the inequities of divorce [Archive]

m0loch

06-04-2005, 01:45 PM

a snippet from http://www.alfra.org/new/myths.asp (not sure how credible a source, but consistent with what I've read on the subject)

MYTH NO. 1: Men are the ones who want to leave the marriage and initiate most divorces and it is usually because of an extramarital involvement.

REALITY: The reality is that women initiate between 65% and 80% of all divorces over the objections of their husbands. Further, among all causes for divorce an affair ranks sixth. Abuse - whether alcohol, violence, or drug-related - doesn't show up until the eleventh cause. When a wife divorces her husband for reasons such as a "gradual growing apart" or "serious differences in lifestyle" (the top two reasons!) and takes the kids with her, her ex-husband truly has been disenfranchised - and left powerless.

Now, that coupled with the astronomical cost of housing where I live $1.005 million for a freaking VACANT LOT (http://www.jacksonholereport.com/lots.html)

So, my story: Married 15 years. I loved my wife unconditionally for all of it. Fat ass and all. Financially supported her for at least 10 years of that. Everything I did, I did for her. Nothing was ever good enough in her eyes, but I did the best I could. She ended up having a fling with a guy at work. Listened to all his bullshit, and took his advice. This piece of shit hasn't stayed up all night with one of my kids when they were having a bad dream. He wasn't there when my oldest boy skied the tram (big deal) for the first time. Didn't teach them to ride bikes. Probably doesn't even know their names, but in my wife's eyes, he's the best thing since sliced bread so she decides to divorce me, based largely on advice she has taken from him. Now, I'm not one to put my kids through a big custody battle that I have little chance of winning in our biased court system anyhow, and figuring I'll get a better visitation deal by negotiating directly with her, we worked out a custody arrangement and I conceded primary custody to her.

Now, of course, there is child support. Don't get me wrong, I feel my kids deserve the very best I can give them and have no problem paying child support, but back to the snippet about the high cost of housing, I went to look at an apartment today. This fuckin' thing is literally a closet. $600(US)/month. That is as inexpensive as it gets, and I'm not going to be able to afford much more. This is how I'm going to have to live indefinately if I want to stay close enough so that I can spend time with my kids. Meanwhile, she gets an additional $500/month tax free income, is moving into a bigger house that comes with all new amenities.

It really shits me that after 15 years of loving her unconditionally, financial and emotional support, sacrificing my goals so she could do what she wanted, the thanks I get is to live in a fuckin' closet while she gets to better her standard of living at my expense.

Fuck me dead, no wonder 80% of divorces are initiated by women. It makes good business sense to them. Crying shame that children are seen by these festering cuntbags as commodities to increase their own personal wealth.

Directed

06-04-2005, 01:48 PM

I feel for you. What she does will come back on her own head someday. Lets hope your kids escape the problems that will come from this.

berserk

06-04-2005, 04:40 PM

"gradual growing apart" or "serious differences in lifestyle"
I doubt these are the real reasons for divorce. They're probably the most common ones as they are the most convenient reasons that ex-couples choose that doesn't dimply fault or somesuch nastiness.

What was the reason stated in the court papers for your divorce?

ShinymetalASS

06-04-2005, 04:43 PM

LOL at the fat arse remark.

Seriously though.... I'm so glad I dont have to do matrimonial/separation matters. I do deal with a lot of the property and financial transfers once the court orders have come through.

Between what I see at work and what I have seen in my own childhood and family, men get bent over and properly rodgered by the system.

I remember being young and saying that I wanted to be a lawyer so I could go after the [expletive deleted] woman who took my Dad to the cleaners (and it wasnt my Mum, she was reasonable so their separation was an amicable and fair process).

I feel for you my friend, I really do.

Blink

06-04-2005, 04:52 PM

Mate, hope things work out ok for you. I have a good friend who until recently was living in a defacto relationship...as soon as things went south the bitch took him to the cleaners.

He didn't even get to enjoy the $5000 breast enhancement she wanted and he paid for...

