Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

So let’s sun this up: you have no ability to understand what someone might actually be saying and it’s all because you’re a mean a$$hole?

The entire thread is a bunch of people talking about other ways for her to go skiing without any effort by OP to steer anything in any other direction so that’s how I assumed I wasn’t the only one reading things that way. And I was just gonna say that I couldn’t relate because
I’m not a cold weather person.

Real Mensa candidate here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should’ve had a better lawyer during the divorce negotiations.

As someone going through it now, and want to keep it out of court, how do you force someone to agree to something they don’t want? Court doesn’t care about his bad behavior or cruelty and it won’t move the needle for alimony or division of assets. So, at some point, he can just say “you want too much” and stop negotiating, knowing he will get a better deal from a judge. How does a better lawyer change that? Honest, genuine question.

OP and all this above. I live in a state that mandates mediation before court. I knew I didn’t even want to get to mediation because of the focus on give to get. Mediation in my state, and maybe this is universal, is a specific process with an outside mediator chosen by a judge with a set amount of days and interactions. If it does not concise with an agreement, off to court you go. Court would decided a settlement that would have been very much to the letter of the law and precedent in my state especially with child support (minimum from a table until your income is off the table and then it still isn’t much), alimony (33% of years married), and assets (50/50).

I started with my priorities- custody and child support- and worked my way down the list. There is a point where no attorney in the universe can force someone to do certain things, especially when the alternative to negotiated agreements (mediation, court) will be better for the party that is advantaged. It is what it is.

It’s hard to have much sympathy when you are not entitled to even what you did get, as you say if the judge decided you would have gotten even less. Plus you are obviously quite well off anyway. So your posts read like “I got more than I was entitled to, but it still wasn’t enough because I didn’t get the ski house and enough to live as a SAHM forever.” That is really tone deaf. Many people have actual problems.

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should’ve had a better lawyer during the divorce negotiations.

As someone going through it now, and want to keep it out of court, how do you force someone to agree to something they don’t want? Court doesn’t care about his bad behavior or cruelty and it won’t move the needle for alimony or division of assets. So, at some point, he can just say “you want too much” and stop negotiating, knowing he will get a better deal from a judge. How does a better lawyer change that? Honest, genuine question.

OP and all this above. I live in a state that mandates mediation before court. I knew I didn’t even want to get to mediation because of the focus on give to get. Mediation in my state, and maybe this is universal, is a specific process with an outside mediator chosen by a judge with a set amount of days and interactions. If it does not concise with an agreement, off to court you go. Court would decided a settlement that would have been very much to the letter of the law and precedent in my state especially with child support (minimum from a table until your income is off the table and then it still isn’t much), alimony (33% of years married), and assets (50/50).

I started with my priorities- custody and child support- and worked my way down the list. There is a point where no attorney in the universe can force someone to do certain things, especially when the alternative to negotiated agreements (mediation, court) will be better for the party that is advantaged. It is what it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

So let’s sun this up: you have no ability to understand what someone might actually be saying and it’s all because you’re a mean a$$hole?

The entire thread is a bunch of people talking about other ways for her to go skiing without any effort by OP to steer anything in any other direction so that’s how I assumed I wasn’t the only one reading things that way. And I was just gonna say that I couldn’t relate because
I’m not a cold weather person.

Real Mensa candidate here.

Well, I’m not wrong am I?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

So let’s sun this up: you have no ability to understand what someone might actually be saying and it’s all because you’re a mean a$$hole?

The entire thread is a bunch of people talking about other ways for her to go skiing without any effort by OP to steer anything in any other direction so that’s how I assumed I wasn’t the only one reading things that way. And I was just gonna say that I couldn’t relate because
I’m not a cold weather person.

Real Mensa candidate here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

So let’s sun this up: you have no ability to understand what someone might actually be saying and it’s all because you’re a mean a$$hole?

The entire thread is a bunch of people talking about other ways for her to go skiing without any effort by OP to steer anything in any other direction so that’s how I assumed I wasn’t the only one reading things that way. And I was just gonna say that I couldn’t relate because
I’m not a cold weather person.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

So let’s sun this up: you have no ability to understand what someone might actually be saying and it’s all because you’re a mean a$$hole?

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

]]

NP, why are you being so mean? The skiing is just emblematic. She can't do the stuff with her FAMILY that she used to do. What she is going through is a massive change in life circumstances.

Why can some of you just not offer compassion and any kind critical thinking? Are you this mean in real life?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You should’ve had a better lawyer during the divorce negotiations.

As someone going through it now, and want to keep it out of court, how do you force someone to agree to something they don’t want? Court doesn’t care about his bad behavior or cruelty and it won’t move the needle for alimony or division of assets. So, at some point, he can just say “you want too much” and stop negotiating, knowing he will get a better deal from a judge. How does a better lawyer change that? Honest, genuine question.

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?

Anonymous wrote:So let’s sum this up: OP is sad about the divorce and jealous of her kids and it’s all because she can’t go skiiing anymore?