No Marriage. No Children. Ever.

[bola]

For your sons and grandsons from Jed H. Abraham, Esq. (USA)

High divorce rates and biased laws have made marriage
a gamble for too many men.

By Jed. H. Abraham, Esq.
Insight Magazine

If you’re like most men, you’re married or you hope to marry some day.
You think you deserve to live happily ever after but, if things don’t work
out that way, you’ll get a civilized divorce and move on. You’ll stay pals
with your ex-wife and you’ll see your kids as often as you want.

You have no idea what you’re getting into.

The odds are 40 to 50 percent that your marriage will end in divorce. The
odds are 70 percent that your divorce will be filed by your wife. The odds
are 80 percent that your wife will get custody of your children — plus
child support, alimony and/or a hefty chunk of your property.

From the moment your wife files for divorce, the state, acting through
the court, will assert authority over everything you own. The court then
can give a major share to your wife by applying the law of
“equitable distribution.”

The law of equitable distribution is based on the “partnership theory
of marriage.” This theory holds that your marriage is a business
partnership. Everything you earned during marriage you earned for the
partnership. Therefore, upon divorce, all your accumulated assets must be
split “equitably” between you and your “partner.”

The theory also holds that if the property your ex is awarded at divorce
doesn’t yield enough to support her at the standard of living you
established during the marriage, then you should “equitably” pay her
the difference in alimony until she becomes self-supporting — in most
states, even if the breakdown of the marriage was her fault.

The partnership theory of marriage doesn’t quite cover everything you
made during marriage: It doesn’t cover your children.

Even though you and your ex were partners in the creation of your
children,
and even though you each contributed “equitably” to their upbringing,
these
considerations will carry little weight in court. Yielding to precedent
and
preconception, the court commonly will decide that it is in the
“best interest” of your children to be in the sole custody of their
mother.

As sole custodian, your ex will acquire primary parental authority to live
with your children and to determine their general development, including
their health care, education and religious training.

You may “visit” with them on scheduled weekends.

After the court awards your ex the sole custody of your children, it will
award you something very special also: the obligation to pay child
support.

Your child-support obligation will not be determined by your children’s
basic needs. The court first will calculate your income, which it then
will proceed to tax at a predetermined “guideline” rate set by law.
The guideline rate will vary according to the number of your children.
It also may vary according to your income level and that of your ex.

At your child-support hearing, you’ll be permitted to introduce evidence
that the guideline rate is too high — that it will generate more money
than
is needed by your children or that it will leave you with too little to
live on. But the law strongly presumes that the guideline rate produces
the correct minimum amount of child support. The burden of proof will be
on you to overcome this presumption. The court won’t reduce your guideline
rate, except in extreme circumstances.


a.. If you are a wage-earner, the child support you owe will be withheld
from your wages and paid directly to your ex without your ever having to
write her a check.

b.. Once in the clutches of the child-support system,
you’ll be systematically shorn of your economic autonomy.

c.. If you lose your job, you must continue to pay the court-ordered
amount. To get relief, you must file a petition with the court. You also
may have to hire a lawyer to argue the petition —which, if unemployed,
you would be hard-pressed to do.

d.. In court, you won’t get complete relief. Initially, the court will
expect you to pay a large part of the ordered amount out of savings. It
will expect you to reduce your own standard of living before it reduces
your child-support obligation. You’ll also have to pay — in full — any
amounts you failed to pay from the day you lost your job until the day
you filed your petition.

e.. If you find a new job which pays less than your old one, the
court needn’t reduce your child-support obligation correspondingly. The
court may suspect that you took the lower-paying job to reduce your
child-support payments. The burden will be on you to prove you didn’t.

f.. If you leave your job to start your own business, and you pay
yourself
a minimal salary until the business prospers, the court needn’t grant you
child-support relief. It may lecture you about “putting your children
first.”

g.. If you remarry and have children with your new wife, the court
needn’t grant you child-support relief. It may lecture you again, this
time about not bringing more children into the world when you already
have children enough to support. And if your new wife works, the court
may look at her income as an indirect source of more child support.

h.. In the meantime, your ex may claim that your children’s needs have
increased significantly, and she’ll seek to increase your payments. You
will have to prove that you can’t afford the increase, and it won’t be
enough to show that your income hasn’t increased significantly. If it has,
your ex needn’t show that the children’s needs have increased
correspondingly.

i.. If your wages are not withheld and you fail to pay your child
support,
the state will garnish your pay, slap liens on your property, intercept
your
tax refunds, report you to credit agencies, suspend your driver’s,
professional and business licenses, hold you in contempt of court, put
your face on a wanted poster, throw you in jail and deny you food stamps.
But if your ex doesn’t spend that very same support on the children, the
state will do … nothing.

j.. Your child-support obligation doesn’t necessarily end when your
children grow up, leave home and become legal adults. In many states,
you may be ordered to contribute to their college tuition, room and board
and their travel expenses, even though married parents can’t be ordered
to pay for these things.