Sagacious

06-04-2005, 05:41 PM

This is not unusual unfortunatley it happens all the time.

I see this shit daily as I do tonnes and tonnes of Fmaily Law Matters in my practice.

Sucks being the guy most of the time cos the women have the hostages (er I mean children) most of the time and have given up working to raise them at least some of the time but it's the law so what can you do?

Get a good lawyer I say and bury the bitch in paper (sorry that's the evil me coming out what I meant to say is get a good lawyer so you rinterests are protected and the best interests of the children are looked after and try and mediate these sorts of things as much as possible).

Good job I am a mediator too.

Gruff Nutz

06-04-2005, 06:44 PM

Chicks are all insane. I'm never getting married because of that.
I'll stick with a girl but the second she goes all bat-shit loco I'll be out of there with no messy paperwork to sort out.

Sagacious

06-04-2005, 07:06 PM

I act for a lot of chicks too and when things get nasty in that area they get really nasty.

I particularly enjoy the death threats from (not so much the husbands) as the fathers of children caught in the middle of it all.

~vjay~

06-04-2005, 09:32 PM

ezer

06-04-2005, 09:40 PM

im just 18 but im getting a fair crash course in this shit, my mum and split up 12 months and like 2 weeks ago. divorce stuff was started recently, the split was cause we (brother, mum and i) got an avo (well advo actually, domestic)

anyway dads in qld and when working out the stupid financial settlement, dads sending all this crazy shit prettymuch saying hes poor when he isnt, causing trouble, hes an alcho and this is pissing all of us off,

the point of that is youll get a better response probably if you are nice, unless you are in the boat of my boss.

2 months after my family problems, his wife left him, for another man. their kids are older and all moved out now hes a nice guy but every step shes being a complete bitch, she gav a list of things he had to give her and among others was a 2 cd pack that he gave her as a present, when one cd wasnt in it, he got threatening calls, notes and more! (it was still in the cdtrap),

point - in this case, dont be like him and fight and dont give an inch!

oh yeah, make sure you keep good records of anyhting that happens

Sagacious

06-04-2005, 11:33 PM

If they are hopeless as choosing men as me they have very good reason to want to leave a relationship, I did let my ex have the whole lot including the house, everything in it & unlimited access,now I have sole custody because my ex is a nutjob & wasn't satisfied even with that, & in saying that, there are women who use the kids as leverage & are bitchy just because they can do it & clean men out, there are bad people in every situation & it isn't right to accuse all women of iniating divorces/seperations just for financial gain.
Child support should be more fairly based on not just the fathers income but also what the mothers assets as well in cases where the mother has remarried & has another income earner sharing expenses with her.

Like Danny de Vito said in War of the Roses in Divorce there are no winners there are only degrees of losing.

There are nutjobs and bitches out there as far as the eye can see but it all comes down to this .....what are our expectations of the process? If we treat it like a competition with a winner and a loser (and most people do) then of course you are going to get those who play to win or play dirty or whatever but if you look at the process as one which is undergone to try and assign rights and responsibilities once jointly exercised and assumed equitably (as opposed to equally) according (under the legislation) to a contribution basis taking into account the future needs of the parties then it vvery wuickly becomes evident that in order to survive the process with as little damage as possible people should agree on how their marriages should end and who gets what.

The principles are not difficult to grasp their results however are sometimes difficult to accept.

AntZ

06-04-2005, 11:55 PM

druid

07-04-2005, 01:01 AM

I'm a reasonable person. That's why I'm going to get a prenupt. I view it as protecting both parties equally. After all we should be living in an equal world. I wouldn't be offended if I was asked to sign one.

On a more serious note, child support/alimony to the party who has spent the most time at home is kind of reasonable considering that they won't be getting any pension from that time they spent looking after the kids. Unless of course they moved straight in with the "new person".

druckfugged

07-04-2005, 01:15 AM

.

He didn't even get to enjoy the $5000 breast enhancement she wanted and he paid for...

Now that's gotta be a red flag.
Says "I want other men to find me more attractive" (at least with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight)

Asmodeus

07-04-2005, 02:04 AM

This is why you all need to take the asmo course of dicorce management.

