Second Wife Sees the Family Court System for What it Is
June 6th, 2009 by Robert Franklin, Esq.Not long ago I wrote a piece about a Texas man, Chris Taylor, who was learning some hard lessons about being a custodial father. I said that, because the family law system is so biased against them, fathers like Taylor provide a never-ending stream of potential supporters of fathers' rights.
Well, there's another group who perform the same function - second wives. Here's an article by a woman who's been divorced herself (amicably), but whose partner is going through the hell of divorce court (Alliston Herald, 6/2/09). In other words, she's seen both sides.
When Paulette McDonald and her husband were splitting up, she went to a divorce lawyer, and describes the smorgasbord she found there. "On the menu was child support, spousal support, pensions, extraordinary expenses, education costs and the list went on. It was all there and ripe for the picking."
But to her great credit, McDonald had a sense of personal integrity seldom seen these days. She was not about to take her ex to the cleaners. She wanted and got a good, amicable, long-lasting relationship with him in which her kids thrived. That's not a bad outcome in a divorce case, even if she didn't get all the money her lawyer said she could have.
By contrast, her partner is now undergoing the type of torture-by-family-court that McDonald's husband avoided. And McDonald sees the difference. She calls family courts "predatory" and "a legalized vehicle for the harrassment of men."
As surely as there are men like Chris Taylor, there are women like Paulette McDonald. Face it, there are scads of divorces going on all the time. And a large percentage of the men who get divorced, get remarried. That means there are second wives out there who are as mad at the family law system for its abuse of men and fathers as Paulette McDonald is.
That's another reason why the fathers' rights movement has such momentum. And it's why it will continue until the gross inequalities of family courts and family law are rectified.
(As an aside, I can't resist pointing out a delightful typo in her article. McDonald describes going into her lawyer's office to discuss her litigation strategy. It was there, she says that "the plan was laid out at my fee (sic)." She meant "feet" of course, but, like all Freudian slips, there's a revealing element of truth in the word she actually used that the correct one could never have had.)
Thanks to "Puma" for the heads-up.
"));
19 queries. 0.372 seconds.
June 6th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Vindictive women do not have the foresight to comprehend the vast number of people they hurt with their ill conceived actions against husbands, fathers, grandfathers and children and others.
While hard core radical feminists see men as their most hated enemies and men as the cause of everything bad, they fail to realize that their actions will eventually hurt themselves as even women will (hopefully?) see that what many women do to men EVERYWHERE, not just in divorce proceedings, is despicable and unacceptably wrong!
This kind of negative behaviour effects us all! Like the scorpion it will bite them unexpectedly from behind!
Attila
June 6th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Great article!
My husbands ex is a hard core feminist (i.e. man hater). However, instead of being empowered and looking after herself, she relies on my husband and the gov't to support her. She has taken their children to live 3000 miles away from an awsome dad, not for a job or an understandable reason, but simply becasue she wanted to. I have spent thousands of my own savings, that I accrued before I met my husband, simply so we could pay our bills after she gets her 50% "share" of his income.
The standard reply I get from feminists is that "you knew what you were getting into, and you shouldn't have had kids if you couldn't afford them". They can't see the irony in these statements. Second wives (and second children) are completely invisible, we don't exist in family court.
The control divorced women exert over their ex husbands and kids, and even the second wives is astonishing. I think second wives can help in the father's rights movement because many men have guilt attached to their divorce and guilt over not being with their kids daily (even though not their fault). This guilt transpires into "just give her what she wants" even when it's completely unreasonable.
Not having the "guilt" associated with divorce and being subjected to basically the same treatment as ex-husbands, second wives KNOW just how crazy these laws and guidelines have become with each passing year. It is so nice to hear the author of this article ADMIT this!
June 6th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
The author of the article cited by Mr. Franklin, Paulette McDonald, a Canadian, is better known to some as "Bat Girl." As a Fathers 4 Justice activist, this was the superhero character she chose in the demonstration in which she allowed herself to be arrested for the cause. Another Canadian, Kris Titus ("Wonder Woman," also arrested in a separate demonstration), is the leader of the national Fathers 4 Justice in Canada and is active in pursuing legislative reform in a practical, organized manner.
I have met a lot of feminists in my life. I regard the "gender"-harping by men who do not take an active (organized, disciplined, practical) role in the movement to be similar to the "gender"-harping women I have met -- with one big difference, the misandrists know how to get things done and they put their volunteer (or paid) time where their lipsticked mouth is.
