| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/6/2008 8:11:42 PM | | Yeah, I thought that was odd, but then I kind of wonder if it is because it isn't his money but his parents. Seems like this is one situation where I don't think that love is coming first. This situation does not sound like it is a union of love. I just can't see putting in a clause about child support in the future, I am all for protecting assets, but geez, these will be his flesh and blood. I think if you have to get to the point where you are thinking about child support for unborn kids, the marriage isn't meant to be. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/6/2008 8:49:51 PM | uh, yeah...I guess that's how the other half lives. It really makes you think about the downside of coming from a wealthy family. The new info that makes me pause is that OP now says the dude may be potentially getting a million per year (did not say pounds or dollars) and he still stands by the 2500 per month CS...along with a "four bedroom" house (which leaves lots of wiggle room in terms of real estate). Anyway, nice to know that mom and pop will give the stamp of approval if their expectations are met. When parents attempt to control the lives of their grown children, I guess that is just a case of the new golden rule:
He who has the gold, rules! | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/6/2008 8:55:12 PM |
I think if you have to get to the point where you are thinking about child support for unborn kids, the marriage isn't meant to be.
Y'know... the one thing people seem to be ignoring here is the fact that Pre-Nups also keep the lawyers out of things, or at least in theory. Planning your children's future (custody and child support) in a Pre-Nup would be a good idea if you think of it in those terms. If there's anybody who gets more money than an ex in a divorce it's those f*cking ambulance chasers. That's probably the biggest reason why Pre-Nups can't include clauses pertaining to custody and support. Where would the lawyers make any money off of people who have already had all property issues taken care of with a Pre-Nup? There's gotta be something for people to fight over... why not make it the kids?
All laws are designed to make lawyers rich... make no mistake of that. Our children's best interests are secondary to the amount of money they can take from us. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/7/2008 12:16:47 AM | It's not so much family control... sheesh, it's being smart about assets. Depending on how hooked in OP's friend is with the family business, it might have a detrimental effect on that as well. And that would be something very much in the family's interests to protect.
I'm certainly not in the situation of needing to protect a family business... even so, my family would insist as strongly as possible that I get a pre-nup or a co-habitation agreement. It just makes sense. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/7/2008 2:49:32 AM | to quote you starfun7........Single mothers like you, in most cases are partly responsible for their predicaments. Yet they try to avoid the consequences that come with being divorced with kids........
Uhhhh......ya .......okay......like you would know?..Here's a tip...pick one sex and start a family first...or even pick one sex that you can committ too!...Forgive my blantent direct address to you being bi-sexual...but I couldn't resist disecting your moral opinions the way you have so easily disected mine.
Arguements from people like yourself and the OP have no interest in what the best interest of the child is....IMO...the best interest of any child is to be reared and nutured by one of their parents. Children are not a commodity to be traded and bargined with....I would question any person who wants to negotiate an unborn child's life as it were a high risk stock to be underwritten by some sort of gurantee if things didn't work out!
As far as my personal situation goes...I will not embarrass you with the breakdown of expenses incurred in raising my children vs the support I recieve for them .....
and as I say that, I don't recall using my personal situation as an example here....much the same as you have no personal experience in this situation to make the flaming comments you have!
Perhaps you need to hop the fence for a moment.....and realize that men are able to make the large salary after having a couple kids...in large part to the women who are staying home or picking up the slack in the responsibilities that come with having children.....for some men....this person the OP is talking about..views children as an asset....not a blessing.....maybe he is better off hiring a broker to aquire some kids.... | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/7/2008 4:42:34 AM |
Children are not a commodity to be traded and bargined with....I would question any person who wants to negotiate an unborn child's life as it were a high risk stock to be underwritten by some sort of gurantee if things didn't work out!
The reason this man is going through this now is because a lot of people do use their children as a commodity to be traded and bargained with... after they have been born. So really... what's the difference if the bargaining begins before or after birth? It's the same as starting an education fund before a child reaches the age of going to college/university... what happens if the child chooses not to go? It's called being proactive. Maybe if less people were being taken advantage of by biased systems, this guy wouldn't even have to worry about it. He's not the one who made the world the place it is today... he's just dealing with it the best way he knows how. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 12:06:31 AM |
After reading, he was so convinced that its the right thing to do. And I agree. No pre-nup no marriage! Real life experiences and opinions (which are far and varying) are definitely more important to have in your pocket before seeking further legal advice. He's also going to find out about the loop-hole mentioned in Msg #8.