"Dead women don't sue"

Ive seen a number of divorces around these parts and they're mostly nuts or totally easy going and amicable. there seems to be little middle ground.

The women many times seem to be the meanest with these things but also at least here, i also blame the lawyers a LOT. you get a lawyer on a womans side and magically she thinks shes entitled to everything in teh relationship.

the inequality of it all is what sickens me. happened to a friend of mine a while back. went through a messy divorce and all. now, he was a stay at home dad by agreement with his then wife. she had a great job and all that and his work was kinda seasonal (construction) well, when he went up to the court for money for the kids and also his support, he practically got laughed out of court and was told to 'get a job'. had this been a woman asking the same she wouldn't even finish her sentence before the judge is awarding her half the guys paycheck before taxes.

I notice tho, all these womens lib and equal rights groups stay strangely silent on these matters. remember, they only want equal rights when it benefits them. if theres an inequality that benefits them, suddenly they get hostile when someone wants to come in and have ACTUAL equality.

scathing

07-04-2005, 03:40 AM

Its shit like this which is a big reason why I'm never getting married, or even getting in a de facto relationship.

Women's lib and feminazis aren't about equality. They're about getting shit they want while keeping the shit they have. You don't hear women saying that movies are perpetrating sexist ideals when you get the "women and children off the about-to-be-destroyed vessel first". Nor when you get ads with guys in their underpants adorning the sidewalk.

Not to mention that most women still expect men to act chivalrously towards them, rather than treating them like they would any male. They do bitch about having men open the door for them occasionally, but its only when they're on the rag and don't have anything else to yell at complete strangers about.

dwarfthrower

07-04-2005, 08:54 AM

In this day and age, any male is an idiot for not following Donald Trump's advice and insist on a prenup before you get married - its dirty and its evil, but if you don't have one you might as well bend over and beg the biggest black guy you can find to fuck you till you bleed.

A prenup only protects assets that you had before you got married. Hence 'pre' - before and 'nuptial' - marriage. Even with a prenup, if you spend the best ten years of your career together and build up a house and a decent block of investments _while_ you are married... your prenup doesn't cover it.

Blink

07-04-2005, 09:48 AM

I notice tho, all these womens lib and equal rights groups stay strangely silent on these matters. remember, they only want equal rights when it benefits them. if theres an inequality that benefits them, suddenly they get hostile when someone wants to come in and have ACTUAL equality.

Exactly. A former Commisioner (or whatever they are called) for this sort of stuff in QLD was quoted a few years ago as saying "equality doesn't mean being equal"!!! Someone should have pointed the stupid bitch at the nearest dictionary.

Snowball

07-04-2005, 09:55 AM

Chicks are all insane. I'm never getting married because of that.
I'll stick with a girl but the second she goes all bat-shit loco I'll be out of there with no messy paperwork to sort out.

Well sorry to disapoint you but if you live with someone for 12 months you are classed as defacto and they can still take you for half of everything. You do not have to be married.

~vjay~

07-04-2005, 09:56 AM

Well sorry to disapoint you but if you live with someone for 12 months you are classed as defacto and they can still take you for half of everything. You do not have to be married.

This is true (nods head)
This is still classed as living as if married.

sperm

07-04-2005, 10:29 AM

In my industry I reckon 85% of marriages go bust, so I work everday with guys who have been through a first or even second marriage. I think its the heavy workload and frequent going away that kills them.

To me the biggest crime is that after the split the garnering of the guys wages. Sure he has a responsibility to the children he created, but the burden of alimony cripples a guy for a very long time.

I think it would be fairer if after the split, the child custodian (i.e. ex-wife), pretty much gets everything, and the guy gets a modicum to get back on his feet.
From there the guy should retain all his wage, for the best chance for him to start a new life. Often the assests built up during the marriage are quite substantial, and should continue to care for the offspring.

