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

  • Originally posted by lumpy View Post
    I have refrained from commenting on the "gender bias, screwed up system" posts because I think that it is a fight that no one can win - so this is my one and only...



    What do you mean that mom only "allows" you to see your kids twice a year? Do you have any legal agreement? If not - Why?



    You should have fired your lawyer. Your kids are (most likely) the most important thing in your life. Get a second opinion, and a third. There are plenty of lawyers who will believe in you and your family. You shouldn't settle for any less. If you know that you would do a good job of raising them in a stable environment then you should absolutley follow through with it. Why does it have to be either mom or dad? Can't you share the time and responsibility? The moment that you broke up you BOTH legally had 50-50 custody. What you did after that is not the system - it is your own decision.



    I think that you are wrong. My husband shares 50-50 custody. He has had 50-50 custody since the day that he separated from mom. Mom tried to fight it originally - he did not back down. He went through a few lawyers and eventually got the 50-50 on paper. Years went by and again mom attempted to get sole custody. Again dad said that it is best for the kids to have 50-50. Again, the legal system backed him up. While I may not agree with mom's parenting methods, both parents are fit to take care of the children and 2x the "broken system" has agreed with dad.



    I would never say that there is no gender bias in the system. But I think that blaming every male "loss" of custody on the system is completely wrong. You are defeated before you even try. You may not have to spend thousands - if you are absolutely asking for what is in your children's best interests and you are capable and willing to work with the other parent (even if they won't work with you) and willing to focus on what you can do for your children (not a mud-slinging battle) And keep on it don't give up... then mom won't have much choice but to agree to more visitation for you.

    Figure out when and how you can spend more time with your children, being 9 hours away makes it harder - but not impossible. You could certainly ask for more holiday time - March Break, long weekends on PD days that you can fly to them and visit, definately more time in the summer. Send mom a VERY business-like, polite email requesting more time. Be specific, have a good plan for how you will fit into your children's lives. It is in the children's best interests to have both parents in their lives as much as possible. If mom says no, go consult with a few lawyers. Do not settle for a lawyer who doesn't think that dad is important in children's lives. Because you are one of the 2 most important people in your children's lives.

    To Canor Elfman - I wish you and your kids the best of luck - and hopefully more time together.

    And to the board in general - Basically what I am trying to say is that NO ONE should use the "screwed up system" as an excuse to not fight for their children. It may be screwed up a little - or a lot... that has been debated over and over again, so, if you would like to change the system, then by all means join groups, bring lawsuits against the FRO... But at the same time NEVER give up fighting for your own children.
    OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG I love you.

    Thank you for posting that. You read my mind.

    Originally posted by lumpy View Post
    This was my point - NEVER give up on your kids. Never said the system wasn't screwed up. Just never give up fighting for your kids. As I said, the above post was from my viewpoint and I still think that the entire gender debate cannot be won or lost - it is different for everyone. Just don't use it as the excuse for giving up on your kids. I sincerely hope that things work out for everyone on this forum.
    RIGHT ON!!!

    Comment


    • Lumpy:

      I understand that, according to the law, most couples have a very clean and methodical breakup. Where the father decides to get a lawyer, he researches the law and knows exactly the very specific steps and hoops he has to take to insure that he has the same access as the mother, who is basically guaranteed custody by default barring very very specific circumstances. (drugs, abuse, neglect)

      In reality it is rarely that way. My situation was kinda messed up because I decided that the marriage was over after the separation. The separation occurred because of a mental health issue and she had to live with her parents because they were the only people she felt peaceful with. The best thing for the children at that time was to go with her because her family could help take care of the kids as I was still working 55 hours a week to pay the bills. As time went on I knew that it was over.

      I know, hindsight is 20-20 and I shouldn't have let them go with her durring the initial separation. I should have quit my job and applied for social assistance and kept them, I am sure that any judge would understand and not look down on me for it (the last part is dripping with sarcasm). They were 4 and 6 at the time, man they were so young.

      Anyway, I was told that a 50-50 split from an eight hour distance would be nearly impossible. My experience with this lawyer was that he was trying to save me the expense of a lost cause, I am sure that if I searched around I would find one that would be more that happy to spend my money in court.

      Originally posted by lumpy View Post
      What do you mean that mom only "allows" you to see your kids twice a year? Do you have any legal agreement? If not - Why?
      We don't have an agreement because she refuses to sign one. I am trying to rectify that. But you miss my point: To get CS she only has to make a phone call and I have an entire government agency all over me. She doesn't have to go to court, the law states that I made a certain income, therefore I pay, simple.

