In the story of Abigail, she is married to a major bad person, yet she continues to be the good wife, until he dies.
Women did not have the right to divorce their husband in the Old Testament. Only men were granted this privilege (not that I agree with it). Abigail had no choice but to wait until her husband checked out.
Xena, I don't remember the scripture references, but your question brings to mind the verses that say that every good gift is from above, God has not given us the power of fear...; if a son asks his father for bread he wouldn't give him a stone; my yoke is easy; all things are lawful to me; we are no longer under the law; the fruit of the spirit.
Remember, Jesus did say that divorced were granted because of the hardness of our hearts. That means that someone in the marriage has a hard heart - It's not necessarily the one asking for the divorce. I think God's will is for us to be at peace and to be able to spend time giving Him the love and praise that He deserves. We can't do that if we're beaten down, oppressed and being abused.
Like Bob said, if Abigail lived in our culture and our times, she would most likely have divorced. And, if you still believe in TWI's administrations, if she lived in the Grace administration she probably would have divorced. Remember, too, that we don't know anything about Paul's wife (at least I don't) for all we know he could have been divorced...
I can't say what God's will is in individual situations, but I can imagine that it IS His will for His kids to be happy and peaceful and if a marriage does not provide that and can not be repaired, then divorce is the only way to resolve it.
Perhaps a bit off-topic, but has anyone noticed that whenever the OT appeared to bolster some wacked-out position of TWI, it was "for our learning", but if it constricted their happy time, it was "oh, we're under grace now, so adultery, etc., is okay."
Amazing.
Anyway, to be a bit more on-topic, I'm going through this divorce thing, too. She doesn't want it, but I do. It's emotionally and physically exhausting.
Anyway, to be a bit more on-topic, I'm going through this divorce thing, too. She doesn't want it, but I do. It's emotionally and physically exhausting.
I have however ministered to numerous guys who had just recieved notification [have never seen anyone 'served'. Just a big stack of letters usually, one 'dear john', followed by a couple things from a court, ending with the 'settlement' and how much the guy now owes]
From what I have observed it always looked terribly hard on the guys to get divorced.
I've been there too Galen. My neighbor directly across the street knocked on my door one evening. He was sobbing uncontrollably and said his wife had just served him papers. We had several long talks after that and my door was always open for him. I think I helped some. He certainly went through hell with it.
One of the important things to remember during a divorce is that the divorce does NOT define WHO you are. The statistics, the judgements, any attitudes, norms, satires, etc... they do NOT make up who you are.
You are still YOU...and there is no need to prove to anyone that you have worth, a good reason, or godliness.
Speaking as one who's been served and divorced twice, I would echo the physically and emotionally exhausting comments.
Also seeing as I was once a "people who haven't been through it" I feel I can say how one cannot begin to imagine just HOW draining the whole process is. I've had days when I've been just stoppped in my tracks by it. Plopped into a seat and just couldn't move - my brain turned to static....
What an unspeakable gift you are to your neightbor, Jim.
Even the second time, when I was not only expecting the divorce, but I wanted it AND was in process of filing, myself... getting filed was a huge blow. There was a "race" to file the papers as the one who files is palced in a position of "tactical advantage" seeing as divorce is techincally a lawsuit. One wins, and loses by the legal nature of the situation.
Morally, emotionally, spiritually both parties lose, big time. The only "winning" is that you lose less than the other party. Financially, the attorneys "win" the money they earn by dismantling your lives, the courts win by recieving the overpriced fees they charge.
I'd say its harder to be served in that its harder to recieve a blow even though it does hurt your fist when you punch a person in the eye.
Unfortunately I'm a veteran of some of the most heinous divorce antics imaginable, two horrible custody fights, evil interferring in-laws, domestic violence, jail, child abuse, legal wranglings dealing with police, daycare providers, schools, children's services, hospitals, extra-curricular lawsuits, prosecutions, rehabilitating injury, etc.
SO. Feel free to email me for, venting, advice based on my experiences, etc. also.
"Do you think divorce is ever "God's will"? Not the general practice of divorce, but maybe in individual cases? In the story of Abigail, she is married to a major bad person, yet she continues to be the good wife, until he dies. It seems like God would have / could have told Abigail to get out of that situation, if it had been His "will". I have heard other women refer to Abigail as the perfect wife, but I don't want to be like her."
Is there ever really truly one single golden path that G-d has in mind for us to walk? I dont think so.
With every breath I take, every step some choice is being made, with each choice I think that I more narrowly define my life and the future possibilities that will befall me. [if I am mean to you today, it will set the pattern for tomorrow's meeting, which will set the pattern for next week's ... ]
I would like to think that as I walk with my creator, that I make 'good' choices. But I seem to think that I really dont. I pray, I meditate, I try to listen; I plan and I act. Is any of it really truly G-d's Will?
I do think that no matter where I go, and what I do physically; I can walk a little closer to heaven spiritually. But that rarely effects what I am doing physically.
I would like to think that, 'IF' I was listening when I dated a girl, I should have been able to tell if she was right for me. But more often than not we date people based on something else [lust].
I think that there is a path down which a newly wed couple could walk, wherein they could find happiness, companionship and love. And in that context then every marriage does have the possibility for being that 'RIGHT' one.
I also think that in life we almost never do actually walk exactly where would be the best for us. Likewise I dont always treat Bonnie as a 'wonderful woman of God' that she is. I think that I try.
Is it possible that a married couple can be together so long and walk so far apart that they can never be 'one-flesh' again? Yes, I think so.
Is it possible that sometimes one or both partners, grow mean spirited and grow to hate the other? Yes, I think so.
In that case, what is the profit in staying togehter? None. But does that mean they were never made for each other? No, I think they were at one point.
It is just that one or both partners did not focus on staying 'one-flesh'.
Once you get to that point, if you did want to walk out and minister to others, or heal others, or lead any kind of 'christ-like' life, somehow you would have to walk away from the 'bad' marriage. St. Paul did [and I find it interesting that the Bible does not give us any details because those details were not important].
"Speaking as one who's been served and divorced twice, I would echo the physically and emotionally exhausting comments."
I am very thankful that I have not had to go through such myself.
It did appear to be terribly draining to each man that I had opportunity to minister to, as they went through those divorces. What I saw was certainly the financail side of it all. WOW !! Now that is nasty. Commonly we wrote letters to the courts and copies of financial statements, and so much work to get alimony and child-support levels to down below the men's Gross income. We were usually very happy if we could eventually get it all reduced down so the men could keep a fourth of their pay.
We have often had guys sleeping on our couch, to keep them off the streets. Having a dependant intitles a servicemember to money for housing, but once that money is paid to the servicemember [and then re-directed to the ex-spouse due to court-order], then the servicemember can no longer get a room at the barracks either. The military is not going to pay twice, to house a servicemember and his dependents.
The same goes for food.
In Naples 'Paul' [a guy who worked for me] was six months without pay, while we tried to get the court-ordered alimony down to less than his Gross income. When we finally did, Paul still had to pay off all the back alimony from before the amount of awarded alimony was reduced. Fortunately for him, working in Naples was not security clearance stuff, we were just doing Law Enforcment; otherwise Paul would have lost his clearances and thus his career.
I had thought we wouldn't have to go through all the ugly stuff. Wrong. She just moved back in and informed me there was nothing I could do about it until the divorce was final. I'm therefore filing on Monday, since the mandatory waiting period is 30 days. We were supposed to go over the whole thing and file in 3 weeks when she got back, but she forced my hand with this stunt.
That is precisely why I made the suggestions to you that I did (on the phone), Zix. I've found in relationships (prior to Steve!) that people do not stick to what they say they will. (especially with the dishonesty you've lived recently)
If they say that the divorce will be amicable, they will turn it into a major battle.
If they agree that they will say, "It just didn't work out" in exchange for money they think is due them, they will turn around and do everything but...and rather immaturely at that. And then blame you.
Rare is the individual who actually does what they say they will.
