</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Jarod_Wynde:
<strong> Irreconcilable Differences:
This is just stupid. It's a cop-out designed for people who would rather break their loving spouse to pieces instead of put forth some effort in a marriage.
I don't believe in divorcing for this reason. Anything can be worked out, or worked around, or fixed with the proper ammount of resloute, or perseverance.
This excuse for divorce is cruel and unusual. Why was this ever accepted into law as reasonable grounds for divorce?

Incompatibility:
Here's another stupid reason for divorce.
The idea that a marriage should be dissolved because one person can't cope with, or grow accustomed to, certain small behaviours or nuances of thier spouse... I hate it. I hate it like I hate hell.
The really troubling thing about this excuse is how many people claim this in regards to sexual issues.
He wants it too much... she doesn't want it enough... then, bam! Divorce.
Hell... I've got a much higher libido than my wife does. I'm not about to haul off and go through a divorce because of it.
I'd rather get used to the idea, and try to work on other things.
But, 'Incompatibility' goes so much further, and gets even more rediculous.
I'm not gonna go into it, because it would take too long. I'm tired.

Anyways... just had to vent a little.
I'm still trying to work things out. I won't be signing any divorce papers so long as she's being beligerant about everything.
All I asked for was another chance. One minute, she's gonna let me try, the next... she's not. Both of us are so back-and-forth on things. It's frustrating. This whole thing is so unstable, and fragile. I wish there was an easy way to get through this. Maybe there is. Maybe I've already got the answer in front of me, and I just need to find it, and use it. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Okay, usually I'm the one who goes bonkers when someone dismisses another person's reasoning as "just semantics". In this case, though, I think you guys are getting hung up on semantics because it makes a great defense against facing a painful truth-your wife can't stand to be around you any more. It hurts when someone you love feels that way about you, and the hurt leads to anger and despair. Displacing that anger onto lawyers or legislatures or mere words does not really help you to cope with it.

Being rejected sucks. Being rejected in a way that makes it clear that if the rejector were an animal, she'd be chewing a paw off right about now to get away from you sucks even more. No one expects you guys to like it. Anger is an understandable response in your situation, even a necessary one. Displaced anger can come back to bite you, though, and at the very least, is harder to face and overcome.

jarod, it is difficult to "know" the other side when they are not prsent to speak for themself...and it is a given folks misrepresent the facts, sometimes a little, oftentimes a lot...and people, all of us, are biased to one degree or another. My participation was not to "choose" a side, but to comment on the topic you raised, and a bit on your tone...which is very aggressive...whether that is significant or not, I have no way of knowing, but it is not a good thing regardless.

I can tell you this, you only have control over yourself, so be the best jarod you can be.....you have absolutely no control, nor should you, over your wife, she can and should do whatever she thinks best..for her, as you do for you. If she is unstable, and/or incompetent then go to court, have her declared such, and terminate her parental rights, if you can't do that then you must live with her choices, and not respond with anger/aggression if you want the best outcome possible.

re the issue of more difficult divorce, call it what you will, but anything that interferes with freewill is restrictive, and any spouse who longs for legal means to bind their spouse in any way is exhibiting ownership behavior, regardless of label. Divorce does not happen instantly, the legal process itself takes time, and there is also often reluctance to actually file (as seems to be the case for you at this time), that is sufficient to balance capriciousness, yet not restrict freewill....on the other hand, one can "marry" literally within minutes of making a decision to do so.....there is something wrong with this picture, and it isn't the legalities of divorce.

Keep your head, understand you can only do what is possible for you, have competent legal advice to protect you and daughters interests, and accept this is not in your control....good luck.

els...I do not respond to posts unless directed to me, the post in question referenced my comments, but the name changed, hence I needed to address that, I agree with your observation.

Medic - My D will be granted in Missouri. That's where she fled after abandoning me. Our trial date is June 14th. Any words of wisdom from the Great State of Missouri?

sufdb - The biggest issue I have with No Fault divorce is the fact that there is no accountability required for a frivolous filing, and I stand to get raped financially by someone with no cause for D other than the fact that she no longer cared or was willing to work towards healing. I do understand that there are legitimate cases of documented abuse, but for those of us being unnecessarily tormented by irresponsibility this issue hits a raw nerve.