Fortunately women are taking an active leadership role in the fathers' right movement and are picking up the slack left by so many male fathers' rights activists who have so often approached activism like a Chinese fire drill exectted by the three stooges. Fathers & Families has several prominent female members. As Fathers & Families expands into a national organization, we should expect women to be some of the most dedicated and competent leaders among us.
We too often forget we are not in rality in a war between women and men; we are ijn a war between sociopathic women (and men) vs.non-sociopathic women (and men).
June 6th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Its not a war between sociopaths and non-sociopaths. Its a war between parasites and hosts... the non-parasites are the neutrals. A woman who does not want to be a parasite will behave like Ms. McDonald. She has additional heart to fight for the hosts. Good on her. There is a woman you would want to be chivalrous towards.. the rest just don't deserve it.
June 6th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
second wives tend to be the brightest bulb around.
June 6th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Second wives are also the most outspoken on men's issues:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/06/13/the_chilling_effect_of_states_divorce_laws/
Of course they have the position of credibility that comes from not being the "bitter divorced guy". I never understood that shaming label. For other public discourse topics such as "Campaing Against Landmines", do we discount somebody's opinion, just because they personally had their legs blown off by a landmine? So it surprises me that men's opinions are sometimes discounted when they speak up on the issue the minute it becomes apparent that the man in question was once divorced. It is a strange double standard.
June 6th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Panjkaj has correctly added that the situation is more complex than sociopath vs non-sociopath. Predators and parasites do indeed find many passive hosts.
"Third wave feminism" correctly observes that many men are willing to accept lying and manipulation and "romance fees" as long as they get their sexual (often only mental thrills)thrills. We see this in so many homicide cases where the female will coax a man into chivalrously performing the hard work. I have collected a number of cases where men have committed murders to "protect" a woman who has made (it turns out) false accusations against the male murder victim.
The "chivalry" angle explains why so many men are willing to turn their backs on other males whose civil rights are violated. Also why should a man who is promiscuous complain that there are lots of women who have burned other men available for casual sexual encounters. She may have kidnapped her former mate's children but, what the hell, if she gets pregnant again one can always turn to "comprehensive reproductive health care" to prevent any unwanted new types from becoming "child support" meal-tickets for the "single mom."
So many men who get burned by parasite women never are willing to admit that they had actually shopped for a mate much like a "john" shops for a hooker -- and only got burned because they got what they paid for.
All this stuff is a reflection of a "Post-Family" ethos.
June 6th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
First I'm please that a guy finds a supportive wife - 1st, 2nd, or 3rd.
Yet I'm astounded that, after experiencing divorce once, also knowing the larger failure rate of the 2nd and 3rd marriage, men decide to marry again.
If you do the math. If a guy owes 20-60% of his check to 1st wife and, then if 2nd wife divorces him, then he owes another 20-60% of the same check to another wife. And after the federal, state, and local government take their taxed share, the guy about 20 cents on the dollar to live on.
$35,000 yearly income
$12,000 yearly tax
$7,500 yearly child support, Insurance other 1st wife
$7,500 yearly child support, Insurance, other 2nd wife
$8,000 yearly or $670 monthly left over for living and entertainment for the guy.
At $50,000 yearly income its not that much better.
This excludes losing children, 1/2 home, car, among other things, again.
I scratch my head saying, "What is that guy thinking?"
June 6th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
The internet is changing a lot of things. One of those is the MRM. There is no question that it has the ability to tie a group of highly motivated people who would not be able to otherwise collaborate.
Women are good at organizing in social networks. That is probably in part why feminism has had so much success while we are still blogging. However men have one ability that women really don't have. That is the ability to raise money.
A modern men's rights movement will probably have more success with a "top down" organizatinal structure vs. a grass roots type of structure. I don't have time to go to meetings or run some type of independent media campaign. And I cannot use my current custody battle as a political field. What I can do is directly support organizations that lobby on my behalf.
June 6th, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Terri,
I understand your fears of marrying again, they are well founded! My husband told me point blank that when he first met me and liked me he would have broken off the budding relationship right then if I hadn't had money and a career. He also said point blank that I would always have to work if we married. After seeing what women are capable of taking away from a man, simply by divorce, I don't blame him one bit.