More certain is childishness, that lasts for years. Pettyness, spitefulness, and immaturity.
You need to realize that...rise above it....and take care of yourself legally.
Realizing all the while that those people I just spoke of are NOT normal...let alone decent.
Their behavior in no way reflects on YOU and your real friends will know that.
Zixar, make sure you have a good attorney. I know you're super sharp and have incredible common sense, but when going through something as emotionally tolling as this, it's really good to have someone on your side who can step back and see the forest for the trees to make sure you don't get royally screwed.
Thankfully mine was pretty amicable, but we didn't have a lot of property and had absolutely no kids to fight over. We didn't even have to have lawyers involved, but I know also that a good lawyer can make all the diference in the world in situations like yours.
This is certainly an area where the first to get a lawyer, is often the only 'winner'.
I did see once where a guy quickly took a day-off and flew to San Diego, then crossed into Mexico, paid $20 for a divorce, and returned home. Shut-down all joint-accounts and credit-cards [Of course, the wife had maxed out all cards and emptied the accounts anyway]. When they all got into court months later, his lawyer was able to lay that on the court. What do you mean? this couple has been divorced since 3 months ago, and has been providing support since then, only to the federal guidlines of support. Blew the ex-wife's claims out of the water.
He was a real 'winner' in the scene. He only had to pay-off the $5,000 in bad debt from the credit cards, the back-payments on rent and his car, and after that his alimony was only $500/month. A much better deal than he would have gotten from the courts, had they determined an amount.
"Beloved, I wish above all things that you would be prosperously healthy, even as your soul prospers." - - God.
Please do not allow oftern regurgetated religous legalism spewed out of the mouths of people who have NO clue of your suffering to place you under misguided legalism.
God would never have any of us suffer unjustly at the hand of ANY other human for even one second.
I could fill this thread longer than both my outstretched arms with my experiences and the experiences of others I've witnessed, similar to what Galen posted.
Suffice it to say, at this point. If the marriage is unhealthy to you, you have every right in God's eyes to get out. Or put the errant partner out.
The system will chew you up and spit you out and destroy your children in the process. Your well-intentioned attorney will buy nice things with your money while you eat Ramen noodles and sleep on "Galen's" couch.
This is certainly an area where the first to get a lawyer, is often the only 'winner'.
How true THAT is. Filing first give you a direct tactical advantage. If you're in the midst of divorce or divorce is on the near horizon - - and you think like I did... this "tactical advantage" thing might be sour to you.
I just wanted some peace, finally. I really didn't want the divorce. I held onto the "we can work this out if we could just...." concept.
That was the first divorce. I learned something then, because I actually told her, "You're the one who wants out, you're the one who's broken your vows; YOU file!"
I looked at it then like she should take responsibility for her actions and therefor take responsibility for the divorce.
I was SO wrong!
Then in the seocond marriage, I had told wifeee #2. while things were "good" how being the defendant in the divorce cast a shadow of dispersion on me in the legal proceedings. Being the defendant meant that I had to answer to all of her REDICULOUS claims.
Your attorney may tell you, "It doesn't mean much." The things they say, we hear stuff like that everyday, people always exaggerate....
I DOES matter. When you're trying to settle on property and custody, especially, if your spouse has painted you as "satan" and themselves as a "saint" the difrst anf PRIMARY and ususally the thing(s) you want MOST may somehow, just "fairly" fall against you.
Magistrates, judges, etc. are people too. You must CONVINCE them in an evidentiary manner of who you really are.
The first words the court hears usually fly and set to tone for the rest of the proceedings.
Its not impossible for the defendant to prevail. Just right next to it, very close to it actually. Especially since statistics are in favor of the plaintiffs, and the overwhelming majority of plantiffs are female, AND the courts are woefully aware of ALL of the statistics mentioned above AND all of the the "hiddend complaints, and reasonings for divorce.
The court has "seen it all & heard it all." They will peg you if they can. Makes it easier for them to go home to their own families. They can more easily go to their own kids' soccer practices if they are not carrying YOUR baggage.
The BEST way for you to navigate the stormy waters of a divorce is to be at the helm. YOU file,YOU file first.
NO. its not "the" BEST. You can't get to BEST from here.
Once your marriage is "over" best is no longer possible. It becomes a matter of choosing the lesser of evils. It boceome a matter of doing the highes good you can, for YOURSELF to preserve yourself so you can be YOUR personal best for your children (if you have any) or yourself to rebuild your life.
I'm thinking, that when God was telling the them to write, "...though I walk through the valle of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil." He was prophetically including divorce. It really is the shadow of death. Death of your marriage, death of your hopes and dreams, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc....
You must not be afraid of the evil that resides in the valley. The deeper the valley, the more evil you must wade through, the more "evil" you may be forced to do to prevail, ultimately.
IF YOU DO NOT PREVAIL. YOU WILL NOT EXTRICATE YOURSELF FROM THE VALLEY ONCE THE DIVORCE IS FILE STAMPED AS COMPLETE.
A successful divorce is one where, once its finished, you are as close to the top of the "valley" as you can get. Then your recovery will be "shorter" and less intense.
" ... Your well-intentioned attorney will buy nice things with your money while you eat Ramen noodles and sleep on "Galen's" couch."
Or they could well end up on your couch, I was just offering by way of example, the kind of things that I have done in the past to try and help these poor guys.
In my limited exposure to divorces, it was overwhelmingly the wife who had ran up the debts, stopped making payments and then left the area, went to her home state and filed against the husband.
On the other hand, it is my impression from listening to my relatives, that commonly people do go into divorce even when they are not in huge debt and the wife has not desserted. Even though among those that I have worked with such has not been my observation.
Reading on the subject, it does sound like immediately getting rid of all assets, to pay off all existing debts. Just like when a corporation is closing it's doors. Liquidate everything, pay-off all creditors, and divide-up any money left over. The idea being that you dont wnat to still have any payments left to be paid, and you dont want to still have any items that could be community property.
By doing this, before you go into court, at least gives you some level of control about where things go.
Otherwise it will often be divided right down the 'middle':
She gets the house, he gets the mortgage,
she gets the car, he gets the car payments,
she gets the kids, he gets the child-support,
she gets to maintain her standard-of-living, he gets to pay for it,
Which is what happened when I was a child, and my mother filed for divorce against my father. She had the family lawyer draw it all up, and kept it a secret from my father until he was served. He walked into the court room, without a lawyer, and everything was already divided right down the 'middle' for him. He walked away living in his pick-up truck, and with 80% of his income going to her. The kids were never asked about it, and were not envolved with the proceedings. He was still required to pay child-support even after I had gone into the Navy, because the divorce decree said he had to pay until some specific date. I thought it was very 'shrewd' of my mother, since I had to begin working at 15 to support myself. [just food and clothing, I did not have to pay rent, until I was 16].
By doing this, before you go into court, at least gives you some level of control about where things go.
Otherwise it will often be divided right down the 'middle':
She gets the house, he gets the mortgage,
she gets the car, he gets the car payments,
she gets the kids, he gets the child-support,
she gets to maintain her standard-of-living, he gets to pay for it,
Which is what happened when I was a child, and my mother filed for divorce against my father.
Well put my friend.
I'm sure you understand, Galen, that I only mentioned your name figuratively, as one who is a true friend, a very present help in time of need... Right?
That being said, Galen's quote above is great example of "the statement of the problem" one will have to overcome. First just by being male, and secondly as being the one filed against.
Forgive me ladies, but the divorce playing field in this country is NOT level. It is tipped abour 85% in your (female) favor. Recent changes in the law haven't helped much either.
Jesus' statement "be sharp as a serpent, but harmless as a dove." definitely applies, should one want to take a spiritual POV on this topic. Shrewd is a good way to put it also.
In my case, wife #2 was so shrewd that she called me at work to specifically cancel a lunch date that she had set up on a particular Friday. Flags went up as I asked a few simple little, appropriate, but not too probing questions, like; "I can take my lunch a little later...." My office was only six minutes from home so I showed up about 8 minutes after the phone call to find her at home and her mother & step father dismantling bunk beds & loading them in a truck.
