Divorce

[Ade]

FYI, "Listing a word as nonstandard is a way that dictionaries concede that a word is in common use, but isn't really a proper word."  So says Grammar Girl, a hot number with her glasses off.   Also, she agrees with me and considers irregardless a double negative. 

I see you've graduated on to become a pedant there Phil.

Let me help you with that;

Irregardless is an informal term commonly used in place of regardless or irrespective, which has caused controversy since the early twentieth century, though the word appeared in print as early as 1795. [1] Most dictionaries list it as "nonstandard" or a word which has become socially acceptable. "Nonstandard" means the word is a colloquialism, not "incorrect" or not a word.

[Ade]

I guess when children are involved, it is best to put up the pretense of having class, and also the topic of divorce disturbs the fantasy.
 
If we want to talk psychology. Let's talk about the Stockholm syndrome that's behind advocating that the guy roll over like a spaniel and take all this woman's bad behavior and be civil, classy, etc. Top priority. Must be civil. Divorce is a burning building and chivalry is dead. I'd grab up my blood children and knock down anyone in the way of me getting the hell out.

I hope you're honest with any women you're hunting that have kids? I wonder how many of the guys who think like you that are sniffing around single mothers because they can get "more for their money" are open about the burning building scenario?


And yes, I've been through a divorce and I acted like a human being even though there were no kids involved. For me it was just money and things, meaningless stuff when placed into perspective. I can hold my head up and know I acted decently and not be ashamed of myself.


And yes, my parents went through a nasty divorce when I was a 9 - 10 year old and it left me damaged for years. I would spare any kids that, mine or other people's. It's the humane and decent thing to do.


My opinion is that people who think like you are just POS.

[GQBlues]

...
If we want to talk psychology. Let's talk about the Stockholm syndrome that's behind advocating that the guy roll over like a spaniel and take all this woman's bad behavior and be civil, classy, etc. Top priority. Must be civil. Divorce is a burning building and chivalry is dead. I'd grab up my blood children and knock down anyone in the way of me getting the hell out.

You're assuming the subject wife is guilty of bad behavior having only heard a snippet of two posts.

I'm mystified why so many men who've had prior bad divorce/s would even *think* of getting involved in the MOB, where, all things considered, are far riskier than what they're shunning away from...

[newjason]

I'm mystified why so many men who've had prior bad divorce/s would even *think* of getting involved in the MOB, where, all things considered, are far riskier than what they're shunning away from...

I think the simple  term is  " glutton for punishment "
and maybe some " we all want what we  can not have "
or maybe  the FSU mousetraps there have better tasting cheese ?
Scott mentioned something about it compares to being in the Mafia.
( MOB is  a coincidence ) ?   


On another thread, Daveman said : this is a high risk - high reward pursuit.

What exactly does that mean?
What is the higher reward ?   

[Faux Pas]

I think the simple  term is  " glutton for punishment "
and maybe some " we all want what we  can not have "
or maybe  the FSU mousetraps there have better tasting cheese ?
Scott mentioned something about it compares to being in the Mafia.
( MOB is  a coincidence ) ?   


On another thread, Daveman said : this is a high risk - high reward pursuit.

What exactly does that mean?
What is the higher reward ? 

It's the woman of your dreams isn't it? It's finding her, marrying her and living happily ever after? 

Dave's statement was probably a tad bit misleading as it is the same high risk, high reward with a woman from any country IMHO

[BC]

On another thread, Daveman said : this is a high risk - high reward pursuit.

What exactly does that mean?
What is the higher reward ?   

Younger, hotter but probably most important the thrill of the ride as the former will wear off rather quickly in the rut of normal life.

Give a man a mountain and he will want to climb it, even if he freezes his nuts off trying to reach the top.  Most FSU seekers are ill equipped and poorly trained, trying to rush to the top just because 'I can'.

[Muzh]

But no, I've never been divorced and never had any children.

Well then, you should STFU. Don't be so opinionated of things you know nothing about.

How's that for a "mentally-castrated" spaniel?

DH

[noelscot]

I hope you're honest with any women you're hunting that have kids? I wonder how many of the guys who think like you that are sniffing around single mothers because they can get "more for their money" are open about the burning building scenario?


And yes, I've been through a divorce and I acted like a human being even though there were no kids involved. For me it was just money and things, meaningless stuff when placed into perspective. I can hold my head up and know I acted decently and not be ashamed of myself.