From there, sorry to be callous, but it is the custodians burden to build their own life up again (i.e. get a job, or find a replaceman husband).
I see far too many single-mothers living lazily off their poor wage-crippled ex-husbands :(
Sorry vikki, I know this isnt your case, but it is in just about every other one I've seen ....

What's worse ? wage crippling or stuck in an unhappy marriage too afraid to leave because of it ??

ShinymetalASS

07-04-2005, 10:34 AM

thingy

07-04-2005, 10:35 AM

Well sorry to disapoint you but if you live with someone for 12 months you are classed as defacto and they can still take you for half of everything. You do not have to be married.
So I need to kick Sapia out before January?

dwarfthrower

07-04-2005, 10:41 AM

To be honest, I couldn't really give a rats. I don't think it's a particularly healthy attitude to take into a relationship to be thinking about how things will pan out if the shit hits the fan.

I'm twice married and have never once given any thought to prenups or any of that sort of thing. The only reason I'm in the relationship is because I believe completely that it will last forever. If I'm wrong about that then I'll deal with it when it happens.

Not that I believe in tempting fate or anything like that ;)

Chocoholic

07-04-2005, 10:58 AM

So I need to kick Sapia out before January?

Depends are you sleeping with her?

I have lived with my male flat mate for two years and the only thing that keeps up from being defacto is the fact that we never have had or will have sex. We actually had a conversation about this after sharing accommodation for exactly 2 years..

scathing

07-04-2005, 02:28 PM

Exactly. A former Commisioner (or whatever they are called) for this sort of stuff in QLD was quoted a few years ago as saying "equality doesn't mean being equal"!!! Someone should have pointed the stupid bitch at the nearest dictionary.
Sounds a whole lot like "All animals are created equal, but some are created more equal than others".

Yet, if I was to call this stupid bitch a fat pig, apparently I'd be in the wrong.

Sagacious

07-04-2005, 02:50 PM

There is actually no set time limit in Qld after which you classify as de facto. They give a list of considerations but otherwise:
de facto relationship is 2 people, whether of same or opposite sex, who live together ..... intimacy, trust.... blah blah....

Anyway, in Qld, it comes down to the opinion of the court.

Bugger eh?

Except the Property Law Act imposes a preumption of the existence of a de facto relationship after the parties to the relationship have cohabited on a genuine domestic basis for a period of 2 years or more or earlier if there are children of that relationship. :)

excalibur

07-04-2005, 02:50 PM

[snip]he practically got laughed out of court and was told to 'get a job'. had this been a woman asking the same she wouldn't even finish her sentence before the judge is awarding her half the guys paycheck before taxes.

I notice tho, all these womens lib and equal rights groups stay strangely silent on these matters. remember, they only want equal rights when it benefits them. if theres an inequality that benefits them, suddenly they get hostile when someone wants to come in and have ACTUAL equality.

I hear you there Asmo. I've had discussions like this with some female friends of mine. I killed the discussion rather quickly before my balls became forfeit. I had one say to me that it was "making up for all the years of opression women had, they deserve to be cut some breaks nowadays" I nearly fell over laughing. She didn't find it funny. When I informed her that she hasn't been opressed, sher still didn't find it funny.

Asmodeus

08-04-2005, 01:32 AM

I hear you there Asmo. I've had discussions like this with some female friends of mine. I killed the discussion rather quickly before my balls became forfeit. I had one say to me that it was "making up for all the years of opression women had, they deserve to be cut some breaks nowadays" I nearly fell over laughing. She didn't find it funny. When I informed her that she hasn't been opressed, sher still didn't find it funny.

bahahaha, i had one of those conversations as well..
they didn't get why i was laughing. I said that when they find me opressing one of them, they can feel free to sue me, until then I don't accept guilt by past gender association.

of course i then proceded them that women have breasts so we know who to pay less, but thats another matter all together.

myself, i would look into a prenup simply becuase im a cover my ass kind of guy. I usually walk into a relationship as the one with the larger chunk of money, buying and earning power. the question will inevitably come 'dont you trust me?' to which they should already know my reply. "not when it comes to my stuff. no, i don't trust anyone, and that includes myself"

King_Crud

08-04-2005, 02:04 AM

So I need to kick Sapia out before January?
hell yes. Would you want people thinking you and Sapia are a couple? Get out while you can!!

hazza

08-04-2005, 02:29 AM

fuck her in the ass and bash up the guy

tikdoph

08-04-2005, 10:57 AM

So I need to kick Sapia out before January?
Why wait 'til January?

