We all have heard (and some have experienced) the nightmares from modern family court. Women are given the role of mother, and men are given the role of financial support. This means she gets the children, the house and he gets the bill. As divorce becomes more prevalent, men are steering clear of this raw deal. Even in cases where joint custody is allowed, there are issues with juggling the kids and not being able to move to start a new life. Nobody wants to have that sort of risk. I steered clear of it by going into the most conservative church I could, and within it finding the most traditional woman I could find. The route I took worked (so far), but it seems like a big price to pay for getting a fair shake at life and having a decent family. Few guys would be willing to take those steps. If trends keep going, marriage will become an anomaly, rather than the expected course of action.
Divorce law needs to be changed. As it stands, men carry the risks of a relationship, women get the rewards. If I were king, here are some changes I would make to divorce law.
Property Division
Property acquired prior to marriage remains completely in the ownership of the original party. Wealth accumulated during the marriage gets split in two. For miscellaneous items contested over acquired during the marriage, auction those items with a neutral arbiter. Items brought in from before the marriage or gifted by one set of in-laws go to that person.For instance, when I married, I had 2,000 savings, 15,000 college debt, and a 1000 pickup. Total would be (-12000). My wife would had a 1000 pickup, 5000 savings and no debt. She had 18k more than me. During our 16 years, we acquired 92,000 paid off my college debt and bought a house for 150k. Sell the house at fair market value and pay off the mortgage would bring about 100k. (It would not matter if she decides to buy the house from the estate, she would be refinancing and making payments to the bank). Total assets would be 192k. Split that and add or subtract half the difference in the original amount. I would get 96k-9k = 87k, she would get 96k+9k = 105k. I inherited my grandpa's .308, so I get to keep that. Her grandpa gave me a cool watch, but since it was her grandpa, she keeps it. We bought a lawnmower, so that goes on the auction block. If she out bids me for $100, she keeps the lawnmower, but instead of her getting 105k, she gets 104,950. and I get 87,050. She in effect, bought my half of the lawnmower from me.
Child Division
Kids need a father and a mother. Breaking them up is tough on them. Moving them around is tough on them. Best compromise considering the circumstances would be to grant full custody for one year starting August 1 (start of school year) to one parent, then to the other parent and alternate years. If one party files for divorce, let the other party choose whether or not to take custody the first year (Being the decision was sprung on them involuntarily).Child Support
Because child custody is alternated, money transfer for child support and alimony will end. Once assets are split up, there would be no reason to contact the ex, other than the yearly plane ride to transfer the kids. Kids cost money, but that money can be saved during the year the parent does not have custody. Giving the parent who did not file the choice, they can make the choice based on whether they have the finances to support the children or not.Conclusion
Removing the pain from the woman in divorce law has made divorce far more common, and creates more pain, not only to the men, but to the children as well. Reversing it would just create a situation where more men would file. Both parties need to share financial responsibilty, and the custody.Think of the children.
Comments
Post a Comment