Quote:
Originally Posted by mykalberta
A prenup would have definatley at least showed what he is owed. Because there is none, then you let an imperfect court and activist judge system to decide your destiny.
Likely they have the often common "feel sorry for the single mother" syndrome which is unfortunately common these days as it "takes 2 to tango".
The article isnt the most clear. I had assumed that the judge arbitrarily decided to lump his future payments into one large one to compensate for the mothers circumstances. Still mondboggling unfair but who said justice was fair.
|
A prenup would have allocated assets entering the marriage, that doesn't appear to be an issue here. This is a judge forcing child care payments disguised as alimony.
If he did act as a father the situation changes, but the article doesn't really tell us anything on that front.