From: jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood)
Subject: Re: The Second Family
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 13 Aug 92 17:11:19 CDT

In article <1992Aug12.214616.8774@u.washington.edu> jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress) writes:
>Chris Rutkowski writes
>> After some time, I remarried, and am now a new
>> parent with my second wife.  Things are great, and I am enjoying going
>> through the joys of fatherhood all over again, this time sharing the
>> experience with a caring, attentive mother. 
>
>    What will you do if your new wife
>    also takes "her" kids from you?
>
>    Please don't answer with: "She won't."


  This is a fundamental paradox for men today. Irregardless of how 
Chris or any other father currently "feels" about his marriage today and
how wonderful he feels about the relationship with his children, HIS
future as a father can be destroyed overnight by HER decision. SHE
has a government guarentee to maintain HER standard of living (MN 
Statute 518.611 states... The children will maintain the standard
of living they have grown accustomed to.) This law welcomes 'quick'
decisions by HER for him. Family law supports her post divorce 
standard of living, guarentees  sole custody (right to move anywhere and 
deny visitation) and it forces him to 'leave' most or all property
behind while HE remains responsible for the payments. The governments
stated reason rests on the premise 'this is in the best interest of
children'. Family court laws allow for quick uncontested divorces 
in the name of "best interest of the children". 
 Chris and men who are currently happy in marriage is a very good
situation for them but contractually speaking, Chris and men like
him are in a fools paradise. Today's society indicates that 
Chris's bliss is short lived and will put him in the financial 
and emotional poor house. When your happy you'll hear the "what's
mine is mine and what's yours is yours, the minute she sees 
greener pastures you'll more than likely hear, what's mine is
mine and what's yours is mine. 
 Divorce numbers are way up. Divorces are easier to get. Divorces
for many women are not a financial problem. In fact, for many 
women divorce is a financial boom. Not only do they collect a
substantial amount of money, but not ONE penny of it is accountable
to the CHILDREN. Funny, the federal government doesn't allow this.
 In the U.S. today, the marriage contract is fraudulant. Men, live with
them, play with them, help them, but don't sign a marriage
contract. 
 I see my children every other weekend without fail. I have paid
nearly 30,000 dollars in child support since 1988. I have been 
dragged into court 3 times because I was allegedly behind in 
child support for 700.00 dollars. I drive 120 miles in one direction
to 'visit' my children. I buy my children shoes and clothes 
when I am given children with inadequite clothing. My children
have 'shared' a bedroom with the mother in their house because
she believes her address status is more important than the children's
lifestyle. My children have had a much lower standard of living
since the divorce, but none of the reduction in 'standard' of 
living has had anything to do with money. This is my arguement
with the government, democrats and feminazi's. Stay the fuck out
of my life and my children's life. You do not help my children.
You do not help me. The ONLY beneficiary in divorce for those 
who choose to exercise their power (not all women do, but ALL women have 
the CHOICE to) is women. What these women do to their children
in the name of anger is criminal. The system FOSTERS it. 
This is my problem with the HILLARY syndrome. Now the bitch wants
to allow my children to grow up and sue me because I didn't 
provide 'X' for them. 
 Hillary's Children Defense Fund is only a Women Rights Group.
 


 
 


 




Xref: sparky alt.child-support:2841 alt.dads-rights:2053