Space Cowboy

08-04-2005, 12:39 PM

I've been through a divorce and I still am being screwed around by the ex. To be honest, I had an affair and I'll admit that. It happened and as a consequence my marriage broke down quicker then what it was already. My ex though was a bitch. She would play mind games with me. An example you ask…..I'm a member of the Rural Fire Service and have been for the last 9 years. I would go out to fires or training nights and she would call me on my mobile and if I didn't answer because I was busy putting out a fire or in the middle of a training exercise, she would flip out and demand an answer as to why I didn't answer my phone. After all, why have a mobile if I'm not going to answer it. I would come home and find my pillows in the hallway and the bedroom door closed.
One day she gave me an ultimatum…either your family(it was only her at this stage) or the fire brigade. So naturally I said her and was dialling the number for my captain when she goes no, stop! I don't want you tog ive up something you love, I only wanted to see if you would do it. This really fucked me up in the head I think. She gave me that ultimatum on 2 more occasions.

So, now I'm seeing a lawyer and getting my life sorted out. I'm married again now but what's really hard is that for me to see my son, I have to drive 2 hours south to pick him up, drive back home then when the contact weekend is over I have to take him all the way back again. I pay child support and I was even giving her some extra cash so that she could at least meet me halfway each trip but no, the selfish bitch takes my money and then uses my son as blackmail saying if you want to see your son you will have to come and get him.

I have no idea where I am going with this story. I think I will stop now :swear:

scathing

08-04-2005, 02:19 PM

That's just a kind of fucked up ultimatum.

Your ex sounds like what psycho girl (http://www.blogwars.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3095) would turn into if she got married.

SamBo

08-04-2005, 02:37 PM

Ultimatums are fucked up and they are one of the few things I absolutly will not stand for. I had an ex who tried to give me ultimatums all the time, and even then (when I was even more of a pushover than i am now) I didn't stand for it most of the time.
Space_cowboy, sounds like you did yourself a favour by getting away from that woman (even though I don't condone cheating on a partner....)

Sagacious

08-04-2005, 02:42 PM

I usually start a relationship with the 'ultimatum ultimatum' which goes roughly like this:

Look I really like you and enjoy being with you but if you ever give me an ultimatum of any kind honey it is over. How about a shag? :p

Gruff Nutz

09-04-2005, 08:01 PM

Well sorry to disapoint you but if you live with someone for 12 months you are classed as defacto and they can still take you for half of everything. You do not have to be married.

What if I lived with another dude for 12 months? Can he take half my stuff?
I'm pretty fucking sure you have to do paperwork to be classified as defacto, I've never heard anything before that says a chick can have half my stuff if she spends 12 months in my bed.

Can anyone verify this?

excalibur

09-04-2005, 08:47 PM

I was telling my parents some of the stuff that was being said in this thread, just making conversation (they have not been divorced) and they where telling me about a friend of theirs.

This is the biggest bitch I have ever heard of in my entire fucking life. They got divorced, and it was all amicable, and she didn't hit him up for alimony or child support or anything, as they split the time with the kids equally, and where on about equal money. He gave her some though anyways on the side, just to help her out a bit which he did not have to do.

This continued on for 5 years.

She then decided, after 5 years, to take him to court for the 5 years of back child support and alimony, she got it too, even though he had been giving her money. Because it wasn't all documented, his word was worth nothing. So much for what he thought was an amicable divorce.

Space Cowboy

09-04-2005, 08:51 PM

I think that if a chick is living with you in a relationship, ie your fucking her and she actually shits, showers and shaves at your place, for 12 months or more then it can be classed as a de-facto relationship. Mind you, she has to be sleeping in the same bed also.