And yes, my parents went through a nasty divorce when I was a 9 - 10 year old and it left me damaged for years. I would spare any kids that, mine or other people's. It's the humane and decent thing to do.


My opinion is that people who think like you are just POS.

I am not "hunting for a wife." Russkaya can see through a WM's rose-colored BS. If someone has the luxury of behaving decently to stepchildren during a divorce, then that's great. But as Goethe said, there was no crime he could not imagine himself committing if the circumstances were right. Human nature is what it is. But since I don't whitewash life, I'm a piece of shit. Some of you guys talk so much about how decent you are, as if you're trying to convince someone.

[noelscot]

Well then, you should STFU. Don't be so opinionated of things you know nothing about.

How's that for a "mentally-castrated" spaniel?

DH

Fair enough. A person can learn much from people who've made mistakes and been unsuccessful, rather than making mistakes and being unsuccessful themselves.

[BC]

Some of you guys talk so much about how decent you are, as if you're trying to convince someone.

Not quite.  Just sharing experience.  That's what the board is really about.

[Faux Pas]

Fair enough. A person can learn much from people who've made mistakes and been unsuccessful, rather than making mistakes and being unsuccessful themselves.

Yeah we have many assholes here and none of them post incessantly about what an asshole they are or even infrequently. They leave that up to everybody else 

If you are looking for anyone to post about what a bad person they are, you've probably got a long wait.

OTOH, this is a forum where many come to post their mistakes rather they know it at the time or not. Many come and go having never admitted their mistakes or even recognized them. Those that pointed out the unrecognized mistakes are considered assholes for providing such a valuable service. It would appear everybody, just can't win for losing, huh?

It's a discussion board. No more, no less. Even a broke clock is right twice a day and nobody is right all the time.

[Jumper]

There isn't much info..
so the speculation is just back and forth banter but i'll play as well?

The OP hung in there for three years ,, (so did the mrs. for whatever reasons)
he says he is close with the 7 yo boy, so three years at the 4 to 7 age is a very  impressionable time.
It is not the boys fault the couple is having difficulties now, or ends their relationship.


The OP can distance himself from the mother and do damage control,all  while still maintaining a relationship with the boy (if the mother allows it)

To simply run from a burning building and leave the child in the smoke seems a poor analogy ,and way to live ones life.and yes I've been through a divorce and it doesn't have to be a blood bath and no one needs to lose their balls or spine.

Even if it bloodied me a bit i'd hang in there for the boy if i was close to him, and he had developed a relationship with me. and wanted to maintain it.
yes this would depend on the mother allowing it of course.

Animal instinct/ self preservation looking out for numero uno is one thing,
ignoring the needs of a 7yo child, because its inconvenient at the moment is another.

Like most things in life there is a lot of room between the opposite ends of the spectrum  posters are gravitating to?

It seems the OP has a genuine concern for the boy? How is that in anyway a negative thing?


Sure he should be concerned for his own welfare through a divorce, but that can include consideration of others involved as well.

[fathertime]

There isn't much info..
so the speculation is just back and forth banter but i'll play as well?

The OP hung in there for three years ,, (so did the mrs. for whatever reasons)
he says he is close with the 7 yo boy, so three years at the 4 to 7 age is a very  impressionable time.
It is not the boys fault the couple is having difficulties now, or ends their relationship.


The OP can distance himself from the mother and do damage control,all  while still maintaining a relationship with the boy (if the mother allows it)

To simply run from a burning building and leave the child in the smoke seems a poor analogy ,and way to live ones life.and yes I've been through a divorce and it doesn't have to be a blood bath and no one needs to lose their balls or spine.

Even if it bloodied me a bit i'd hang in there for the boy if i was close to him, and he had developed a relationship with me. and wanted to maintain it.
yes this would depend on the mother allowing it of course.

Animal instinct/ self preservation looking out for numero uno is one thing,
ignoring the needs of a 7yo child, because its inconvenient at the moment is another.

Like most things in life there is a lot of room between the opposite ends of the spectrum  posters are gravitating to?

It seems the OP has a genuine concern for the boy? How is that in anyway a negative thing?


Sure he should be concerned for his own welfare through a divorce, but that can include consideration of others involved as well.

This post makes good sense.  Based on the little information given, the lady sounds pretty rancid (sleeping around/abusive), so I would NOT cut her ANY slack.  Heck I would try to throw the book at her if I could.  Now somehow it would be nice to shelter the child he cares for throughout this process.  If the lady is how the OP describes her, she may well make him pay in order to be a part of the child’s life.  It all seems rather screwed up, here you have a guy that cares enough to want to be good to a child that isn’t even his (biologically), and he will probably be stabbed in the back for doing it.    I don’t know that I’m that good a person.  If it were me, I’d probably just be so happy to be free.  He must be a real nice little kid.

