Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is your opinion??

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

  • #16
    Yes things vary from household to household. My ex was a clean-freak who demanded perfection. He expected extensive home-cooked meals and large lunches packed for him each and every day. Our grocery bill was hefty and the shopping alone was a chore as he would only eat certain cuts of fresh meat. I couldn't go and stock up on a deal on meat as he didn't like to eat meat that had been frozen. He expected home-made cabbage rolls, pyrogies, deserts, cookies etc. Laundry was done daily as were the floors washed and everything kept in pristine condition. I ironed everything, including his bluejeans. On top of this I did the accounting for the business and raised a son. I also did contract work when opportunities arose. I put all of my inheritance in the business. We entertained frequently. I cooked for most of his family on major holidays and sometimes that meant cooking for 26 - 28 people.

    When someone refers to a stay-at-home individual as a person who basically just cleans up around the place I see red. Yes there are some people who do minimum around the house but that seemed to be all that their spouses expect.

    SS should, and is, determined on an individual basis. Documentation is very, very important. If the ex did relatively nothing then it is incumbent on the person who doesn't want to pay SS to prove this.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by arabian View Post
      . He expected home-made cabbage rolls, pyrogies, deserts, cookies etc..

      I pretty much stopped reading at Cabbage Rolls.....mmmmmmm
      To bad its almost a lost art. My wifes Grandma makes great ones though, they are often a christmas present (usually about 10 meals worth of them for us.

      Comment


      • #18
        Oh I forgot to mention that I did all of my ex's personal shopping for him, cleaned the vehicles. The bathrooms (3) were cleaned each and every day. I arranged all of his appointments (medical and financial). I also brought him his tea to him each and every night. Throughout the marriage I drove our son to every single practice/activity.

        I performed my "job" to the best of my abilities. I'm sure many other spouses did the same and contributed to the family unit.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by fireweb13 View Post
          I pretty much stopped reading at Cabbage Rolls.....mmmmmmm
          To bad its almost a lost art. My wifes Grandma makes great ones though, they are often a christmas present (usually about 10 meals worth of them for us.
          You can go on utube and it shows how to make them. You just need a head of savoy cabbage and rice and whatever else you want to put in them. These things aren't difficult to do they just take time. Time that could have been spent going to a gym or shopping or going for a manicure - which many people think stay-at-homers do all day LOL.

          Comment


          • #20
            Going by the information given.

            Not married, no kids. No entitlement to SS is my opinion. The jobless one stayed home and did house work (minimal given that there are no kids!), chose to not find a job. Financially the one with the job would have been better off to hire someone to do housework, rather than completely support the jobless one.

            The jobless one benefited financially from the arrangement and didn't have to work - house work for a couple is not equal to a full time job by any stretch of the imagination.

            The jobless one is responsible for themselves - when the relationship ended there should be no need for the one with the job continue to provide something to the jobless one when nothing is provided by the jobless one to the one with the job.

            Get a job, take care of yourself as any adult should.

            Comment


            • #21
              According to the poster the jobless one did, indeed, get awarded SS. With that in mind I suspect there is more to the story.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by arabian View Post
                According to the poster the jobless one did, indeed, get awarded SS. With that in mind I suspect there is more to the story.
                One would hope

                Comment


                • #23
                  I found this thread interesting. Here is my input:

                  I would be inclined to pay the Spousal Support and move on (and on, and on) with my life. Sometimes you have to put the fairness (morally, ethically and financially) aside and just endeavor to go forward with your own life. The life that you want to be separate and apart from the partner/spouse you had. That sometimes entails paying the support just to buy yourself a little freedom.

                  To not do the above means that you are stuck. Virtually frozen as you will likely be dragged through the courts and spend money, time, effort and energy that will bog you down for a considerable amount of time, if not years. Is it a good deal for the jobless/her? Of course it is! But it has its pros for the payor as well.

                  ...sometimes we can't see the forest for the trees. I also read into the original post that started this thread, and although I could be wrong, I sensed resentment and anger. I mention this because resentment and anger often impedes an individual's ability to move forward in these types of situations.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    The problem is that unless you are making 120k+ per year, then paying spousal support completely prevents you from moving on.

                    I would love to have moved on with my life, but after income tax, child support and spousal support I had $1400/month to live on. With this I was required (by court order) to provide a vehicle for my access, provide a place to live where my son could spend nights, pay the premiums on the health insurance and life insurance for my former family. Don't forget being dinged monthly for random S7 expenses. Oh, and buy food.

                    For most people, being ordered to pay SS is not tantamount to "moving on" with your life. It's simply a period of court ordered wage slavery. If you're unlucky enough to lose your job due to the strain, you may lose your license and you may go to jail depending on where you live.