The living room was already empty.
The plan was that I'd come home to an empty house as my fist knowledge that she was "moving out."
Others may get involved in your spouse's strategy as there are more people that you associate with who ALREADY know of your marriage problems. They pretty much know better than you, especially if you are the one who is "trying to keep it together." They've already formulated silent opinions.
They usually wait to surface later, sometimes once you're in their living room, or out to lunch, or something like that and sigh, "Gee. Glad THAT mess is over."
The level playing field is not impossible to overcome, just a mountain to climb.
In divorce #1 I tried to take the total highroad, not realizing that I had been drug into the valley of death by the nature of the proceeding. I soon found that my just BEING "right" didn't matter to the court. I was already on a fast track to the "down the middle" split Galen described.
I found myself in the position where I had to tape her phone calls to provide evidence that she was actually who I said she was. Otherwise that were NOT EVEN CONSIDERING giving me custody of my daughter.
Once it became evident that I, as a professional had a potential earning capacity far beyond the mom, the court told me it was their intent to "free me" from the daily burden of raising my daughter so that I'd be free to persue my highest earning potential. I said, "WHAT!!!!???"
Just like that, with all of the exclamation! I had to go as ballistic as I could get away with to SHOW the judge that I was serious, and NOT just trying to duck child support.
I had to produce reams of information that my attorney reduced to a few well crafted legalese statements in court. The statements communicated to the court of my wife had abandoned her marriage, me AND the kids and was trying to "screw me over" in the process while she was actually having sex with another man - while I was alone at home with HER children.
Still. I didn't get custody of my daughter. I did get an extended visitiation arrangement that was beyond the 'normal' extension. That meant I had my daughter at my home only 36 days less than half the year. (For tax purposes, this kept me from being able to clain her as my dependant. I'd have been able to claim her even without having custody if she "lived with me" for six months. This was the most I could say in terms of months was four, even though she was actually with me for a few days less than five. Talk about shrewd!)
My right down the middle was like this:
I got the house, AND the mortgage,
I got MY car, she got hers, mine was the one with the payments.
she got MY daughter, specifically because she had OTHER daughters from the last husband she had, (HEY! No fair! )
I won the no alimony, but still paid her standard of living via child support.
I was able to prove she was a real B!#@& to me and had left me, and had parents she could live with (I had noone). I also proved that I was a great (good is NOT good enough to get custody) father and had sucessfully blended our family, accepting her children as my own.
SO. They gave me the house and 75% of the bills gave hey my daughter (cause the court felt the children should be together as sisters) and made me pay for everything I kept and pay HER child support.
THEN. Regardless of the fact that I actually had a job that I was going to start the following Monday following the hearing on Friday. They placed an "eternal" Seek Work Order on me that states that I MUST make PERSONAL contact with at least five potential employers each week, should I become "Unemployed." I'm court ordered to get a person's name, business address, and telephone contact information EVERY WORK DAY that I'm between contracts, or even on unemployment compensation and paying my support (albeit a reduced level based on the unemployment compensation, which they can LEGALLY take up to HALF).
If I don't, in the event that I'm techinally 'unemployed,' provide a Seek Work Contacts form EVERY Friday. The CSEA caseworker can turn me into a CRIMINAL.
They can:
- report me to the judge as being in contempt of court,
- suspend my drivers license, block my registration
- suspend any other professional licenses I have
- debit any banking accounts they find I have under my ss#.
There's no problem as long as they get their money coming in on a regular basis. If it stops and the worker chooses. I'm in a world of hurt.
Oh. I forgot to mention that on the date my FIRST suport payment was due I was already 10 weeks behind and therefore in contempt of court from DAY ONE.
AND. If you owe any arrearage to Child Support, the CSEA reports it to the IRS who then confiscates your income tax return $$ to satisfy the arrearage.
Over the past 15 years I've had three extended periods of "unemployment." After each period I've paid the arrearages down close to nothing, negating whatever pay increase the next pposition brought. Then, the arrearage stacks up quickly when you're out or work for a few months. Then is on to a "better Job" but no more money because they (CSEA) add a significant amount to your regular payment to pay down the arrearage... AND confiscate your income tax return.
The same situation exists that Galen mentioned. Its a Catch 22. Once they set you up on support payments, if you get behind they order you into court. There they add an arrearage, based on your newfound ability to pay. This amounts to the same as a modification without the obligee asking for it.
Once the obligee hears of your increased income, she can modify the amount you have to pay every three years. In Ohio. If the OBLIGEE, gets a pay raise, and the Obligor doesn't, she (98% of the time its a she ) can ask for a modification and INCREASE the amount the Obligor must pay! (The same or even a smaller percentage of a bigger total amount of $$ [parents' combined GROSS income] means a larger payment even though obligor has had NO increase in income.)
I've been modified, then had a larger %age added in arrearage payments, AND had my tax return snatched; all in the same year that I got a new, signifiacntly higher paying job that I only worked 8 months in thay calendar year.
It netted out to a significantly lower paying job that negated the concept of an upward career move.
Being set back on my heels, defending the divorce, set a tone in the divorce. Its like comedian Jeff Foxworthy's old "You MIGHT be a Redneck" routine.
"Because you've been accused, no matter how you answer, 'You MIGHT be an A$$hole!"
So they treat you that way. It goes like this,
"If you find that YOU're the Defen-DANT and the DEE-vorce was granted - - - "You MIGHT be an A$$hole!"
Especially if you're a guy.
If you're in the position. File FIRST, as questions later. You can always be nicer and set a more gentile tone to the proceedings. If you want to. On the other end of things you can only answer & make counter claims.
Then its like,
"If you make really extreme counter-claims in a DEE-vorce, but you apparently didn't care enough about them to file yourself;
When a man and woman get engaged, there are many many discussions about many things but very rarely is divorced mentioned. The truth is and most people do not like it marriage is a CONTRACT, filed with the state you live in, it is not unlike an employment contract. Before people get upset with my clinical attitude think about it, an employer promises you A.B.C., for you doing E.F.G. and you get paid, if you do not fufill E.F.G. the contract is null and void, and if you are a relatively decent buisness person you will have written down the consaquences of breaking said contract.
The employee will have clauses placed in the contract to protect themselves, ie. employer fires me, hires some one younger and quicker on the typewriter. I have been married-divorced-remarried. My second marriage is based on love mutual respect and friendship, he is my soulmate, my bestfriend and the person I want to grow old with, having said that below is a section of my "Ketubah"
"Be my wife according to the laws and traditions of Moses and Israel. I will work, honor, feed, and support you in the custom of Jewish men, who work, honor, feed, and support their wives faithfully. I will give you the settlement (mohar) of virgins, two hundred silver zuzim, which is due you according to Torah law, as well as your food, clothing, necessities of life, and conjugal needs, according to the universal custom." Miss agreed and became his wife. This dowry that she brought from her father's house, whether in silver, gold, jewelry, clothing, home furnishings, or bedding, Mr. , our bridegroom, accepts as being worth one hundred silver pieces (zekukim).
Our bridegroom, Mr. agreed, and of his own accord, added an additional one hundred silver pieces (zekukim) paralleling the above. The entire amount is then two hundred silver pieces (zekukim).
Mr. , our bridegroom made this declaration: "The obligation of this marriage contract, this dowry, and this additional amount, I accept upon myself and my heirs after me. It can be paid from the entire best part of the properties and possessions that I own under all the heavens, whether I own (this property) already, or will own it in the future. (It includes) both mortgageable property and non-mortgageable preperty. All of it shall be mortgaged and bound as security to pay this marriage contract, this dowry, and this additional amount. (It can be taken) from me, even from the shirt on my back, during my lifetime, and after my lifetime, from this day and forever."