Fathertime!   

[jb]

Very late to the party,,, but my guess is that the OP is in big trouble.  He needs to get a good lawyer.  One who can open veins in the neck and lend a new meaning to the term "Blood Sucking Lawyer".

I only check this forum every other week or so just to see what Gator is up to, but this thread caught my attention.

1st of all, the AOS only applies to Federal Welfare Programs.  Most welfare programs are administered at the State level, therefore the OP should not be concerned about the 10 years of support he thinks he's on the hook for.  Not a big deal.  No one will be knocking on his door if she applies for welfare.

There is so much misinformation out there that it is hard to keep it all straight, the major issue is DV, if the OP has dodged the bullet on that, he's pretty much golden in divorce court.  The marriage has lasted only 3 years, and if the suggestion that she was only in it for a GC can be made, so much the better, judges understand these things.  Otherwise. it boils down to, "hey, we can't get along", let's go our separate ways", neither party has that much invested in the marriage.   It won't cost that much to dissolve the marriage.

I'm sorry for her 7 y.o. son, but he needs to go live with his mom.  andalusia needs to be able to separate from the kid as well as the mom, it needs to be a clean break.  I'd almost bet real money that the kid knows his mom better than you think.  Women who do these scams plan far into the future, kids are part of the plan. The kid knows what's going on.  Count on it.

[Turboguy]

Wow, nice to see you here jb.   You are totally correct your comment about AOS and he really doesn't need to worry about it.  The first form you file with a K-1, the I-134 isn't worth using for toilet paper.  It is totally non binding.  The one you file with AOS, the I-864 does have teeth but I have never, ever seen it enforced and it only applies to any money she would get from welfare or similar programs.

[noelscot]

Yeah we have many assholes here and none of them post incessantly about what an asshole they are or even infrequently. They leave that up to everybody else 

If you are looking for anyone to post about what a bad person they are, you've probably got a long wait.

OTOH, this is a forum where many come to post their mistakes rather they know it at the time or not. Many come and go having never admitted their mistakes or even recognized them. Those that pointed out the unrecognized mistakes are considered assholes for providing such a valuable service. It would appear everybody, just can't win for losing, huh?

It's a discussion board. No more, no less. Even a broke clock is right twice a day and nobody is right all the time.

Ok, but on a serious note.....


The OP said the woman was violent and had beat him up several times. I don't know if she is some ex-Soviet Olympic women's body builder, but if true, it sounds dangerous to be around her.


In the main, there is a duty for him to remove his children from a situation where they could be hurt by some crazy woman. I would say remove his children and her children from the situation, but I am not sure how that would work.

[newjason]

It's the woman of your dreams isn't it? It's finding her, marrying her and living happily ever after? 

Dave's statement was probably a tad bit misleading as it is the same high risk, high reward with a woman from any country IMHO

Okay,
But is not everything in life a risk?
the more risk i take, the more reward I make?
What is the reward exactly?
Love? happiness?
ok. but those are the same with every available woman, right?
I still don't see what is higher reward.

Younger, hotter but probably most important the thrill of the ride as the former will wear off rather quickly in the rut of normal life.

Give a man a mountain and he will want to climb it, even if he freezes his nuts off trying to reach the top.  Most FSU seekers are ill equipped and poorly trained, trying to rush to the top just because 'I can'.

Interesting.
what is the higher reward versus any other compatible woman?
The thrill of riding a younger hot woman? is that it? 
Yes that does wear off and can be done anywhere.


So, to everyone,  again I ask,  what is the higher reward exactly?

I am not seeing what it is, and what is so worth the greater risk?

I will start a new Topic for this..

[Gylden]

There is no real "higher reward", there is a perceived "higher reward" (getting someone out of your league), but it has already been mentioned, it most likely wears off. It is definetly more risky! 

[newjason]

There is no real "higher reward", there is a perceived "higher reward" (getting someone out of your league), but it has already been mentioned, it most likely wears off. It is definetly more risky! 

hello again Glyden,
thank you for the truthfull response.
Of course I already knew the answer, but I am really curious why so many have this perception, and where it comes from.
I suppose like base jumping in Kjerag if the risk is high, is the reward any greater?  no it's not.
It's still an amazing feeling, but it does wear off, and that's why we love it and keep going back.

