Men - a meal ticket for life?

[marantha]

Reading the amount of abuse the poster Washwithcare has received here over the past few days for suggesting that her husband does not offer more money to his ex-partner (not NOT married, no contract signed) and her (not biologically HIS) children it strikes me that feminism doesn't really exist- or only exists when it suits women.
Women are still baby machines that try to get as much money off a man as they can, when the chips are down.
AIBU?

Yeah that's exactly what marriage is - a legal contract because you don't have to marry to be in love and you don't have to be in love to be married!

x-posts with BonsoirAnna

"Yeah that's exactly what marriage is - a legal contract because you don't have to marry to be in love and you don't have to be in love to be married! "

In that case - you can keep it!!

'so i just dont understand why anyone would want money from an ex for themselves (not speaking kids here - kids need shoes ect) '

This would be my sit rather than general, but as my ability to earn would be entirely curtailed by our children I would think I was entitled to a bit extra (if hetrewere any ,doubtful) tbh. I am of coursemarried with kids but notbeery sit 1+1=2 is it? Dh would still be free togoearn and doa s he wishes, whilst I would still be a FT carer.

Ohmy ticket isalrgely illegible sorry eyes v v tired now.

ticket freudian slip pmsl

post

marantha

I'm sure I recognise that posting style.

You big old troll you!

Have a

I'd love to emotionally invest in all this, but it's all getting a bit predictable.

Peachy - the Family Courts would take this in to account. They are interested in the ability of the wife/husband to support themselves independently after the divorce. Your FT caring duties would preclude this. A judge would (should) therefore consent for you to receive a maximum spousal maintenence award.

Oh and RE the contributing bit

DH is setting upa business whilststudying,wereapvey ittleginancialreward ATM but will when he gets the licenses to do the extra bits (one a year for next three summers).

given that we have 4 kids, two of whom get DLA for their care needs, i think it can bresafely assumed that DH only gets to spend allhis evenings etc on the PC slogging because I take over a lot of work.

Should he leave me in 2 years time,just before he grads, why the hell should only he get reward for that? I've worked at least as hard to enable him, after all.

Combined with the ongoing caring responsibilities I dothink I would be entitled to a bit for me, absolutely.

You don't need to emotionally invest in this, crunch.

It is a topic that people should think about a lot more however.

I do think it is great that my needs would be coverd

But paint an alternative pic- say we'd ahd the child and I had no intention of leaving wotrk and was happy toself fund (as indeed I was) but a child born into this arrivedor became disabled; why then shouldn't father be in some way liable equally given that the only causeof this was a child equally his reposnsibility?

Statistically,marriageswhere there is a disabled child are v v likely to fail; we knowthat. So why is it OK that a aprent could technically say 'fuck this,this sin'twhat I wanted, here'sa few quid for the baby and I am off'-leaving Mum option free (usually mum, anyway)

caramel, I licked it off Sorry about that.

I was only replying to the OP, if he's the troll I think he is he's never worth responding to as he simply increases the level of antagonism as the discussion goes on. It's quite pointless.

I wasn't referring to any discussion that may have developed despite the OP

But Peachy you are married, you have explicitly declared your husband and yourself to be a team, if your husband decides to break the promise he made to you, he should be accountable to it and vice versa.

The difference between cohabitees and the married is that they have not made such a declaration therefore it is not possible for a third party to know what goes on in their private life- it's not out of viciousness I say this but out of simple reason.

If a married couple who declared that they were "as one" decide to split then THEY should most definitely be asked, "Why?" and recompense if necessary. Just like a person who broke a business contract would be expected to answer for their actions.

RIght I am but I can see many people whoa re not

And in fact I wasn't married when ds1 was born- so the very samereason I cannot work was present then.

luckily my DH ahd the guts to stick with us (and I have repaid this in full I promise through his illnesses( but I think the laws should provide maintenance for parent carers in the advent of a split over and above basic cohabitation laws (or lack thereof)

There is many a man (or indeed woman) that would cancel planned nuptials on the basis of escaping a disability sadly,that sort of scenario is devastatingly common.

Peachy I agree that that is very sad that people would cancel nuptials on these grounds.

But I also feel that if two people were devoted to their disabled child they'd most likely be married anyway- precisely to avoid any confusion if one of them were to die unexpectedly and so on.

Or if not married at child's birth, get married soon afterwards.

Hoew cop,ewewerelessdevoted before ds1'sbirth than afterwards at 3 months,when we did marry in along booked ceremony weweresaving for,then? Our choice towait and save I now but no reflection of devotion level.

Anyway the whole point iis that sadly there are people out there who are not devoted to their disabled child`(dure toembarassment or whatever) who would be to another child. That's a simple if awful fact of life.

Sorry (youn won't know but I have eyesight probs)

that should be

Hoew cop,ewewerelessdevoted

how come we were less devoted

marantha, this topic seems to make you quite angry... why not post on another thread on a different topic and take a break?

It's just that I have never seen you on a thread which wasn't discussing marriage/co-habitation. Branch out.

That's just not true- I started an insomniac/sleep thread and a troll thread but nobody much responded.

I plan to go to the recipe section right now and start a thread entitled: "101 ways with overripe bananas". I am not a one-trick pony!

I look forward to it

OOH mash with crushed hazelnuts and a bit of cinnamon, allspice, tbsp of dessictaed coconut and molasses,good shake of both light and dark brown sugars, 200g each of rye, white and wholemealflour, knob of butter, 260ml water, 7g yeast and bung in breadmaker on wholewheat progrramee(or amke as per normal)

Yumfor brekky and solid ona cold day

So, what if the woman earns more than the man? What if the man was a SAHD, does that mean she has to keep HIM??

Everything has to be equally reversible for sure,only way.

peachy that's an idea to use up the 10 blackened bananas I've got lurking in the kitchen.

Anyway, irresponsible person that I am, I am about to abandon my "baby" (the thread I started) and p**s off down the pub.
Sorry ladies, I am boring myself now (and that's never good).