to find work also or get training. This is a problem for her, not me which is why I offered to assist her to find employment. When my son stated he is going to get brasses she replied with a laugh and said "I don't have to pay" With braces, the cost of raising him, and potential college Id rather settle in court. Moving further away from my work now with a 360km round trip (moving in with family) Need opinions on this also please!! Is it worth offering her something? Or not?

[1ati2de]

The way I read his description, this is something he did while they were still together. I didn't read it that he out there trying to get her a job right now.

Yes we are still in the same home, separated for 4 years.

[1ati2de]

I realize this comment is irrelevant to the OP's issues and makes me sound like everyone's least favourite high-school English teacher, but - I think your wife had an epidural at the birth of your child, not an epidermal. "Epidermal" means "related to the skin" (think dermatologist). "Epidural" means "related to the outer layer of the spinal cord", which is one way anesthesia is administered during child birth.

Damn, spell check on!

[Tayken]

It is semantics...

No... It is not semantics. It is about time, duration and the status quo. If two months after you got married sought divorce because you didn't realize what you were getting into then you would have an argument. After 1+ years of accepting the relationship and the agreement made in marriage, you can't claim stupidity anymore. You very well know what you got into.

The reality is that you can't complain you didn't have ILA during a marriage and get the marriage agreement annulled.

Because TIME is the factor there. Most people are married for over a year prior to getting a divorce. This identifies you knew what you were getting into. The same thing with a separation agreement singed without ILA. If after a year you try to contest the agreement made and demonstrate you were following the agreement, the argument that you didn't know won't fly either.

You CAN complain you didn't have ILA when getting a divorce and get that divorce agreement annulled.

Again, there is a TIME LIMIT and how you conduct yourself in accordance with the agreement that matters. That is why the wise posters on this site provide advice to parents who are "separated" to equalize their time with the children to establish a status quo because how you act and behave is often MORE IMPORTANT than what you agreed to on paper.

The difference shows that ignorance does matter it is just ignorance by proxy because of the fact you got ILA or not.

No, it shows ignorance that you may not understand the basic concepts of what establishes a status quo under the law that is all.

Case on point:

Lisa Ludmer v. Brian Ludmer, 2013 ONSC 784 (CanLII)
Date: 2013-02-11
Docket: 05-FD-304485FIS
URL: http://canlii.ca/t/fw5c3
Citation: Lisa Ludmer v. Brian Ludmer, 2013 ONSC 784 (CanLII)

[54] In this case, the parties were already married. This is, therefore, unlike the case where a marriage contract is sprung on one spouse at the 11th hour just before marriage.

[55] It is clear that the applicant had time to consider the agreement. She sought and received independent legal advice. Her lawyer, Mr. Lightman, swore his oath to the fact that, at the time, the applicant understood the nature and effect of the agreement and signed it voluntarily.

[56] The applicant’s evidence is, as well, ambivalent. She said, on more than one occasion during her testimony, and also to Mr. Lightman and, later, to Dr. Sutton, that she signed the marriage contract because she “never expected to be divorced.”

[57] Her evidence, even accepting it at its highest, is that she thought Irving Ludmer would have been “annoyed” and that there would be unspecified “ramifications” if she refused to sign; she felt familial pressure to sign.

[58] In my opinion, this evidence, even if accepted without question (which I cannot), is incapable of meeting the serious threshold required to set aside an agreement on account of alleged duress. At its highest, this evidence indicates that there was some stress associated with the issue of the marriage contract and that the applicant felt “pressure” to sign. I find that the applicant’s will was not overborne or coerced. There was no improper threat or intimidation. She may not have thought it mattered at the time, but she understood the nature and effect of the marriage contract and signed it voluntarily.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[frustratedwithex]

As long as he pays SS and CS it IS his concern. That being said its not his place to find her a job but I think unemployed ppl collecting support payments from others should recognize they have a duty to earn as much as possible.