Now, if she decided to abandon me and run into oblivion, without expecting any financial reward for her actions, I could handle that. The fact is that No Fault encourages the enrichment of lawyers, it clogs up the legal and social services systems and those with legitimate issues at times don't get the help they need, and it makes it WAY too easy for D and breakup of families.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by hurting Promise Keeper:
<strong> Medic - My D will be granted in Missouri. That's where she fled after abandoning me. Our trial date is June 14th. Any words of wisdom from the Great State of Missouri?

sufdb - The biggest issue I have with No Fault divorce is the fact that there is no accountability required for a frivolous filing, and I stand to get raped financially by someone with no cause for D other than the fact that she no longer cared or was willing to work towards healing. I do understand that there are legitimate cases of documented abuse, but for those of us being unnecessarily tormented by irresponsibility this issue hits a raw nerve.

Now, if she decided to abandon me and run into oblivion, without expecting any financial reward for her actions, I could handle that. The fact is that No Fault encourages the enrichment of lawyers, it clogs up the legal and social services systems and those with legitimate issues at times don't get the help they need, and it makes it WAY too easy for D and breakup of families. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Amen!

I don't want to force her to stay in a marriage she doesn't want. I just don't want to pay for her desire to break the vows she took 7 years ago.

I agree the no-fault divorce exists solely to ensure lawyers get paid, as the laws seem to be written to shift the legal costs to those with the most ability to pay instead of examining fault.

So if it were truly no-fault, then the party seeking divorce would be charged with the whole thing.

My WW will/would get five figures in assets after splitting assets and debts and yet she is still seeking the court to award me her legal fees in addition to a split of assets.

Fortunately, my lawyer assures me that we made a fair settlement offer, and the local courts know her attorney as one who runs up the bill, and will probably NOT award me her full legal fees given we made a reasonable offer to settle, that was rejected without a counterproposal.

Tony

jarod..sufdb - The biggest issue I have with No Fault divorce is the fact that there is no accountability required for a frivolous filing, and I stand to get raped financially by someone with no cause for D other than the fact that she no longer cared or was willing to work towards healing.

sufdb...Hmm.., there is legal recourse for frivolous lawsuits. I guess one could try to prove a divorce filing was frivolous and extract monetary damages from the plantiff, but I suspect that would be extremely difficult to prove. I also suspect it is very rare, people file for divorce because they don't want to be married (for whatever reason), by definition that is not frivolous. The problem is the defendant spouse may vehemently disagree that the marriage should end, and make a DISRESPECTFUL JUDGEMENT re the motivations of the plantiff spouse. In fact, the marriage may indeed be reconcilleable, and the plantiff spouse acting irresponsibly...but what you are asking is for someone else (the defendant spouse, or the state by making divorce harder), to impose their will on each of us re our choice to be married or not. Personally I find that idea abhorent, no one should have any means whatsoever to force another human being to remain in an intimate relationship against their will...the feedom to determine our own destiny is the most important freedom we have. Don't you agree?

Turn it around, suppose the defendant spouse is unworthy, a poor partner and the plantiff spouse has had enough, and wants out...so now they can't leave and must endure more of this dysfunctional spouse? People have to have the means to make these decisions for themselves jarod, it can't work any other way without restricting freewill. Unless a court declares someone incompetent, the presumption is we are all capable of making decisions regarding our well-being, and acting on them....and that obviously includes something as basic as who we live with.

I can imagine some sort of tribunal that is part of domestic court, which has the power to delay divorce and mandate counselling, prohibit relocation of either spouse, and supervise parenting..based on an examination of the two people and finding some serious medical/psychological condition that is affecting rational judgement...but boy, what a can o worms that would be, and I suspect they would act only very rarely.

jar...I do understand that there are legitimate cases of documented abuse, but for those of us being unnecessarily tormented by irresponsibility this issue hits a raw nerve.

sufdb...well, what about undocumented? What about someone who feels tormented and hopeless, even if their spouse self-servingly doesn't agree? What about someone who just flat out decides the marriage was a terrible mistake and wants it ended...these are all very legtimate reasons to terminate the civil arrangement....UNLESS we are going to suggest OWNERSHIP by contract of another humans beings freewill. Jarod, when you marry someone you accept the risk they will leave you at any momenmt, unfairly, without notice, irresponsibly, whatever....you cannot own a human being. This is not a contract for services, it is not an employment contract, it is a state recognized status (marriage), that can be terminated at any time by either party for no reason at all....that is how it must be. Marriage can never be anything but a completely voluntary choice that can be withdrawn at will. You cannot force someone to meet your needs, or sleep with you, by legal fiat, it is inhuman.

jar...Now, if she decided to abandon me and run into oblivion, without expecting any financial reward for her actions, I could handle that.


sufdb...Now I think we have reached the real crux of the matter...it really isn't about the relationship, it is about consequences. Ok, that is an entirely different animal.

jar...The fact is that No Fault encourages the enrichment of lawyers, it clogs up the legal and social services systems and those with legitimate issues at times don't get the help they need, and it makes it WAY too easy for D and breakup of families.

sufdb...actually it doesn't. No-fault removes the need for very expensive trials, and proofs of fault. Two people sit down (with a mediator if necessary), settle the financial/child issues according to accepted practice (which the lawyers and mediators are well aware of, and advise on), the lawyer files some simple and inexpensive paperwork, and the divorce is granted. Cost is only an issue where one spouse is unreasonable, the coupld then has a trial, the judge imposes what the lawyers had allready told the clients would be imposed...but now at much greater cost. But this would happen, and even more so in fault proceedings.

