• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

spousel support

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
This is INCREDIBLY offensive. I am not a cow and I don't have milk, and a relationship is about more than sex. Believe it or not, there are plenty of men who do NOT base their decision to get married on whether their partner will have sex with them. And any man (or woman, for that matter) who would say "I don't need to get married, I'm already getting laid and I don't want anything else" is worthless. Did you miss the point of the women's rights movement being that we don't have to use our body parts to manipulate men into taking care of us anymore, because we can take care of ourselves? That women have more to offer a relationship than a hole and a heartbeat? It's real easy to sit on the other side of your keyboard and call someone a slut because she dares to have a relationship that you personally disapprove of, but it really doesn't make you look superior, it just makes you look petty and sexist.

And no, I don't think everyone who gets into a relationship with a separated-but-still-married person is horrible and deserves to be ridiculed, nor do I think they are all being taken advantage of by their boy/girlfriend. Some of them, maybe, but the blanket condemnation and insults are uncalled for.

I don't necessarily think this OP is the poster child for morality either, but every time I see this archaic bit of rhetoric thrown around, it pushes my buttons.
Then you missed the point -- why is he going to get a divorce when he has everything he wants already without getting the divorce? You thought narrowly. I didn't. You are offended because of what YOU read into that statement. Look at the bigger picture. He has a girlfriend. Being married to his wife isn't interfering with his life. It is not a problem for him. Why should he buy the cow -- get a divorce -- when the milk (what he wants) is there for the taking without him doing a thing (easy or for free)? Could it be used as a sexual comment? Yes. But you are the one who decided that was how it should be applied here.
 


Bali Hai

Senior Member
Then you missed the point -- why is he going to get a divorce when he has everything he wants already without getting the divorce? You thought narrowly. I didn't. You are offended because of what YOU read into that statement. Look at the bigger picture. He has a girlfriend. Being married to his wife isn't interfering with his life. It is not a problem for him. Why should he buy the cow -- get a divorce -- when the milk (what he wants) is there for the taking without him doing a thing (easy or for free)? Could it be used as a sexual comment? Yes. But you are the one who decided that was how it should be applied here.
I agree OG. And he doesn't have to pay alimony to either one of them. Although, according to the women's movement, they both should be self supporting.
 

Just Blue

Senior Member
:mad:

YOU peolpe on here are amazing. People log on here and ask advise but all you people do is judge people. For your information the daughter is 30 yrs old. And has only been hurt by her drug addict mother who drains people for all they have including her elderly mother . this is supposed to be for "legal advise" and all you people do is hop up on your high horses and look down on people you know nothing about . All of you need not not judge only GOD can judge and he isn't on this freakin website.
"Only GOD can judge." Are YOU God? Because you seem to be free and easy with your judgments toward the WIFE. If you are God perhaps you could have Mr Merriam-Webster assist you with your less than Divine spelling.;)
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
How do YOU know he has everything he wants? How do you know that he isn't just ignorant of the law/procedure on obtaining a divorce? Lots of people are. Or yeah, maybe it's just too much trouble, but that's got nothing to do with whether he's got a girlfriend or not.
 

Ohiogal

Queen Bee
How do YOU know he has everything he wants? How do you know that he isn't just ignorant of the law/procedure on obtaining a divorce? Lots of people are. Or yeah, maybe it's just too much trouble, but that's got nothing to do with whether he's got a girlfriend or not.
If he wanted a divorce -- really wanted it -- he would be asking the questions and trying to find out if it could happen. He would take some initiative. But apparently, based on his girlfriend's postings, he hasn't taken the initiative to move forward. She is. Which means she is NOT satisfied with the situation -- but that doesn't mean he isn't satisfied. If he really didn't like the situation he would take steps to change it.

Why does it bother you that I pointed out that he has a girlfriend and that his wife doesn't seem to be interfering with him moving on with his life? I never said he has everything he wants. He however is satisfied with the situation if he is NOT taking steps to change it. Which per the girlfriend he doesn't appear to be.
 

colbey111

Junior Member
omg

Did u ever think his daughter is doing this on her own free will. She has seen her father hurt over and over. Nobody here could give good "advise" if they got it straight from Dr. Phil himself.
 

stealth2

Under the Radar Member
Did u ever think his daughter is doing this on her own free will. She has seen her father hurt over and over. Nobody here could give good "advise" if they got it straight from Dr. Phil himself.
And a good parent would say "I know you want to help, dear. But this is between your mother and I."
 

tuffbrk

Senior Member
Reality is that his "new" business has a co-owner. His Wife.

The level of ignorance is pretty obvious based on spelling alone. I would think a person hanging with the OP would probably be just as ignorant.

He is doing nothing to protect himself from his wife's claims on his assets at all. If he spoke to an attorney or a tax expert I'm sure they would have advised him to divorce prior to starting a new venture - or at least advised him to incorporate.

Some people are just doomed to continue to mess up no matter how hard they work.
 

Proserpina

Senior Member
Did u ever think his daughter is doing this on her own free will. She has seen her father hurt over and over. Nobody here could give good "advise" if they got it straight from Dr. Phil himself.


That's probably a Very Good Thing given that, y'know, Dr Phil has about as much legal knowledge as your average soggy spinach leaf.
 

not2cleverRed

Obvious Observer
Did u ever think his daughter is doing this on her own free will. She has seen her father hurt over and over. Nobody here could give good "advise" if they got it straight from Dr. Phil himself.
You're still here?!

(1) Yes, a wife can apply from spousal support.:cool:
(2) Yes, when a relationship has lasted over 30 years (judging by the age of their daughter), and there has been a pattern of on spouse supporting the other, then it is likely that a judge in his/her own right mind would award some sort of spousal support.:cool:
(3) This is not a short term marriage. The wife is over 50. Retraining to become employable would be deemed more difficult than for a 20 something.
(4) As tuffbrk has pointed out to you, wife is co-owner of his new business, by virtue of being his wife. The business is a marital asset.:cool:

That is legal advice which even Dr. Phil would agree with. Then again, Dr. Phil's doctorate is not in jurisprudence, nor has he passed the bar in any state.
 

Proserpina

Senior Member
The dude isn't even a doctor, either.


Though it pains me to admit this, he is.

He does hold a valid Ph.d in psychology and legally he's entitled to be known as Dr. McGraw.

He is NOT a currently licensed psychologist however and that's not to say he hasn't at the very least perpetuated and encouraged an incredibly misleading public image that he is indeed a medical doctor. He's not - but he certainly doesn't discourage that impression.

But yeah. He is allowed to refer to himself as "Doctor", because that's his qualification.
 

tuffbrk

Senior Member
Though it pains me to admit this, he is.

He does hold a valid Ph.d in psychology and legally he's entitled to be known as Dr. McGraw.

He is NOT a currently licensed psychologist however and that's not to say he hasn't at the very least perpetuated and encouraged an incredibly misleading public image that he is indeed a medical doctor. He's not - but he certainly doesn't discourage that impression.

But yeah. He is allowed to refer to himself as "Doctor", because that's his qualification.
Huh. I thought to hold the title you needed to maintain your license but I guess not. Learn something new every day...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top