Message #8
While any clause in a prenuptial agreement limiting child support will be ignored by all U.S. divorce courts, I have heard of one legal loophole that can work to the same end. Simply include a clause in a PA that whatever child support is awarded, she owes an equal amount to you as a private debt.
LOL! Too funny!!!! And here I thought men were supposed to be good at math! So, let's see......2 - 2 = 2!!! WOW! Unfortunately, any woman stupid enough to marry this guy and his parents is also stupid enough to believe this "new math". She would also be stupid enough to accept ANYTHING from such a person....what a shame. Any children from this union would be far BETTER off if she were to reject ALL "charity" from this guy....including allowing her children to borrow his name, his house, his car, his educational subsidies. The 2-2=2 formula is designed to make it look like he's involved....when in fact his ONLY involvement is that of sperm donor. What is truly sickening about this whole deal is that I am so vehemently opposed to lieing to children. I don't support telling children about Santa Claus, the tooth fairy or the Easter Bunny......"something for nothing fantasies". Here's $2500 a month dad....now, run down and pay the CSEA this money so that you can tell the children what a nice guy you are for supporting them???? OMG! LOL! You actually can't figure this one out!!!! | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 9:08:06 AM | OK. Enough is enough. I am getting sickened by the lifestyle argument as a validation for excessive child support. Consider this:
a) The primary bread winner more than likely subsidized their partner’s lifestyle prior to marriage.
b) The primary bread winner subsidized their partner's lifestyle during marriage.
c) The primary breadwinner will continue to subsidize their partner's lifestyle post divorce through child support and alimony.
At what point is the primary bread winner ever considered? Nowhere have I heard any arguments for the sacrifices often done by the primary breadwinner to get where they are economically in the first place. I just hear she/he deserves this and that upon dissolution of a marriage.
I have some single female business partners who make significant amounts of money. This discussion was brought up and none, I repeat none, would even contemplate marriage without a pre-nup and everyone agrees and empathize with their assessment. Yet a male asking for the same level of protection in an equivalent and reversed situation will be chastised and labeled shallow! How come??
Societal gender expectations are still guided by outmoded early 1900s norms. The man is expected to behave based on chivalry norms even though our society strives for equality! These unwritten social behavior rules/expectations where adapted to an early 1900s environment where the man truly where the sole provider. Today things are different, yet our unwritten rules, and more importantly, divorce laws remain static. As indicated by this and numerous other treads the general consensus among females is that a man should be generous, caring, chivalristic and financial stable to be a suitable partner. He is expected to open doors, pay for dates and bring flowers on a regular basis. Yet no such unwritten expectations exist for modern and equal females. How come??
The truth of the matter is that no one deserves to maintain or keep a certain lifestyle. You have to earn it!! Your child deserves to be feed and cared for, but you (referring to the subsidized party whether man or woman) have no right to "maintain your lifestyle". You deserve the lifestyle you can support on your own, not a lifestyle subsidized by an ex. Having that said, there is no way anyone can rationalize a $2,500 monthly child support check without saying that it's main purpose is to subsidy the kept party's lifestyle. OP's friend is an idiot for even consider placing these generous terms in a pre-nup even though he can afford it. And idiots will eventually be cleaned out!!
The difference between generosity and stupidity is very very vague!
Just my 2 cents! | |
|
Reese1
|
Joined: 2/18/2006
Msg: 184 | |
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 10:33:33 AM | Starfun7 that is the most intelligent thing I have heard in a hell of a long time, do you want to come to Alberta and get married .
If the government would set a basic amount $$$ figure that would provide the childs NEEDS and not there WANTS , based on what it takes to raise a child of a certain age per month it might be alot better place to live.
I don't really think it takes more money to raise a wealthy familys child compared to a none wealthy familys child , because both of the childrens NEEDS are the same not there WANTS, cloths , food, a roof , education etc.
Starfun7 great post, what you said is bang on. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 10:59:34 AM | Twisted Sister - the Canadian federal guidelines do NOT take into account the recipient's income, which I think is a huge mistake by the way. The payable amounts are also disproportionately generous, offering financial incentive to potential sole custodial parents and jeopardizing the payor's standard of living while with their own kids. This discourages on-going cooperation re kids etc.
