Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It's only getting worse

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

  • It's only getting worse

    Here is the latest family law absurdity from the UK Supreme Court. Stay single folks, it's only getting worse ! Women entitled to council house if they move because partner shouts | Mail Online

  • #2
    This is ludicrous, I would of given anything if my X would of yelled and got things off his chest. Instead he would go into silent mode for a week or two then act as if nothing was wrong. I on the other hand am a talker and would want to talk about our problem even if it meant yelling just to get him to acknowledge we had a problem...respond in some way. This only caused us to drift even further apart.
    Can you imagine a world of no one getting angry, raising their voices, being upset? The build up of emotions would be like a A-bomb going off again...somewhere along the line, there would be a leak in that perfect seam.

    Comment


    • #3
      Sad very sad story. This is what us taxpayers are paying for. The Judge is a mental case.

      Comment


      • #4
        We have them here in our own Supreme Court...Bev Maclachlen

        Comment


        • #5
          Coincidence they are both women? I don't think so.

          Comment


          • #6
            Lorac - PLease if we should ever find ourselves in the same town - heck even a couple of towns away - I have been longing for so long to have a real conversation with an engaging individual........

            Ok I admit, I have raised my voice, sadly more in the last three months than the last thirty years - frustration of getting nowhere. To "discuss" the issues even one and hopefully come to some form of - well at this point I would take anything! Instead it is the silience and stealth moves - this would be a different post but I do remember reading here in this forum something that sticks in my head. Fair? Justice?? has nothing to do with our Family Law system so is this truely the next step?

            But a serious point was brought up - quoted from the article;
            "The decision also means that denying money to a partner or criticising them can count as violence and bring down draconian domestic violence penalties from the courts."
            I find myself in agreement - depravation of money, continual barage of words intended to break one's spirit and self asteam, threat of "taking the kids away - forever". Once we would all say just words..... years of taking this form of abuse and it becomes a very real form of violence that can harm much more than a punch, a broken arm - those things heals in weeks (months) but the mental abuse certainly has a good cause for being labelled "violence of the worst kind" taking years if ever to get over the trama.

            Comment


            • #7
              ddol1, here is the difference.

              If I punch someone they will end up in the hospital. OK, I punch harder than most, some people need to punch a couple of times. But this is clear violence and a punch is a punch and if I do it in a bar I get arrested just the same as in a house.

              If I yell at someone or don't give them money, once, twice, three times, yell louder? Where is the damage? Verbal CAN be abuse, but not if you do it once, or once a year, or once a month. Someone yells at you in a bar or in the street and see what response the courts give, and for good reason will they ignore it.

              Verbal abuse needs to be constant and chronic to be abuse. As far as the court decision in the article goes, I have problems with it, I have problems with judge's comments, but there is a middle ground. The trouble with middle ground is that it is going to be different for everyone.

              This needs to be treated in a manner of civil damages. The issue is not what was done (yelling) but if actual damages can be shown to have resulted from the yelling, in which case the yeller should have wised up and backed off long before the damage.

              I don't like the court decision as a precedent, because it doesn't spell out limitations. I also don't like the comment that the "government" doesn't have a say in how the word "violence" is interpreted. I also don't like the decision because it won't be applied in a gender neutral way by the courts going forward. When a wife yells at her husband, will this judge protect the husband? Doubt it.

              That said, it brings up issues that need to be addressed and clarified, and parliament *in Britain* needs to clarify the laws.

              Comment


              • #8
                may I ask - I understand the continued link to our past with the Queen and the Royal family but the link stops there does it not...... In other words, things that are put into Britian's laws through British judicial rulings and as an extension, thier Family Law Act are not or do not find their way into Canada's Laws as a matter of course over time? Canada judges following Britian lead?

                Comment


                • #9
                  You are correct, generally speaking. However our laws are based on the same principals so oftimes an argument presented in court in one country can find equal credibility in the other.

                  But yes, the decision means nothing to us directly.

                  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