Fathers for justice. Watch

thesuperficial
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#21
Report 10 years ago
#21
(Original post by Cattleman)

Rough case study:

Mr and Mrs Smith are married with 2 children, living in a nice house in a leafy suburb that Mr Smith's salary has paid for. Mrs Smith one day decides she is bored in her marriage and decides to start sleeping around and suggests that they should get divorced.

The divorce court gives Mrs Smith custody of the two children, orders Mr Smith to continue paying 100% of the mortgage payments + child support (on top of the rent which he has to pay on newly aquired flat).
so...mrs smith has given up work, is the primary carer for her children (seeing as mr smith is working long hours), knows them well and has a nice home for them where they are near friends and their school.

what would be prefereable? having to move and upset the children? have them live with the father who they might not have a close bond with?

at the end of the day, neither scenario is great and ideally there should always be near enough equal custody granted. What annoys me about examples like yours is that it seems to place a higher importance on money than on relationships and family life.
0
reply
34253
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#22
Report 10 years ago
#22
(Original post by jacketpotato)
Absolute and utter rubbish.

The woman cannot stop a father from seeing his children. The courts are really, really tough on ensuring that fathers get meaningful contact with children; less than 1% of cases are refused and typically involve cases where the father physically abused the mother.
Mothers have been forced to do community service and sent to jail for stopping fathers from seeing their children; the courts are very VERY prepared to make orders facilitating contacts.

As for taking everything from her husband, again, rubbish. She can claim 1) what she needs to meet her and the children's basic needs of food and shelter, if these are met 2) compensation for earning disadvantage as a result of the marriage e.g. giving up a career to look after the children, and after this 3) equal sharing of 'family assets'; i.e. money the husband was able to earn by virtue of the mother staying home looking after the kids.
This almost always comes to some sort of arrangement so everyone's needs are met in low-money cases, or a 50/50 sharing of assets in big money cases.
Heres the thing though: you don't need to give up work to look after children, yet most women who get a favourable divorce don't work more than 10 hours a week. The man has to pay for everything. I've seen my friends mothers go through some very favourable divorces, getting the house and the children and on top of that the man having to pay the upkeep. Basically if you get divorced the man gets stuck with paying for everything he did before PLUS his own house and he gets to see the children less. The courts can make all the orders they want but why do you think FFJ exist? There are a lot of dads out there who'll never get to see their children grow up but they still get to pay for them. I see no reason why men have to keep women in the life they're acquainted to even if it was them who ended the relationship/cheated. As somebody else rightly said there are cases where the courts, if fair, would have ruled as heavy handedly in the males favour but instead they chose to favour women. There's no denying it, the courts are very biased towards women.
0
reply
DamnitJanet
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#23
Report 10 years ago
#23
Personally I think there should be a Kids 4 Justice.
Because honestly, in the case of divorce, how often are the actual children listened to? What the father and mother want should be of secondary concern, really.
But back to the point, I think Fathers For Justice is a good thing, and they are making a good point.
0
reply
2026
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#24
Report 10 years ago
#24
(Original post by Cattleman)
Fathers for Justice? - Ignoring their methods, what do you think of the point they are trying to make? Is it valid?

Rough case study:

Mr and Mrs Smith are married with 2 children, living in a nice house in a leafy suburb that Mr Smith's salary has paid for. Mrs Smith one day decides she is bored in her marriage and decides to start sleeping around and suggests that they should get divorced.
The divorce court gives Mrs Smith custody of the two children, orders Mr Smith to continue paying 100% of the mortgage payments + child support (on top of the rent which he has to pay on newly aquired flat).
Lol, obviously you're not a fan of the ladies. However, certainly thin you should be able to express your mysognistic views, regardless of how disgusting it is (and it is disgusting).
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (346)
37.9%
No - but I will (72)
7.89%
No - I don't want to (65)
7.12%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (430)
47.1%

Watched Threads

View All