Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Florida lawmakers want to end life-long alimony payments, make alimony and child custody laws more fair. Naturally, some people have more sand than Daytona Beach in their vaginas over this   ( divider line
    More: Hero, child custody, Rick Scott, Daytona Beach, lawmakers  
•       •       •

2694 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Apr 2013 at 10:12 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

156 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

2013-04-24 11:39:49 PM  

Tr0mBoNe: What if you never had a carrer and are just a lazy coont?

What if you're a man stupid enough to marry someone like that?
2013-04-24 11:48:27 PM  
I was raised by my single dad. He had to mortgage the house a second time to get her to agree to sign away custody -her suggestion. My brother and I won big time in that deal. So no, I do not believe it should always be to the mother.

When both my relationships broke down we worked out what was fair for kids, and then informed court what we had arranged.  I have NEVER had a cent alimony (just child support) from anyone but came out of each relationship worse off. Except my dignity. Any money for the kids goes to the kids - little things like education, medication, glasses, clothing - like it begins to cover that. Yeah, right. No 1 tried so hard to always be part of kids lives - including my second batch of kids. No 2, well, lets just say he is now paying (and that is pretty irregular) for multiple kids by multiple partners. A real set of shocks came out of that... But I give him chances, he just drifts in and out.

Got back together with No 1, and worked out what had gone wrong, and we fixed it. Years of happiness together later, he got bonus kids out of our break, and we both got wisdom. It all works.

So, tl;dr? Parenting should be shared but custody to most likely to be stable parent if one is not stable, no matter the agenda. Alimony should not be automatic, and yes it should be duration based. Marriage and divorce should NEVER be get out of work free cards.
2013-04-25 07:09:43 AM  
So divorced isn't really divorced. If it were, all ties, financial, and otherwise, would be terminated. Not really fair.
2013-04-25 08:37:59 AM  

Pick: So divorced with kids isn't really divorced. If it were, all ties, financial, and otherwise, would be terminated. Not really fair.


If there are no kids involved, a true separation is possible.  Once you have kids though, you're responsible for them even if your marriage falls apart.  Strange how that works.
2013-04-25 11:52:32 AM  
Here's my argument:

I know a guy, high powered, high earning trader.  He probably makes $10 million a year.  Stay at home Mom wife decides she's sick of him being at work 70-80 hours a week and asks for a divorce.

I'm all for her getting a decent portion of the assets (no more than 50%) but after the divorce, she no longer is  paying the "costs" of that kind of salary, namely an absentee partner.  Why should she still get any benefit?  If she wants any ongoing payment after the divorce, let it be limited to the amount a good nanny would cost.  The kids are probably getting child support that is higher than most of us make in a year.  If she wants more, she can get a job (or a new sucker husband) that can give her the lifestyle she used to have.
2013-04-25 12:14:20 PM  

balki1867: Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: Dad probably poisoned the well ahead of time. Apparently if you go and meet with every major divorce lawyer in town, some conflict of interest magic happens and they are forbidden from taking your spouse's case - even if you don't hire them. So if you're an asshole, that's always an option.

Some random ambulance chasing lawyer explained this to me once as we were waiting in line at a takeout place (didn't know the guy, he just struck up conversation).  You talk to every nasty lawyer out there and then go hire the one you wanted in the first place.  Now she can't hire any of those people because they've already worked your case and it would violate your attorney-client privilege.  I'm not legally inclined so I have no idea if its true.

I learned it from the Sopranos

/learned all my legal knowledge from the Sopranos
Displayed 6 of 156 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.