This is a traditional contract, it hangs above my bed, I also have an elaborate pre-nup that outlines what would happen in specific situations.
ie: he cheats, I cheat with children and with-out.
My attorney and I came up with as many senarios as possible and the consequences of them, and it was hard.
I have no simpathy for people in there second, third or more marriage who get divorced and say how could this have happened. You've been there you know the drill. No reasonable buisness person would sign a contract (or any other legal document for that matter) with out reading it and understanding it. That's just foolhardy.
And one last thing HCW I read your post and my heart hurts for you, but I must humbly disagree with some things you said.
The courts will more likely than not try to keep the children with their mother and siblings, because the children of divorce have to deal with the loss of so many things that keeping somethings the same is the kindess thing we can do. You and Galen, have been batering around how well women do after divorce, that is simply not true. It is a fact that women more often then not suffer economically after a divorce. As for the rules of child support, they are harsh, but necessary you seem to be an honorable man, not all are(nor are all women) but children need to eat and have clothing and shelter no matter what. It is not uncommon for child support to be used as a power tool between the adults, and truth be told whomever gets custody of the children face the most financial burden.
My ex-husband pays $1000.00 a month (2 kids), sounds good right? Fact my medical insurance costs $650.00 a month. I'm not whining just pointing something out.
Which is why, I would prefer if divorces were hard, the most difficult things to get. And required substantiated proof of: abuse, or neglect, or adultery.
Since the courts so often don't require such, that is why I have known a few guys [and counseled others] to go get a quicky divorce and quickly manuveur yourself to be able to withstand later court proceedings.
Unfortunately as so often happens the guys only hear about their divorce when the paperwork arrives in the mail. And that is the first time they hear about their 'past' abuses, or neglects. From the cases that I have seen, often that first learning about it, when it comes in the mail, is also long after the bank accounts have been frozen, the CCs maxed without any method of making payments, and our pay-roll has already been attached to make court ordered restitution. Thus huge insurmountable debt, no pay, no home, no car, no clothing [outside of the uniforms you carried when you went out to sea], and the only method of getting pay again is to begin the process of contacting the court to assert that you were out to sea and un-able to be contacted and no you dont earn $100,000/year salary, and it was the wife who desserted the marriage, and can you please get a partial pay-check again.
Yes I fully understand that in theory spousal abuse happens every day, and I have known some guys whose spouses did become fairly abusive. But the rate that such seems to be reported in divorce cases, does seem to make a strong argument that such is being 'reported' purely for purposes of manipulating the courts and putting the guys into hock. From the cases that I have observed it has been far more 'normal' that the wife had already been commiting adultery and that she had already sought the advice of her friends; long before any thought of divorce ever occured to her.
During my 6 years working as an MP [both in Ct and Europe] I did have the occasion of responding to numerous domestic disputes. Getting the guys to medical and stitched-up and finally into the barracks. Only if the couple had lived on-base could we do anything to the wives, which was usually barring them from coming back on-base. But these don't make the statistics, for many reasons. First being that the Navy simply does not record statistics from DDs. And since we have limited jurisdiction over the spouses, there is nothing to charge them with, to charge a civilian in a federal magistrate court requires envolvement with other federal agencys, which is a big no-no for the military.
When a military spouse goes into Navy Legal first to get assistance in handling her planned divorce, it stops the servicemember from ever being able to use Navy-legal to defend him [since it is un-ethical for the same legal group to provide assistance to both sides]. So I have seen spouses go to Navy-legal first to get 'advise' just for the purpose of locking-out that avenue of assistance later when she does file for divorce in a civilian court.
So it is common for the wives to wait and when he goes to sea next time, then they go to their hometown and file for divorce. Claiming that he has desserted her. Since he does not respond to the court's summons, the court usually goes along with whatever the wife says. Usually the court is in some rural county somewhere that they dont have any military bases around and have no idea of what military pay-scales are like.
Even though the spouse has the joint checking account and all his pay goes into that account, so she has always had full-access to all of his pay; wives commonly claim: first that the husband has desserted her, and secondly that he has not been paying his alimony and child-support. So the courts will issue all these attachments to his pay, including back-child-support and back-alimony. Even though the now ex-wife still has the joint checking account and all his pay.
Adultery is a crime under the UCMJ, as a retiree I am still subject to that body of federal law. Adultery is punishable by jail time, in federal military jails [which we have seen in the media of late]. Unless you can get a courts-martial, the normal rules of evidence do not apply. A body of hear-say enough to convince the CO, is all that it takes for a conviction. But civilian spouses are not subject to the UCMJ. So they can only be charged with adultery if such is a crime in that area, and if you have evidence.
You see HCW it is all dealt with fairly and evenly ;-)
and one last thing and please dont take this wrong but you being unemployeed (for what ever reason) should in no way affect your child support.
Often people withhold money that they normaly would have given gladly to their child, because of anger to their ex.
The REAL commitment in life is children, they did not ask to be here and have very little say in what happens to them, because we as parents have issues it is not their fault.
I am not saying thats what any of you do, but it is done.
and one last thing and please dont take this wrong but you being unemployeed (for what ever reason) should in no way affect your child support.
Depends on the state.
In Nebraska, child support is determined by totalling both parents incomes, and then applying a formula to determine how much of that combined income should go to child suuport. (It is figured on a "curve". The percentage for the 2nd child is less than for the first, the third is less than the second, etc.)
The non-custodial parent pays a percentage of child support based on the percentage of the combined income that he or she earns. This can be changed by seeking a Modification of Child Support if income changes dramatically, like when there is unemployment.
If I became unemployed, or had my income seriously reduced, I would need to go to court for a modification that would reflect my lower percentage of the combined income.
"I have no simpathy for people in there second, third or more marriage who get divorced and say how could this have happened. You've been there you know the drill. No reasonable buisness person would sign a contract (or any other legal document for that matter) with out reading it and understanding it. That's just foolhardy."
Good point.
I have sat down with couples who wanted to get married, being seconds or thirds.
What can be asked? Have they learned something that would cause them to honestly beleive that this union will be everlasting?
Still pre-nup contracts are a hard sale.
"The courts will more likely than not try to keep the children with their mother and siblings, because the children of divorce have to deal with the loss of so many things that keeping somethings the same is the kindess thing we can do."
That is the accepted thought. Keeping the syblings together with their mother is kinder than to keep them together with their father. I dont always agree, but it is the common thought.
"... have been batering around how well women do after divorce, that is simply not true. It is a fact that women more often then not suffer economically after a divorce ... My ex-husband pays $1000.00 a month (2 kids), sounds good right? Fact my medical insurance costs $650.00 a month. I'm not whining just pointing something out."
True.
How is it different?
If your husband pays 80% of his earnings to you to maintain your household and your medical
assuming that he was the 'provider' before the divorce he was still maintaining your household and medical than as well. Now he has to maintain you, as always, plus his own seperate lifestyle. Is he living under a bridge somewhere? Or on someone's couch? Because so much of his money goes to you that he no longer earns enough to support to seperate households.
It does cost far more to maintain two seperate households, than it costs to have a single household. That one individual income is not going to be able to be stretched forever.
Yes you maintain the same standard of living, but can he? No. The court orders are all about maintaining your standard-of-living.
I am not saying that children should be left out in the cold, but $1000/month so still only $1000/month [or however much youwant to say]. It can not be stretched out to provide for an infinite number of households.
So many familys find that they need to have both adults working to make ends meet. Fine. So where in the system does the requirement come from that says. To solve this, just get a divorce, and attach his pay? Who cares that the ex-husband will never be able to pay rent, he will be doing good to be able to pay insurance on a car and sleep in it. So long as his pay continues to keep her in the standard of living that previously it required BOTH OF THEIR INCOMES to maintain.
