Is the Husband being discriminated against... Family Court?
-
Is the Husband being discriminated against, in the implementation of the Women’s charter at the Singapore family court?
Hi, this is something of a desperate attempt to get help for my situation. I had the privilege of first-hand experiences going through a divorce.
May I be allowed to express my feelings and thoughts? It seems we have a system with good intentions, the system of mediations. I guess it is also practical as there are just too many divorce cases to deal with. The idea is to avoid going to trial but the trouble is nobody bothers to go through the details of the cases anymore. What’s the point of going through the details if the idea is to avoid going through the details to save time in the first place? But without going through the details of each case how could fair and effective mediation be rendered as a service rather than a disservice?
It seems the whole system operates on a few key assumptions:
- First assumption is that the wife is the weaker party, the disadvantaged party and so where
sympathy automatically is inclined towards. This is what the Woman’s Charter’s
fundamental purpose, base on the said assumption to protect their rights and
interests against the husband’s. What about the husband? Well may be we could
also assume that the fool can fend for himself.
- Second assumption is that the husband is always the dominant party and that the wife a housewife
and even if a career woman has more likely than not played a subordinate and
supporting role in the union. And so credit should be reserved for the wife.
- Third that only the husband has benefited from the wife’s assumed contributions
to the failed marriage. Sacrifices had only been one way, from the wife to the
husband.
- Fourth that the
contributions from the wife are always positive, beneficial, always assets and
never liabilities. So the length of marriage always goes in favour of her. No
matter what she did – even if she steals money to give to her church that pays
over half a million dollars to its pastor etc.
- Fifth that the
wife is always the party that suffers the most disadvantage in a failed
marriage and so should be compensated with monetary rewards at his expense.
What if the assumptions are all wrong – so wrong? What if the husband had put everything on the line including his life’s savings and invited her into his life and she then took over his business, banished him from his work, ran the business to the ground, abandoned the family and left him to take care of their child on his own, siphoned money out secretly, bought a brand new car paid for in cash and donated tens of thousands to her church, and when nothing was left, abandoned him to fend for himself, then chased him out of the house ... and when he did not go under, she returned to get more out of him… Can the wife simply make use of the Women’s Charter to hound the husband?
Will the mediators, councils and judges alike be willing to look at all these crucial facts before deciding summarily that the length of marriage is THE determining factor automatically favouring the wife?
It looks like a full trial can’t be avoided for me. I am desperate to find a good trial lawyer who would look into the facts without prior misassumptions. Any helpful comments would be much appreciated.
- First assumption is that the wife is the weaker party, the disadvantaged party and so where
sympathy automatically is inclined towards. This is what the Woman’s Charter’s
fundamental purpose, base on the said assumption to protect their rights and
interests against the husband’s. What about the husband? Well may be we could
also assume that the fool can fend for himself.
-
I beg yr pardon, those are yr assumptions, and assumption dun prove anything in court..just ass u and me. Court dismissed
First and foremost, nobody put a gun on your damn head to marry her, you wanted her, you loved her, you sex with her, she borne your childrens, so what if she took over your business and failed, so what if she takes yr money??? Isn't husband and wife make vows to go thru thick and thin of life. If you wanted to file for a divorce just go ahead. She did nothing wrong, too bad you get a bad wife, unlike others whose wifeys are caring and loving them, just blame it on yr poor life, and please paid your bills for divorcing, there is nothing wrong to our women's charter, it has served the court here for many years, Law by law.
-
On the contrary, I envied your wife, so clever.
-
Let me add a few points.
The women's Charter is meant to protect rights of women due to them being the weaker sex. It should not be used to work in favour of the woman
A women;s charter comes into effect when the woman is not guilty or has no participation in anything in the cause of the event. Examples are rape, family maintenance ect and when the other party usually a man is not willing to provide the corrective action when it is entirely his fault.
But if u have evidence that yr wife siphoned money out from you. Try to file a charge against her for theft.
-
Firstly its your fault, for allowing it happen.
Secondly its your fault, for not standing up for yourself and your child.
Thirdly its your fault, for being a pushover, because she certainly did whatever she could do to walk all over you.
Fourth, her good lawyer would make you out to be a lousy businessman, abandoned the family, bought her an extravagant car, did not care for the child, does not go to church, ask her for more money, chased her out of the house when she has no more money. Bou, will you be the one at fault.
Fifth, there is no discrimination, because everything will be according to valid laws. Thats what lawyers will see to. That there's no discrimination.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
Firstly its your fault, for allowing it happen.