The other thing is that she would have to be contributing to the relationiship/household, I believe, in order for her to be able to claim anything....

That's what I know so far.

ezer

09-04-2005, 08:53 PM

gruff no, you dont need paperwork to be defacto

Gruff Nutz

09-04-2005, 10:17 PM

gruff no, you dont need paperwork to be defacto

Fuck.
Well I now have a new relationship rule: 11 months and you're out the door.

psi_ko

09-04-2005, 10:43 PM

Sagacious

10-04-2005, 01:21 AM

What if I lived with another dude for 12 months? Can he take half my stuff?
I'm pretty fucking sure you have to do paperwork to be classified as defacto, I've never heard anything before that says a chick can have half my stuff if she spends 12 months in my bed.

Can anyone verify this?

In Queensland (and in most other states of Australia as far as I am aware) if a relationship which is a genuine domestic relationship based on mutual intimacy and trust subsists for a continuous period of 2 years the law presumes that there exists a de facto relationship and then similar rights to those subsisting between married couples come into play with respect to the property of the parties to that relationship.

That presumption is legislated for in Part 19 Property Law Act 1974 in Qieensland at least.

The presumption is rebuttable and the court will conclude that a de facto relationship existed prior to the 2nd aniversary after which the presumption arises if there are other indicators of a de facto relationship existing such as a child of that relationship.

So basically you can no longer get around the property distribution thing just because you are shacked up rather than married.

In Australia however there is no recognised concept of palimony (Spousal Maintenance for a de facto spouse) like in some states of the US

m0loch

10-04-2005, 01:53 AM

She then decided, after 5 years, to take him to court for the 5 years of back child support and alimony, she got it too, even though he had been giving her money. Because it wasn't all documented, his word was worth nothing. So much for what he thought was an amicable divorce.

Yep, where I'm at, if the money doesn't go through the court system, it ain't child support and will be looked at as a gift. Even if it is documented.

Sagacious

10-04-2005, 12:53 PM

I guess one way to overcome the inconveniences caused by long term relationships is to have many short term ones but that could lead to a situation a mate of mine claims to have been faced with years ago now...it went a little something like this:

during a break in a shagatghon with his new girlfriend my mate is lying there in recovery mode when she props herself up on one elbow and after telling him how great the shagging had been (remember this is my mate telling the story) says those three words guaranteed to stike terror and impotence into the souls of the chronically commitmentphobic 'I love you.' she declares.

Quick as a flash and without flinching (apparently) my mate says...'don't involve me in your personal problems.'

He then apparently proceeds to shag the girl further and for another three months on and off.

How do you think he handled that situation boys and girls?

BtrFly

10-04-2005, 01:21 PM

Defacto was recently reduced to living toget ther for a period of 3 mths. Reduced from the 2 years.... gets a little tricky then doesnt it.

Sagacious

10-04-2005, 01:24 PM

Defacto was recently reduced to living toget ther for a period of 3 mths. Reduced from the 2 years.... gets a little tricky then doesnt it.
Where did this happen?

catt

10-04-2005, 03:26 PM

I'm almost certain it has always been 6 months in NSW, one of my girlfriends had an ex used to disappear just before they got to the 6 month mark in their relationship and return after a residing with his parents or a mate for a period of about 2 weeks .. go figure ;)

Whiskers

10-04-2005, 04:15 PM

In NSW, a de facto relationship is defined as a relationship between two adult persons who live together as a COUPLE, and who are not married to one another or related by family.' (s 4(1) Property (Relationships) Act 1984)

In NSW at least- no specific amount of time is strictly necessary to establish a de facto relationship. In determining whether a de facto relationship exists, the court is entitled to assess all the circumstances of the case.
(See section 4(2) Property (Relationships) Act 1984)

Glompbot

10-04-2005, 04:48 PM

I don't think I could ever get married...

its hard enough ending a normal relationship where you don't live with the person.

i'd hate to think what it would be like living with a person and having things like shared possessions, children, and on top of that you have this whole marriage thing to sort out before you're essentially able to move on.