You also may owe your ex one further payment: part or all of her
“reasonable” attorney’s fees.

The court will try to eliminate any financial advantage you have in
selecting
a lawyer. It will not make her fritter away her equitable share of your
property on something so inequitable as her attorney’s fees. It will make
you fritter away your share. Equitable distribution, alimony and child-
support law produce a net transfer of assets from you to your ex.
Child-custody law produces a net transfer of custody from you to your ex.

From an economic point of view, divorce is a wealth-redistribution racket
that forces fathers to make payments to mothers. From a social point of
view, it is a family resocialization scheme that turns mothers into
state-sponsored single parents and fathers into infrequent visitors of
their estranged children.

When the economic and the social aspects of divorce law are netted,
fathers
are two-time losers. They must pay for the maintenance of women to whom
they
no longer are married and for the support of children to whom they no
longer
are full-time parents — all the while having to carry the costs of their
own
new households.

This skewed regime spawns strong reactionary forces. The strife which the
divorce should have ended indeed has only just begun. Your ex will warm to
calling all the shots. She may cancel your visitation now and then. If she
’
s
truly mean-spirited, she’ll go much further. Under the cover of her court-

appointed role as sole custodian, she’ll systematically sever your
relationship with the children: she’ll badmouth you to them; she’ll
schedule their extracurricular activities during your visitation time;
she even may accuse you of domestic violence and child abuse.

The authorities will act quickly to “protect” your children from you:
They’ll curtail your visitation during their investigation, you’ll be
restricted to being with your children only in the presence of a
supervisor, and you’ll be ordered to pay the supervisor’s fees.

In the end, your children themselves will refuse to spend any time
with you. Their brainwashing will be complete and irreversible.
They will be alienated from you — forever.

More efficiently, your ex may simply move with the children to a
distant community, with the law’s acquiescence.

As the struggle wears on, your frustrations will deepen. You’ll pass
up overtime work rather than earn extra income for your ex. You’ll be
tempted to “do a fade”: to flee the jurisdiction and disappear.

Your health will deteriorate. Your sleep will be disturbed. You’ll
feel fatigued and distracted. You’ll sweat a lot. You’ll develop
elusive internal pain. The tests will rule out a tumor. The pills
will help a little, but the pain won’t go away.

While the law pits your ex against you, its ultimate victims will be
your children. Your sons will be battered by the absence of their most
important role model. Your daughters will be gutted by the loss of their
primary standard for opposite-sex comportment. They’ll seek compensation
elsewhere — in aggressive, seductive or rebellious behavior. They’ll
develop deep-seated psychological problems. They’ll drop out of school,
lose their jobs and get into trouble with the police.

You’ll know no peace for a generation.

The odds are high that your marriage will end in divorce. The odds are
daunting that your divorce will disrupt your well-being. You’ll lose
your children and your property. You’ll pay alimony, child support
and attorney’s fees. You’ll be subject to state scrutiny over employment
and spending decisions. You’ll have chronic health problems. You’ll watch
helplessly as your children carry deep emotional scars into adulthood.

The odds are it doesn’t pay for you to marry and have kids.

And the odds are that you will.

[Alexandra]

I think a lot of these "dead-beat dads" are really dead-BROKE dads! I bet a lot of times it's not that they won't pay it, it's that they CAN'T.

Try to marry a more "traditional" woman if you wish to marry. Hate to say this, but a pre-nuptial agreement may be in order as well.

[Percy]

"High divorce rates and biased laws have made marriage a gamble for too many men."

Gamble? Let's look at that.

Russian Roulette at leasts takes you out of life altogether if you lose and there is a one in six chance of that. Marriage leaves you a life, but one of misery, poverty and heartache; a life which often ends in suicide. And it is a one in TWO chance.

What sort of people gamble? If the odds are pretty even then the risk undertaken by a real gambler is usually no more than a few bucks one way or another. Little gain, little loss. Few would wager thousands on a 50:50 chance unless they had an awful of of money to spare or were desperate.

