What Do You Do When Your Ex Cut Your Ties With Your Kids

[despair_divorcee 0]

I always believe a failed marriage does not lead to failed family. Fatherly love is equally important as motherly love.

Unfortunately, not everyone can be rationale when going through divorce. My brother case is one good classic example.

When the wife cannot get what she demands ($3500 for child support for 2 kids less than 10 years old !), she imposed PPO on him based on alleged violence. Fyi, there were no past history of family violence. This is simply abusing the good intent of woman's charter.

A divorce proceeding can be a lengthy one when your ex is immature to contest every single item including the reasons for divorce. Every attempt to see the kids will end up police case. So till date, my brother has not seen his children for the past 5 months though he misses them dearly.

I am a lady and recognise more women are financially capable. They may not be the weaker party. When they become unreasonable and started to manipulate the kids to severe their ties with the fatherhood, what should and can the father do ?

I am sure there are many men who suffered in silence out there. Should the man give up their fatherhood and be mistaken by their young kids when they grow up ? Does a mother have the rights to make such decision for the young children ?

We have exhausted all options feel disheartened to see my brother being prohibited to access the kids due to unreasonable behavior.

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated

[asoon88 0]

I always believe a failed marriage does not lead to failed family. Fatherly love is equally important as motherly love.

Unfortunately, not everyone can be rationale when going through divorce. My brother case is one good classic example.

When the wife cannot get what she demands ($3500 for child support for 2 kids less than 10 years old !), she imposed PPO on him based on alleged violence. Fyi, there were no past history of family violence. This is simply abusing the good intent of woman's charter.

A divorce proceeding can be a lengthy one when your ex is immature to contest every single item including the reasons for divorce. Every attempt to see the kids will end up police case. So till date, my brother has not seen his children for the past 5 months though he misses them dearly.

I am a lady and recognise more women are financially capable. They may not be the weaker party. When they become unreasonable and started to manipulate the kids to severe their ties with the fatherhood, what should and can the father do ?

I am sure there are many men who suffered in silence out there. Should the man give up their fatherhood and be mistaken by their young kids when they grow up ? Does a mother have the rights to make such decision for the young children ?

We have exhausted all options feel disheartened to see my brother being prohibited to access the kids due to unreasonable behavior.

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated

Divorce is a serious matter. The fact the your brother and his spouse arrived to this stage cannot be the doing of one party only. His spouse is claiming an exhorbitant amount for child support. Unless your brother was (is) a rich man, coughing out $3.5K is no small change.

I sense that your brother has done something grave enough to piss-off his wife. That is why she does not want the children to be near him at all.

I suggest that your brother stop insisting on his 'right' to see the children. The cheapest and simplest way is to create a facebook account with an identity bearing the children's name + "father", eg. Trilyn Tang's Daddy or Desmon Goh's Papa.

Soon enough, the children will have their own facebook account and somehow, things will connect. It can be on any other social website.

I am a married man with 4 kids aged between 6 to 18 years. I know a woman can be nasty and unreasonable at times despite a husband's best of intentions. However, every party in a marriage must give-n-take including the children. Only time can heal wounds. Ask your brother to reflect on what he has done to cause his marriage to fail. He cannot be an angel. You know what I mean.

I wish them well and get back together for the sake of the children. They are still young. Falling back in love isn't that difficult if one stops being selfish and point fingers

[m@cky 0]

......

Edited December 27, 2010 by m@cky

[manutd1972 1]

i'm sorry to say....but at present, thr is no law to protect the rights of a man caught in a divorce.

whether just a husband or a father, the law, by virtue of the Women's Charter, only looks after the interests of the woman in a divorce.

even in our modern society where so much has changed, and women's rights, status, education, employability, earning power, financial position etc etc etc has improved by leaps and bounds, the law unfortunately has not caught up wif "modernisation" and maintains that the female is the weaker sex and in a divorce, would be highly subjected to gross abuse, be taken advantage of, or be left in a hugely distressed state. Thus the great level of protection accorded to women by the Women's Charter.

As for us men, too bad for us. we can only hope tt when things go wrong, d woman we married and are nw divorcing, would be fair and rational.

[kalimantan 6]

woman charter protects both men and women equally, do not be mislead by the words.

men can also apply for PPO against wife too. Why didn't the men do that ? Once the man do that, the judge will stops issuiing PPO to both parents ! Actually it is to keep the "wife" from un-necessary PPO.

[flashock 0]

Kids are innocent, do what you can for the kids. Love = lots of volunteering efforts!

