quote:Originally posted by Kweli4Real:quote:What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her?
That's a rhetorical question, right? But completely ignoring what DD correctly stated:quote:Family court is about economic equity, primarily for the child(ren), not about exacting financially punitive measures based on emotional pain.
The question should be "What is the acceptable amount of money a millionaire should pay his ex
and his child, after he cheats on her and abuses her? Leave the children out of it because there is nothing to suggest that they witnessed any of the abuse or infidelity.
If he abused her, sue him in civil [not family] court. If he was unfaithful, sue him in civil [not family] court.
It has not been established that Kelis is "exacting financially punitive measures based on emotional pain." The filter of gender and past experience may lead some to interpret it that way.
also there is no way to "leave the children" out of a broken marriage regardless of whether they eyeballed the specific acts of betrayal. Children are sensitive and they know when parents are angry with each other, avoiding each other, and not making those funny noises that they used to make at night. As much as one may want to compartmentalize it's not possible to leave the children out of it.
What would be the point of taking a family court matter to civil court? That makes no sense whatsoever. A dude would be lucky to avoid criminal court in matters of abuse. FAmily court is for family issues and the correct venue to sort out the details surrounding the dissolution of a family.