stoltz
Platinum
Reged: 01/29/07
Posts: 1478
Loc: Texas
|
|
... to start from scratch and revamp the entire process of divorce, how would you institute it? What would you do differently as far as EVERYTHING associated with the legal aspects of divorce (i.e., alimony, property division, child support, child custody, and so on). I mean EVERYTHING as a lot of the stuff, while legally different, is tied together in some small way. Or would you keep it the way it is? Would you require some sort of state-/federally-mandated premarital education (and, if so, what would the curriculum entail)?
This idea was spawned by a recent thread in one of the other forums, but I think it should be hammered on more by the entire community. I know the "Men's Rights" forum is probably not the best place to host this kind of thread, but there was no "General" forum available.
Speak up and maybe we can actually get some good ideas flowing for once.
|
cantbelieveit02
Silver
Reged: 01/01/08
Posts: 60
|
|
Premarital agreements signed by both with a 3 to 5 year limit and then a new agreement with another time limit if an agreement cannot be reached then there is no marriage. This would put all those worthless mindless one sided judges out of business and the lowlife divorce lawyers as well
|
aspect
Platinum
Reged: 01/08/08
Posts: 531
Loc: Texas
|
|
Let's start with one of the more obvious ones...
Child support
I'm in Texas, and the law currently requires me to pay 25% of my gross income in child support. This is regardless of my custody percentages.
I can understand paying child support in situations where one parent has full custody, but in a joint custody situation (primarily 50/50), there shouldn't be any child support paid.
Let's look at my situation. I'm going to be paying my STBX $2,000 a month in child support. That's $24,000 a year, tax free. Plus, health insurance.
I'm going to have the kids roughly 75% of the time (they come to my house everyday after school, even on the days when they go back home to their mother's house). I still have to put a roof over their heads. I still have to feed them. I still have to buy them clothes. I still have to pay half of their daycare, sports activities, medical fees, etc.
All of this because of 2 little words. 'Primary caregiver'. You put those words next to my name, and I don't give their mother a penny. And to think, I could then get money from her.
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 989
|
|
This is a good idea, but IMHO may be a bit too ambitious. In anything that people try to do they can never anticipate and prepare, or plan, for every eventuality or situation that may arise.
Just as everything else we do must be prioritized, in terms of importance and urgency, so it is with marriage and divorce law reform. Surely no one who has been reading this forum would disagree with me that some abuses enabled by these presently existing laws, are clearly more outrageous and repugnant than others, and demand immediate redress. I would personally start with laws which are clearly ANACHRONISTIC such as community property and alimony. These two bodies of law obviously have been passed on to us from a time when virtually all marriages were also businesses, there were virtually no employment opportunitys for single women and the woman, once married and now divorced, had no means of support for the rest of her life. No thinking person would today assert anything so preposterous.
Once we get this straightened out, we can then proceed to other unjust areas of present divorce law, as enumerated in the works of Jed Abraham. In the event of any conflicts in law in the mean time, the newest reforms would take precedence over, and have interlocutory control of presently existing statute or case law. I would require mandated premarital education, but worry that this would just result in more couples simply skipping marriage altogether and merely living together.
Edited by jbar (03/29/08 01:19 AM)
|
WolRon
Platinum
Reged: 01/16/08
Posts: 255
Loc: MN, USA
|
|
Divorce: Not allowed unless filer can provide concrete proof of extreme circumstances (continuous physical abuse, for example) (divorces would not be granted for things that simply boil down to the married couple "not getting along")
'Typical' divorce reasons such as physical abuse or infidelity would simply be handled as crimes. It wouldn't change the marital status. The offender would be prosecuted and life would go on.
Alimony: Never exceeds 5 years and tapers off in the 5th year. Basically, this is the amount of time that the recipient has to find a supporting career or go through schooling to obtain a supporting career.
Child Support: 50/50 custody always (not debatable unless one parent actually wants to have less time) with all child related expenses split down the middle regardless of custody time.
--------------------
I didn't get married to pay CS later in life.
http://home.cmit.net/rwolbeck/childsupport
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 989
|
|
===========================================================
...'Typical' divorce reasons such as physical abuse or infidelity would simply be handled as crimes.