Also fault laws favor the spouse with greater access to money, or a marriage with little money, as a spouse remains trapped because they cannot afford an attorney to prove fault, becoming a defacto prisoner to the marriage. Fault is a nightmare, and much more abusive regard outcome than no-fault. The state should not be in the business of decideing the quality of something so intimate and personal as a human relationship. Fault laws were antiquitated holdovers from another era designed primarily to keep women enslaved, as males exercised their perogative to do whatever they wanted, and run their marriages as personal fiefdoms...Their women economically and legally bound to them...yeah they could run away, penniless, and then "divorced" by their H who keeps the kids, and the money...not really to fair methinks.

re money jarod, whether mo. or wherever (and you can check, she may have not established residentcy sufficient to force a divorce action in that state, if you counterfile in your state, and seek jurisdiction), you will be required to a statuatory amount of child support, and possibly spousal support. An attorney can advise you of the likely amounts, also visitation issues. All you can do is then negotiate a better deal if possible. Thats the legal side, relationship wise, continue to be the best jarod you can be, and who knows what the future holds, people often reconcille after divorce.

Tony, you answered your own comment. The legal fess were run up by an irresponsible spouse, and indeed she will "pay" out of her proceeds. As you noted the courts can award attorney fees, you could probably get yours awarded if she would not negotiate in good faith. No-fault exerts tremendous downward pressure on legal fees cause there is no need for court action by reasonable people. If it were only a matter of money, lawyers would lobby long and hard for "fault" laws, cause that would generate more legal action, and a lot more fees.

No-fault was not promoted by lawyers per see, it was promoted by the public, and remains popular because it places power over relationships where it belongs, in the hands of the people in it. If someone makes a bad marital decision, marrying a loser who is a poor partner, and/or fiscally irresponsible/selfish...then shame on you for making such a bad choice, or sticking with them longer than you should. Why should the state be involved in your bad choice of character? The solution to divorce is to make marriage a lot harder to enter requiring extensive pre-marital counselling, temperament testing, and role modeling, so people make more compatible choices. The fact is, large numbers of people expend more effort decideing what car to buy, than trying to understand what marriage is, and how it would work with a given individual. They are just "in-love" and want to make a life with this person....who oftimes they hardly know at all really, just someone they dated and had fun with....all pursuit behavior, often has nothing to do with character.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by sufdb:
<strong> Tony, you answered your own comment. The legal fess were run up by an irresponsible spouse, and indeed she will "pay" out of her proceeds. As you noted the courts can award attorney fees, you could probably get yours awarded if she would not negotiate in good faith. No-fault exerts tremendous downward pressure on legal fees cause there is no need for court action by reasonable people. If it were only a matter of money, lawyers would lobby long and hard for "fault" laws, cause that would generate more legal action, and a lot more fees.

No-fault was not promoted by lawyers per see, it was promoted by the public, and remains popular because it places power over relationships where it belongs, in the hands of the people in it. If someone makes a bad marital decision, marrying a loser who is a poor partner, and/or fiscally irresponsible/selfish...then shame on you for making such a bad choice, or sticking with them longer than you should. Why should the state be involved in your bad choice of character? The solution to divorce is to make marriage a lot harder to enter requiring extensive pre-marital counselling, temperament testing, and role modeling, so people make more compatible choices. The fact is, large numbers of people expend more effort decideing what car to buy, than trying to understand what marriage is, and how it would work with a given individual. They are just "in-love" and want to make a life with this person....who oftimes they hardly know at all really, just someone they dated and had fun with....all pursuit behavior, often has nothing to do with character. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Once again, I must say....
six months of stable marital counselling should be required before ANY divorce proceedings are granted... except in the case of proven physical abuse.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Jarod_Wynde:
<strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by sufdb:
<strong> Tony, you answered your own comment. The legal fess were run up by an irresponsible spouse, and indeed she will "pay" out of her proceeds. As you noted the courts can award attorney fees, you could probably get yours awarded if she would not negotiate in good faith. No-fault exerts tremendous downward pressure on legal fees cause there is no need for court action by reasonable people. If it were only a matter of money, lawyers would lobby long and hard for "fault" laws, cause that would generate more legal action, and a lot more fees.