Glompbot

10-04-2005, 05:12 PM

Also, space cowboy i don't think anyone could fuck with your head the way an SO can...

tikdoph

11-04-2005, 05:22 PM

What a crock of shit. A marriage is a legally binding contract, an agreement that two consenting adults enter into of their own volition, "for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and health... 'til death do us part". Given that vow, there is an expectation of permanence to the arrangement.

A de facto relationship lacks any such legal agreement so where the fuck the courts get off telling someone that they have effectively entered into a contract with someone without ANY kind of formal arrangement is beyond me. The last time I checked, I had to SIGN a contract to make it valid, not simply live with and fuck someone on a long term basis.

If that's the case, then I'm in a defacto relationship with the Federal Government, because I have to live with them for four years and they fuck me over every day. I should sue for half of everything!

dwarfthrower

11-04-2005, 05:43 PM

A de facto relationship lacks any such legal agreement so where the fuck the courts get off telling someone that they have effectively entered into a contract with someone without ANY kind of formal arrangement is beyond me. The last time I checked, I had to SIGN a contract to make it valid

I'll have to try that angle next time I go to a restaurant.

Sagacious

11-04-2005, 06:04 PM

The last time I checked, I had to SIGN a contract to make it valid...

That's where you be wrong tikdoph you enter into contracts every day without signing.

Buying your groceries is a contractual process... Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) LD [1953] 1 QB 401...and nothing is even written down never mind signed.

locust

11-04-2005, 06:25 PM

Sagacious

11-04-2005, 06:36 PM

On the other hand, the determining factor regarding contracts is IIRC the "meeting of the minds" - the two parties are supposed to know exactly what they're agreeing too. Writing it down and signing it produces pretty steadfast documentation of this.

If you go into a restaurant and order food, that boy who was raised by wolves may be able to convince a judge that he and the waiter didn't understand he'd have to pay for the food. Nobody else will.

The problem with the defacto relationship is, I think, that lots of people don't think that moving in with somebody means giving them half your stuff. That's why I think it's wrong.
De Facto Relationships are not contractual arrangements per se they are arrangements whereby people conduct themselves in certain ways based on certain expectations and representations made to eachother so that after a relationship becomes established and then goes south equity coinsiders it unjust to allow one party to screw the other one over by resiling from those representations and that acknowledgement.

For this reason Equity will impress the property of the parties to the relationship with resulting and/or constructive trusts detailing the beneficial ownership of the property regardless of legal title.

At least that was the case until the legislature stepped in and put everything within a legislative framework...so that now it is neithr a contract nor is it a trust but rather a statutory entitlement.

locust

11-04-2005, 07:36 PM

Oh yeah, I forgot to add at the end, "but de facto relationships are a matter of statute law so it's a moot point."

What I was trying to say is that I think the reasoning behind contract law is sound, and that the same principles seem to apply with things like marriage and ordering food. De facto is nastier because people don't know what they're getting into.

m0loch

12-04-2005, 02:58 AM

polite

12-04-2005, 03:01 AM

Given that vow, I should legally be able to kill her so that death will do us part.

That is a fucking stupid thing to say.

scathing

12-04-2005, 03:33 AM

If that's the case, then I'm in a defacto relationship with the Federal Government, because I have to live with them for four years and they fuck me over every day. I should sue for half of everything!
That fucking slut!

I've lived with them for almost my entire life and I've been fucked by them more times than I can imagine!

amj

12-04-2005, 03:39 AM

PAH to you all. You think its hard being a partner in divorce, try being the children.