:-)
"It is a fact that women more often then not suffer economically after a divorce"
Yes, they go from a two-income [both adults worked] household, down to a single-income [the ex-husband provides all] household. So yes you are correct the ex-wives do 'suffer'.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
26
14
19
17
Popular Days
Apr 5
35
Mar 4
24
Mar 9
13
Mar 17
11
Top Posters In This Topic
Galen 26 posts
Steve! 14 posts
Belle 19 posts
HCW 17 posts
Popular Days
Apr 5 2005
35 posts
Mar 4 2005
24 posts
Mar 9 2005
13 posts
Mar 17 2005
11 posts
Bob
Women did not have the right to divorce their husband in the Old Testament. Only men were granted this privilege (not that I agree with it). Abigail had no choice but to wait until her husband checked out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Xena, I don't remember the scripture references, but your question brings to mind the verses that say that every good gift is from above, God has not given us the power of fear...; if a son asks his father for bread he wouldn't give him a stone; my yoke is easy; all things are lawful to me; we are no longer under the law; the fruit of the spirit.
Remember, Jesus did say that divorced were granted because of the hardness of our hearts. That means that someone in the marriage has a hard heart - It's not necessarily the one asking for the divorce. I think God's will is for us to be at peace and to be able to spend time giving Him the love and praise that He deserves. We can't do that if we're beaten down, oppressed and being abused.
Like Bob said, if Abigail lived in our culture and our times, she would most likely have divorced. And, if you still believe in TWI's administrations, if she lived in the Grace administration she probably would have divorced. Remember, too, that we don't know anything about Paul's wife (at least I don't) for all we know he could have been divorced...
I can't say what God's will is in individual situations, but I can imagine that it IS His will for His kids to be happy and peaceful and if a marriage does not provide that and can not be repaired, then divorce is the only way to resolve it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Perhaps a bit off-topic, but has anyone noticed that whenever the OT appeared to bolster some wacked-out position of TWI, it was "for our learning", but if it constricted their happy time, it was "oh, we're under grace now, so adultery, etc., is okay."
Amazing.
Anyway, to be a bit more on-topic, I'm going through this divorce thing, too. She doesn't want it, but I do. It's emotionally and physically exhausting.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
houseisarockin
(((((Zixar)))))
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
I've been there too Galen. My neighbor directly across the street knocked on my door one evening. He was sobbing uncontrollably and said his wife had just served him papers. We had several long talks after that and my door was always open for him. I think I helped some. He certainly went through hell with it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Zixar, I am soooo sorry!! It IS emotionally and physically exhausting. Drains everything out of you. It's never easy.
Please feel free to e-mail me if you need to vent or talk with someone who's been through it recently.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cindy!
One of the important things to remember during a divorce is that the divorce does NOT define WHO you are. The statistics, the judgements, any attitudes, norms, satires, etc... they do NOT make up who you are.
You are still YOU...and there is no need to prove to anyone that you have worth, a good reason, or godliness.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Speaking as one who's been served and divorced twice, I would echo the physically and emotionally exhausting comments.
Also seeing as I was once a "people who haven't been through it" I feel I can say how one cannot begin to imagine just HOW draining the whole process is. I've had days when I've been just stoppped in my tracks by it. Plopped into a seat and just couldn't move - my brain turned to static....
What an unspeakable gift you are to your neightbor, Jim.
Even the second time, when I was not only expecting the divorce, but I wanted it AND was in process of filing, myself... getting filed was a huge blow. There was a "race" to file the papers as the one who files is palced in a position of "tactical advantage" seeing as divorce is techincally a lawsuit. One wins, and loses by the legal nature of the situation.
Morally, emotionally, spiritually both parties lose, big time. The only "winning" is that you lose less than the other party. Financially, the attorneys "win" the money they earn by dismantling your lives, the courts win by recieving the overpriced fees they charge.
I'd say its harder to be served in that its harder to recieve a blow even though it does hurt your fist when you punch a person in the eye.
Unfortunately I'm a veteran of some of the most heinous divorce antics imaginable, two horrible custody fights, evil interferring in-laws, domestic violence, jail, child abuse, legal wranglings dealing with police, daycare providers, schools, children's services, hospitals, extra-curricular lawsuits, prosecutions, rehabilitating injury, etc.
SO. Feel free to email me for, venting, advice based on my experiences, etc. also.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Xena:
"Do you think divorce is ever "God's will"? Not the general practice of divorce, but maybe in individual cases? In the story of Abigail, she is married to a major bad person, yet she continues to be the good wife, until he dies. It seems like God would have / could have told Abigail to get out of that situation, if it had been His "will". I have heard other women refer to Abigail as the perfect wife, but I don't want to be like her."
Is there ever really truly one single golden path that G-d has in mind for us to walk? I dont think so.
With every breath I take, every step some choice is being made, with each choice I think that I more narrowly define my life and the future possibilities that will befall me. [if I am mean to you today, it will set the pattern for tomorrow's meeting, which will set the pattern for next week's ... ]
I would like to think that as I walk with my creator, that I make 'good' choices. But I seem to think that I really dont. I pray, I meditate, I try to listen; I plan and I act. Is any of it really truly G-d's Will?
I do think that no matter where I go, and what I do physically; I can walk a little closer to heaven spiritually. But that rarely effects what I am doing physically.
I would like to think that, 'IF' I was listening when I dated a girl, I should have been able to tell if she was right for me. But more often than not we date people based on something else [lust].
I think that there is a path down which a newly wed couple could walk, wherein they could find happiness, companionship and love. And in that context then every marriage does have the possibility for being that 'RIGHT' one.
I also think that in life we almost never do actually walk exactly where would be the best for us. Likewise I dont always treat Bonnie as a 'wonderful woman of God' that she is. I think that I try.
Is it possible that a married couple can be together so long and walk so far apart that they can never be 'one-flesh' again? Yes, I think so.
Is it possible that sometimes one or both partners, grow mean spirited and grow to hate the other? Yes, I think so.
In that case, what is the profit in staying togehter? None. But does that mean they were never made for each other? No, I think they were at one point.
It is just that one or both partners did not focus on staying 'one-flesh'.
Once you get to that point, if you did want to walk out and minister to others, or heal others, or lead any kind of 'christ-like' life, somehow you would have to walk away from the 'bad' marriage. St. Paul did [and I find it interesting that the Bible does not give us any details because those details were not important].
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
HCW:
"Speaking as one who's been served and divorced twice, I would echo the physically and emotionally exhausting comments."
I am very thankful that I have not had to go through such myself.
It did appear to be terribly draining to each man that I had opportunity to minister to, as they went through those divorces. What I saw was certainly the financail side of it all. WOW !! Now that is nasty. Commonly we wrote letters to the courts and copies of financial statements, and so much work to get alimony and child-support levels to down below the men's Gross income. We were usually very happy if we could eventually get it all reduced down so the men could keep a fourth of their pay.
We have often had guys sleeping on our couch, to keep them off the streets. Having a dependant intitles a servicemember to money for housing, but once that money is paid to the servicemember [and then re-directed to the ex-spouse due to court-order], then the servicemember can no longer get a room at the barracks either. The military is not going to pay twice, to house a servicemember and his dependents.
The same goes for food.
In Naples 'Paul' [a guy who worked for me] was six months without pay, while we tried to get the court-ordered alimony down to less than his Gross income. When we finally did, Paul still had to pay off all the back alimony from before the amount of awarded alimony was reduced. Fortunately for him, working in Naples was not security clearance stuff, we were just doing Law Enforcment; otherwise Paul would have lost his clearances and thus his career.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
I had thought we wouldn't have to go through all the ugly stuff. Wrong. She just moved back in and informed me there was nothing I could do about it until the divorce was final. I'm therefore filing on Monday, since the mandatory waiting period is 30 days. We were supposed to go over the whole thing and file in 3 weeks when she got back, but she forced my hand with this stunt.
Sigh. What a mess.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cindy!
That is precisely why I made the suggestions to you that I did (on the phone), Zix. I've found in relationships (prior to Steve!) that people do not stick to what they say they will. (especially with the dishonesty you've lived recently)
If they say that the divorce will be amicable, they will turn it into a major battle.