I beleive strongly in 50/50 custody, with no money changing hands, and I would never go through the family law system. Why should I have the right to deprive our children from having a full relationship with their dad?! It is absolutely mind boggling. And why should he pay me $$$ for this priviledge? Mind boggling. He probably knew it was a safe bet because when I left my previous common-law relationship I left with what I came into it with, even though technically 1/2 the house was mine. (But it was my decision to move into HIS house, why should I get 1/2 of it!).
Divorced men have such hurdles to finding another fulfilling relationship, while divorced women don't have these same concerns. And isn't that what life is all about? Living and loving others and feeling loved? Sad that divorces make many men feel they cannot afford to have the most precious things in life again, because you are right, if 2nd wife feels entitled too, you're are a slave until your dying days.
June 6th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Follow the money. Who makes the most money in a divorce? The lawyers. Who does the judge serve? The lawyers. How do lawyers make money? By promising to obtain everything a woman believes she deserves. How do feminists earn money? By helping out victims of the patriarchy with government money. What does an alienating parent fear? The children might love the other parent more. Lawyers fan the flames and fill their troughs.
June 7th, 2009 at 11:47 am
"Women are good at organizing in social networks. That is probably in part why feminism has had so much success while we are still blogging. However men have one ability that women really don't have. That is the ability to raise money."
JohnBoy --
I don't know about this. Women have raised -- and continue to raise -- a crapton of money for feminist causes. Groups like Emlily's List, NARAL, NOW and so on are lavishly funded, with much of the money coming from individual women, particularly younger, single women. Yes, women collaborate more easily than we do, especially when it comes to male/female issues -- that's the classic "sisterhood" scenario --> something which does not exist when women deal with each other normally, but which comes into play when women are in conflict with men.
And the obstacle that we face, which women did not, is chivalry. Not in the sense of holding open doors and picking up the tab on dinner dates, but in the sense of an overarching social regime which mandates that women be supported and protected, and men not -- men are to fend for themselves. That is the root of chivalry, and it is harshly enforced by men and women alike whenever men even do as much as openly complain about female behavior -- the shaming language comes out almost immediately as the social system of chivalry works to silence that criticism so that women can be supported socially. This, in my opinion, is the main obstacle we face -- we simply need more men who are not going to be fazed by the substantial social shaming that will be spewed in our direction once we start to really challenge the women's groups on these issues politically. We will be called every shaming word under the sun -- cowards, losers, bitter divorced guys, guys who can't gt dates, guys with mommy issues, abuse lobbyists and on and on. We need to develop thick skins for when this kind of invective is thrown at us as we start ot move forward and press for change.
June 7th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
Novaseeker: We're all already pretty used to withstanding shaming language and rank mischaracterization. Many of us have been at it so long our responses are as "rote" as the accusations.
The one constant throughout the whole time?
Feminists have NEVER been able to justify their actions sufficiently.
June 7th, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Questions:
What message has the fathers' movement sent to the publishing industry (and by extention to the mainsteream media) by creating a very modest sales success for the publisher of Baskerville's "Taken Into Custody."
What message would be to same sent if -- out of the tens of millions of fathers, now-grown-up children, sisters, grandmothers and second-wives who have had their lives turned upside-down by the various anti-family and anti-father rackets -- we could convince a mere 100,000 of them to spend about $20 on the book?
June 7th, 2009 at 8:27 pm
Factory:
Devil's advocate response offered. Feminists have successfully justified their actions in that they have created a lot of jobs in the so-called "public sector": prison jobs (to supervise sons of single mothers), endless varieties of social workers (many of whom are "single mothers"), lawyers, incompetent teachers (who promote intensely ant-family messages to kids) and the list goes on.
The point is that this is indeed success in the eyes of policy types. This very real "success" makes union bosses, elected officials and public "servants" incredibly powerful and the lawyers and psychiatrists (see the issue of drugging children for bogus ADD).
Therefore we are going to tear down the "Berlin Wall" between fathers and childen. We cannot ask Big Brother or Big Sister to begin to behave like ethical entities. We have to fight long hard battles and defeat them by artful strategy. We are at war here!
June 7th, 2009 at 8:43 pm
This lady is not the first 'second wife', nor I suspect will she be the last, to point out the opportunities afforded an ex-wife to legally entangle a man in a web of harassment, antagonism and just in general make his life miserable.. courtesy of the divorce industry and its minions.
And as stated in the comments section of the aforementioned article by the discussed second wife... there are organizations working to rectify this.