I hope you are enjoying the summer in your beautiful country. It is an amazing place.

[Maxx2]

I am married to a lady from near Ukraine.We have been married for over three years. It is truly been like riding a roller coaster. Up and down, but mostly down. She has been verbally abusive to me and my kids and has even  hurt me a couple a few times. I have stayed with her because of fear of failure and because I love her son. She stop sleeping in our  bed months ago and has been unfaithful to me. She started sleeping away from me after her paperwork was mailed for 10 year visa. She just received her visa last week.I realize I should have divorced her before she obtained her visa. My question is about the affidavit of support that I signed. Do I really have to support her for 10 years or till she is a US citizen if she is unfaithful?  My mom was dying of stage IV cancer and told her she did not want her at our house because it was too small. Mom died about 2 months later. Will the government sue me if she goes on welfare or using any of these programs?

Thanks

9 years ago I asked the former District Director of the INS of three States about the Affidavit of Support. He told me not to worry about it. That is is not enforced. The 9 years since I have never heard of a case of it being enforced and I have been contacted by a lot of guys including some American women that had this concern. Not a one was this ever a factor. Good luck on everything. It was great seeing jb making a post.     

[ML]

But is not everything in life a risk?
the more risk i take, the more reward I make?

This is a very misunderstood concept, most often associated  with the field of investments.

There indeed is a risk/return tradeoff or relationship.
But this does not mean that if you take higher risk, that you will realize higher returns.

The correct wording (with an extra word needed) goes in the opposite direction:

If you are EXPECTING (or wanting) to make a higher return, you must take higher risks.

However, the way it works is that you WILL incur the higher risk, but you WILL NOT necessarily achieve your EXPECTED higher return.  That is what risk means.

Likewise, if you are actually earning a higher return, you are involved in a higher risk situation . . . even if you do not realize it.

It is a totally false idea that you will achieve a higher return if you merely take higher risks.  If that were truly achievable, then no one would ever take the lower risk road.

Most often when naive and inexperienced (with respect to the task at hand) people take higher risks, they achieve exactly what the higher risk can provide.  That is a zero or negative result.

So when you hear one of your friends say:  I am going to take higher risks and reap the associated higher returns . . . please slap them in the face.  And hope that someone else does the same for you.

[Jumper]

hello again Glyden,
thank you for the truthfull response.
Of course I already knew the answer, but I am really curious why so many have this perception, and where it comes from.
I suppose like base jumping in Kjerag if the risk is high, is the reward any greater?  no it's not.
It's still an amazing feeling, but it does wear off, and that's why we love it and keep going back.

I hope you are enjoying the summer in your beautiful country. It is an amazing place.

In your examples you are already assuming compatibility in any situation,regardless country,lifestyle ,personal qualities.
while that's a realistic view,

this endeavor  is often perceived as having a higher probability  of finding someone compatible.
(why that would be , i don't know )
thus the higher risk, possibly  higher reward mentality.

The perception isn't necessarily that  that a compatible person you end up with would be *better*,
its the perception that finding someone compatible is more like;ly, and therefor worth the added risk.

I'm not saying its true,in fact i think its less likely, but  just what I think motivates that thought process.

[Brianinaz]

To the OP's original question here's a link to the form: http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-864.pdf. It tells you what you're obligated for
By signing it you agree to provide her with 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines for her and her household. That means not just any monies she obtains from federal programs. It tells you that if she obtains any public funds the government can sue you for those funds but does not limit your responsibility to those funds. Your responsibility is 125% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines for her and her household. For 2012 that is $18,912.50.
When I first thought about marring a woman from the FSU I did a fair amount of reading on this and came across a couple of cases where it was in forced, not by the government but as part of the divorce proceedings. One of them was I believe from Florida. The form is in effect a contract and a judge may choose to enforce it in which case he could be on the hook for the above 19K. In addition it's not for 10 years. It's "worked or can be credited with 40 quarters of coverage under the Social Security Act". One could conceivably be on the hook endlessly

[BC]

http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/JNJournal01.nsf/c0d731e03de9828d852574580042ae7a/2cbe6a52e76636f28525763b00661a63!OpenDocument&Highlight=0,*

[ML]

That's pretty scary stuff !!   

Somebody in a recent thread just mentioned that the Feds rarely enforce this.
But,  by reading Brian and BC's referenced posts, we can see that is of little comfort now.