If they agree that they will say, "It just didn't work out" in exchange for money they think is due them, they will turn around and do everything but...and rather immaturely at that. And then blame you.
Rare is the individual who actually does what they say they will.
More certain is childishness, that lasts for years. Pettyness, spitefulness, and immaturity.
You need to realize that...rise above it....and take care of yourself legally.
Realizing all the while that those people I just spoke of are NOT normal...let alone decent.
Their behavior in no way reflects on YOU and your real friends will know that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Zixar, make sure you have a good attorney. I know you're super sharp and have incredible common sense, but when going through something as emotionally tolling as this, it's really good to have someone on your side who can step back and see the forest for the trees to make sure you don't get royally screwed.
Thankfully mine was pretty amicable, but we didn't have a lot of property and had absolutely no kids to fight over. We didn't even have to have lawyers involved, but I know also that a good lawyer can make all the diference in the world in situations like yours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
This is certainly an area where the first to get a lawyer, is often the only 'winner'.
I did see once where a guy quickly took a day-off and flew to San Diego, then crossed into Mexico, paid $20 for a divorce, and returned home. Shut-down all joint-accounts and credit-cards [Of course, the wife had maxed out all cards and emptied the accounts anyway]. When they all got into court months later, his lawyer was able to lay that on the court. What do you mean? this couple has been divorced since 3 months ago, and has been providing support since then, only to the federal guidlines of support. Blew the ex-wife's claims out of the water.
He was a real 'winner' in the scene. He only had to pay-off the $5,000 in bad debt from the credit cards, the back-payments on rent and his car, and after that his alimony was only $500/month. A much better deal than he would have gotten from the courts, had they determined an amount.
Good luck.
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Is divorce ever God's will?
"Beloved, I wish above all things that you would be prosperously healthy, even as your soul prospers." - - God.
Please do not allow oftern regurgetated religous legalism spewed out of the mouths of people who have NO clue of your suffering to place you under misguided legalism.
God would never have any of us suffer unjustly at the hand of ANY other human for even one second.
I could fill this thread longer than both my outstretched arms with my experiences and the experiences of others I've witnessed, similar to what Galen posted.
Suffice it to say, at this point. If the marriage is unhealthy to you, you have every right in God's eyes to get out. Or put the errant partner out.
The system will chew you up and spit you out and destroy your children in the process. Your well-intentioned attorney will buy nice things with your money while you eat Ramen noodles and sleep on "Galen's" couch.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
How true THAT is. Filing first give you a direct tactical advantage. If you're in the midst of divorce or divorce is on the near horizon - - and you think like I did... this "tactical advantage" thing might be sour to you.
I just wanted some peace, finally. I really didn't want the divorce. I held onto the "we can work this out if we could just...." concept.
That was the first divorce. I learned something then, because I actually told her, "You're the one who wants out, you're the one who's broken your vows; YOU file!"
I looked at it then like she should take responsibility for her actions and therefor take responsibility for the divorce.
I was SO wrong!
Then in the seocond marriage, I had told wifeee #2. while things were "good" how being the defendant in the divorce cast a shadow of dispersion on me in the legal proceedings. Being the defendant meant that I had to answer to all of her REDICULOUS claims.
Your attorney may tell you, "It doesn't mean much." The things they say, we hear stuff like that everyday, people always exaggerate....
I DOES matter. When you're trying to settle on property and custody, especially, if your spouse has painted you as "satan" and themselves as a "saint" the difrst anf PRIMARY and ususally the thing(s) you want MOST may somehow, just "fairly" fall against you.
Magistrates, judges, etc. are people too. You must CONVINCE them in an evidentiary manner of who you really are.
The first words the court hears usually fly and set to tone for the rest of the proceedings.
Its not impossible for the defendant to prevail. Just right next to it, very close to it actually. Especially since statistics are in favor of the plaintiffs, and the overwhelming majority of plantiffs are female, AND the courts are woefully aware of ALL of the statistics mentioned above AND all of the the "hiddend complaints, and reasonings for divorce.
The court has "seen it all & heard it all." They will peg you if they can. Makes it easier for them to go home to their own families. They can more easily go to their own kids' soccer practices if they are not carrying YOUR baggage.
The BEST way for you to navigate the stormy waters of a divorce is to be at the helm. YOU file,YOU file first.
NO. its not "the" BEST. You can't get to BEST from here.
Once your marriage is "over" best is no longer possible. It becomes a matter of choosing the lesser of evils. It boceome a matter of doing the highes good you can, for YOURSELF to preserve yourself so you can be YOUR personal best for your children (if you have any) or yourself to rebuild your life.
I'm thinking, that when God was telling the them to write, "...though I walk through the valle of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil." He was prophetically including divorce. It really is the shadow of death. Death of your marriage, death of your hopes and dreams, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc....
You must not be afraid of the evil that resides in the valley. The deeper the valley, the more evil you must wade through, the more "evil" you may be forced to do to prevail, ultimately.
IF YOU DO NOT PREVAIL. YOU WILL NOT EXTRICATE YOURSELF FROM THE VALLEY ONCE THE DIVORCE IS FILE STAMPED AS COMPLETE.
A successful divorce is one where, once its finished, you are as close to the top of the "valley" as you can get. Then your recovery will be "shorter" and less intense.
All the best.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
HCW:
" ... Your well-intentioned attorney will buy nice things with your money while you eat Ramen noodles and sleep on "Galen's" couch."
Or they could well end up on your couch, I was just offering by way of example, the kind of things that I have done in the past to try and help these poor guys.
In my limited exposure to divorces, it was overwhelmingly the wife who had ran up the debts, stopped making payments and then left the area, went to her home state and filed against the husband.
On the other hand, it is my impression from listening to my relatives, that commonly people do go into divorce even when they are not in huge debt and the wife has not desserted. Even though among those that I have worked with such has not been my observation.
Reading on the subject, it does sound like immediately getting rid of all assets, to pay off all existing debts. Just like when a corporation is closing it's doors. Liquidate everything, pay-off all creditors, and divide-up any money left over. The idea being that you dont wnat to still have any payments left to be paid, and you dont want to still have any items that could be community property.
By doing this, before you go into court, at least gives you some level of control about where things go.
Otherwise it will often be divided right down the 'middle':
She gets the house, he gets the mortgage,
she gets the car, he gets the car payments,
she gets the kids, he gets the child-support,
she gets to maintain her standard-of-living, he gets to pay for it,
Which is what happened when I was a child, and my mother filed for divorce against my father. She had the family lawyer draw it all up, and kept it a secret from my father until he was served. He walked into the court room, without a lawyer, and everything was already divided right down the 'middle' for him. He walked away living in his pick-up truck, and with 80% of his income going to her. The kids were never asked about it, and were not envolved with the proceedings. He was still required to pay child-support even after I had gone into the Navy, because the divorce decree said he had to pay until some specific date. I thought it was very 'shrewd' of my mother, since I had to begin working at 15 to support myself. [just food and clothing, I did not have to pay rent, until I was 16].
Good luck
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Well put my friend.
I'm sure you understand, Galen, that I only mentioned your name figuratively, as one who is a true friend, a very present help in time of need... Right?
That being said, Galen's quote above is great example of "the statement of the problem" one will have to overcome. First just by being male, and secondly as being the one filed against.
Forgive me ladies, but the divorce playing field in this country is NOT level. It is tipped abour 85% in your (female) favor. Recent changes in the law haven't helped much either.
Jesus' statement "be sharp as a serpent, but harmless as a dove." definitely applies, should one want to take a spiritual POV on this topic. Shrewd is a good way to put it also.
In my case, wife #2 was so shrewd that she called me at work to specifically cancel a lunch date that she had set up on a particular Friday. Flags went up as I asked a few simple little, appropriate, but not too probing questions, like; "I can take my lunch a little later...." My office was only six minutes from home so I showed up about 8 minutes after the phone call to find her at home and her mother & step father dismantling bunk beds & loading them in a truck.