Anyway re OP's question if that issue is already on the table with your "friend" tell him to walk away - at an income of $150,000 the Ontario guidelines require $1,992 in child support for two kids (ridiculous I know). That's the base amount without add-ons for day care and uninsured health expenses. At double the income the child support would be much higher, but not necessarily double because after $150,000 in income a judge has leeway in awarding CS. $2,500 sounds a little low but $4000 would probably be enough (but see a lawyer!). He shoud be able to afford that ($48,000 per year) so the risk is lower at his high income. At his income spousal support might be the bigger issue and prenups should cover that. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 11:09:22 AM | children have nothing to do with a prenup!!...
and both parents should be supporting their children before and after (if there is a marriage breakdown)
A child should not want for ANYTHING!!.. as far as health care and education are concerned. not to mention dental..and anything else they need to promote personal growth.
Is your friend preparing for those things outside his little fantasy world?
what if they get married and her second pregnancy results in twins?..will he only support one of his twins..(the one born first per say?)
what if one or all his children are born with special needs?..will he compensate for that?
I am all for a prenup...I woulds sign one in a second no questions asked..but when you start involving unborn children in them...I think its past the point of ridiculous. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 11:23:07 AM | Child support is based on income and ability to pay. If the childs life style was private school and high living the judge usually agrees to an amount that will allow them to continue in that style of living. It's the same as alimoney. Ability, income, life style.
Pre nups are made to be broken. All bets are off when a child comes into the picture | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 12:01:19 PM |
My friend makes well over $300K and is looking to marry his g/f of 2 years. He wants to know if the issue of child support payments can be included in the prenuptial agreement. They agree on having a max of 2 kids and he thinks a max of $2500/month for both kids should be more than enough (ie should the marriage breakdown)! He is British and she is Canadian.
Would the courts uphold this or nullify it and base it on his income?
From what you have said, I would advise the girlfriend to run as fast as she can since he's decided he is the one to pay child support and she should be the one who is 100% burdened with the day to day care for the children which quite often puts her career aspirations in jeopardy, and a huge dint into her social life or other potential relationships.
It doesn't just take money to raise children, how involved does your friend plan to be in his children's life? A lot more questions need to be answered here. I don't want to be judgemental, but it does sound like the only thing your friend has to offer is money.
Now, if she is only marrying him for his money............she should get herself a job that pays $300,000.00 per year, which is not impossible. That way, no one is beholding to another and there will be 2 less screwed kids in the world. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 12:58:14 PM | | I am not sure if this has been said in the last 8 pages but in Canada the Federal Divorce act when it comes to child support supersedes any and all contracts and agreements. It specifically states that the childs right to child support can not be bargained away. If someone where to include in a prenup it wouldn't be worth the paper it is written on. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 1:04:37 PM |
It specifically states that the childs right to child support can not be bargained away. If someone where to include in a prenup it wouldn't be worth the paper it is written on.
Thank goodness there is a government that sees human life as something that doesn't reduce (unborn) children to money. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 1:20:09 PM |
but in Canada the Federal Divorce act when it comes to child support supersedes any and all contracts and agreements. It specifically states that the childs right to child support can not be bargained away. If someone where to include in a prenup it wouldn't be worth the paper it is written on. Partly true! You can include CS in a pre-nup so long as it is not lower than the govt guildlines.
In this case, he is better of going with the govt guildlines because at $300K he will be paying abt $52K/yr and doesnt have to provide the accomodation and transportation etc! At his pre-nup rates, he'll be paying $30K/yr plus accomodation and transportation (abt another $30K ie $1500/month for rent plus $1000/month for car and maintenance) - total of $60 plus other medical and college costs.
Yes they are his kids (hopefully after DNA testing ..:) so theres nothing wrong with him being this generous. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 2:00:49 PM |
At his income spousal support might be the bigger issue and prenups should cover that.
That is very correct... and IS an area that a pre-nup can handle... he'll need to get very careful legal advice so they don't nullify the agreement in the way they choose to live their lives or by a conservative disclosure of potential assets. ILA (independent legal advice) for BOTH parties and FAIRNESS is critical in getting a pre-nup that can't be turned over. Child support has a definite end date and a set amount - spousal support does not. It's the messy area that needs to be defined.
