Quote:
Originally Posted by jonarmis  Ok, men are not entitled to maternal leave as most people say, but in other countries paternal leaves are granted to male spouses. This is for men to be able to render assistance to their women or the wife. That covers regular or normal childbirths and even miscarriages. The role of men has evolved thru the years. But let not the deadbeat dad be the prevailing norm that we should stick to.  |
Sorry I'm mentioning Canada so much, it's what I know because I live in this country. Don't quote but I'm pretty sure it works like this, women get something like 7-8 months maternity leave, a man is entitled to 4-5 months paternal leave but what is common is that we give up our paternal leave and give that time to our wives who extend their maternity leave to a full year - it's actually a pretty good system: most couples will get the full 12 months for the mother but some will split the maternity leave/paternity leave so that the mother can re-enter the workforce and free herself from the stress of taking care of newborns 24/7 and it allows the husband/father time to bond with the newborn and take on more responsibility as a parent.
Either way it's a win/win because the maternity/paternity leave is paid for by the government, it's like going on unemployment insurance, something like 55% of your gross income for a full year so even when you're on mat leave you still are bringing in income which is helpful considering that this a very expensive time what with all the new things that need to be purchased for babies and ongoing care items as well (diapers, formula, clothes, strollers, beds, cribs, furniture, etc.) - it all adds up.
I also think we've veered off the main topic by quite a bit but it's still an interesting discussion to be sure. I'm hoping we can all agree (or most of us anyways) that deadbeat dad isn't a great label, just like deadbeat mom wouldn't be a great label if it was ever used.
I am noticing that family law is changing with the times and it's good because it has to stay current to reflect what's happening in society. Men having to pay spousal support forever because of a divorce that they didn't choose to have is ridiculous. Child support doesn't have to be exhorbitant either and from what I've read if the father does want to have joint custody of the children, the courts are looking at the situation from the child's benefit perspective: children don't ask to be born and both parents should play an equal role in raising their children. Joint custody also means not having to pay any or very little child support which means less stress for the father who gets to have equal access to his children. It also means that women are being held more accountable and to the high standards they helped to set. That means women are expected to find gainful full-time employment to support themselves and can't expect their ex-husband to support them indefinitely. It also means that in situations where the wife was the higher wage earner, a man can request spousal support from his wife just the same way a wife would expect it from him. The problem is that society frowns upon that situation even though men & women are supposed to be regarded as equals, it's almost expected that a wife pursue spousal support but when the situation is reversed, people will frown upon the man for doing the same thing, the same old stigma, "be a man, don't ask for money from your wife to support you", you are made to feel bad to ask for equal treatment.
Personally in the event of divorces, unless the marriage is being ended because of some abuse issues, the person initiating the divorce should pay a hefty premium and should probably cover all court costs on top of that. If that's what you want you should pay for it, especially when the other spouse doesn't want the divorce and is willing to work things out and pursue counselling. Marriage is so disposable nowadays, everyone is so quick to pull that trigger - that's why it should cost you alot of money to get a divorce, a lesson to be taught to you for not keeping your word & your committment. When you make that choice, there should be consequences. Others will argue that this impedes your free will & freedom in general - it doesn't impede anything, it just makes you accountable for your actions and there is nothing wrong with accountability. Marriage used to be the most sacred institution and now it's nearly the opposity - divorce statistics prove this; relationships and matters of the heart mean nothing when it's so easy to drop the old and get with something new. I think you could look at it from the other side as well, you should have to pay a hefty premium and get certified to get married, this would mean going to school and learning about relationships and how to deal with conflict, problems, difficult times, etc. to better prepare you for marriage and pay a decent amount of $$$ for a wedding license. This would weed out most of the "riff raff" from getting married, you would only have serious people getting married, limiting dysfunctional relationships and issues of spousal support, child support and how these divorces ultimately affect the children the most.
I'm sure God never intended marriage to become a big joke and to have such little value that people found it too easy to end one marriage and start another. Too bad we can't see the wisdom in repairing relationships rather than ending them only to start new ones that are bound to fail because we never took the time to learn our mistakes from the previous ones. That is the pattern of behavior that is in effect and no one seems to get it.
Or even worse, no one seems to care.