Space Cowboy

13-04-2005, 01:11 PM

try being the father who only wants to see his kids as much as he can but the ex is just a fucking bitch that won't even agree to anything.
more on this rant later

I have an interesting snippet of an email which I might post sometime.

ms edeity

14-04-2005, 12:58 AM

i feel compelled to respond but it's long and my personal crap doesn't effect the circumstance of anyone elses. but here goes

i was in a violent marriage (no i'm not a conniving bitch...doctors and police) and when i realised this would turn to our children i left....married 1996, first child 97 second 98 separated 99, divorced 2000. so yeah i was an idiot but i give dates to show i'm not that stupid....so he had unlimited access because i thought my children should have a relationship with their dad, i never uttered a bad word,we had no assets to speak of , i was still feeding our 2nd. i waited a month from a year before i saw anyone else and the shit hit the fan....my kids have been through gun firing and threats, being locked in closets, emotional crap to the point where the teacher said stop these visits.etc... and finally my daughter was thrown on her head for sitting on a couch after he cleaned it..(again hospital), i felt guilty for the abuse and yet i tried so hard to prevent it. i do not and have not received child support because he won't lodge his details. he hasn't seen his children, sent a card or anything in over 3 years even though all he needed to do was have anger management counselling and supervised visits for a while.After he was stopped from unsupervised visits i didn't press charges at the police's insistance because it wasn't my goal...i just wanted the kids to be safe.i have also felt deep empathy for men who get shafted but the danger of painting women as the bitches is that when we genuinely need help there is a doubt that it's necessary...until it's proven by injury.
i think it's not a man woman thing it's a clear right wrong thing. the court gave my ex numerous chances when abuse was clear and the csa have never pursued a tax return.

having rambled i and my children are now happy and in a family and i choose not to let baggage destroy my faith in relationships. so it's in the past and all anyone can do no matter how bad is keep going, whether you're the man or woman.

divorce sucks but i only answer to my children and i am comfortable i can.

amj

14-04-2005, 08:42 AM

PAH to you all. You think its hard being a partner in divorce, try being the children.

I just wanna clarify, nobody think I'm sayin that being a partner in divorce is easy. I was merely expressing my anger at certain recent events.

Space Cowboy

14-04-2005, 09:20 AM

I just wanna clarify, nobody think I'm sayin that being a partner in divorce is easy. I was merely expressing my anger at certain recent events.

Don't worry, I didnt think you were saying it was easy at all.

My ex is the one that is stopping me from seeing my son. I give her over and above what CSA say I should be giving her but I was doing so in the hopes that she would at least meet me halfway with the travelling and wouldn't be able to say that she can't afford it. Mind you that is her fucking excuse every single time and it's my problem if I can't drive to her place and see him. She tells "me well, if you can't get down here then you can't see him cos I can't meet you anywhere else as I don't have the money and I have plans".

When we split I was kicked out of the house, then told that they are moving away so I said ok, I'll come back when you are packing everything so we can sort out what's what. I was told pretty clearly that I wasn't going to be there when they packed because it would be too awkward for her family and friends. WTF???? She took everything out of the house, left me with the crap she didn't want like broken a table, old mismatched cutlery a broken bed.

Left the house in a mess, muddy footprints and greese marks on the carpet. Took the car and I was still having to pay the car loan aswell as give her child support plus travel a total of 8 hours per contact weekend.

After all of this, what pisses me off the most is that she turned around to my son and said
"Daddy doesn't want to live with us anymore, he just wants to visit every now and then"

edeity

14-04-2005, 09:31 AM

that's fucked up! and i want to say get a good lawyer but i'm sure you have heaps of money for that after everything else!....

ms edeity

14-04-2005, 09:32 AM

that was me btw...but im sure he'd agree

Munchkin

14-04-2005, 09:47 AM

My parents weren't married, but that didnt stop ugly 'divorce' stuff happening. It was odd in one way because I remember seeing more of my dad and doing more stuff with him after he moved out than we did when he lived at home.

And when my parents argued, it was always pretty vicious ... not violent, but they'd do the classic bitching at each other , trying to make me take sides ( I was 13 ish at the time, brothers would have been 4 and 2 ). They have a fairly amicable relationship now, but I find it hard to forget the big arguments early on .. having to take both brothers up to bed with me and hug and comfort them while I can hear screaming coming from downstairs was never cool. I feel luck because there were never the ugly custody and money battles like the ones Ive read on here.