Family Law

This is My Other Account asked:


wee willy: i would suggest that you research topics before you make yourself look foolish

qwerty asked:


thanks for the responses

Rebel Yell asked:


It means to split any property acquired during marriage 50/50. The law These laws were created to attempt fairness to those who financially earned a property and to those who maintained the property. ALL LAWS IN ALL AREAS CONTAIN LOOPHOLES FOR THE WRETCHED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE

Rich people pay others to do all that (maintenance)……so why are FEMINISTS blamed for all the crapola that happens in family law?
Kris. you speak mostly of wealthy couples and gold digging whores. WHAT ABOUT THE MAJORITY?! Millions of housewives still exsist and still deserve what ever effort they put into a home…no matter who actually paid for it. .
.
.How do a few laws ensure justice for all?

Eoghan. asked:


More specifically, family law.
Ill give the obstruction of parental alienation as an example.
Celtish got some info in that?
Well cristina it would be more constructive if we didnt have that us against them mentality and an inclusive group that actually stood for eqality instead of just pretending to.
Setting men and women up as political opponants that have to fight amongst themselves to try to maintain equality is a huge waste of resourses when we could have an inclusive people movement instead.

Raphy asked:


During proceedings concerning child support and custody situations is there ever an option of simply splitting custody jointly and completely absolving either party of child support payment?

I’m not familiar with family law at all- have no idea what happens in those sessions but I’m curious because i don’t think I’ve ever heard of situations where both parents simply split custody (half the time with papa and the other half with mama) and therefore ruling that neither party should pay child support.

And wouldn’t this make more sense than mandatory child support payments?- I don’t know the answer to this- hence the asking of the question
Oh and this question is meant to imply even if there is a difference in income
thanks Joe but I meant as a primary option if feasable (they live close enough to make it work for example) even if one party would rather take the money

Rio Madeira asked:


How would you propose to put an end to that sort of treatment? (Not just for you, but for men in general.)

Twilight asked:


Assuming women do get the lions share of custody battles.

A number of questions have been posted suggesting MRAs believe feminists are partly to blame for this, but my impression is that custody cases are usually determined by Traditionalist Sexist Men - in the family court system who maintain the Traditionalist belief that children should be raised by their mothers.

When MRAs put the blame at Feminisms door, are they simply barking up the wrong tree?

Can somebody set the record straight?

! Answers asked:


Also for women who have denied access to the father to his children. What would you tell your son that had this happen to him, and how would you comfort him, if infact you did it to his father
edit
Ashleigh
That is the worst feminist fob off I have ever seen. You could not have tried any less.
edit
666666z
No it means mothers hate their sons for someones son having to resort to stealing the children to be a part of their life.