Secondly its your fault, for not standing up for yourself and your child.
Thirdly its your fault, for being a pushover, because she certainly did whatever she could do to walk all over you.
Fourth, her good lawyer would make you out to be a lousy businessman, abandoned the family, bought her an extravagant car, did not care for the child, does not go to church, ask her for more money, chased her out of the house when she has no more money. Bou, will you be the one at fault.
Fifth, there is no discrimination, because everything will be according to valid laws. Thats what lawyers will see to. That there's no discrimination.
the problem with lawyers in SG is they will most likely see it within the limit of the law.
-
Originally posted by Worldlybusinessman:
Let me add a few points.
The women's Charter is meant to protect rights of women due to them being the weaker sex. It should not be used to work in favour of the woman
A women;s charter comes into effect when the woman is not guilty or has no participation in anything in the cause of the event. Examples are rape, family maintenance ect and when the other party usually a man is not willing to provide the corrective action when it is entirely his fault.
But if u have evidence that yr wife siphoned money out from you. Try to file a charge against her for theft.
yup truly agree. It is meant to be used as a shield and not as a sword. -
Originally posted by TheFool:
Is the Husband being discriminated against, in the implementation of the Women’s charter at the Singapore family court?
Hi, this is something of a desperate attempt to get help for my situation. I had the privilege of first-hand experiences going through a divorce.
May I be allowed to express my feelings and thoughts? It seems we have a system with good intentions, the system of mediations. I guess it is also practical as there are just too many divorce cases to deal with. The idea is to avoid going to trial but the trouble is nobody bothers to go through the details of the cases anymore. What’s the point of going through the details if the idea is to avoid going through the details to save time in the first place? But without going through the details of each case how could fair and effective mediation be rendered as a service rather than a disservice?
It seems the whole system operates on a few key assumptions:
- First assumption is that the wife is
the weaker party, the disadvantaged party and so where sympathy
automatically is inclined towards. This is what the Woman’s
Charter’s fundamental purpose, base on the said assumption to
protect their rights and interests against the husband’s. What
about the husband? Well may be we could also assume that the fool
can fend for himself.
- Second assumption is that the husband
is always the dominant party and that the wife a housewife and even
if a career woman has more likely than not played a subordinate and
supporting role in the union. And so credit should be reserved for
the wife.
- Third that only the husband has
benefited from the wife’s assumed contributions to the failed
marriage. Sacrifices had only been one way, from the wife to the
husband.
- Fourth that the contributions from
the wife are always positive, beneficial, always assets and never
liabilities. So the length of marriage always goes in favour of
her. No matter what she did – even if she steals money to give to
her church that pays over half a million dollars to its pastor
etc.
- Fifth that the wife is always the
party that suffers the most disadvantage in a failed marriage and
so should be compensated with monetary rewards at his
expense.
What if the assumptions are all wrong – so wrong? What if the husband had put everything on the line including his life’s savings and invited her into his life and she then took over his business, banished him from his work, ran the business to the ground, abandoned the family and left him to take care of their child on his own, siphoned money out secretly, bought a brand new car paid for in cash and donated tens of thousands to her church, and when nothing was left, abandoned him to fend for himself, then chased him out of the house ... and when he did not go under, she returned to get more out of him… Can the wife simply make use of the Women’s Charter to hound the husband?
Will the mediators, councils and judges alike be willing to look at all these crucial facts before deciding summarily that the length of marriage is THE determining factor automatically favouring the wife?
It looks like a full trial can’t be avoided for me. I am desperate to find a good trial lawyer who would look into the facts without prior misassumptions. Any helpful comments would be much appreciated.
I know someone that went through a divorce and you are right... there is massive discrimination.
She can for example, easily get a protection order against you.
You have to be smart and protect yourself as much as possible but there is not much you can do. Not much you can do about it accept to bite the bullet and get through it, the divorce.
- First assumption is that the wife is
the weaker party, the disadvantaged party and so where sympathy
automatically is inclined towards. This is what the Woman’s
Charter’s fundamental purpose, base on the said assumption to
protect their rights and interests against the husband’s. What
about the husband? Well may be we could also assume that the fool
can fend for himself.
-
Originally posted by mlmersrlosers:
yup truly agree. It is meant to be used as a shield and not as a sword.
yup, i agree too, so far, the laws has serve us well, it has shield and protect us well, it nice to be a Singapore girl. -
Nice to be a Singapore girl, but if you are insane....
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
Nice to be a Singapore girl, but if you are insane....
