Divorce

[bullhunter]

I've an acquaintance who is divorcing. He doesn't want the divorce, but his wife found a new guy. She doesn't work, and technically is a stay-at-home mom who I guess hasn't been staying home that much. Anyway, she wants a divorce now. They have one child.

 

He's been a hard worker, and makes very good money. He always has put his family first. He spends a lot of time with his son, keeps things up around the house, took his wife on great vacations and dinners and he always thought he was doing the extra to make his wife happy as well but a neighbor was doing more .

 

Anyway, he figures that if she wants a divorce, that there is nothing he can do to stop her. But, he wants custody of his son and he wants the house. He figures that he made all the money that paid for it and would have happily stayed there with his wife and child. If she wants a divorce she can leave. She can have her stuff and 1/2 of the money he earned while they were married, but the house and child stay with him. I told him that I didn't think he was going to be able to get a judge to give him that, so maybe he should rethink, but he is pretty adamant that he won't sign the papers otherwise. What do you think? I'm not too sure what to say to him as he's hurt and I don't want to make it worse.

[Bryanp]

I think you are correct and he is living in fantasy world. The best he can hope for is 50% custody of the child but I think that is doubtful since the wife has been a stay at home mom. The house is joint property if they purchased it after they were married. He will probably have to pay for child support and alimony depending on the State in addition to splitting the rest 50/50. He needs to find a sharp attorney.

 

If he does not divorce what does he have. A wife who is screwing another man, spending his money and making him look like a complete fool. He is in a no win situation.

[Distant78]

I've an acquaintance who is divorcing. He doesn't want the divorce, but his wife found a new guy. She doesn't work, and technically is a stay-at-home mom who I guess hasn't been staying home that much. Anyway, she wants a divorce now. They have one child.

 

He's been a hard worker, and makes very good money. He always has put his family first. He spends a lot of time with his son, keeps things up around the house, took his wife on great vacations and dinners and he always thought he was doing the extra to make his wife happy as well but a neighbor was doing more .

 

Anyway, he figures that if she wants a divorce, that there is nothing he can do to stop her. But, he wants custody of his son and he wants the house. He figures that he made all the money that paid for it and would have happily stayed there with his wife and child. If she wants a divorce she can leave. She can have her stuff and 1/2 of the money he earned while they were married, but the house and child stay with him. I told him that I didn't think he was going to be able to get a judge to give him that, so maybe he should rethink, but he is pretty adamant that he won't sign the papers otherwise. What do you think? I'm not too sure what to say to him as he's hurt and I don't want to make it worse.

 

He's in La-La Land if he thinks he's going to get sole custody, especially since his WW is a stay-at-home mother and a woman for that matter. He's screwed either way whether he wants to divorce or not. Since she's a lazy no-good, cheating, stay-at-home wife, its most likely he will also have to pay spousal support. That doesn't even include child support and the other money he will have to cough up. Hope he continues to work his arse off at that high-paying job of his because he's in for some major boo-boo.

[PegNosePete]

You don't say which country you're in...

 

If the UK, then he's pretty much screwed. She can divorce him on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour and there isn't much he can do about it. Contesting a divorce is almost always a waste of time and money. The mother will usually get custody of the child, the entire house, and he will have to pay maintenance. To boot, she will get legal aid, which basically means her solicitors will have an unlimited budget, whereas he will have to pay his. The divorce settlement is not based on who paid what or who earned what, it is based on who needs what. With a well-paid job, he can afford to get a new place to live, support himself and pay maintenance. But she has little or no income, so she would basically get the house for free. Yeah it's kinda sucky for him... but that's how it works here. The reason for the divorce (ie. her adultery) is totally irrelevant.

[bullhunter]

I guess I should have said what country. He lives in California (I don't, so don't know the laws there). His son is in school, here it's called middle school. His wife worked before the son was born, and their agreement was that she would return to work when the child began school, but she decided she didn't want to. According to my friend, though, she's never home until after he (my friend) is home, so even though she is a "stay at home" mom, she is never there for the child. My friend also spends 1/2 of his work time working from the home.

 

I think (though I am not certain) that he owned the house before they married.

 

He's got a pretty good lawyer, I understand. Which is a good thing.

