Divorce ruling - don't stop...

[[TW]Fox]

White knighting of the highest order, well done.

Seriously?

“White Knight” (also known as “Internet White Knight”) is a pejorative term used to describe men who defend women on the Internet with the assumption that they are looking for a romantic reward in return.

Amazing, I look forward to the offers. Not entirely sure who it is that might offer that, though, you know, given the completely generic nature of the thread and lack of any actual specific women.

But in the "real world" I've seen plenty of relationships like this. True, most of them haven't tied the knot. Most of them live together for a few years, have a kid or two, then separate.

Yea, and good luck getting the sort of settlement we are discussing after a dysfunctional 2 year marriage.

Perhaps you only know people with functional and equal marriages, but in the real world those aren't the only kind.

I believe we are talking about 'divorce' in this thread, which last time I checked, was the polar opposite of a functional marriage. I am attempting to explain why the law is as it is in these cases.

 

[trilobite]

When I was starting out I did a lot of family work, and although I hated it I was surprised at how different the reality was from the assumptions I had made.

The Courts in most cases have a really difficult job trying to divide assets, one home is far cheaper to run than two, so no one comes out as well off as they went in. The first priority is housing the kids, and if possible a house/money to buy a house will go to the resident parent. Often this is on terms until the eldest child is 18, or remarriage/co-habitation, (as a parent this seems entirley reasonable).

The next principle to remeber is that the courts are trying to achieve a "clean break", so if there is sufficient then there is no need for ongoing maintainance for the other party. There is rarely if ever an expectation that future earnings will be divisible, and even if there was should those earnings decrease there is always the option to return to court, (not possible when there is a clean break...except as in these cases where there has been fraud, and in these cases a criminal attempt to pervert the course of justice).

However assets earned during the marriage are assets in the divorce, so share options or pensions can be considered. As in this case if and when he sells his shares, no doubt at the time he thinks is in his best financial interests, she will receive 30%. It is not as if he has been ordered to sell them at a sub optimal time just so she can have more cash.

30% not 50% because there is no "law" that says it should be a 50/50 split. In low assest cases it is oiften weighted much more heavily in one persons favour, and in big money cases it tends to go the other way.

In short marriages, where there are no children the "goldigger" gets a few quid, and told she can keep her diamond earrings, she does not get a mahoosive payout.

Remember most judges are men, and not rampant feminists. They seek to do what is fair to all. Perhaps they having spent many tears doing a stressful job they value the input a wife/mother can have in a family.
I could not do my job without my wife, (who gave up a well paid job to look after our kids.) By the time the youngest is at school she will look to go back to work. Not doing what she was, her qualifications will have expired by then, so as something less well paid, and more child friendly.
Yes that allows me to "bring home the bacon", and yes she probably has more leisure time than before. Consequently we have a happier marriage, less stress, and a better overall lifestyle, despite a significant cut in income. Alternitively we could have both carried on working had th ekids in nursery full time/hired a nanny etc, but I don't want that for my family. If she hadn't married me, hadn't taken time out to have kids, who knows she might have ended up as a judge, she certainly had the brains and the work ethic, as it is I value her contributions equally to my own. Should the worst happen I would want her to be provided for, our children to be provided for, and her not to be penalised for giving 10 years of her life over to support me, which in turn enables me to support her and the kids.

Some people on here clearly don't realise what marriage is about.

 

[ICDP]

What if you get married as a pauper, work hard and get rich, wife contributes nothing to the hard work aspect of getting rich, does she still get the full payout even though she contributed nothing to the wealth, and also didn't technically marry into it?

The wife would be entitled to a fair percentage yes. All a partner in a marriage has to do is enable the other partner to devote more of their time to earn money. The most obvious scenario was pointed out above. When a married couple have kids it is almost always the wife who gives up her work, or a large portion of it (eg goes part time). As a consequence her income is lower, as is her potential for promotion due to the fact that part time workers rarely (if ever) get promoted.

There is a fairly common misconception usually among males ironically, that the gender pay gap is about how a woman earns less for doing the same job as a male. In general males and females earn roughly the same salary in like for like scenarios/jobs. The gender pay gap is a much larger issue, where due to cultural factors such as women being the ones who automatically must go part time, or quit their jobs to look after the kids. It then follows that when the kids get older, a woman who has not worked for 5-16+years will find it extremely difficult to get well paid skilled work. So even when a "housewife" does eventually start work again, she does so at the bottom of the career ladder, or even in unskilled labour. This does not generally affect the male's potential earnings as he almost always continues along his chosen full-time career path, along with potential for promotion. This is a contributing factor towards why the average (overall) earnings for the female part of the population is lower than the males, aka the gender pay gap.

