petitefrancaise

"Having an agreement in place about finances and child support/alimony could prevent huge legal bills in the US. From what I've read a post-nuptial agreement can't cover child custody issues. If your ex-wife/husband says you can't go back to the UK with your children, then you probably can't but an agreement could mean that at least you are better off financially than you would be if your local state rules are applied."

Can't think why you lot are still blethering on about the custody issue. See above which I wrote in post #1.

Trailing spouses can be forced to stay in host country because of child custody issues. Worse if their visa expires but the kids get LPR through father. Yes, I know of a case of this. Having something in writing may not make this one any better but certainly might help.

People who have married USC and kids born here. Well, it may help with the financial situation if you do a pre-nup. Can't imagine I would marry someone who would put in writing that he would be prepared to only pay $400 a month for their upkeep.

I repeat, you may not like the idea of a pre-nup but you already have one. - the state one. You may not like the idea of a post-nup ( which I'm guessing applies mostly to ex-pats moving here for work since you have to be married) but seriously would you want to end up in the situation of the other poster? BTW - she hasn't said anything about moving to keep the kids from their father, she's exhausted and needs some help.

I have divorced friends in europe who live in a different country to their ex-husbands (hubby moved for work purposes in both cases), Kids spend 50% of their holidays with him and everyone is happy.

moneypenny20

You truly believe that the fathers are happy that they see their kids for 8 weeks a year? That the kids are happy they see their dads 8 weeks a year?

scrubbedexpat099

Probably not that long.

petitefrancaise

yes. in both cases the husband asked for a review of the custody arrangements which the wives agreed to. Not everyone is father of the year. The kids speak to their dads most days through video calls. He helps with homework virtually.

Unless you're doing 50/50 custody ( which happens a lot in France - it's the default which you have to have a good argument to not do) then the kids only see their dads every other weekend anyway.

Besides which, how many families do you know where the father or mother takes an assignment abroad but the family stays put and they all manage things?

Anyway, the POST_NUPTIAL agreement is about the finances. You keep coming back to the custody. Maybe you'd like to start a different thread?

scrubbedexpat099

She wants what she wants, hardly unusual.

Children moved here when they were babies and I am sure have no recollection of the UK. And as has been mentioned above such agreements do not apply in these circumstances.

Put it another way, and I only know what has been posted, what if an ex spouse came on here and said the other one wanted to take the children who are US Citizens and who grew up here to another continent, what can I do to stop it?

petitefrancaise

good lord Boiler. That's easy. The Hague Convention...... if any of you bothered to look at the lawyer's link I put in, you would read about how the Hague Convention is being interpreted to make it more applicable to real-life couples. It was put in place precisely to stop a parent absconding with the children without the other parent's permission.

You want another scenario? A british wife living in Pakistan with almost no money and 2 UK children but the husband pays nothing. She can't take the kids to the UK due to the Hague Convention. Unless he's beaten her.

scrubbedexpat099

Exactly, you seem to think a pre or post nup is some sort of end run around Hague.

petitefrancaise

I would suggest that you all go away and look at your state's divorce laws. Then come back here and tell me you'd be happy to live with that?

And if you fought for what you could get, how would you fund the fight? My next door neighbours (both USC) are selling their house to pay the credit card bills incurred from paying the lawyers. Both have about $60k to pay.

petitefrancaise

NO I DON'T!!!!!

The Hague convention is about custody not finances.

The agreement is centered on the finances.

If you have to stay in a country because you can't leave the country at least make sure you have the money to do it.

Is that so hard to get?

scrubbedexpat099

I know quite a few Lawyers, and a couple of Judges.

One who does Divorce made some comment a long time ago, forget exactly how it went, but on the lines of how surprised she was about how far some people would go and it ends up with the Lawyers dividing the assets. That was not her style, but some clients, well....

Another friend once said that you are only finally divorced when you have no money left.

But that is hardly State or even Country specific.

petitefrancaise

sure, but you can't control the behaviour of the other spouse. In the ideal world everyone would put the needs of the kids first and be prepared to pay for it. Some don't and then you have no choice but to fight back. I go back to my original post where I stated that having an agreement in place regarding FINANCES in the case of divorce means that you are having a discussion when everyone wants the best for each other. Which is often not the case when you are divorcing and very emotional/fearful.

Why don't you ask your legal buds about the cases where a pre/post nup was in place?

scrubbedexpat099

Life is not like that, would be nice if it was. The issue is custody and support and that is a court issue. Most people well certainly the ones I know, well there is simply not enough in the pot for everybody to be comfortable, Divorce is usually about how much you lose, not if you lose.

petitefrancaise

exactly. And that is why spouses end up fighting. There is a basic minimum financial arrangement in the state laws and if you need more (more than $400 for 2 kids?) then you have to be prepared to fight for it if your spouse isn't going to be agreeable.

All of you reading, go away and look at how much alimony or spousal assistance your state would allow you with no other arrangement in place. With no money to pay a lawyer, with an angry spouse that's what you'd get.

scrubbedexpat099

I roughly know how it operates in CO and there is no State mandated amounts.

You seem fixated on the amount. It may be quite reasonable. I have no idea either way.

petitefrancaise

Boiler, this whole conversation started because a woman is struggling financially with little help from her ex-husband.

If there is no state-mandated amount in CO, how do you suppose the matter is decided? Over a nice cup of tea and a chat?