The gains of a 'win' have to be substantial to balance the likelihood of immense loss. What does marriage bring that is so valuable? Some would argue that the benefits of a marriage are immense. It is a 'future', children, happiness. I would, personally. But to gamble on it? With a 50:50 chance of penury and heartbreak? Continuing? For life? A ruined future.

It isn't something to be gambled.

Then there are the ignorant; the fools who are soon parted from their money. If it is ten bucks wagered, no great harm. But we are talking of hundreds of thousands of bucks here. Futures.

Jed. H. Abraham, Esq. does us - and the fools, the ignorant - a service by showing them the extent of their likely loss if they take such a gamble.

Women by the millions who ask 'where have all the good men gone?' may well be advised to reflect that the good men have all wandered out of the gaming room and are sitting in the bar, and the pool, and the restaurant, or left to go bike riding in the hills or sailing the seas, anywhere but the gaming table. They know that the tables are rigged. They know that the casino is run by the Women's Mafia. They know that the chance of winning is only 50;50 and even the winners are fleeced on the way out, mugged by the taxman, the retail mall-owners, the in-laws and a host of others.

And only the pig ignorant thickos are sitting there waiting for her to come and find them, clutching their hopes and ten bucks.

Enjoy, ladies.

[Billy]

Ball and chain anyone? Those young naive guys say it wont happen to me for sweetcheeks is too good to me.
You never really know someone til you divorce them or after the wedding cake. I'm telling you they put something extra in those cakes.

pre-nuptial agreement

Pre-nups mean nothing after children come into the picture.

[Alexandra]

Originally Posted by Billy

Pre-nups mean nothing after children come into the picture.

Never had such an agreement with my husband...we've been married 14 years.

You'd think wedding vows would have been enough. Guess not.

[AKUUS]

While I agree with the frustrations expressed in the article and see the suicide mission that marriage has become for most Western men, I still have to believe that at some point I will find someone with whom I can make it work some way. Finding a spouse and having kids is just a basic part of human life for most people. I can't not have that in my life just because of a bunch of feminists and manginas who are basically waging a genocidal war.

[Percy]

While I agree with the frustrations expressed in the article and see the suicide mission that marriage has become for most Western men, I still have to believe that at some point I will find someone with whom I can make it work some way. Finding a spouse and having kids is just a basic part of human life for most people. I can't not have that in my life just because of a bunch of feminists and manginas who are basically waging a genocidal war.

This is Heartfelt. It is uncontestable.

I agree, as most men and women are likely to agree.

"Finding a spouse and having kids is just a basic part of human life for most people"

And what do we do?

We throw caution to the wind. Our legitimate and reasonable and natural wants and desires are blown into the wind.

Ours is the Hurricane, like it or not.

So do we chase the fury or batten down until it passes?

[Wallet]

If I had my life to live over I would never make the mistake of getting married again. It would help if things were fairer. She took 'it all' plus the kids I have not seen in years. Neither have my parents.

Maybe 3 times in the last 7 years I have seen them. She even called the cops on me once for giving them a ride home from school on a rainy day, just after we split, we used to live near by then she moved and basically she has kept them away from me and blah blah I know I have alleged rights but in reality the courts do not care and I have nothing left to even afford to take her to court and what for? Get a tongue lashing from the judge that I am such a horrible father again because I am not an endless supply of cash?

She won't work but spends her days on Facebook and neopets. Kids are 14 and 12 yet she would rather nail me for every little thing and expense than get off her ass to help herself and the kids. But it is all about her. No excuse not to even get a part time job with kids 12 & 14.

I talk to different younger guys that are just out of high school and working at a fast food joint and they think I am nuts when I say do not get married, do not have kids as you will regret it. But they just laugh and think with their 'dink' at that age.....

I new my relationship was over literally hours after the wedding, she became a lazy loveless slob once she had that piece of paper. It was like that piece of paper caused a switch in her brain to engage and change but looking back I think it was all part of her manipulative plan for financial security without having to get of her ever growing ass size and get a job.

Sorry for babbling but if you are thinking that marriage is great like you see on TV then think again...

[Marx]

Originally Posted by Alexandra

You'd think wedding vows would have been enough. Guess not.

You'd think yeah...

[AKUUS]

Originally Posted by Wallet

If I had my life to live over I would never make the mistake of getting married again...Sorry for babbling but if you are thinking that marriage is great like you see on TV then think again...

Wallet, I'm sorry to hear about your horrible situation. I'm sure it's not atypical. Don't feel bad about sharing. That's one of the reasons we're here. I can't imagine what it would be like to not be able to see your own kids.