      On the other hand, I have to spend thousands to make sure I have the right representation to have access to my kids, how is this fair? Well, it's because most likely CP is the mother so the politicians are safe to enforce CS, enforcing access is against mothers witch is not exactly politically correct.

      So indeed the system by default is against the fathers. My conclusion was that if we had an agency for support AND access, things would be more balanced... but it doesn't exactly buy votes so I don't expect it to change soon.

      Originally posted by lumpy View Post
      I think that you are wrong. My husband shares 50-50 custody. He has had 50-50 custody since the day that he separated from mom.
      Your husband did things right from the beginning, I congratulate his foresight but I think his case is very specific and very rare. Again, to relate this to the topic at hand and not just talk about a specific case, I just don't understand why CS is not dependent on the situation but access is. Why do we, as fathers, have to do everything exactly right in accordance with the law to see our kids. If we don't then it costs thousands to rectify it.

      Most fathers would love to have 50-50 access but if they apply for it and get it, they would have a hell of a time lowering their CS because they am a full time dad half the year. Being a full time mom she doesn't have to work because, being a full time mom is her contribution. If a father does the same thing, the court treats him like a deadbeat, especially if he tries to then equalize the payments. To me that is just gender bias plain and simple.


      Originally posted by lumpy View Post
      To Canor Elfman - I wish you and your kids the best of luck - and hopefully more time together.
      Thanks Lumpy. It will eventually work out one way or another. Since we live so far away from each other I am hoping that I get the entire summer holidays. My daughter is in the lower 35 percentile in her class so I am hoping to help with her reading and shapes in that time. MY STBX says that they have separation anxiety so they can't be away from home more than two weeks. pfft. I am taking her to court for access this spring. So I am not giving up, just frustrated that I have to go fight so hard for something that should be my right to begin with.


      Lost Father:

      It's frustrating when my children get out of their mothers car at pick up time, and see my GF who just adores them, stop and say "oh, it's you, why id she here dad?". The STBX is just smiling away. Nothing I can do about it and she knows it. They come around after a few days but still annoying.

      Originally posted by LostFather View Post
      not even a return phone calls (50% of my calls are not returned)
      Same here only when I do get a hold of them the mother puts on a movie. That ends a conversation pretty quick. They have to stay in the living room with the movie cause mom needs to "monitor the conversation". That is what my daughter says when I tell her to go to her room.

      She has her in dance classes most of the week and play dates on the weekends so if I call she is always busy. My son is five so I need her to keep him talking on the phone and reminding him what he did today.

      Man, I don't know what to tell you. Your situation, although similar to mine, is way way worse. The only way to fix some of that is to have a specific agency that enforces access and will remove the children from one home to another with every bit of gusto that they enforce CS with. If they continually have to intervene then a more permanent solution, removing the children from the CP to the NCP, would be addressed. Just having that agency there would definitely smarten up some parents.


      Originally posted by dadtotheend View Post
      OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG OMG I love you.

      Thank you for posting that. You read my mind.

      RIGHT ON!!!
      This is filled with may too much emotion for me to comment on, in so far as to the topic at hand. If you didn't want me to comment you would have private messaged your friend, lover, whatever instead of posting it here. Not judging, just saying that this thread is a serious running commentary on the divorce law, not a thread on trying to score brownie points, no offense. But I digress.


      Holly crap was this long. Thanks for reading everyone. Have a great weekend.

      Comment


      • What about the other side of the coin!

        [quote=Ihave2kidsIcannotsee;19591]
        Originally posted by sasha1 View Post
        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.

        Funny thing is when the parent that has the children re-marries he or she does not have to worry about having more children because he/she has an extra income coming in every month. The support system is unfair to the non custodial parent. If the custodial parent is remarried why are they not able to keep a roof over their heads and support the children. I think that the support payed to the other parent should be drastically reduced when the custodial parent remarries and any support given should be put in a trust for the children to have when they turn 21. There is so much injustice in family court that it sickens me to death and so many Women (sorry to be biased) are gold diggers.
        What about when the support payor hides behind his new spouse...Shes rich he cant find work and the courts wont see hes hiding to avoid paying child support....so why is it that you think that when the wife remarries that his income should be used to support the step children!!!!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          I know, hindsight is 20-20 and I shouldn't have let them go with her durring the initial separation. I should have quit my job and applied for social assistance and kept them, I am sure that any judge would understand and not look down on me for it (the last part is dripping with sarcasm). They were 4 and 6 at the time, man they were so young. .
          You made a choice to prioritize a heavy workload. One of the consequences of that choice is giving primary care to the other parent. Another consequence that flows from that choice is child support.

          Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          Anyway, I was told that a 50-50 split from an eight hour distance would be nearly impossible.
          That's true. The fatal error there was allowing that distance. A motion to block that move in court would have almost assuredly succeeded.

          Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          We don't have an agreement because she refuses to sign one. I am trying to rectify that. But you miss my point: To get CS she only has to make a phone call and I have an entire government agency all over me. She doesn't have to go to court, the law states that I made a certain income, therefore I pay, simple..
          Not true at all. The FRO requires a written separation agreement or court order before enforcement commences. You can't just pick up the phone and order up CS like a pizza.

          Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          On the other hand, I have to spend thousands to make sure I have the right representation to have access to my kids, how is this fair? Well, it's because most likely CP is the mother so the politicians are safe to enforce CS, enforcing access is against mothers witch is not exactly politically correct..
          Your choice to allow the status quo to develop has consequences. One of them is that is very tough to change a status quo - translation ---> $$$.

          Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          Your husband did things right from the beginning, I congratulate his foresight but I think his case is very specific and very rare..
          So did I.

          Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          Most fathers would love to have 50-50 access but if they apply for it and get it, they would have a hell of a time lowering their CS because they am a full time dad half the year. Being a full time mom she doesn't have to work because, being a full time mom is her contribution.
          They might love to have it, but are they prepared to make sacrifices in their career to make it happen? CS is a function of what you earn. If you made the career sacrifice then your CS would be lowered. Another part of Mom's contribution is her career sacrifice and a diminished standard of financial living. Do you really think that the support she receives puts her into the same financial ballpark as you?

          Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          I am taking her to court for access this spring. So I am not giving up, just frustrated that I have to go fight so hard for something that should be my right to begin with.
          That's what you have to do. Good for you.

          Originally posted by Canor Elfman View Post
          This is filled with may too much emotion for me to comment on, in so far as to the topic at hand. If you didn't want me to comment you would have private messaged your friend, lover, whatever instead of posting it here.
          Just saying that I completely agree. Open forum, open season to leave public messages.

          I'm not trying to rain down on you, but you made some critical decisions and may not have been aware of the serious consequences that flowed from them. Now you and your kids have to live with them, or spend a lot of energy and $$ changing it.

          Good luck.

          Comment


          • [quote=Canor Elfman;55151] you would have private messaged your friend, lover, whatever instead of posting it here. Not judging, just saying that this thread is a serious running commentary on the divorce law, not a thread on trying to score brownie points, no offense. But I digress.
            quote]

            Just to clarify - Dadtotheend and I have never met. We are just 2 examples of families that have had success with the court system...

            I think that if you read the history of our families, you will find that it hasn't always been easy and parts of it certainly weren't fair - but it has worked out fairly well so far. I can't believe that we are the minority - that being said, we are very likely the minority on this site!

            Have a great weekend.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by lumpy View Post
              Just to clarify - Dadtotheend and I have never met. We are just 2 examples of families that have had success with the court system...
              Can you imagine allowing your kids to move 8 hours away from you?

              And then having the nerve to blame the system later on?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by dadtotheend View Post
                You made a choice to prioritize a heavy workload. One of the consequences of that choice is giving primary care to the other parent. Another consequence that flows from that choice is child support.




                Your choice to allow the status quo to develop has consequences. One of them is that is very tough to change a status quo - translation ---> $$$.



                I'm not trying to rain down on you, but you made some critical decisions and may not have been aware of the serious consequences that flowed from them. Now you and your kids have to live with them, or spend a lot of energy and $$ changing it.

                Good luck.
                In many cases it is not possible to see the outcome of certain actions. Because what may have been good for all involved at one point in time should not be held against you when circumstances change. From what many have posted, it seems clear that it is easier for mom to get changes made to suit her needs, but not for dads, and if dad does want to try, it may be prohibitively expensive for him to even attempt, and often is told this by many lawyers. How many men just give up, or don't even bother in the first place?

                Often the debts are left for the ncp to pay. My lawyer recommended I file for bankruptcy when my divorce started. I am glad I didn't because I don't know if I could have lived with myself, and I am not sure what problems I may have faced if I did, but I had to live a very meager life, and things have not improved much, despite my drastically changed situation. I don't think it is fair to blame anyone for working to pay down debts, and I don't think it is fair to hold back changing to a shared parenting situation once the situation changes.