Fathers 4 Justice (with which I am affiliated) as an example is mounting a national 'Fatherless Day' rally at state capitols across the country on the 19th. All are welcome to participate (check with your local state coordinator or to go to website www . f4j . us and find out where it's being held in your state). The more we show, they sooner they know... so to speak.
Gunner Retired
June 8th, 2009 at 7:29 am
I can completely sympathize with Paulette. I was not interested in taking my ex-husband to the cleaners, either, but that seems to be the "way of the world' for first ex-wives today. My boyfriend is one of them; I am astonished at the amount that the ex-wife ( loved by all the community CPS worker) has wrung out of him. She also plays "the victim" and now that she has cut him out of the children's lives, she is blaming their school failure not on her shoddy parenting, of course, but on their "traumatic" (she made it that way for the drama element) divorce, so called "learning disabilities" and ADHD.
June 8th, 2009 at 7:48 am
My wife is in the same boat. She was actually told she had to take her x for this and that and the other thing, and she simply said no she didn't. Her lawyer told her she had to take child support, she said no she didnt and refused. Her and X made fairly close to the same amount of money at the time.
As I'v posted before, I think the way she handled things is at least partially responsible for her daughter being so incredibly well adjusted to things. Her daughter gets to spend 50% of her time with her Dad and 50% of the time with us. Her grades are great, she is a wonderful little girl. My kids went through text book high conflict issues. Regression, internalising, low self esteem and so on. I did my best to cause as little conflict as possible, but unfortunatly my X was a different kind of woman.
She wanted money, money and more money, and she certainly didnt' want to pay any share of any bill. She also wanted absolute control over the children and refused to even consider allowing me 50% shared custody. She also goes way out of her way to interfear in small ways. Example - Several summers in a row the kids have expressed they want to spend more time with me.. but each summer they end up being put in things that make this impossible due to the distance we live from one another. Little things like that. Very annoying.
June 8th, 2009 at 7:55 am
"wives can help in the father's rights movement because many men have guilt attached to their divorce and guilt over not being with their kids daily (even though not their fault). This guilt transpires into "just give her what she wants" even when it's completely unreasonable."
I give her what she wants not out of guilt, but out of fear. She was the one who got caught with another man. I have nothing to be guilty about. I give into almost all her wishes because if I don't, I'm afraid I will not see my children, or have them turned against me.
June 8th, 2009 at 11:59 am
to Burke:
Believe me, whether or not you give into her wishes, she will try and turn the children against you and try to keep them from seeing you. that's the dirty little secret. The more you give to these parasites, the more they will take AND bash you in the process. It doesn't work; believe me, it didn't work for my boyfriend.
It's best to stand up for you and your parental rights and for any future relationship It's very hard to have a relationship with a person who constantly cowtows to the ex "for the sake of the kids"; you lose respect for him and so do the kids.
The children come away thinking that "daddy drools and mommy rules" then they will model this in their relationships and the host/parasite cycle will continue. just my opinion but i see it all the time.
June 8th, 2009 at 1:38 pm
Yeah, but thus far i get to see my kids every second week-end and on a extra days here and there. I don' want to risk that being messed up, so i just keep quiet for now :).
My situation isn't as bad as other posters here. I KNOW if i challenged anything that would change in a heart beat and I can not afford a lawyer to fight for my rights.
June 8th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
My partner and I have been forced into an emotional and financial "nightmare" from hell, simply because we requested one more night per week with our children. We requested Equal Parenting!
Since then, I have been publicly attacked by both the ex-wife (who then physically removed my step daughter from me) and her current husband, I have been accused of physically abusing our chldren and was forced out of my own home (until CAS investigated) during my partners sanctioned parenting time. Then the first thing CAS said to me was, "This meeting should not be taking place and I'm probably crossing the bounderies by saying this but, that's what happens when you put a Pinto up against a Maverik." making reference to our incompetent lawyer at the time and the ex's lawyer. (our ex's income is double that of my partner's, so she can afford to go on and on and then simply change lawyers when they refuse to comply with her crap...)
My partner has been falsly accused of Cocaine abuse, alcohol abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse... he went for drug testing and guess what, he doesn't drink, do drugs or any of the other crap she has accused him of.
And of course, all of the ex's crap came to us during our time with the children, all the false allegations, false claims to the FRO, excessive telephone calls, forcing the children to spy on us, forcing the children to report back to her after every visit... it just keeps going and going.