Look at the big picture guys. Some of you (myself included) are married, or in a relationship with kid(s). Is it your wife who went part time or even quit their jobs? Mine did, even though I did offer to go part-time myself so she could pursue her nursing career. Now it could be argued that a lot of this cultural problem is because women do tend to be more predisposed to want to take time off work to look after the kid(s). Just pointing out that it is unfortunately the accepted norm and most males are not doing enough to eradicate this cultural "norm". For better or for worse (sorry for the pun) it does affect how much a woman, and by extension the male in the relationship earns.

It also more often than not explains why in divorce settlements, it almost always looks like the poor hard working male is being shafted by the lazy, scrounging stay at home woman who contributed nothing. When in matter of fact the woman has most likely given up her career to look after the man, the kids and the family home. This is a massive sacrifice that directly affects the males career prospects and earnings. It should not be ignored when looking at a lot of divorce settlements from a males perspective.

 

[UTmaniac]

Good to see these test cases win, in that their ex-husbands lied to court about their true wealth at the time of the divorce.

 

[fendi]

isn't he worth 600 million. getting only 10 million because he chose to lie seems a little cheeky. i think closer to 200 would have been fair.

 

[Tosno]

The gender pay gap is a much larger issue, where due to cultural factors such as women being the ones who automatically must go part time, or quit their jobs to look after the kids.

Now it could be argued that a lot of this cultural problem is because women do tend to be more predisposed to want to take time off work to look after the kid(s). Just pointing out that it is unfortunately the accepted norm and most males are not doing enough to eradicate this cultural "norm". For better or for worse (sorry for the pun) it does affect how much a woman, and by extension the male in the relationship earns.

Cultural Marxism aside... There is a biological reason women go part time... Breast feeding. Breast is best and men can't give what is best for the child 12-24 months.

 

[ICDP]

Cultural Marxism aside... There is a biological reason women go part time... Breast feeding. Breast is best and men can't give what is best for the child 12-24 months.

As you stated most women will do breast feeding for a year or so at most and in many cases stop breastfeeding long before they return to work after maternity leave. Up until our son was around 9 months old we had entire shelves of the fridge taken up with expressed milk. You also neglect to consider that if a woman does not breast feed or express, she will typically stop producing milk and return to normal non-lactating hormonal levels within a few weeks. The child can easily be fed formula milk, either exclusively or as a supplement to breast feeding. While breast is indeed best it is not mandatory and does not explain why women, in a lot of cases are expected to stay part-time or become "housewives" until the kids go to school or even move out.

Sorry but we can't use the "I'm a man, I can't breastfeed luv" defence. Certainly not for 5-16+ years... "here mum are you lactating, I'm feeling a tad thirsty".

 

[Tosno]

Entire shelves of the fridge taken up by expressed milk, didn't he like the bonding with his mother when breast feeding or vice versa? Formula is not best, breast is best. Breast > mixed > formula.

Nice straw man about 5-16+ years when I said 12-24 months... and men cannot breast feed, men cannot give the best.

 

[Tunney]

There is no misogyny on this forum. I would know if I saw it.

 

[Tunney]

Cultural Marxism aside... There is a biological reason women go part time... Breast feeding. Breast is best and men can't give what is best for the child 12-24 months.

It rhymes so it must be true!

 

[ICDP]

Entire shelves of the fridge taken up by expressed milk, didn't he like the bonding with his mother when breast feeding or vice versa? Formula is not best, breast is best. Breast > mixed > formula.

Nice straw man about 5-16+ years when I said 12-24 months... and men cannot breast feed, men cannot give the best.

My first sentence acknowledged your 12-24 months claim (year or so). It just doesn't refute the fact that my post (which you did respond to) was referring to the UK cultural "norm" that women in a marriage or relationship involving kids, are generally expected to go part-time, or even quit work entirely for anything from birth right up to until the kids go to school or even move out.

Breast might be best but it is not a valid explanation as to why this cultural "norm" still prevails.

P.S. Only a man would claim the reason women are expected to go part-time when they have kids is because they have breasts. The irony meter is flying off the scale

 

[Tosno]

It rhymes so it must be true!