                Australia changed their laws to permit parents to earn extra money to help get them back on their feet after divorce without this income being considered for support calculations. This situation is time limited to 2 years.( it may be 3yrs) But it seems to have helped. Why can't Canada do this too?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                  In many cases it is not possible to see the outcome of certain actions.
                  The family law outcome of his decision to prioritize work over kids was very predictable with a modest amount of research.

                  Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                  Because what may have been good for all involved at one point in time should not be held against you when circumstances change.?
                  It's not being held against him, it is done in order to minimize disruption to the kids. Separating parents need to understand how important status quo is in determining custody, but often times they don't research the matter until it's too late.

                  Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                  How many men just give up, or don't even bother in the first place?
                  Not bothering to try in the first place is a tired old crutch. Those who don't bother to try deserve what they get. Is there anything in one's life for which it is more important to try?

                  Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                  Often the debts are left for the ncp to pay.?
                  Not if property is properly equalized.

                  Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                  I don't think it is fair to blame anyone for working to pay down debts, and I don't think it is fair to hold back changing to a shared parenting situation once the situation changes.
                  He wasn't blamed. He was advised of the consequences of his actions, too late it seems.

                  As to changing back to shared parenting, is it fair to the kids to have one parent choose to take a severely diminished role and then reappear again, after new routines are settled into? Maybe so, but if battling parents have to resort to courts that know next to nothing about the family dynamic, isn't it fair that the courts err on the side of not disrupting the children's routines? Status quo. Status quo.

                  Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                  Australia changed their laws to permit parents to earn extra money to help get them back on their feet after divorce without this income being considered for support calculations. This situation is time limited to 2 years.( it may be 3yrs) But it seems to have helped. Why can't Canada do this too?
                  That's a financial consideration, not a custody one or one that speaks to the children's living arrangments. And BTW, there has been criticism of the Australian model as well.

                  Comment


                  • Yes there has been criticism of the Aussie system, and it looks like the new government will return family law to the dark ages, but they did make some very good changes that had helped, and should be a model for the rest of the world.

                    Family law is often all about money. Whoever has the kids gets the money, whether it be tax benefits, or support, often both. I don't think anyone can argue the support guidelines are fair, and the way they are enforced is not fair either. This is one area that needs a drastic overhaul because the current system harms children.

                    I agree that not trying to do anything to get a better role in your children's lives is unacceptable, but for many the road there is near vertical. If you are a novice skier you don't go down double black diamond runs, or you risk your life. For some court is the same. Why spend thousands of dollars that you don't have just to get a lawyer to go to court and lose?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                      Family law is often all about money. Whoever has the kids gets the money, whether it be tax benefits, or support, often both.
                      I wish that were true, but it's not. Not in my case, anyway.

                      Deadbeat Mom abandoned her kids and is living 3 provinces away. She won't work and so isn't paying CS (I have both children 100% of time) but she's "entitled" to, and collecting, SS.

                      Someone tell me that's fair, or that the money is following the kids.

                      Cheers!

                      Gary

                      Comment


                      • In my case I don't get any money either, as the ex refuses to work, and our judge has yet to impute an income, and I have been too broke recently to go back to court to get support dealt with. And I am having great problems getting the CCTB as well. They don't seem to accept just the court order showing I have custody, and have had to get letters and other documents to prove that the kids live with me, and now am just waiting for them to approve my claim.

                        There are also some ladies here who also don't see any money despite having the kids, and they too feel let down by our system.

                        But for the majority, whomever has the kids gets the money.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rwm1273 View Post
                          And I am having great problems getting the CCTB as well. They don't seem to accept just the court order showing I have custody, and have had to get letters and other documents to prove that the kids live with me, and now am just waiting for them to approve my claim.
                          Just for you.

                          I will guide you through the abyss, as it seems I'm exactly what you need.

                          PM me, I'm a tax accountant.

                          Comment


                          • That would explain your overwhelming knowledge in financial matters relating to divorce. Thanks for the offer.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by dadtotheend View Post
                              I'm a tax accountant.
                              Wanna be best friends?

                              Cheers!

                              Gary

                              Comment


                              • so only men who had wives that stayed home can be successful? What about all the women who do work? Does this mean they do not contribute to their husbands sucess? Is it only moms that stay home that are recognized as contributing to their husbands sucess. What about all the wives who married a rich guy because they didn't want to work?

                                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