I had no idea how rampant parental alienation and hostile aggressive parenting is in our society today and no idea how flawed our family law system is, it's overwhelming to me the scope of injustice towards the non-custodial parent and our innocent children caught in the crossfire of people they love.
We are now self-represented and preparing to return to "FLAW" and I must say, it feels good to have some sense of control back.
I will never stop fighting for our children's Right's or our own human Right to have a life after Divorce.
(As an aside, my last name is MacDonald and not Mc)
June 8th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
My partner and I have been forced into an emotional and financial "nightmare" from hell, simply because we requested one more night per week with our children. We requested Equal Parenting!
Since then, I have been publicly attacked by both the ex-wife (who then physically removed my step daughter from me) and her current husband, I have been accused of physically abusing our children and was forced out of my own home (until CAS investigated) during my partners sanctioned parenting time. Then the first thing CAS said to me was, "This meeting should not be taking place and I'm probably crossing the bounderies by saying this but, that's what happens when you put a Pinto up against a Maverik." making reference to our incompetent lawyer at the time and the ex's lawyer. (our ex's income is double that of my partner's, so she can afford to go on and on and then simply change lawyers when they refuse to comply with her crap...)
My partner has been falsly accused of Cocaine abuse, alcohol abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse... he went for drug testing and guess what, he doesn't drink, do drugs or any of the other crap she has accused him of.
And of course, all of the ex's crap came to us during our time with the children, all the false allegations, false claims to the FRO, excessive telephone calls, forcing the children to spy on us, forcing the children to report back to her after every visit... it just keeps going and going.
I had no idea how rampant parental alienation and hostile aggressive parenting is in our society today and no idea how flawed our family law system is, it's overwhelming to me the scope of injustice towards the non-custodial parent and our innocent children caught in the crossfire of people they love.
We are now self-represented and preparing to return to "FLAW" and I must say, it feels good to have some sense of control back.
I will never stop fighting for our children's Right's or our own human Right to have a life after Divorce.
(As an aside, my last name is MacDonald and not Mc)
June 9th, 2009 at 12:15 am
Pssssst..... most elected officials are lawyers.......they make laws that benefit lawyers.......judges are lawyers.......they make rulings that benefit lawyers.......families die=lawyer's profits......get it? It is not a man against woman issue.
June 9th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Paulette and my wife sound like similar women. My wife is devorced from her first husband and gets nothing in CS, they each have their son half the time and have no anamosity in their relationship. My son's mother is the dirrect opposite of my wife; she's taken me back to court every three years to adjust her CS, I've had to fight for every day with my son and next year will cap off 17 years in SC, courts, false claims and a TON of $ to lawyers - all would be for naught if it weren't for my wife whose been there for me and my/our son. She's enabled me to move on with my life and, finally, get our of the unhealthy trap of self pitty and bitterness towards the mother of my child I'd been stuck in for years.
June 9th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
RE 2nd wife’s
I somewhat tend to agree with the parasite theory above
Reasoning:
Most 2nd wives girl friends ,do not want to help raise a child from another woman in fact they will place children from a previous relationship 2nd class.
Women require there man (IE) significant other to accept children from past relationships.
I’m sure you all have heard this line from a woman
"If you do not want my children then you do not want me"
If men took up that attitude many would never be remarried.
Equality must be finely examined. What would we men choose first our children or some women?
To me it is clear men are more giving keep up the good work Guy's
Sincerely
david & ann williams
June 9th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
My daughter is caught up in a new marriage/hateful ex/step child nightmare.
Far from treating her new stepdaughter as 'second class' she is terrified of the child.
Only 5 years old, and a beautiful little girl - the child is constantly on the phone to her mother with false reports and accusations. "She didn't feed me dinner tonight" "She yelled at me for no reason" "She tried to hit me".
"We had a wonderful afternoon baking cookies together, her mother called and she tearfully told her I didn't feed her dinner last night!"
The Ex wife immediately called my new son in law, screaming and howling in a mad fury, which in turn he was agitated with his new wife.
My daughter now refuses to be alone under any circumstances with the child.
Her husband was suddenly deployed to a very dangerous combat zone, leaving my daughter pregnant with her first child, who will be 9 months old before he returns.
He has pleaded with my daughter to continue his visitation rights with his child this summer while he is deployed. His daughter has been his whole life, he wants his new wife to share that love with him.