Edited September 3, 2010 by bullhunter

[Trimmer]

He's got a pretty good lawyer, I understand. Which is a good thing.

Well, then they'll hash it out...

 

When he said he's "not going to sign the papers, unless" what does that mean? There are lots of papers to sign along the way. The "petition" is just the paper you sign to get the process started, then you go along and do lots of other stuff before you get to a judgement or a decree...

 

Incidentally, if she wants to start the divorce, she can file the petition with her own signature, and have him served. It doesn't require his agreement to start the process, but of course, he can make it hard along the way.

 

Given that there is a kid involved, now I'm going to give my opinion on that: no kid deserves to be used as a pawn, a bargaining chip, a prize, or a punishment in a divorce, and your friend needs to know that most courts will not allow that to happen. Unless there is real harm likely to come to him (the son) then I believe this father should really look honestly at his motivations for seeking sole custody, and consider what's truly best for the kid.

 

I know a lot of the more militant types will argue "Well, if she's cheating, then that will obviously hurt the kid, so the father should get sole custody, etc..." but I don't agree that this is ALWAYS the case. I think - for the benefit of the kid - you have a significant burden of proof before you remove him from EITHER parent (and I'm being intentionally gender neutral there, because I truly believe it goes both ways - this isn't a gender argument.)

 

I know it's hard for a spouse in his position to get to this point where he could actually say: our family is breaking up, but it's developmentally preferable for our son to continue to have a relationship with both parents. I know it's hard, because I had to do exactly that myself, but I did and I don't question for a moment that was (and continues to be) the right thing for my kids - for our kids, for they are still that, no matter what, and both parents need to respect and support the childrens' need for both parents to be in their lives.

 

Again, I grant that if there are true, operational concerns - like drug use, abandonment, abuse - on the part of a parent, then yes, those should factor in, and could reasonably override any benefits of keeping the kid in contact with that parent. But you really have to ask yourself: is this truly in the kid's best interest, or is it for one side to strike a blow for revenge? Is he acting as a hurt husband, or a responsible parent?

Edited September 3, 2010 by Trimmer

[bullhunter]

Trimmer, I hear what you are saying. I would imagine that at least part of his desire to have sole custody is anger and hurt, as he does not want his son to be raised by the new man. But there is also the fact that the son spends far more time with my friend than with the mom.

 

This guy has been my buddy a long time. He's a good guy. He doesn't want to use his kid, and doesn't want to see the kid hurt. He also doesn't want him to be raised by another man. That doesn't seem like a bad thing to me.

 

I don't know what he meant about the papers. I assumed the final papers, but don't really know. I don't know if anything has been filed yet. As you say, I'm sure they will hash it out with the lawyers, I just want to be able to give him a shoulder, and no advice that will steer him wrong or set him off. So far he's been holding together fairly well all things considered.

 

I appreciate the comments. I've told him about this site and this thread so he may read it, too.

[bentnotbroken]

As long as he wants his child because he loves him/her and thinks he will be a better parent, not for revenge. I have a really good guy friend who knew he was the better parent and he has fought for his child. He keeps getting dragged back into court on crap his ex spews and the judge always says he is the better parent. He also got the house. He is now remarried to a great lady and they are happy. I say go for it. Dig in your heels and fight.

[Dexter Morgan]

Anyway, he figures that if she wants a divorce, that there is nothing he can do to stop her. But, he wants custody of his son

 

unless she is a crack addict or beats her son, and if she wants custody also...he won't get it.

 

 

and he wants the house.

 

he can get the house if she lets him, but then he'll owe her 1/2 the equity in it. Or if she gets the house, she will owe him half the equity...more than likely negotiated that she would get less of his retirement to pay him his 1/2.

 

 

 

He figures that he made all the money that paid for it and would have happily stayed there with his wife and child. If she wants a divorce she can leave.

 

thats the way it SHOULD be, but sadly, he can't make her leave.

 

 

She can have her stuff and 1/2 of the money he earned while they were married, but the house and child stay with him. I told him that I didn't think he was going to be able to get a judge to give him that

 

and a judge won't give him that...custody anyway, unless she lets him have custody. She could be the biggest wh0re in the town, and it won't matter one iota in a custody battle.