No no, uncle, you make my life, Uncle. Me so happy to have your around, or else, here will be very boring.
Yo 4 oclock liao, did u miss the afternoon intake of medications??
And plse use red font, very unlike of u to use bold black
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
yup, i agree too, so far, the laws has serve us well, it has shield and protect us well, it nice to be a Singapore girl.I guess I can't agree with you more.
Is that the reason why so many sg girls are single?
-
With the way SG men has proven to be so self-serving.
You SG guys should be so thankful the Women's charter exists.
If not, NO smart SG woman will dare touch a SG men.
And no smart foreign woman will be interested in SG men or consider marrying them.
And NO discerning parent will allow their precious daughters to marry a SG man.
Before you strike the Charter down, you better think deeper about how you SG men are actually benefiting from the Women's charter.
Bottom line, treat your wife well, so you do not end up another pauper who claims unfairness.
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
With the way SG men has proven to be so self-serving.
You SG guys should be so thankful the Women's charter exists.
If not, NO smart SG woman will dare touch a SG men.
And no smart foreign woman will be interested in SG men or consider marrying them.
And NO discerning parent will allow their precious daughters to marry a SG man.
Before you strike the Charter down, you better think deeper about how you SG men are actually benefiting from the Women's charter.
Bottom line, treat your wife well, so you do not end up another pauper who claims unfairness.
Get your facts right, the Women's Charter can be taken apart in a court of law if the wife involved is not of sound character.
It was created to protect housewives who do not work professionaly in the marriage, not wives who give executive decisions in a family business. In fact, the family business was ruined by the wife should count against her in a family court and maybe a business court.
Custody of the child or children should also go to the threadstarter as he has always been there for the child or children. This fact must be strongly contested and evidence produced to prove that the wife did not care for the family unit.
Siphoning of family finances shows that wife does not have a good or sound character and any alimony should be reduced if awarded. Buying a new car in her own name and donating family finances to the church beyond means means she could be of unsound mind.
If the wife dares to challenge, get all evidence ready and be prepared to go to court.
-
protection orders?
If you have a police report of abuse, you will get it. how easy you can get it through other channel, not too sure... anyone knows?
-
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
Get your facts right, the Women's Charter can be taken apart in a court of law if the wife involved is not of sound character.
It was created to protect housewives who do not work professionaly in the marriage, not wives who give executive decisions in a family business. In fact, the family business was ruined by the wife should count against her in a family court and maybe a business court.
Custody of the child or children should also go to the threadstarter as he has always been there for the child or children. This fact must be strongly contested and evidence produced to prove that the wife did not care for the family unit.
Siphoning of family finances shows that wife does not have a good or sound character and any alimony should be reduced if awarded. Buying a new car in her own name and donating family finances to the church beyond means means she could be of unsound mind.
If the wife dares to challenge, get all evidence ready and be prepared to go to court.
Tsk tsk, good thing we don't have idiots like you holding the hammer.
Listen to one side only make such stupid judgements.
How you know the business is not already underwater before the wife takes over. If he is such a genius why he needs to hand over the business to his wife ?
You don't even know what kind of business it was, and what kind of setup it was, so you judge simi judge ?
Siphon money to buy car ah, buy what car, when the company goes under, the creditors come knocking, you think the car will not be towed ah ? Wake up ok ?
Donate tens of thousands to church ? Harlow... that man donno how to move money around meh ? You mean she send one SINGLE cheque to the church in TENS of thousands ah , then if he don't like donno how to cancel cheque issit ? Where the fark was he when she wrote that cheque ??? Or she has been doing it for past several years ? How you know if she donate hoping that her family (INCLUDING) her husband can get savior and was in good intentions ?????
Freakin one sided coin.. you lap it up like a kitty cat.
You think I donno meh ? Prior to divorce, many men also wants to fight custody, wants to fight to take the children hoping that the wife will stay because of the children.
Some women no choice have to leave the children because the father keep using the children as weapons to force the wife to stay.
Men do stupid things. So why should women have to bear the stupid consequences ?
How come that man got no power over his family affairs ? The wife got bigger guns than him issit ?
Wake up wake up... smell the shitty roses. Want to lie also lie properly lah.
Money money.. if she finish everything in the bank account, then what's there to claim ? If you really so stupid go and believe that stupid shit.. I think God also cannot help you.
-
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
Get your facts right, the Women's Charter can be taken apart in a court of law if the wife involved is not of sound character.
It was created to protect housewives who do not work professionaly in the marriage, not wives who give executive decisions in a family business. In fact, the family business was ruined by the wife should count against her in a family court and maybe a business court.
