Jump to content

D.i.v.o.r.c.e


StandFree1982

Recommended Posts

Just been reading the story of those wifies getting additional money from their (then) husband after they found out they had more money than they said.

 

What are folks thoughts on the whole giving 50% of everything to the missus? Even if the money was earned, in someone like Paul McCartneys case, before they came along (or even born...)

 

What about if the man came into more money AFTER they split up, should the ex wife be entitled to that?

 

Discuss.....

Link to comment

Just been reading the story of those wifies getting additional money from their (then) husband after they found out they had more money than they said.

 

What are folks thoughts on the whole giving 50% of everything to the missus? Even if the money was earned, in someone like Paul McCartneys case, before they came along (or even born...)

 

What about if the man came into more money AFTER they split up, should the ex wife be entitled to that?

 

Discuss.....

 

I would say earnings before and during a fair game but new earnings after your officially divorced should not be considered.

Link to comment

If women are truely the equals of men, then they should be able to go their own way and provide for themselves following a divorce.

 

I regard the system, which essentially turns the man into a kind of cash cow to ensure an easy life for the woman, as a tacit admission that women are not the equals of men.

 

In what is known as "womans lib" women have only sought to further advantage themselves, they not sought equality in areas where they had privilege or special treatment.

Link to comment

If women are truely the equals of men, then they should be able to go their own way and provide for themselves following a divorce.

 

I regard the system, which essentially turns the man into a kind of cash cow to ensure an easy life for the woman, as a tacit admission that women are not the equals of men.

 

In what is known as "womans lib" women have only sought to further advantage themselves, they not sought equality in areas where they had privilege or special treatment.

 

That's not true though. There was a case a while back of a woman told to get a job and stop trying to leech off her divorce. The courts - if it goes that far - will start off at 50% of assets of the marriage then make allowances where necessary. If a woman has been a housewife to look after kids and stuff she's forgone a lot of her earning potential by being out of work. The courts have rectified that to an extent. It's fair enough imo but others will disagree.

Link to comment

 

That's not true though. There was a case a while back of a woman told to get a job and stop trying to leech off her divorce. The courts - if it goes that far - will start off at 50% of assets of the marriage then make allowances where necessary. If a woman has been a housewife to look after kids and stuff she's forgone a lot of her earning potential by being out of work. The courts have rectified that to an extent. It's fair enough imo but others will disagree.

 

But very few women are home makers these days, most work.

 

Plus, the court should not consider what has gone before, only the future - and, even if the woman has been a home maker before, she can still get a job to support herself in future.

 

Certainly, yes, she should get half of the value of the house or other assets, but her ex shouldnt have to work to give her an allowance, instead of her earning her own wage.

 

And I go off on a tangent here:

 

Incidentally, I think what feminism has done to the idea of being a home maker (either gender) is terrible. It was (is) a very important thing, especially for young children and all women going en-masse into the workpalce has achieved is to undermine families, make everything twice as expensive and give women extra vehicles to talk about themselves.

 

Imo women wil never be happen until they start being women again, instead of second rate men.

Link to comment

Pretty sure that's what it is. Half of the assets collected during the time married.

 

Okay, and avoiding broom handles at all costs, newcastlered is right, the default settlement is 50% to allow both parties a 'clean break'. The argument about lost earnings whilst bringing up kids is what gets me. My wife CHOSE to work less, felt she didn't need to and I went along with it. Now she wants more than 50% even though her friends all worked full-time and had same aged kids. Of course, if you have a decent pension and she doesn't, she'll want a proportion of your pension, in cash, to equal the pension pots. On top of that, you will have to pay child maintenance to the age of 18 or until they finish full-time education. Also any money gifted or left you during the marriage, she will get half of, even though it had nothing to do with her.

 

I agree with Clydeside_Sheep, far too many women will try and screw you over as a sort of revenge, and that's when you need to pay big bucks for the best lawyer. All round, it's a shit state of affairs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Okay, and avoiding broom handles at all costs, newcastlered is right, the default settlement is 50% to allow both parties a 'clean break'. The argument about lost earnings whilst bringing up kids is what gets me. My wife CHOSE to work less, felt she didn't need to and I went along with it. Now she wants more than 50% even though her friends all worked full-time and had same aged kids. Of course, if you have a decent pension and she doesn't, she'll want a proportion of your pension, in cash, to equal the pension pots. On top of that, you will have to pay child maintenance to the age of 18 or until they finish full-time education. Also any money gifted or left you during the marriage, she will get half of, even though it had nothing to do with her.

 

I agree with Clydeside_Sheep, far too many women will try and screw you over as a sort of revenge, and that's when you need to pay big bucks for the best lawyer. All round, it's a shit state of affairs.

It's those pesky affairs that cause the mess in the first place!

Link to comment

Maybe its different in the US but my divorce cost me nothing much financially.

Just the $400 to file papers.

There was no division of assets..i let her have the house since she was going to be the primary care for the kids.

That and i pay for the kiddos health insurance.

Its different for other probably.

I pay child support though, but get my daughter weekends and whenever i want..ex and I are still friends, so its never a bother if i get a day off work and want the kid.

Link to comment

Don't get married if you plan on having a divorce, defeats the whole purpose of marriage.

 

Marriage is a life commitment.

It's a piece of paper and a very expensive meal and piss up. If you end up despising someone after getting married, there is no reason to stick with them, especially not because some fucking religious words said by a child molesting (probably) vicar in a church says so.

 

 

Note - Religion, location and Vicar can be interchangeable depending on your views, i.e. Humanist Wedding at Pittodrie with Willie Miller.

Link to comment

It's a piece of paper and a very expensive meal and piss up. If you end up despising someone after getting married, there is no reason to stick with them, especially not because some fucking religious words said by a child molesting (probably) vicar in a church says so.

 

 

Note - Religion, location and Vicar can be interchangeable depending on your views, i.e. Humanist Wedding at Pittodrie with Willie Miller.

If it has Willie Miller involved in the deal it will never last

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...