 

 

so maybe he should rethink, but he is pretty adamant that he won't sign the papers otherwise. What do you think? I'm not too sure what to say to him as he's hurt and I don't want to make it worse.

 

all he can do is get the best attorney, a bulldog...and follow his advice. let the attorney do whatever he wants to get her to agree.

 

its all about negotiation.....otherwise if left up to the courts, they will split all marital assets down the middle...home equity, bank accounts...his retirement......but as the mother, unless he can prove her unfit, which is virtually impossible unless, like I said, she is a drug abuser or beats her child, she WILL get custody if she goes for it. being a s!ut, unfortunately, doesn't deem a mother unfit. IMO it does, but to the courts....nope. (and they say they care about whats best for the child...bulls##t)

 

So the only way to get more than his 1/2 of the assets, etc. is to get her to agree somehow in negotiation.

 

but more than likely if she is a stay at home mom that made him stay home while she was out spreading them for other men....then she is b!tch enough to try to screw him over even further. She'll probably not only go for custody and support, she'll probably try for alimony.

 

But you tell him to have his attorney fight for years if he has to to fight alimony.

[Distant78]

If he wants to file for sole custody because he sees his wife as an unfit parent, then he has that right to do so, but you're right on one point: the courts don't give two ****tz about infidelity and its less likely he'll receive full custody, especially if he's a man.

[bullhunter]

I doubt that he sees her as an unfit parent, she's just not what "stay at home" implies. I know he is concerned that if he doesn't get custody she'll marry this guy she is divorcing him for and maybe even move to the other side of the world. I wonder, is it possible to include in a decree that the party who has child custody cannot move more than X miles from party who does not? What is the arrangement in joint custody situations, anyone know?

 

Also, thanks Dex, about the note regarding alimony. I think California is an alimony state, isn't it? He's not thinking about that, because she's talking about marrying this new dude, but if he doesn't get her to release his obligation and then ends up not getting married he could be stuck for a long time.

 

I think maybe he is hoping that with her plans to marry again that she won't really want the house, but I suppose the court could give it to her anyway. It would be terrible as he built it himself planning to live there for the rest of his life.

Edited September 3, 2010 by bullhunter

[Woggle]

This my friends is why many men are so afraid of marriage.

[Dexter Morgan]

I doubt that he sees her as an unfit parent, she's just not what "stay at home" implies.

 

then if she wants custody and child support...she will get it.

 

she would have to be deemed unfit for him to have any chance of custody.

 

 

I know he is concerned that if he doesn't get custody she'll marry this guy she is divorcing him for and maybe even move to the other side of the world.

 

hey, been there, living that. it sucks. a woman can cheat, betray her vows, and still be able to take a man's child away and as far as she wants to. it is what it is.

 

 

I wonder, is it possible to include in a decree that the party who has child custody cannot move more than X miles from party who does not?

 

nope. if she has custody, she can move to BFE if she wants to, and he'd still have to pay child support even if he can't see them all that much, if ever.

 

 

What is the arrangement in joint custody situations, anyone know?

 

joint custody doesn't mean anythign. I have joint custody. all it means is that I have a say in the upbringing of my children. but get this, if we have a dispute, she get final say. So whats the point.

 

The only time joint custody means anything is when there is an agreement for 50/50.

 

 

Also, thanks Dex, about the note regarding alimony. I think California is an alimony state, isn't it? He's not thinking about that, because she's talking about marrying this new dude, but if he doesn't get her to release his obligation and then ends up not getting married he could be stuck for a long time.

 

he could be yes. Alimony is a joke. especially in the case of the one getting it being a cheating wench. the courts are biased against fathers and men.

 

If she is a stay at home mom with no education or cannot work for whatever reason, then she might get it.

 

My x tried to get it. Her attorney said she had "limited means".

 

My attorney said, "thats funny, my client's wife has a college degree, of which my client has paid a majority"

 

Judge said "Mrs. Jane Doe....is it that you just don't want to get a job? You have a degree"

 

no alimony. although they only put alimony on the table to get me to give her more retirement than she was entitled and other things....but my attorney said, "she has means, no need to negotiate anything with her to take alimony off the table"

 

 

I think maybe he is hoping that with her plans to marry again that she won't really want the house

 

well if she signs a Quit Claim Deed giving the house to him, he'll owe her 1/2 the equity, which he can negotiate to pay his half out of his retirement.