The living room was already empty.
The plan was that I'd come home to an empty house as my fist knowledge that she was "moving out."
Others may get involved in your spouse's strategy as there are more people that you associate with who ALREADY know of your marriage problems. They pretty much know better than you, especially if you are the one who is "trying to keep it together." They've already formulated silent opinions.
They usually wait to surface later, sometimes once you're in their living room, or out to lunch, or something like that and sigh, "Gee. Glad THAT mess is over."
The level playing field is not impossible to overcome, just a mountain to climb.
In divorce #1 I tried to take the total highroad, not realizing that I had been drug into the valley of death by the nature of the proceeding. I soon found that my just BEING "right" didn't matter to the court. I was already on a fast track to the "down the middle" split Galen described.
I found myself in the position where I had to tape her phone calls to provide evidence that she was actually who I said she was. Otherwise that were NOT EVEN CONSIDERING giving me custody of my daughter.
Once it became evident that I, as a professional had a potential earning capacity far beyond the mom, the court told me it was their intent to "free me" from the daily burden of raising my daughter so that I'd be free to persue my highest earning potential. I said, "WHAT!!!!???"
Just like that, with all of the exclamation! I had to go as ballistic as I could get away with to SHOW the judge that I was serious, and NOT just trying to duck child support.
I had to produce reams of information that my attorney reduced to a few well crafted legalese statements in court. The statements communicated to the court of my wife had abandoned her marriage, me AND the kids and was trying to "screw me over" in the process while she was actually having sex with another man - while I was alone at home with HER children.
Still. I didn't get custody of my daughter. I did get an extended visitiation arrangement that was beyond the 'normal' extension. That meant I had my daughter at my home only 36 days less than half the year. (For tax purposes, this kept me from being able to clain her as my dependant. I'd have been able to claim her even without having custody if she "lived with me" for six months. This was the most I could say in terms of months was four, even though she was actually with me for a few days less than five. Talk about shrewd!)
My right down the middle was like this:
I got the house, AND the mortgage,
I got MY car, she got hers, mine was the one with the payments.
she got MY daughter, specifically because she had OTHER daughters from the last husband she had, (HEY! No fair!
)
I won the no alimony, but still paid her standard of living via child support.
I was able to prove she was a real B!#@& to me and had left me, and had parents she could live with (I had noone). I also proved that I was a great (good is NOT good enough to get custody) father and had sucessfully blended our family, accepting her children as my own.
SO. They gave me the house and 75% of the bills gave hey my daughter (cause the court felt the children should be together as sisters) and made me pay for everything I kept and pay HER child support.
THEN. Regardless of the fact that I actually had a job that I was going to start the following Monday following the hearing on Friday. They placed an "eternal" Seek Work Order on me that states that I MUST make PERSONAL contact with at least five potential employers each week, should I become "Unemployed." I'm court ordered to get a person's name, business address, and telephone contact information EVERY WORK DAY that I'm between contracts, or even on unemployment compensation and paying my support (albeit a reduced level based on the unemployment compensation, which they can LEGALLY take up to HALF).
If I don't, in the event that I'm techinally 'unemployed,' provide a Seek Work Contacts form EVERY Friday. The CSEA caseworker can turn me into a CRIMINAL.
They can:
- report me to the judge as being in contempt of court,
- suspend my drivers license, block my registration
- suspend any other professional licenses I have
- debit any banking accounts they find I have under my ss#.
There's no problem as long as they get their money coming in on a regular basis. If it stops and the worker chooses. I'm in a world of hurt.
Oh. I forgot to mention that on the date my FIRST suport payment was due I was already 10 weeks behind and therefore in contempt of court from DAY ONE.
AND. If you owe any arrearage to Child Support, the CSEA reports it to the IRS who then confiscates your income tax return $$ to satisfy the arrearage.
Over the past 15 years I've had three extended periods of "unemployment." After each period I've paid the arrearages down close to nothing, negating whatever pay increase the next pposition brought. Then, the arrearage stacks up quickly when you're out or work for a few months. Then is on to a "better Job" but no more money because they (CSEA) add a significant amount to your regular payment to pay down the arrearage... AND confiscate your income tax return.
The same situation exists that Galen mentioned. Its a Catch 22. Once they set you up on support payments, if you get behind they order you into court. There they add an arrearage, based on your newfound ability to pay. This amounts to the same as a modification without the obligee asking for it.
Once the obligee hears of your increased income, she can modify the amount you have to pay every three years. In Ohio. If the OBLIGEE, gets a pay raise, and the Obligor doesn't, she (98% of the time its a she
) can ask for a modification and INCREASE the amount the Obligor must pay! (The same or even a smaller percentage of a bigger total amount of $$ [parents' combined GROSS income] means a larger payment even though obligor has had NO increase in income.)
I've been modified, then had a larger %age added in arrearage payments, AND had my tax return snatched; all in the same year that I got a new, signifiacntly higher paying job that I only worked 8 months in thay calendar year.
It netted out to a significantly lower paying job that negated the concept of an upward career move.
Being set back on my heels, defending the divorce, set a tone in the divorce. Its like comedian Jeff Foxworthy's old "You MIGHT be a Redneck" routine.
"Because you've been accused, no matter how you answer, 'You MIGHT be an A$$hole!"
So they treat you that way. It goes like this,
"If you find that YOU're the Defen-DANT and the DEE-vorce was granted - - - "You MIGHT be an A$$hole!"
Especially if you're a guy.
If you're in the position. File FIRST, as questions later. You can always be nicer and set a more gentile tone to the proceedings. If you want to. On the other end of things you can only answer & make counter claims.
Then its like,
"If you make really extreme counter-claims in a DEE-vorce, but you apparently didn't care enough about them to file yourself;
EVEN if your counter-claims ARE true...
you STILL might be an A$$hole."
File first.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sharon
When a man and woman get engaged, there are many many discussions about many things but very rarely is divorced mentioned. The truth is and most people do not like it marriage is a CONTRACT, filed with the state you live in, it is not unlike an employment contract. Before people get upset with my clinical attitude think about it, an employer promises you A.B.C., for you doing E.F.G. and you get paid, if you do not fufill E.F.G. the contract is null and void, and if you are a relatively decent buisness person you will have written down the consaquences of breaking said contract.
The employee will have clauses placed in the contract to protect themselves, ie. employer fires me, hires some one younger and quicker on the typewriter. I have been married-divorced-remarried. My second marriage is based on love mutual respect and friendship, he is my soulmate, my bestfriend and the person I want to grow old with, having said that below is a section of my "Ketubah"
"Be my wife according to the laws and traditions of Moses and Israel. I will work, honor, feed, and support you in the custom of Jewish men, who work, honor, feed, and support their wives faithfully. I will give you the settlement (mohar) of virgins, two hundred silver zuzim, which is due you according to Torah law, as well as your food, clothing, necessities of life, and conjugal needs, according to the universal custom." Miss agreed and became his wife. This dowry that she brought from her father's house, whether in silver, gold, jewelry, clothing, home furnishings, or bedding, Mr. , our bridegroom, accepts as being worth one hundred silver pieces (zekukim).
Our bridegroom, Mr. agreed, and of his own accord, added an additional one hundred silver pieces (zekukim) paralleling the above. The entire amount is then two hundred silver pieces (zekukim).
Mr. , our bridegroom made this declaration: "The obligation of this marriage contract, this dowry, and this additional amount, I accept upon myself and my heirs after me. It can be paid from the entire best part of the properties and possessions that I own under all the heavens, whether I own (this property) already, or will own it in the future. (It includes) both mortgageable property and non-mortgageable preperty. All of it shall be mortgaged and bound as security to pay this marriage contract, this dowry, and this additional amount. (It can be taken) from me, even from the shirt on my back, during my lifetime, and after my lifetime, from this day and forever."
This is a traditional contract, it hangs above my bed, I also have an elaborate pre-nup that outlines what would happen in specific situations.
ie: he cheats, I cheat with children and with-out.
