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

  • #46
    Originally posted by bearall
    Haha, well I guess I could give you an application or analogy quip with my retort.

    In the game of poker and stock markets and legal shenanigans and life. You sit around the table and spot the fool, once the fool is targeted the remaining players work against him, the fool eventually loses his position, and of course the other players divy up the profits. RULE:if at any time "you" can't spot the fool...... you are it !

    Know where you are in the pecking order when you sit down at the table...knowing your weakness makes you stong !!!....Aggravates the sh#t out of the other players too
    Did you see the movie, The Usual Suspects?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Sk8r
      See my above post. Because my ex pays child support - he refuses to spend a single penny above and beyond that for the kids. And he does not pay ANY section 7 expenses because I do not ask him to.

      I think what he pays in Child Support is adequate, but I get tired of hearing him complain about it.

      And for the record - he sees the kids every other weekend and half of all holidays. So no 50-50 scenario here.
      I'm fighting for 50-50 access, equal parenting and a fair amount of support. Your mad because your ex does not pick up the odd DVD. I am trying to see your point, but are you see the bigger picture here?

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Decent Dad
        Well besides his poor attitude with/to the children, I assume you mean he does not buy things. Like items. Because he must feed them at least and provide the basics of life when they are with him.

        So I must ask, do you feel he should be buying things. Books? Toys? DVD's? Am I to understand you feel he should buy those things, and pay full support.
        No, I do not expect him to buy them "things" like clothes or books or whatever. And yes, you're right - he feeds them for 2 days out of 14. But that's about it. He takes it to the extreme - e.g. he invites the kids to do things during his time (like the movies) and then says your mom will pay. Or when he took our son to a father-son retreat and asked me write a cheque for my son's fees. But my FAVOURITE was when he told me to go buy a new pair of dress shoes and a dress shirt for our son for HIS WEDDING. (His new wife said no to that one )

        And I will admit that I don't mind paying for every item and every expense they incur -even the wedding clothes. What I do mind is the pettiness and the WHINING. Truth is my financial situation IS better than his - but he CHOSE to marry a fulltime student with 2 kids that he now has to support in addition to his own two children. He cries injustice. To me it's a matter of priority.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Decent Dad
          Did you see the movie, The Usual Suspects?
          Gene Hackman in that ?

          Comment


          • #50
            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?

            Comment


            • #51
              jenibri,

              Just a scenario, If something would happen to you and your current husband and all of a sudden he had to pay support for your child it would be based on his gross salary amount of $ 52000 per year and not $ 32000. The courts would also not consider the amount of child support he was paying for the first child from the first relationship.

              Comment


              • #52
                That is a thought that has crossed my mind a few times.

                But does that not just go to show how weird our law's are. For my son to be considered equal, we would have to be separated.

                Another area where my son would loss.
                -Scenerio number 1-
                parents still together

                Let's say when he finishes HighSchool and comes home one day and tells us. Mom & Dad I really want to go to "post secondary school" can you pay for it? We actually can say No . We could tell him, find a job and pay for it yourself. Correct me if I am wrong please, but there is no law that says we must provide for him beyond 18 (age of majority were we live) & that we must pay for his post secondary education.

                when he is ready to pursure a post seconday education. We will help him, but I 'm just trying to make a point.

                - Scenerio number 2-
                Child Support
                Child wants to pursure post seconday education, Paying parent has to continue to support this child and pay for the costs of the education.

                My point is again, What protects the child "financially" when his parents are still together? Nothing....

                Comment


                • #53
                  With regard to the complaints about the SOL for subsequent children being impacted by paying child support for the previous-born children... OF COURSE the standard of living is less for those subsequent children! You don't just wipe the slate clean when you start a new family! It's not like scrapping an old car, buying a new one, and still having to pay insurance for the old one.. The children from the 'old' relationship still exist! The fact that financial support is needed for those children is well within the scope of one's knowledge when they decide to create more children.

                  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?
                  Jenibri, I think it's all in how you look at it. CS amounts are based on gross income, yes, but that's just how it is figured out. If they were based on net income, they'd be higher per child to make up the difference. Bottom line, on a gross income of $52,000, your husband is required to pay $5300 per year in CS. The reality of the situation is that roughly $15,000 went to deductions, right? Not to Child 1, so to say Child 1 benefits from a $52,000 income while child 2's SOL is based on $32,000 is a little misleading. In actuality, the money to support each child comes out of your husband's income after his deductions come off his income.

                  In addition to you and your husband choosing to have children knowing he has Child 1 to support, you're forgetting about the other side of the coin. If the subsequent spouse made $100,000 per year, the father's child support amount is still only based on his income, not the combined income of his new family. If that was the case in your family, your child's SOL would be based on an income of $152,000 (less deductions), less $5300 CS.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I would gladly give up my entire paycheque if it meant i could spend significant amounts of time with my son.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by sasha1
                        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.
                        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

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Exactly right, Grace. I'm glad I'm not the only one to see that!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by jenibri
                            That is a thought that has crossed my mind a few times.

                            But does that not just go to show how weird our law's are. For my son to be considered equal, we would have to be separated.

                            Another area where my son would loss.
                            -Scenerio number 1-
                            parents still together

                            Let's say when he finishes HighSchool and comes home one day and tells us. Mom & Dad I really want to go to "post secondary school" can you pay for it? We actually can say No . We could tell him, find a job and pay for it yourself. Correct me if I am wrong please, but there is no law that says we must provide for him beyond 18 (age of majority were we live) & that we must pay for his post secondary education.

                            when he is ready to pursure a post seconday education. We will help him, but I 'm just trying to make a point.

                            - Scenerio number 2-
                            Child Support
                            Child wants to pursure post seconday education, Paying parent has to continue to support this child and pay for the costs of the education.

                            My point is again, What protects the child "financially" when his parents are still together? Nothing....
                            There was a Charter challenge on the ground of equality based on the argument you're making. It wasn't successful...
                            Ottawa Divorce

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              I agree Rowan..

                              Rowan.. we are very much alike..I too would give my entire pay and I practically am...to see our son more often and our daughter...I truly would..
                              Aden

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Sorry to hear you are giving your entire pay and still getting very little in return

                                It sounds like your ex is really devoid of a heart.

                                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