It’s babies and mummies.
Holding and rocking and baby talking.
It’s supply and demand and tiny hands.
Eating, drinking and sitting thinking.
It’s a bond that’s strong, secure, life-long.
It’s babe’s perfect meal…the real deal.
There to share, it’s beyond compare.
It’s boobs that leak and nursing top chic.
Squishy embraces and milk-drunk faces.
Breath so sweet and playing with feet.
It’s stressing and guessing and hand expressing,
Tummy squeezing, pumping and freezing.
Delicious and free, it’s cold cups of tea.
It’s what babies desire, it doesn’t expire.
Never hot nor cold, beats anything sold.
It’s mustard poos and permanent up-dos.
Pyjamas, spit-ups, burps and hiccups.
Perfecting latches and tell-tale wet patches.
It’s gazing into eyes, lows and highs.
Peaceful vibes and switching sides
It’s cluster feeds and twiddle beads.
A learning curve and holding your nerve.
It’s comfort, cuddles and sleepy snuggles.
The oldest home cure, sweet and pure.
It’s feeding all hours and wishing for showers.
It’s hitting your stride and filling with pride.
Boobies, bubbies, it’s the warm and fuzzies.
Protection, perfection, two-way affection.
It’s your tribe, troop, your support group.
It’s the love that flows, sprays and grows.
It’s booboos, babaas, num nums and ning
Right now it’s our everything.

 

[ICDP]

It’s babies and mummies...snip

That's it ladies, you must give up your careers because this rhyme proves that a child needs their mum. You are denying your child a natural motherly love because you decided to work and have a career.

Obviously it's absolutely impossible to love your child and be a good mother unless you are with them every second of every day.

Breast is best, remember that ladies.

 

[Tosno]

Much truth is said in jest, of course you are denying your baby a natural motherly love if you are chained to the work desk (often losing money) and not breast feeding/bonding with your baby. But apparently a stranger at the day orphanage feeding your baby from a plastic bottle with man made chemicals is just as good as mummies natural milk, pity it doesn't rhyme... or maybe so cold and depressing no one wants to make a ryhme about it. Poor babies knowing toska so soon.

 

[Randomface74]

y u no prenup

 

[FoxEye]

y u no prenup

Not legally binding in this country anyhow.

 

[Randomface74]

fo real? that's wack yo

 

[lafemmefatale]

It’s babies and mummies.
Holding and rocking and baby talking.
It’s supply and demand and tiny hands.
Eating, drinking and sitting thinking.
It’s a bond that’s strong, secure, life-long.
It’s babe’s perfect meal…the real deal.
There to share, it’s beyond compare.
It’s boobs that leak and nursing top chic.
Squishy embraces and milk-drunk faces.
Breath so sweet and playing with feet.
It’s stressing and guessing and hand expressing,
Tummy squeezing, pumping and freezing.
Delicious and free, it’s cold cups of tea.
It’s what babies desire, it doesn’t expire.
Never hot nor cold, beats anything sold.
It’s mustard poos and permanent up-dos.
Pyjamas, spit-ups, burps and hiccups.
Perfecting latches and tell-tale wet patches.
It’s gazing into eyes, lows and highs.
Peaceful vibes and switching sides
It’s cluster feeds and twiddle beads.
A learning curve and holding your nerve.
It’s comfort, cuddles and sleepy snuggles.
The oldest home cure, sweet and pure.
It’s feeding all hours and wishing for showers.
It’s hitting your stride and filling with pride.
Boobies, bubbies, it’s the warm and fuzzies.
Protection, perfection, two-way affection.
It’s your tribe, troop, your support group.
It’s the love that flows, sprays and grows.
It’s booboos, babaas, num nums and ning
Right now it’s our everything.

What in the holy **** is that load of old guff? ^^ Did you just make that up on the spot?

 

[dowie]

Not legally binding in this country anyhow.

not true any more:

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2010/oct/20/prenuptial-agreement-enforced-uk-law

Prenuptial agreements have been recognised as enforceable under British divorce law for the first time, in a supreme court ruling today.

Judges found in favour of the 40-year-old German heiress Katrin Radmacher, who had sought to protect her £106m fortune in the eventuality of a marriage breakdown.

Radmacher and her French ex-husband, Nicolas Granatino, 38, a former investment banker, had signed a prenuptial agreement before their wedding in London in 1998. The agreement stipulated that neither party would benefit financially if the marriage ended.

By ruling that such contracts are legally binding, the supreme court has altered the landscape of divorce settlements. It is likely to be a severe blow to the UK's reputation as the "divorce capital of Europe".

 

[dowie]

frankly if millions are at stake then it would be silly not to enter into a reasonable and fair prenup