That's why an income is imputed to her. Hopefully it will motivate his ex to find work. If not, then he isn't paying SS support based on an income of $0. As I understand, he will not be paying CS, as the child lives with him. So he is looking at SS duration and amount.

Look he is 17.5 not 7. He can move out, get a job, get married, and have children at his age. He is a man not a child. Regardless of what each parent says he will see it how he wants to and make his assessment on what he feels is right or wrong. He lives in the same house and watches what goes on so I don't understand why you keep beating this to death. I don't need to justify my choice to him because he can make his own conclusion with no help at all.

Not beating anything to death. You posted to a public message board and I am giving my opinion. And yes, I feel strongly about this. I have kids that were this age and older when we separated 5 years ago. Doesn't matter if they are 17 or 7. They may appear to be adult to you, but they are children of the marriage and I disagree with discussing the marriage, the divorce and my choices with them.

My kids were also present during the marriage and saw what went on. Ex has made many disparaging comments about me since we separated. I did not feel it necessary to defend myself to the kids. They make their own conclusions based on their parents behaviour. It is not my place to define this for them. My relationship with their dad is as a partner not a parent. Some people are better parents then partners. I don't get to weigh in on what my kids think is a good parent.

I don't mean to be rude here but are you serious?? Offering anyone a job that they use to do 17 years ago that has 7 years experience is controlling? Doing a job that they are comfortable with?? LMAO! How in the world would I ever make her take this in the first place? She did ask what am I going to do and I told her Ill make a call, when I said I can get you a job she changed her tune. Whatever she does is none of my business now and honestly I don't care at this point, she asked, I offered, then she refused, I'm done!! I couldn't get her to work when we were together so I care even less now.

Yes I find this controlling. You are separated. She is responsible for her own employment. You offered she declined, impute an income.

Id rather settle in court.

Be careful, this is very expensive and you may not be happy with the out-come. Judge will see a long term marriage ex. spouse is not self-sufficient and support will be ordered. Amount and duration is what will be decided.

[Qrious]

Not beating anything to death. You posted to a public message board and I am giving my opinion. And yes, I feel strongly about this. I have kids that were this age and older when we separated 5 years ago. Doesn't matter if they are 17 or 7. They may appear to be adult to you, but they are children of the marriage and I disagree with discussing the marriage, the divorce and my choices with them.

I agree with Frustrated.

My X often spoke badly of me and told our S (then 10, now 15) at the time of the split that it was all his mother's fault, and he has recently taken to text disparaging remarks about me to S.

These communications, along with other self-alienating behaviours, has our S15 not wishing to communicate with him anymore. He's heard enough and had enough. When I told S to just ignore the comments, he said that he doesnt like it (makes him uncomfortable) and that he feels like he needs to defend me.

NO CHILD, 7 or 17, should be put in that position!

Leave the children out of it. It's not good for them, and may end up not good for you.

[momforever1956]

The facts are what count in court, proven verified facts, black and white. This is also presented to the arbitrator if you choose not to go to court.
Fact- together over 20 years.
Fact= she has not worked in over 15 years.
Fact- you stayed with her even when she was suppose to return to work and decided not to.
Like Judge Judy says if you don't like the meal served to you, return it and refuse to pay and leave, but once you ate it, the deed is done it is too late to whine and complain and you have to PAY.
You stayed, maybe looking back you made the wrong decision, well, it is too late. My x has taken the same position. I NEVER WANTED HER TO STAY AT HOME. No-one buys it!!! It is laughable. Why did it take my x 29 years to voice his opinion? Did he leave me after 29 years because I didnt return to work?
The fact is---I kicked him out, and it is then he started crying over the spilt milk, and not only does he have to pay support, he was NOT treated very well by his counsel and the arbitrator, due to the fact he was totally unreasonable, tried to lie and deceive.
You keep saying you don't care, but in fact you do care. And just be aware the system is very familiar with people who reduce their income once SS is ordered. In fact I got a 5 year free card without review no matter what the reduction is. Just be careful how you proceed, they have seen and heard it all.