No-fault was not promoted by lawyers per see, it was promoted by the public, and remains popular because it places power over relationships where it belongs, in the hands of the people in it. If someone makes a bad marital decision, marrying a loser who is a poor partner, and/or fiscally irresponsible/selfish...then shame on you for making such a bad choice, or sticking with them longer than you should. Why should the state be involved in your bad choice of character? The solution to divorce is to make marriage a lot harder to enter requiring extensive pre-marital counselling, temperament testing, and role modeling, so people make more compatible choices. The fact is, large numbers of people expend more effort decideing what car to buy, than trying to understand what marriage is, and how it would work with a given individual. They are just "in-love" and want to make a life with this person....who oftimes they hardly know at all really, just someone they dated and had fun with....all pursuit behavior, often has nothing to do with character. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Once again, I must say....
six months of stable marital counselling should be required before ANY divorce proceedings are granted... except in the case of proven physical abuse. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">sufdb...That is probably a reasonable idea, provided extensive pre-marital counselling/testing/waiting period is required as well. Personally I think one should be required to wait 1 year from filing for a marriage license before the marriage can take place. That time to be used for counselling/testing/role modeling by accredited agencies.

btw good luck with your new developments. Also re anger, I hear a good work out (weights) and/or punching bag exercise is helpful....and both are really good health wise.

<small>[ April 24, 2004, 08:40 AM: Message edited by: sufdb ]</small>

sufdb - I think you were posting in response to my comments, not Jarrods, but that's ok. You raise some legitimate issues regarding No Fault, but I still thinks it's a travesty to the spouse who is innocent of any wrong-doing, has NOT been accused of marital misconduct, and is trying to avoid financial raping. The system, as it is presently set up, assumes the plaintiff is the innocent party and the defendant is guilty. My W has free legal counsel, the coaching and tutoring of her "advocates" from the women's shelter, and the advantage of being able to file in another state's court where she was NEVER a legal resident until she fled there to avoid accountability in our real home.

I have to pay (substantially) for legal counsel. I have the expense of travel/lodging/lost work time/inconvenience in being forced to fight my case in another state. These expenses can never be recouped, whatever the outcome of the case. I have NO access to a men's shelter and the services they would offer AT TAXPAYER'S EXPENSE, unlike my W who has the whole social services network at her disposal. Public opinion has been programmed to automatically assume I am an abusive animal because I am male, therefore I MUST be guilty. My attorney has already cautioned me that my W's "handlers" strategy will be to portray me as an abuser. The cards are already stacked against me PRIOR to my case even being heard by the judge.

My hope is in the Name of the Lord. He knows I am not an abuser or a violent person. My attorney is very aggressive and she will stand up against the system designed to grant frivolous divorces (No Fault). I have the Lord's peace in my case, but I still have the responsibility to speak out against a corrupt policy.

No fault is definitely the copout.

And there are grounds to be cited when somebody is cruel, abusive, or adulterous. I outghta know as I filed under three grounds intitially. But after the abuse and adultery, I also added in "irrevocable breakdown" because after all the lies, cheating, and cruelty that's what really happened.

And sufdb...my xh didn't try at all. Didn't care to do one thing except carry on with the OW and live in his own words..."like a rock star"...those words were btw read in court.

Jarod...might I add that Linkin Park is great for listening to in such circumstances as ours...Nothing like hearing Chester scream when you aren't able to do it yourself...Go jogging and put in linkin on your cd/mp3 player and let the stress fly out!

When WS want out, they want out. They make up stupid excuses why things are completely broken and why their even trying a little won't work. It's called fog brother.

My x is beginning to wake up after creating the biggest fog storm the south has ever seen. And it's horrible what he's waking up to now. I know without a doubt he'll regret it but it's by far too late as he eloped with OW and baby was born last month. I am checked out and doing fine now..Moving ahead at light speed.

You will recover. But you gotta deal with the bad stuff they do and move on. Don't spend too much time dealing on them as they're unable to be helped right now ok?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by justpeachy:
<strong> Jarod...might I add that Linkin Park is great for listening to in such circumstances as ours...Nothing like hearing Chester scream when you aren't able to do it yourself...Go jogging and put in linkin on your cd/mp3 player and let the stress fly out!</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">In The End.... the perfect song for relationships, in general.
However.... I prefer Mike Shinoda's rap flows...

<small>[ April 24, 2004, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: Jarod_Wynde ]</small>