                    I consider what I had to go through as punishment and jail time for the mistake of agreeing to take part in the "two become one" trap of marriage and trusting my partner completely.

                    My eyes are open, and any "partnership" I choose to remain a part of will be based on the premise of shared responsibilities, whether they be financial, domestic or parenting.
                    Last edited by FightingForFamily; 11-19-2013, 12:30 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Fighting for family, I agree with much of what you said. Don't kid yourself, we are struggling too. And the more you make, the more you pay. The truth is, if you make $120K you are also stuck with all or most of the S7 expenses and guess what? You don't even get to budget for them as they are predetermined without you. You just get to pay the bill. Nothing is easy in these situations unless people are reasonable and rational. It is my experience that reasonable and rational fall by the wayside all too often.

                      But with regards to $1400 a month to live on. I know how that is. We have more children and have had to do with much less. Seriously, it hasn't been easy. We have made many sacrifices and tap into everything free we can.

                      My biggest point was that sometimes the spousal support (offering to pay it) is the lesser of two evils. Meaning you can predict and budget. And sometimes it is less than the cost of legal costs AND the spousal support you might have to pay anyways if it goes to court.

                      Lastly, I would just say this: There are good people out there. I met my partner when he was going through the woes of his separation. We both assessed each other consciously and subconsciously as to how each other was managing, rationalizing, processing and dealing with our ex's. I determined that although things weren't always "fair" that he had emotionally separated himself from the issues and was really trying to get closure and move on with a new life, while incorporating the bests interests of all parties.

                      He was stressed about finances and literally had the price per slice of processed cheese figured out in his budget. Whenever he was faced with an obstacle he worked hard to find a solution.

                      Shared responsibilities is an absolute for us. That also goes hand in hand with shared responsibility for finding a solution. I guess that is what I was trying to say.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Well said Serene, and I agree.

                        It was a nearly unbearable financial burden, but when faced with the full might of the family destruction (ie divorce) industry, it was still the lesser of two evils. I escaped from my divorce and my indentured servitude without debt and can slowly rebuild my life now.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Serene View Post
                          ...spousal support (offering to pay it) is the lesser of two evils. Meaning you can predict and budget. And sometimes it is less than the cost of legal costs AND the spousal support you might have to pay anyways if it goes to court.
                          If more people gave serious consideration to this they would likely save money in the end. However, it would take a very mature and smart individual to do this and they wouldn't have their day in court. Too often I think the 'day in court' is what drives people to act like idiots.

                          SS is intended to ensure people are on equal footing when the marriage ends (taking in lots of variables into account of course). Therefore, if you are a large income earner, and your ex makes nothing or less, expect to pay proportionately.

                          If you decide to have more children after your divorce, good for you, you're "getting on with your life" - just don't expect the ex to pay for your new family by having SS reduced unless that is something you have previously negotiated.
                          Last edited by arabian; 11-19-2013, 01:17 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by soonfree!! View Post
                            In this case there are no children. The "jobless one" was unemployed due to a turndown in their industry and a lack of similar job opportunities, NOT because they were unable to work at all. Why does one person need to support the other if they were never "married", just living together. I know the law provides for this but doesn't anyone agree that the focus should be on the individuals choice not to be married as in the recent Quebec case? Shouldn't the " jobless one" take some responsibility for themselves instead of becoming parsitic!! ((As far as the "affair" part goes, isn't it "no fault" for divorcing couples, so this shouldn't legally matter right?))

                            Why wasn't the "jobless" one expected to work while you were together? You state that they could work, but the agreement must have been that they didn't work. Not even an expectation that they upgrade skills during this time?

                            The stage was set for spousal support claim by the acceptance of this agreement in the household. Now that person is out of the workforce even longer and it will be even harder to become employed. Depending on the age, skills and area of work, it may be downright impossible.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              MSMom - A valid point you raise and likely one of the reasons ex in this case was, according to poster, awarded SS.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Didn't read OP post fully but in Quebec the jobless one wouldn't have gotten any spousal support.

                                Quebec is the only sane place to live with an unemployed person because your commitment to them is only as long as you live with them and there are no "hidden" clauses telling you that you have to pay them 50% of your salary for 50% of your marriage.

                                Ethically:
                                There shouldn't be spousal support IN ANY case if it wasn't clearly explained at the beginning of the marriage agreement. There is no OTHER agreement in the world with the type of penalties and contortions in it that screw over working people for the sake of non-working people that doesn't even have a DISCLAIMER. If a cell phone company made you sign an agreement without any explanation of what could happen at the conclusion of the agreement it would be in court.

                                I'm so happy I got divorced young from a useless "career-stay at home mother"!!! I feel bad for the long-timers.

                                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