 

 

but I suppose the court could give it to her anyway.

 

if they do, they she will owe HIM 1/2 the equity, in which he can take it from her in the form of a reduced settlement on his retirement...or any other way.

 

It would be terrible as he built it himself planning to live there for the rest of his life.

 

I know...it sucks. women can be the biggest witches in the world, and a good man, good father will get screwed over....sucks, thats just the way it is. All we can do is hire a good attorney, live with the loss of our children on a daily basis, and tell the x-wives to f##k off whenever they demand anything above child support.

[Distant78]

This my friends is why many men are so afraid of marriage.

 

Hey!!

 

I wasn't though, because I thought it was one of the most wonderful things to do in life, but now count me in that compartment.

[Woggle]

Hey!!

 

I wasn't though, because I thought it was one of the most wonderful things to do in life, but now count me in that compartment.

 

Marriage for a man is like betting every single thing you own on the lottery.

[spriggig]

I haven't bothered to confirm, but Gunny says that most men who TRY, do get PRIMARY custody of the kids. It's just that most men don't try, they think the court is against them.

 

He could very well get primary custody and she would end up paying child support.

[NoIDidn't]

Sounds to me like this friend is going to do everything he can to hold up this divorce - that he doesn't want.

 

He's not likely to get sole custody of his child since his W hasn't worked outside the home since the child was born. Wishful thinking on his part that "not signing the papers" or stating that "she's not home that much to be a stay-at-home mother" is going to help him any. In fact, he sounds rather limited in his thinking to me. Was she supposed to be a slave to their home just because she didn't have a job?

 

He might get the house, though.

 

But him fighting the divorce really won't have a thing to do with the primary custody of their child. He can still "sign" the papers for the divorce part and continue fighting the custody battle long after he's divorced if he's got that kind of money to waste.

 

Personally, I don't think him fighting for custody of a child between the ages of 11 to 14 is all that beneficial to the child. Plus, in most states, a child that age can simply choose which parent they want to stay with primarily anyway.

[LifesontheUp]

I haven't bothered to confirm, but Gunny says that most men who TRY, do get PRIMARY custody of the kids. It's just that most men don't try, they think the court is against them.

 

He could very well get primary custody and she would end up paying child support.

 

I don't understand why men don't try either. If you don't try you don't get. What have you got to loose?

[Darth Vader]

unless she is a crack addict or beats her son, and if she wants custody also...he won't get it.

 

 

 

 

he can get the house if she lets him, but then he'll owe her 1/2 the equity in it. Or if she gets the house, she will owe him half the equity...more than likely negotiated that she would get less of his retirement to pay him his 1/2.

 

 

 

 

 

thats the way it SHOULD be, but sadly, he can't make her leave.

 

 

 

 

and a judge won't give him that...custody anyway, unless she lets him have custody. She could be the biggest wh0re in the town, and it won't matter one iota in a custody battle.

 

 

 

 

all he can do is get the best attorney, a bulldog...and follow his advice. let the attorney do whatever he wants to get her to agree.

 

its all about negotiation.....otherwise if left up to the courts, they will split all marital assets down the middle...home equity, bank accounts...his retirement......but as the mother, unless he can prove her unfit, which is virtually impossible unless, like I said, she is a drug abuser or beats her child, she WILL get custody if she goes for it. being a s!ut, unfortunately, doesn't deem a mother unfit. IMO it does, but to the courts....nope. (and they say they care about whats best for the child...bulls##t)

 

So the only way to get more than his 1/2 of the assets, etc. is to get her to agree somehow in negotiation.

 

but more than likely if she is a stay at home mom that made him stay home while she was out spreading them for other men....then she is b!tch enough to try to screw him over even further. She'll probably not only go for custody and support, she'll probably try for alimony.

 

But you tell him to have his attorney fight for years if he has to to fight alimony.