Custody of the child or children should also go to the threadstarter as he has always been there for the child or children. This fact must be strongly contested and evidence produced to prove that the wife did not care for the family unit.
Siphoning of family finances shows that wife does not have a good or sound character and any alimony should be reduced if awarded. Buying a new car in her own name and donating family finances to the church beyond means means she could be of unsound mind.
If the wife dares to challenge, get all evidence ready and be prepared to go to court.
you note even in your reply, the male has to prove all these. Not easy too sometimes.
unfortunately the woman's charter discriminates against males and there's seriously not much we can do about it.
-
Originally posted by hisoka:
you note even in your reply, the male has to prove all these. Not easy too sometimes.
unfortunately the woman's charter discriminates against males and there's seriously not much we can do about it.
There's a lot you can do.
Just don't be so stupid go and lie to the judges like what TS intends to do.
The judges hears hundreds of divorce cases every month, you think they so stupid cannot see through the big pot hole lies TS is presenting to him ? Please lah.
If you stop treating everyone like a fool, you wouldn't be treated like one.
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
There's a lot you can do.
Just don't be so stupid go and lie to the judges like what TS intends to do.
The judges hears hundreds of divorce cases every month, you think they so stupid cannot see through the big pot hole lies TS is presenting to him ? Please lah.
If you stop treating everyone like a fool, you wouldn't be treated like one.
that does not help with the discriminatioin. Whether he lies or not is another issue. You're going to have to take up your own vendetta with TS.
-
Originally posted by hisoka:
that does not help with the discriminatioin. Whether he lies or not is another issue. You're going to have to take up your own vendetta with TS.
My dear boy, don't let these stupid and irresponsible adult male scare you into thinking the Women's charter is out to destroy men.
The charter exists to reduce the number of women who become victims of some men's irresponsible ways. Till today, there are still many women and children abandoned by men who managed to find ways to weasel out of their obligations.
Protecting women and children is not discrimination.
If men had not been so irresponsible, the Charter would have become redundant long time ago.
-
he lied? about what?
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
he lied? about what?
About men's intelligence.
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Tsk tsk, good thing we don't have idiots like you holding the hammer.
Listen to one side only make such stupid judgements.
How you know the business is not already underwater before the wife takes over. If he is such a genius why he needs to hand over the business to his wife ?
You don't even know what kind of business it was, and what kind of setup it was, so you judge simi judge ?
Siphon money to buy car ah, buy what car, when the company goes under, the creditors come knocking, you think the car will not be towed ah ? Wake up ok ?
Donate tens of thousands to church ? Harlow... that man donno how to move money around meh ? You mean she send one SINGLE cheque to the church in TENS of thousands ah , then if he don't like donno how to cancel cheque issit ? Where the fark was he when she wrote that cheque ??? Or she has been doing it for past several years ? How you know if she donate hoping that her family (INCLUDING) her husband can get savior and was in good intentions ?????
Freakin one sided coin.. you lap it up like a kitty cat.
You think I donno meh ? Prior to divorce, many men also wants to fight custody, wants to fight to take the children hoping that the wife will stay because of the children.
Some women no choice have to leave the children because the father keep using the children as weapons to force the wife to stay.
Men do stupid things. So why should women have to bear the stupid consequences ?
How come that man got no power over his family affairs ? The wife got bigger guns than him issit ?
Wake up wake up... smell the shitty roses. Want to lie also lie properly lah.
Money money.. if she finish everything in the bank account, then what's there to claim ? If you really so stupid go and believe that stupid shit.. I think God also cannot help you.
In the family, there is such a thing as trust, even if misplaced. If a man thinks his wife can make better executive decisions, do you think he wouldn't leave the decision-making to his wife?As I said before, he must prepare evidence of wrong-doing that is culpable in a court of law. If none are present, then surely he must be lying. If the husband produce sufficient evidence of wrong doing, the law must be fair to the husband.
If you ask me what's there to claim? If the above case is proven to be true, the wife must not be able to claim alimony and can only claim whatever she contributed to the family unit prior to the marriage. If further evidence proves wrong-doing in a business court, the wife may have to pay for damages.
-
Not the women's charter again. lol
No MA AM !!
Women's Charter also protects her in the court in relation to her character into question regarding her past. Like rape cases.
We need a Men's Charter.
LoL!
-
Herwog,
The courts dont call it alimony.
And no, the womens charter does not discriminate men per se. Its just kinda discriminate against stupid & reckless men.