It specifically states that the childs right to child support can not be bargained away. If someone where to include in a prenup it wouldn't be worth the paper it is written on. Thank goodness there is a government that sees human life as something that doesn't reduce (unborn) children to money.
Yes. sigh. That point was made very early on in the thread... it can't be bargained away and the amount can't be defined. I can't help but think the pages of out-raged people demonizing the op and going on about commoditizing children never really absorbed that point. The amount of cash does not take into account all of the "extras" the children would have become accustomed to... like sports, or tutoring or private schools.
I still don't get how some feel the OP is a demon for wanting to fully understand the ramifications before getting into a situation. Good = jumping in blindly and Bad = an informed choice? | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 2:12:44 PM | Hmmm. I guess his only viable option is to establish and maintain residency in a country that awards little or nothing to women in divorce. Afghanistan, perhaps? Then if they divorce, it would be handled in their country and state of residency by the laws in effect there. Too bad I didn't think of that the first time around!!  | |
|
| |
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 5:57:43 PM | With all the whining about paying child support that fathers do.......I am surprised that women continue to agree to bear children for any man.
When a mother pays child support......don't those dead beat daddy's sing a different tune.
It's a gimme gimme world out there, until the shoe is on the other foot. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 6:01:38 PM | The Government isn't reducing the children...seems from the op that the couple that are talking about marriage are.
Two parents that get along are better than one. Two parents that are not getting along, abusing children etc., are not better than one. One parent that is providing the children's needs to mature to happy healthy adults is better then two parents that aren't.
Children's needs should come first period.
But in my opinion, these two shouldn't be married. I can see protecting property, money, etc., but giving kids to the other parent that aren't even born and figuring how much support to give them, doesn't sound like a good environment to have children. Why does he even want to have kids if he doesn't think he would commit to raising them? Not that custody battles are good. I just can't get over thinking about reducing unborn children to money and not thinking of them as your flesh and blood. Just doesn't sound like a couple that should get married. Not even married and they have an uphill battle. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 6:05:39 PM |
I am surprised that women continue to agree to bear children for any man.
Well, yeah, except that far too many women decide all by themselves that they are gonna have a kid without even consulting the guy.
It's a gimme gimme world out there, until the shoe is on the other foot.
I agree, and it's gonna be MIGHTY interesting in the future when women are the ones who are obligated to pay spousal support and child support as often or even MORE often than men.
THEN the laws will change, but not until then. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 10:07:32 PM | That Guy Him,
It is apparent that issues as they relate to CS differ between men and women...as one would expect when two parents can't agree on what is a fair and equatable contribution in raising kids after a split/divorce...
This is one of your quotes regarding the negotiation of paying CP....
>>>what's the difference if the bargaining begins before or after birth?...It's the same as starting an education fund before a child reaches the age of going to college/university... what happens if the child chooses not to go? It's called being proactive.>>
Fistly, children aren't meant to be bartered over period.....and it isn't considered being proactive when anyone looks to negotiate and contain the reprecussions of what a failed partnership might bring...on both sides.
The difference between saving for a child(s) education and negotiating a CP order before they are born is called investing in your child's future, instead of bargaining your responsibilities for your own.
I agree with you that the OP is not the guy who has made the system to be one that is so manipulated by both parents on issues of child support....but his attitude and outlook sure is helping to perpetuate a stigma that gurauntees nothing will change when it comes to two parents that are able to negotiate the best interest for thier kids. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/8/2008 11:53:45 PM | Oh, come on... I really don't see what the OP has done that is so terrible to place him in this spot...
I agree with you that the OP is not the guy who has made the system to be one that is so manipulated by both parents on issues of child support....but his attitude and outlook sure is helping to perpetuate a stigma that gurauntees nothing will change when it comes to two parents that are able to negotiate the best interest for thier kids.
The OPost said hey, two people are planning to marry and they are discussing their prenuptual agreement
^^ that sounds like a very sane thing for two people to do in these times, especially where they have enough assets that it would be "worth" chewing up several hundred thousands of dollars in court time getting a judge to sort things out for them. Much better to discuss and agree yourselves... and no better time than when you are in love and know you are going to beat the odds.