[manutd1972 1]

woman charter protects both men and women equally, do not be mislead by the words.

men can also apply for PPO against wife too. Why didn't the men do that ? Once the man do that, the judge will stops issuiing PPO to both parents ! Actually it is to keep the "wife" from un-necessary PPO.

when one party makes any accusation/application via the Charter, the onus of proof is on the male party.

when she cries foul, he must prove his innocence. when he cries foul, he must prove he suffered a disadvantage instead of her proving her innocence like he had to do in the former scenario. the onus is always on the male party to prove themselves. that in itself, shows a biased position.

so tell me den, how does the Charter serve to protect both men and women in the same breath? when it is the men who always have to prove themselves? whether the innocent party or the aggrieved one.

i'm sorry, even lawyers, counsellors, women's rights activists also say that the Charter does not adequately protect the men as it does the women. so i cannot agree wif ur statement.

[kalimantan 6]

i assume PPO refers to physical injury. Not any "foul" u describe above.

If woman issues PPO on physical injury, the woman must provide medical proof.

I encounter a case where woman accused the biological father molest the daughter by touching daughter's private part. So the father bring the daughter to kk hospital for a check-up. Doctor said no trace. After that, woman knows cannot have such pranks anymore. This is becasuse the father can also say that the woman (adulter or step-father) touches her daughter and this cycle continues.

Main thing is no need to prove anything in court first. Make sure all the greviance the woman tries to play punk is apply equally to her so that she also don't have a good time, ie inconveneince her as well.

Remember one thing, when judge makes decision, they don't accept hearsay, they only accept evidence as in the affavidit.

So when you hear what lawyers, counsellors or women's right activists say - it is all based on hearsay.

[manutd1972 1]

......Main thing is no need to prove anything in court first.......when judge makes decision, they don't accept hearsay, they only accept evidence as in the affavidit......

i'm sure a lot of the readers here are appreciative of your clarifications.....

and i dun mean to nit-pick or deliberately oppose you, but isn't it contradicting, wat u just said? "no need to prove anything in court first?", yet, the judge makes a decision only on evidence? if u show evidence in court, so that the judge can make his ruling, den u are proving ur case in court.

[OhMyTohFu 0]

woman charter protects both men and women equally, do not be mislead by the words.

men can also apply for PPO against wife too. Why didn't the men do that ? Once the man do that, the judge will stops issuiing PPO to both parents ! Actually it is to keep the "wife" from un-necessary PPO.

No offence but you are the first person i've heard saying that the WC protects both the men and women equally...

just curious...are you male or female?

let me give you a scenario - say a husband has been providing his wife with an allowance of $2k a month for all her facials, spa treatment etc...wife have an affair outside and was caught red handed. husband filed for divorce based on adultery..

If the WC protects the men equally, why is it that the cheating wife have the right to ask for a $2k alimony then?

Why is it that when you appear before the fmaily court judge, adultery is only a ground for immediate divorce but cannot be used as a reason for not paying alimony?

If this is equal then seriously, i dunno what isn't..

Edited December 28, 2010 by OhMyTohFu

[kalimantan 6]

i m a family MAN, not woman :-)

Refering to the scenaio of the 2k spa thing and wife commits adultery - are u hearing from people or did the judge give actual judgements of 2k? This is impossible because the wife that was caught red-handed - u must submit the adultery photos and bring the 3rd party up to court as well. Then the judge will give $0 , not $1 as nominal sum.

Question to u is : was there evidence submiited ? If not, the wife will bite back and say "no adultery". TAKE NOTE THAT in any affaidvit, EVERYONE CAN LIE inside the document and ask for the SKY AMOUNT. So don't be agitated when the wife ask for the MOON.

To : manutd1972. If you have evidence , just submit it.

[tofu123 0]

Woman charter is an extremely unfair charter..i have friends who are lawyers and they readily admit it themselves....when it comes to divorce it is extremely one sided in the family court...woman charter entirely protects the women...the women are allows to claim against their man in the event of a divorce...but the men can do craps if their women stray or ever decide to leave them...any guys with half a brain would not even consider marriage when divorce is so common nowadays and with woman charter breathing down their neck......it would be best that they just co-habit with the girl without the need to sign on the dotted line.... let's not forget that every little thing a particular person can get in a marriage they can get outside the house of a marriage, this sort of as companionship, sex, residing with each other, and so forth.... and adultery is extremely hard to prove in the court of law....a guy who is dumb enough to get married is better off paying the alimony for the women...

Edited December 22, 2011 by tofu123

[CuGu 12]

i think that as long both party or any party hated each other , with or without woman charter...it will still be a very difficult situation for all...cos both will think of creative way to hurt each other...

[mayhem 2]

Seems like the woman is driven by money. If that is the case, then offer her money or pay for his children's stuff (e.g. education, clothing or toys) and she will probably agree to let him be with his children.