My attorney and I came up with as many senarios as possible and the consequences of them, and it was hard.
I have no simpathy for people in there second, third or more marriage who get divorced and say how could this have happened. You've been there you know the drill. No reasonable buisness person would sign a contract (or any other legal document for that matter) with out reading it and understanding it. That's just foolhardy.
And one last thing HCW I read your post and my heart hurts for you, but I must humbly disagree with some things you said.
The courts will more likely than not try to keep the children with their mother and siblings, because the children of divorce have to deal with the loss of so many things that keeping somethings the same is the kindess thing we can do. You and Galen, have been batering around how well women do after divorce, that is simply not true. It is a fact that women more often then not suffer economically after a divorce. As for the rules of child support, they are harsh, but necessary you seem to be an honorable man, not all are(nor are all women) but children need to eat and have clothing and shelter no matter what. It is not uncommon for child support to be used as a power tool between the adults, and truth be told whomever gets custody of the children face the most financial burden.
My ex-husband pays $1000.00 a month (2 kids), sounds good right? Fact my medical insurance costs $650.00 a month. I'm not whining just pointing something out.
Sorry so long, but imho worth reading
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Which is why, I would prefer if divorces were hard, the most difficult things to get. And required substantiated proof of: abuse, or neglect, or adultery.
Since the courts so often don't require such, that is why I have known a few guys [and counseled others] to go get a quicky divorce and quickly manuveur yourself to be able to withstand later court proceedings.
Unfortunately as so often happens the guys only hear about their divorce when the paperwork arrives in the mail. And that is the first time they hear about their 'past' abuses, or neglects. From the cases that I have seen, often that first learning about it, when it comes in the mail, is also long after the bank accounts have been frozen, the CCs maxed without any method of making payments, and our pay-roll has already been attached to make court ordered restitution. Thus huge insurmountable debt, no pay, no home, no car, no clothing [outside of the uniforms you carried when you went out to sea], and the only method of getting pay again is to begin the process of contacting the court to assert that you were out to sea and un-able to be contacted and no you dont earn $100,000/year salary, and it was the wife who desserted the marriage, and can you please get a partial pay-check again.
Yes I fully understand that in theory spousal abuse happens every day, and I have known some guys whose spouses did become fairly abusive. But the rate that such seems to be reported in divorce cases, does seem to make a strong argument that such is being 'reported' purely for purposes of manipulating the courts and putting the guys into hock. From the cases that I have observed it has been far more 'normal' that the wife had already been commiting adultery and that she had already sought the advice of her friends; long before any thought of divorce ever occured to her.
During my 6 years working as an MP [both in Ct and Europe] I did have the occasion of responding to numerous domestic disputes. Getting the guys to medical and stitched-up and finally into the barracks. Only if the couple had lived on-base could we do anything to the wives, which was usually barring them from coming back on-base. But these don't make the statistics, for many reasons. First being that the Navy simply does not record statistics from DDs. And since we have limited jurisdiction over the spouses, there is nothing to charge them with, to charge a civilian in a federal magistrate court requires envolvement with other federal agencys, which is a big no-no for the military.
When a military spouse goes into Navy Legal first to get assistance in handling her planned divorce, it stops the servicemember from ever being able to use Navy-legal to defend him [since it is un-ethical for the same legal group to provide assistance to both sides]. So I have seen spouses go to Navy-legal first to get 'advise' just for the purpose of locking-out that avenue of assistance later when she does file for divorce in a civilian court.
So it is common for the wives to wait and when he goes to sea next time, then they go to their hometown and file for divorce. Claiming that he has desserted her. Since he does not respond to the court's summons, the court usually goes along with whatever the wife says. Usually the court is in some rural county somewhere that they dont have any military bases around and have no idea of what military pay-scales are like.
Even though the spouse has the joint checking account and all his pay goes into that account, so she has always had full-access to all of his pay; wives commonly claim: first that the husband has desserted her, and secondly that he has not been paying his alimony and child-support. So the courts will issue all these attachments to his pay, including back-child-support and back-alimony. Even though the now ex-wife still has the joint checking account and all his pay.
Adultery is a crime under the UCMJ, as a retiree I am still subject to that body of federal law. Adultery is punishable by jail time, in federal military jails [which we have seen in the media of late]. Unless you can get a courts-martial, the normal rules of evidence do not apply. A body of hear-say enough to convince the CO, is all that it takes for a conviction. But civilian spouses are not subject to the UCMJ. So they can only be charged with adultery if such is a crime in that area, and if you have evidence.
You see HCW it is all dealt with fairly and evenly ;-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sharon
and one last thing and please dont take this wrong but you being unemployeed (for what ever reason) should in no way affect your child support.
Often people withhold money that they normaly would have given gladly to their child, because of anger to their ex.
The REAL commitment in life is children, they did not ask to be here and have very little say in what happens to them, because we as parents have issues it is not their fault.
I am not saying thats what any of you do, but it is done.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
In Nebraska, child support is determined by totalling both parents incomes, and then applying a formula to determine how much of that combined income should go to child suuport. (It is figured on a "curve". The percentage for the 2nd child is less than for the first, the third is less than the second, etc.)
The non-custodial parent pays a percentage of child support based on the percentage of the combined income that he or she earns. This can be changed by seeking a Modification of Child Support if income changes dramatically, like when there is unemployment.
If I became unemployed, or had my income seriously reduced, I would need to go to court for a modification that would reflect my lower percentage of the combined income.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
sharon:
"I have no simpathy for people in there second, third or more marriage who get divorced and say how could this have happened. You've been there you know the drill. No reasonable buisness person would sign a contract (or any other legal document for that matter) with out reading it and understanding it. That's just foolhardy."
Good point.
I have sat down with couples who wanted to get married, being seconds or thirds.
What can be asked? Have they learned something that would cause them to honestly beleive that this union will be everlasting?
Still pre-nup contracts are a hard sale.
"The courts will more likely than not try to keep the children with their mother and siblings, because the children of divorce have to deal with the loss of so many things that keeping somethings the same is the kindess thing we can do."
That is the accepted thought. Keeping the syblings together with their mother is kinder than to keep them together with their father. I dont always agree, but it is the common thought.
"... have been batering around how well women do after divorce, that is simply not true. It is a fact that women more often then not suffer economically after a divorce ... My ex-husband pays $1000.00 a month (2 kids), sounds good right? Fact my medical insurance costs $650.00 a month. I'm not whining just pointing something out."
True.
How is it different?
If your husband pays 80% of his earnings to you to maintain your household and your medical
assuming that he was the 'provider' before the divorce he was still maintaining your household and medical than as well. Now he has to maintain you, as always, plus his own seperate lifestyle. Is he living under a bridge somewhere? Or on someone's couch? Because so much of his money goes to you that he no longer earns enough to support to seperate households.
It does cost far more to maintain two seperate households, than it costs to have a single household. That one individual income is not going to be able to be stretched forever.
Yes you maintain the same standard of living, but can he? No. The court orders are all about maintaining your standard-of-living.
I am not saying that children should be left out in the cold, but $1000/month so still only $1000/month [or however much youwant to say]. It can not be stretched out to provide for an infinite number of households.
So many familys find that they need to have both adults working to make ends meet. Fine. So where in the system does the requirement come from that says. To solve this, just get a divorce, and attach his pay? Who cares that the ex-husband will never be able to pay rent, he will be doing good to be able to pay insurance on a car and sleep in it. So long as his pay continues to keep her in the standard of living that previously it required BOTH OF THEIR INCOMES to maintain.
:-)
"It is a fact that women more often then not suffer economically after a divorce"
Yes, they go from a two-income [both adults worked] household, down to a single-income [the ex-husband provides all] household. So yes you are correct the ex-wives do 'suffer'.
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Oakspear:
"Depends on the state.
In Nebraska ... "
Wow that sounds great.
Should we try and get Navy bases in Nebraska?
:-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.