Divorce: Canadian Style.

**Phillygirl** · 01-27-2009, 07:09 PM

Originally Posted by MrsSmith

Speaking as a second wife, I can state that the smartest thing Mr Smith and I ever did was set up our household so I could pay the main bills without his check, if needed. Until his second daughter turns 21, his income is just simply not his. At any time, the ex can demand hundreds of dollars for medical costs, extra-curricular activities, camping trips, etc...in addition to the set $800 per month plus 60% of all college costs and 100% of transportation costs for visitation.

I have seen some women that ended up poorer after divorce, but usually their ex-husbands were the kind of bums that would switch jobs every time they were tracked down. Any man who keeps a job is screwed.

You have planned well, knowing that his responsibilities to his children came first, and will continue until they are emancipated.

**Gingersnap** · 01-27-2009, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by Phillygirl

Doesn't anybody ever read those vows..."for better for worse; for richer or poorer; in sickness and in health...?"

I am constantly amazed at the lamenting that goes on over the financial aspects of divorce. For every man that says he's getting raked over the coals, there are at least 2 women that claim they have been left penniless.

The last part of that vow is "...until death do us part."

Luckily, I have not personally been affected by the screwy divorce laws here. I do think that there's something wrong with this Canadian disposition. Anybody who is on half an Advil once a week for "pain control" isn't seriously disabled.

I have no problem with women who elect to stay at home and be home-makers whether they have kids or not. Obviously, there's a risk there if the union collapses. Even then, it doesn't take more than 2 to 4 years to get a degree or certification in something. I can see support during that period. I just can't see unending support.

Of course, there's an upside to all this. If divorce and living together both become equally burdensome, maybe more people will make more sensible choices in their mates and be more motivated to repair problems in their current relationships instead of chucking it all for Ms. or Mr. New.

**Phillygirl** · 01-27-2009, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by Gingersnap

The last part of that vow is "...until death do us part."

Luckily, I have not personally been affected by the screwy divorce laws here. I do think that there's something wrong with this Canadian disposition. Anybody who is on half an Advil once a week for "pain control" isn't seriously disabled.

I have no problem with women who elect to stay at home and be home-makers whether they have kids or not. Obviously, there's a risk there if the union collapses. Even then, it doesn't take more than 2 to 4 years to get a degree or certification in something. I can see support during that period. I just can't see unending support.

Of course, there's an upside to all this. If divorce and living together both become equally burdensome, maybe more people will make more sensible choices in their mates and be more motivated to repair problems in their current relationships instead of chucking it all for Ms. or Mr. New.

My guess is that there is more to her story than has been reported. The advil obviously makes her disability appear somewhat benign. I would think there is more to it than that, however. I also would gander that his alleged current disability due to stress is being disputed.

While I don't ever agree to carte blanche permanent alimony, he obviously screwed up. Guidelines like that do not pop onto the horizon. Any good attorney would have known what was coming down the pike and formulated a settlement agreement keeping that in mind.

**Gingersnap** · 01-27-2009, 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by Phillygirl

My guess is that there is more to her story than has been reported. The advil obviously makes her disability appear somewhat benign. I would think there is more to it than that, however. I also would gander that his alleged current disability due to stress is being disputed.

While I don't ever agree to carte blanche permanent alimony, he obviously screwed up. Guidelines like that do not pop onto the horizon. Any good attorney would have known what was coming down the pike and formulated a settlement agreement keeping that in mind.

He screwed up on the insurance thing, for sure. That was just stupid.

**lacarnut** · 01-27-2009, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by Phillygirl

Doesn't anybody ever read those vows..."for better for worse; for richer or poorer; in sickness and in health...?"

I am constantly amazed at the lamenting that goes on over the financial aspects of divorce. For every man that says he's getting raked over the coals, there are at least 2 women that claim they have been left penniless.

You sound like my ex who was dating this dumb ass lawyer. He advised her to sue me for alimony. She was making a very good salary and I was unemployed. I told her to go ahead and that I would counter sue. After that bad advise, she decided to drop the sue crap. This guy was so stupid that he told her that she was out of luck for the damages when her car got stolen at a car dealership. They had left the keys in the ignition. I told her that it was negligence on their part and the liability for contents did not apply for a repair in this type of situation. I walked out of my beautiful house with my clothes and a 5 year old Pinto and that was one of the happiest days of my life.

If you have never been married or divorced, you do not have a clue. Besides, marriage is a twofer. If the woman wants a divorce, why should the man be crippled financially?

**Phillygirl** · 01-27-2009, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by lacarnut

You sound like my ex who was dating this dumb ass lawyer. He advised her to sue me for alimony. She was making a very good salary and I was unemployed. I told her to go ahead and that I would counter sue. After that bad advise, she decided to drop the sue crap. This guy was so stupid that he told her that she was out of luck for the damages when her car got stolen at a car dealership. They had left the keys in the ignition. I told her that it was negligence on their part and the liability for contents did not apply for a repair in this type of situation. I walked out of my beautiful house with my clothes and a 5 year old Pinto and that was one of the happiest days of my life.

If you have never been married or divorced, you do not have a clue. Besides, marriage is a twofer. If the woman wants a divorce, why should the man be crippled financially?

Yes, I understand that someone embittered by divorce would more likely be able to objectively determine the financial consequences of divorce. Thank you for your anecdotal evidence of your ex-wife who apparently had poor taste in men.

**lacarnut** · 01-27-2009, 09:08 PM

Originally Posted by Phillygirl

Yes, I understand that someone embittered by divorce would more likely be able to objectively determine the financial consequences of divorce. Thank you for your anecdotal evidence of your ex-wife who apparently had poor taste in men.

And how would a lesbo bitch know.