She loves her husband dearly, but as I said - is terrified to be alone with the child . She knows the ex wife will have no hesitation to call him at his duty station and do whatever she can to upset him and cause trouble irregardless he is in combat and his life is in danger.
"The horrrible way she speaks to my new husband - I would never allow anyone to speak to him like that, yet all I can do is cringe when she calls".
His ex wife became pregnant when he was last deployed. He endures incredible abuse to keep his little girl in his life.
This is a hateful situation for her to be in. They have the potential for a long lasting loving relationship, but I fear this situation will put it to a severe test.
June 9th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
http://www.henrymakow.com/the_real_patriarchy_is_plutocr.html
Wonderful article, "Sugar Daddies Of Feminism" ought to answer some questions about where women's 'fund raising' is coming from.
June 10th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
As a stepmom with primary custody of two young stepsons, I find Mr Williams comments offensive. Many women take on primary responsibility of their partners children from previous marriages or relationships. To imagine that it is "clear that men are more giving" is ignorant and baseless. In fact, research on blended families shows that in families where the father is custodial, stepmothers generally take on considerably more childrearing responsibilites than do their male counterparts, stepfathers living with custodial mothers. I am familiar with many such women, as well as many noncustodial stepmoms who are working hard to maintain healthy and strong relationships with their partners' children. It is rare that I come across a stepmother who expects her new husband to choose her above his children, just as it is rare to hear of stepfathers asking something similar of their wives.
June 10th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I am married to a wonderful man who is a victim of the system. His ex got custody of the kids and child support because she gave birth to them The judge did not take into account the laundry list of things she had done prior to the separation that would make any logically minded person see that she was not fit to be the custodial parent. She was the mother and that was that. She can do with the CS money what she wants. We pay the vast majority of medical and dental (although she is suppose to pay half of all out of pocket expenses, this has never been the case), insurance, school supplies and all extracurricular expenses. No one checks to see that she is caring for the kids appropriately - which she does not. If my husband were to miss one CS payment he would be in jail or have his name posted in the newspaper for being a dead beat dad. He has done nothing but care for and support his kids. He has always had the children the majority of the time - although this is not the court ordered schedule. She has taken full advantage of his desire to have the kids by leaving them with him any time she wanted to do her own thing-(go to bars, meet men) which has been the majority of the time. Of course she would tell you that she is being the caring mother and allowing him more time with his children. I am tired of hearing about the poor single mom who has to work 2 jobs to support her children. This is not always the case. I do have friends who are single moms and they work their tails off to support and care for their children with no help from the father, but this is not always the case. It is time we hear about the poor single fathers out there who are not only supporting and caring for their children but supporting their dead beat mother ex wives. I am so happy to have found Fathers and Families. Now we know we are not alone in this.
June 14th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Family law is definately not a man against woman, woman against man problem. Also, I might be inclined to say that it is not necessarily a legal system against the people problem. Lawyers do what they do. Create any system where profit is the product of evil and many will step forward to take advantage. It's not just lawyers profiting from the evil of family law. The problem is politicians. The only reason we have politicians and government is to protect the public good. As an example , they manage our police and fire protection and pave our roads. However, they are not supposed to be in our private lives and most people don't want them there. We must force our legislatures to prove what public good is being accomplished by what is going on in family courts. Not the feigned or imagined public good but the real and tangible public good. If they can't and they won't help fix the problem then, we have to get rid of them. Ask any happily married couple where their marriage license is and they may tell you it's tucked away with other important papers in the back of a closet somewhere.However, like Aladdan's lamp, pull it out and start messing with it and what pops out is not a genie but, the devil and all his demons.
June 26th, 2009 at 9:46 am
To every last one of the disgusting lazy pigs out there who are sucking on their ex-husbands teat: You should have gotten one alimony check for one month and that's it. You should have used it to go buy an ounce of self-pride at the corner market, then get your lazy ass out and get a job. Marrying a spiteful hateful sack of white trash shouldn't be an offence punishable by doling out a lifetime of salary. An EX-husband is expected to work to support a woman working a $10/hour part-time job while waving around her master's degree (or in MA while she's perhaps earning more than he)? Men are good enough to pay womens' bills for the rest of their lives, but not good enough to parent their own kids. The courts in this country are thoroughly messed up. Why are men rolling over and allowing themselves to have their lives forever ruined by these robed kangaroos?