===========================================================
Would you like to see the man prosecuted for infidelity if his wife had become frigid or otherwise incapable of having sex, with his being unable to divorce her? I believe this dialog can safely proceed on the assumprion that "no-fault" divorce is here to stay.
In addition to my previously posted comments, I rhink no obligation should be incurred or implied between the parties unless specifically required in a pre-nup, which would have to be written in accordance with real contract law and with the parties entitled to have full disclosure as to the meaning of the contract--followed by a 30-day "cooling off" period before they could wed. During this time they would have to attend premarital counseling and education.
As far as CS payments and CP designation are concerned, I have often thought that it would be interesting to require, experimentally, that the parents work that out among themselves--failing which the children would be removed from the custody of both parents, and the parents would be assessed an equal charge for their care. The parents could be allowed visitation rights at the facility where the kids were residing, or even at the home of foster parents, but they may have given up their right to raise them because of their infantile, selfish determination to put their wants--and acrimony toward each other--ahead of the welfare of the kids and their companionship.
Edited by jbar (03/29/08 11:11 AM)
|
WolRon
Platinum
Reged: 01/16/08
Posts: 255
Loc: MN, USA
|
|
"Would you like to see the man prosecuted for infidelity if his wife had become frigid or otherwise incapable of having sex, with his being unable to divorce her?"
Yes I would like to see him prosecuted for infidelity. He married her. That was his free will and choice to do so. He took a VOW to stay with her 'til death for better or WORSE. Marriages aren't unions based on sex. Sex is just one of MANY activities that married couples enjoy.
With that kind of attitude, people could (and do today) get divorced simply because they don't agree on all of the same activities that they used to.
How very SAD that is that marriage has become so disposable and that our children have to grow up dealing with our lazy and greedy lifestyles.
I hope that your reply and attitude on that doesn't reflect the majority of society today...
--------------------
I didn't get married to pay CS later in life.
http://home.cmit.net/rwolbeck/childsupport
|
jbar
Platinum
Reged: 12/16/06
Posts: 989
|
|
===========================================================
Yes I would like to see him prosecuted for infidelity. He married her. That was his free will and choice to do so. He took a VOW to stay with her 'til death for better or WORSE.
===========================================================
Ron (I assume you're Ron), I respect your view and would possibly agree with it, except that a revision of divorce law based upon a return to a much more conservative approach is, in this day and age, basically a non-starter. The historical tide of change in this regard remains in favor of less control of people's lives by the government and not more. I know that some would contend that movement in this direction represents a conservative change rather than a liberal one, but that is arguing semantics.
The web site is very impressive, and I certainly feel for you. Child support, however, is only part of the problem!
Edited by jbar (03/29/08 09:09 PM)
|
picasso
Platinum
Reged: 09/16/07
Posts: 1839
|
|
[quote]"Would you like to see the man prosecuted for infidelity if his wife had become frigid or otherwise incapable of having sex, with his being unable to divorce her?"
Yes I would like to see him prosecuted for infidelity. He married her. That was his free will and choice to do so. He took a VOW to stay with her 'til death for better or WORSE. Marriages aren't unions based on sex. Sex is just one of MANY activities that married couples enjoy.
With that kind of attitude, people could (and do today) get divorced simply because they don't agree on all of the same activities that they used to.
How very SAD that is that marriage has become so disposable and that our children have to grow up dealing with our lazy and greedy lifestyles.
I hope that your reply and attitude on that doesn't reflect the majority of society today... [/quote]
I agree. A vow isnt some mere promise. A vow is supposed to be unrecendable...meaning you can NOT "take it back".
--------------------
NO FATE
|
jakandme
Platinum
Reged: 12/30/07
Posts: 569
Loc: on my way up the hill
|
|
yes, marriage has become something so easily disposable in today's society. I think it is a very wrong approach and one that our children will suffer for eventually. I am not a man but I just wanted to put my two cents in if that is ok. I think that marriage should be entered into only if those two ppl have decided without a shadow of doubt that they will not be getting out of it without a hell of a lot of trouble. As far as changing some things... I think I would leave it the same because I didn't ask for alimony and I just want him to go on with his OW since he left us to be with her. I wish that there were strict punishment for this in my state but it isn't. When you have a wife at home who supports you every way she knows how and gives you sex when you want it, then I see no reason to run off into the arms of another.
--------------------
What is the future but a mirrored image of the past? Only we can make it better or worse!
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
