Justice is blind....Pfffft!

I am a very lucky guy. I have a wife and two children and we are one very happy family. Well, most of the time anyway (inside joke). But I know many who are not that lucky. I know many people who are separated/divorced and have children. These poor SOB's just can't get a fair shake. Life never seems to move forward for them.

My friends in this situation will often confide in me many of the minute details of their situation. I don't ask. They just offer. I try to stay as impartial as possible and make, what I feel, are rational suggestions to help alleviate their particular circumstances. But increasingly, I find it is difficult to come to rational conclusions because the laws in this area are anything but rational. They are blatantly skewed and biased.

Justice is supposed to be blind. But don't forget that Justice is a woman, and she can see through the blindfold! I think the laws are fine in supporting women that are getting abused or trying to get away from abusive situations. I suppose they could be even stronger in this regard, as I have not one ounce of sympathy for a guy who lays hands on a woman. But I don't want to get into that. I want to illuminate the fact that if both the man and the woman are equally stable and able to provide for a child's needs, the courts will always side with the woman.

This in itself is not a great revelation. But consider this; once the woman has been given custodial guardianship of the child, all the cards are in her deck. The trump card is the child. Both ex-partners can get on with their lives to a point. They can re-marry, have more kids to other partners, buy new homes or get new jobs. But only three of those four things matter to the courts. Can you guess which one DOESN'T matter?

The new partner's income can be brought into the mix. Buying a new home may change the balance sheet so it can be considered in the courts. And of course, getting a better paying job (or just a raise) can be considered when the custodial parent decides more money is needed. But the fact that either of the ex's families have gotten larger is of no consequence to the courts. All that matters is the trump card that the custodial parent wields like a sledge hammer.

I strongly believe that any new children need to be factored into the equation! Otherwise, the new children end up on the short end of the stick. They get nothing in the way of extras while the children from the first marriage get all kinds of extras. How is it fair for one child to be able to enroll in hockey year-round or attend private schools while their half-siblings are lucky they get new running shoes when they need them?

I also have a problem with the fact that the custodial parent doesn't need to provide evidence of how the child support money was used. After all, it's called CHILD SUPPORT, shouldn't it be used to support the child? Things like clothes, food, education funds and a percentage of general household expenses would all be acceptable uses. Trips to the Caribbean, not acceptable. Especially when the half-siblings are lucky to be able to afford a pup tent they can put up in their backyard.

If you are a Canadian man in this situation, check out the Men's Divorce Centre . They can't change the crappy laws but they may be able to save you some cash in the long run. If you are not in this kind of situation, count your blessings, hug your loved ones. I am a very lucky guy.