 

 

But Dex, that's in Illinois, where you're at! Not all states are as crooked as yours! I hope Dex you find out something on your Ex-Hex soon, for your own peace of mind! BTW Dex, Can your child/ren decide they want to live with you at a later age(like 12 years old and up), or is your state so F @ ck e d up that they won't hear of it?

[Darth Vader]

I don't understand why men don't try either. If you don't try you don't get. What have you got to loose?

 

 

A lot of men think they're gonna fight extremely hard and something's gonna cause them to lose on some twisted technicality, or the courts are going to give her everything no matter what.

 

That's why in Dexter's state (IT F-ing SUCKS!), it's no use to fight as the crooked laws are still uncontested. I have to wonder why someone hasn't beaten the $hit out of those crooked, backwards laws. But, from what I understand, everyone's either on the payroll, or they're paying off the polititions and judges! Something's wrong with that state!

[Darth Vader]

I haven't bothered to confirm, but Gunny says that most men who TRY, do get PRIMARY custody of the kids. It's just that most men don't try, they think the court is against them.

 

He could very well get primary custody and she would end up paying child support.

 

 

Like I said, that's true in most cases, on the exception of a post or two above.

[jnj express]

In Calif., as to custody----he can force a psych eval, to be performed, and this will be reviewed by the judging authority, whether it be a mediator or judge----as to prop---Calif. is a Comm. Prop, state---no fault div.---so anything after the mge., gets split 50--50 including his retirement benefits----Hopefully he can avoid to much spousal support, by her getting remarried--If he can prove her unfit---because of the psych eval---he does have the possibility of sole custody----it depends on how she has carried herself while in the A.----Dad's do have some decent rights in Calif.

[Dexter Morgan]

But Dex, that's in Illinois, where you're at! Not all states are as crooked as yours!

 

oh Illinois is definitely a load of crap when it comes to whats best for the child and fairness in custody cases.

 

But most other states are just as bad. If they weren't, you wouldn't be hearing about fathers all over the US getting the shaft.

 

and in any event, no matter what state you are in (unless you have one that is different I'd love to hear it) courts don't care if a mother is an unscrupulous cheater. They don't consider it when handing custody to the mother.

 

 

I hope Dex you find out something on your Ex-Hex soon, for your own peace of mind! BTW Dex, Can your child/ren decide they want to live with you at a later age(like 12 years old and up)

 

I think at the age of 12 they can. Thats about 4 years away.

 

 

or is your state so F @ ck e d up that they won't hear of it?

 

not sure. all I know is my attorney, and he is a bulldog, said it takes an act of god to get the kids taken away from the mother in Illinois. She could bring home a different guy every night and they wouldn't give me custody. He said I have to wait until they get arrested for drugs, or one of them ends up abusing my kids. So it doesn't matter what I know, its what I can prove, and they are good at covering their tracks.

 

I wish I could have her randomly drug tested, but I can't.

[Darth Vader]

oh Illinois is definitely a load of crap when it comes to whats best for the child and fairness in custody cases.

 

But most other states are just as bad. If they weren't, you wouldn't be hearing about fathers all over the US getting the shaft.

 

and in any event, no matter what state you are in (unless you have one that is different I'd love to hear it) courts don't care if a mother is an unscrupulous cheater. They don't consider it when handing custody to the mother.

 

 

 

 

I think at the age of 12 they can. Thats about 4 years away.

 

 

 

 

not sure. all I know is my attorney, and he is a bulldog, said it takes an act of god to get the kids taken away from the mother in Illinois. She could bring home a different guy every night and they wouldn't give me custody. He said I have to wait until they get arrested for drugs, or one of them ends up abusing my kids. So it doesn't matter what I know, its what I can prove, and they are good at covering their tracks.

 

I wish I could have her randomly drug tested, but I can't.

 

 

Oh, so you suspect something's going on? Have your children mentioned anything to you about what's going on over there? They need to to get out of that Hell Hole!

[Dexter Morgan]

Oh, so you suspect something's going on? Have your children mentioned anything to you about what's going on over there? They need to to get out of that Hell Hole!

 

no, I have a feeling they have been told not to tell daddy anything. Oh I know her new man is a drug user, but unless I have proof to tell the authorities, they won't do anything about it.