The OPost went on to say they agreed they'd have a max of two kids
^^ great... we don't have one wanting 6 kids and the other none... seems like they are on the same page
He says he thinks $2500/month is enough child support and asks if the courts would uphold it or nullify it based on his income.
^^ Well, he got his answer... the OP hadn't known the child support guidelines are posted on the web and didn't know that you cannot cover children in a pre-nup. Maybe I'm more inclined to give the guy a break because I wasn't aware of that either before speaking with a lawyer to discuss my pre-nup.
Let's also, please people, consider that before the OP knew the law... he was intending to pay $2500/month. That's not exactly looking to shirk your responsibilities. And since the courts currently award custody to the mother in about 90% of cases... it really is quite smart for a fellow to consider he would not get custody and would be required to pay child support.
There's also been a tendancy to assume his wife would be staying at home and "living off" the child support and spousal support (if any awarded). We have no information about her. For all we know she might be a career woman... and the cost of a nanny will have to be figured into these things.
I'm all for people looking into these things before they get married and before they have children. Don't we frequently say more people should give greater thought to getting married before they make this big step? And isn't that exactly what this guy is doing? If the OP's friend ends up divorced down the road he isn't going to be blindsided by the law and I imagine he isn't going to be complaining about fulfilling it either.
*shakes head* maybe it is just me, but I can't figure out where all the resentment and vilifying is coming from. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 1/9/2008 1:59:36 AM |
Why should the person be giving the other person the money at all?
It shouldn't be given to that individual, it should go directly to supplying the children's needs (Food, water, shelter, the basic necessities of life....not lifestyle.). This is EXACTLY why I said in an early post that the Mom should REFUSE ANY AND ALL connection with the man after they're divorced!
Because it has NOTHING to do with caring for the children....and everything to do with STILL trying to control her life (or his should the obligor be the female) through these "charity payments".
It shouldn't be given to that individual, it should go directly to supplying the children's needs (Food, water, shelter, the basic necessities of life....not lifestyle.). Go DIRECTLY to supplying food....meaning that the paying party would DECIDE, SHOP,PURCHASE, and DELIVER the groceries that HE/SHE chose to buy, and understanding the control freakishness and petty mindedness of the individual would likely be spam and powdered eggs just for spite....to show that THEY are still in control. Water? Don't know about Canada, but around here, the water bill must be in the name of the property owner....which brings us to the question of shelter.....and again you advocate that the the EX has the right to decide WHERE....right down to the street address the ex and kids are going to live.....no doubt you'll choose a location as inconvenient to the ex spouse as possible, right?
In any case, thank you for STRONGLY REINFORCING the values which I taught MY daughters almost 30 years ago......which were to NEVER, EVER count of a man for anything....MUCH LESS something as precious as your children. Ladies....PLEASE, MAKE CERTAIN that BEFORE you have children, that YOU and YOU ALONE are quite capable of providing to ALL of their needs without any assistance from an ex spouse. Child Support remains one of the most degrading things that a legal system does to the custodial parent. The goal is to make you out to be some bum living on welfare who swills down whiskey with your childs milk money....and even if you yourself earn 5 times more than your ex, you WILL be accused of such ridiculous behaviors.
In 1982, when CSEA was established and the State of Ohio took my ex to court.....I FOUGHT it! I was outraged that I was subpoenead into court for a "law suit" which I DID NOT want to be party to. I refused to shake hands with the attorney which had been appointed to me....if you can imagine that! HOW DARE a state force an attorney or a law suit onto a person who wants NO PART of the action? I don't know....but they did! Just a waste of taxpayers money! I neither needed nor did I want a dime from him, but State law said he must pay at least the minimum $25 per child per week. In spite of this however....his wife # 3 told her daughter that they were poor because he was paying for MY house! That child is today 23 yrs old...and STILL believes this lie.....still tells her 1/2 sisters (my children) how much she suffered for their greed! By the time my girls were 16 yrs old....THEY wanted to be legally adopted by their stepfather.....something which would have been done almost 14 years earlier HAD the lousy courts not forced their father to pay his piddly $50 a week, thus circumventing my right to petition for their adoption due to "non support" after a 12 month period.
Child support is just WRONG.....no child should have to have a parent who MUST BE FORCED into accepting responsibility for them! The TRUE parent is the one who cares for them out of LOVE and COMMITTMENT.....Not a court order! | |
|
Home
login 
