clarification on the "half" posting

A fair bit of emotion comes through in my previous postings.

To those who take offence: Sorry if I'm emotional with regard to these issues, or upset about being compared to a child molester...

I understand that anger lessens me. Especially public displays of it. But I have contained that anger for years until it made me physically ill.

I apologise for the display of anger you saw here.

The people who have seen that anger as expressed here? My parents, unfortunately Smitten, and you. I suspect it will pop out at my next counselling session...

Not even my lawyer. My instructions there? An even handed and flat voiced statement "I have decided that your advice is well taken. I should proceed toward an even split."

---

I believe that spouses in a marriage breakdown should get half. I worked for years supporting the inclusion of those principles into our matrimonial property act. I also believe in joint custody, and worked to have those principles enshrined in law as well.

Oddly enough, we were successful in our endeavours and it is law in our jurisdiction.

I also believe in the value of raising children and have worked to alter our social welfare structure and childcare and scholastic structures to recognise the value of children and families.

Many of those beliefs are also reflected in public policy in our jurisdiction.

We were classified as the best place to live in the world by the United Nations. A huge part of that was the social environment we have created for families and children. We actually reduced child poverty levels here. The only jurisdiction in the western world to do so.

---

I believe that the work I did in raising the kids is a significant value to our family. That even I did not earn the same money as Mrs_C while I was at home (when they were little I earned about $12-20,000 a year just working from home. mrs_c earned about $40-50,000 at that time) I believe that I made a strong contribution in child rearing, and made pretty decent money out of my basement during nap times and after they went to sleep.

My income went up when they started attending part-time daycare and part-time at Grandparents. But I still did the shuttling, school, doctors and other stuff. I cooked, cleaned, shopped and other stuff too.

---

I was prepared, in my divorce situation, to take less than half for a number of reasons:

• i believed that it would make things smoother;
  
• i believed that it would make the settlement faster;
  
• i believed that it would cause less disruption to mrs_c and to the kids;
  
• i felt guilty about leaving, even though i felt justified;
  
• i felt guilty about earning less money than mrs_c during our marriage, even if it was a mutual decision;
  
• i have been angry for years when every time mrs_c would tell me she was leaving me, the thing she would always say was "The thing that sickens me most is that if I leave, you'll get half of my pension." I didn't want her fucking pension.
  

I have always proposed a reasonable structure and timing to settlement. I have always said that my goal was to minimise disruption, and to make sure that she was not put under undue financial stress because of the split.

I am still paying part of the bills on the house. I pay for her cell phone. She has the house and the use of all the stuff in it. I have offered to stay married for a longer period of time just to extend our medical coverage. Dental work (unless it is "disease" related) is not covered under medicare here. Mrs_C needs a bunch of major dental work. Each of our coverages will pay about half the bill.

When I was discussing property settlement with mrs_c, I proposed a decent and reasonable structure for settlement:

1. She keeps her pension, I keep mine (hers is substantially larger).
   
2. She keeps her personal (credit card) debt, I keep mine.
   
3. I take the whole vehicle loan (even though $3000 of it was to to pay off her credit card) because it is on my vehicle
   
4. She keeps the majority of the household effects (worth about $35,000 according to our insurance documents). I take my CDs and my personal stuff and some of the things that were provided to us by my parents that she doesn't use.
   
5. The equity on the house gets split equally
   

When I originally proposed the above, and she refused to discuss it, I had offered to take only 40% of the net value of the house. I have since moved to the above position of 50% of house equity.

Mrs_C's response to the outline I gave was "I paid most of the bills while we were married, I should get most of the stuff. You can have your personal stuff."

When I pointed out that it was a mutual decision, and reminded her of the times she said I shouldn't get a higher paying job so that I could spend more time with the kids, and that she had said she liked me being home because then she could "Have [my] time whenever she wanted it, instead of a job interfering with it"

She retorted with something else that I don't remember. I asked "So what do you think would be fair? Should you get everything? The house, the kids, everything?"

She responded "YES!"

"You should get nothing. You should be left penniless and alone. I made you. You would be nothing without me, and now some other woman will reap the benefit!"

When we discussed bill splitting with regard to costs for the kids she was arguing about what constituted fair, then all of a sudden she said "You'll be paying me. I'm going for full custody and you'll be paying me support. I'm going to take so much of your money, you'll have to move into some shitty apartment that the kids won't want to visit you in, and I'll send you postcards from the Caribbean."

---

If I had received my share of the property settlement as outlined in either of the above scenarios I would have been able to pay off all my debt and buy a house - I would have the third bedroom. The reason I am still in an apartment is that it would make each month too tight for me. I prefer to have some maneuvering room.

---

[LATER EDIT]
When I said "fuck her" in the last posts, I meant (and wrote) "i am standing square on the line defined by the law. half is half."

The "fuck her" meant I am not going to bend over and be a patsy anymore

I meant: I am not giving her more than half and fuck her if I will be Mr Nice Guy and go further than half way.

Yep. That's me being nasty. Standing square on the line of fairness and not giving more than my share.

Just for the record, I still suspect the final settlement will look like my proposal above. I may ask for more of a split of the value of houshold effects... I really have little interest in taking her pension. Never did. That's why it pissed me off so bad every time she would say it to me.

I only ever wanted her to love me.
[END LATER EDIT]

---

It is mrs_c's stated intention to take the kids away from me, and to "Use every trick in the book to get [her] way".

---

Mrs_C comes from a family where she was molested by her Mother's brother and her cousin, and beaten and abused by her Mother.

(in my opinion her mother still abuses her metally and emotionally)

Her mother's favourite tool to beat her with was a belt buckle. One of Mrs_C's Aunt's took her to the hospital (small town - early '60s) once because the bruising was so bad. Mrs_C said it happened regularly (almost daily) - that was the only time there was medical intervention.

Mrs_C has left bruises on our son before. We agreed that we would not use corporal punishment in our household after she whacked him so hard with a belt that it left bruises on him. She told me that she had felt herslef losing control and that she wanted to never be in a situation where the anger could take over physically because whe didn't know if she would be able to stop herself if she had that kind of rage overtake her again.

For the record, I can recall being struck by my parents (my Dad) twice. I recall getting a few quick single whacks on the ass from my Mom with a wooden spoon or such when I was little.

---

Having worked on a couple of child abuse prevention/protection protocols in my time, and having dealth with it as part of public policy debate, I have some notion of what constitutes reasonable force and what constitutes violence. I also understand my role as a parent in protecting and intervening. Also, I understand the weight of evidence and documentation that will be needed for that intervention.

I have discussed "escape/flight" scenarios with my children and have provided them with telephone numbers to call and locations to go to. I carry my cell all the time - even when I am working out. I have a couple of designated people who live in the area who will do a pick-up in the event that Mrs_c flips her wig.

I have not fully thought through all the "escape" scenarios.

I will be sewing small bags with keys and quarters that I will be sewing to the kids coats for emergencies. There is a 24 hour store right by our place (across the school yard) that is only ever closed on Christmas day that can always provide at least physical shelter.

---

So there you go.

Some clarification.