Divorce in North America

[Oleg]

FYI, just in case you were not aware of this:

"If a man insists on a prenuptual agreement, he is selfish and unromantic. However, when is the last time a woman who demanded a prenup was called "unromantic"? On the contrary, if a woman requests a prenup, she is fiscally responsible and looking out for herself. (Note: If your fiancйe refuses to sign a prenup, she has just shown her hand...)

What is astounding is the hypocrisy of the reaction towards prenups. Women can conveniently assert that a man is unromantic if he suggests a prenup. After all, how can a man pollute true love with signing of legal paperwork! However, what is a marriage contract? Women do not seem to balk at signing this legal paperwork, which entitles her to at least half the money a man earns, and obligates him to support her if the event of a breakup. The distraction of bridal magazines, selection of dinner napkins, churches, wedding dresses, receptions, wedding showers, and honeymoons have clouded the legal reality of what men are getting themselves into. Marriage is as much an unromantic legal contract as a prenuptial agreement is."

Only someone who is naive, or is unfamiliar with the system in Canada would consider getting married without having a prenuptual agreement.

"50% of American marriages end in divorce, and 70% of these divorces are initiaited by women. All men should consult an attorney before marrying, and understand the implications of divorce, b/c they may participate in one whether they like it not.

Upon divorce, all assets accumulated during a marriage are subject to division. How many people would ever accept a job offer that stipulated that in the event of resignation, you would have to return 50% of every dime you were ever paid? No one in his or her right mind. Yet, men unknowingly agree to the exact same insanity when they sign their marriage contract!

"Assets accumulated prior to a marriage are exempt from a divorce." Yes, in theory. However, real life dictates otherwise. If funds from an account are commingled, it can become marital property. If even a dime from an account is spent towards the marriage, it can be considered marital property. Buy your child a lollypop from your own account, and a good lawyer will take 1/2 of it for your ex-wife when you divorce. If a woman moves into a home the man owned prior to the marriage, it is not safe from divorce. If she so much as hangs up a sheet of wallpaper, the home is now classified as marital property, and is subject to equal division. (Worse actually, the man can be ejected from the home.)

Imagine yourself giving a homeless man a sandwich. A generous act, indeed. Now imagine your reaction if the homeless man sues you in court! The judge orders you to keep feeding the homeless man sandwiches, indefinitely, because he has become accustomed to your support!! This would be categorically absurd, yet this happens to men in divorce court every day. Instead of thanking you for paying her bills for all those years, you get the reward of legally having to keep paying her bills! Remember folks: No good deed goes unpunished.

Generous, caring men who spoil their wives should certainly think twice about how this generosity can later be used against them. The phrase used in divorce court is "She has become accustomed to a certain lifestyle". A husband's reward for spoiling his wife today is the legal obligation to spoil her indefinitely. Yet...imagine a husband that became accustomed to eating a home cooked dinner prepared by his wife. Now imagine the courts obligate the ex-wife to continue cooking for him and his new girlfriend each night, despite being divorced! Inconceivable, but it happens the other way around every day!"


As soon as you suspect that your wife is contemplating a divorce, try to not ever be alone with her. Move out, right away. "Unless you have a FEMALE witness present with you when you are in her company, she can falsely accuse you of domestic violence, or marital rape." "The police will be called. You will spend 5-9 days in jail. You will have a restraining order placed on you. You will never set foot in that house until she decides to leave. You will have a criminal record. You will be bared from most government jobs. You will do 52 weeks domestic violence counseling regardless of what happened. You will report to a probation officer every month for the next 2-3 years. The total cost will be over $5,000." "Whatever you do, do not have sex with her. She might try to hook you for the next 18+ years or charge you with marital rape."

"Marriage was born as a way for families to merge land and property, so maybe people should view it as just that. The rest of the hype is just bogus modern TV fantasy polluting the minds of today's impressionable youth, and a way to keep the $70 billion-per-year U.S. wedding industry chugging along. Perhaps the only criteria for marrying someone should really be "Am I excited to merge my finances with him/her?" Because, when all the fluff and hype are boiled away, that may be the only remaining reality."

[Бойцовый кролик]

Олег, вы по-канадски многословны. Позвольте изложить краткое содержание?

1. Все женщины продажны.
2. Женщина при разводе получает все.
3. Мужчина - запись о приводе в полицию или даже судимость.
4. Брак - аццтой.

Ну кто еще мне расскажет про лаконичность английского языка, особенно в его Канадском варианте?

[Oleg]

I never said, or implied that "Все женщины продажны".

"Женщина при разводе получает все." Things are more complicated than that. See my post to get a sense of some of the issues involved, and to figure out exactly what is at stake here.

"Брак - аццтой." Some people may still want to get married. The important thing is for everyone in the family to know exactly what they got/are getting themselves into.

As you can see, some parts of my post are in bold font. Those are the most important points, in case you don't want to read the whole thing. And those points don't correspond to your summary.

Let me summarize Your post, BK: "Oleg, I didn't read your post."

There.

[Oleg]

Also, using your reasoning, BK, why did the founding fathers of the United States decide to write "The Declaration of Independence"? According to you, all they had to do was write down the title. However, if you read the actual text, you will find that you will learn a lot of interesting new things.

[Oleg]

Check out the unofficial guidelines regarding the support payments following a divorce.

http://www.westlawecarswell.com/spousal/exec.asp

This link was provided by ViRuCa in the "Relationships in Canada" thread. You may also want to take a look at pages 7 and 8 of that thread for more details.

=======================

I know one more fact about divorce. Suppose one spouse works and supports the other spouse who is attending university. If they divorce before the second spouse graduates from the university, then the first spouse is entitled to a fraction of the second spouse's income, once he starts working.

For example, suppose spouse X is supporting spouse Y to attend medical school. They divorce sometime before Y starts making the big money as a doctor. The law entitles X to part of Y's earnings.

[ViRuCa]

I know one more fact about divorce. Suppose one spouse works and supports the other spouse who is attending university. If they divorce before the second spouse graduates from the university, then the first spouse is entitled to a fraction of the second spouse's income, once he starts working.

For example, suppose spouse X is supporting spouse Y to attend medical school. They divorce sometime before Y starts making the big money as a doctor. The law entitles X to part of Y's earnings.

и по вашему мнению это НЕсправедливо?
я бы не согласилась. несправедливо это когда кто-то 7 лет пашет и содержит другого, пока другой закладывает основу для своей безбедной оставшейся жизни. а потом когда другой начинает получать хорошие деньги, первого (супруга) выбрасывают как ненужную тряпку.
если оба решили чем-то жертвовать ради карьеры одного (в данном случае жертвы приносит тот кто пашет первые 7 лет), значит и получать выгоду от этой карьеры имеют право оба, даже если после принесения жертв наступил развод.

[Oleg]

I never stated how I felt about these facts. I just stated the facts.

I think that if, over the years, spouse X contributed $Z towards Y's education, then Y owes $Z + interest to X. But Y ends up paying an amount that might be ten times higher than $(Z+interest)...

Put another way, many people agree with you about what is fair. This implies that Y would not be acting rationally, if he or she were to get married before starting to attend medical school. Y could achieve a much higher expected payoff, by borrowing the money from the bank.