Ah, but the Supreme Despot would much rather spend his free time at an outdoor table at a tavern on a corner, watching all the girls go by, then trying to decipher the minutae of every single domestic partnership contract that comes along. Lawyers are useful for a society. (Although if someone would beat Alan Dershowitz’s tongue to death with a stick and put a stake through it, there’s a cabinet post in it for them ;).)
**
And they can. But if the boilerplate contract doesn’t fit your situation, you can customize it or completly re-write it, as long as it has the couple of state-required clauses in it. And I would strongly recommend that any Fenris-topian who wants to “roll their own” contract work with a lawyer. A cousin of mine who is a lawyer told some horror stories about people’s do-it-yourself wills. (Hint: you can’t bequeath 135% of your belongings and you certainly can’t give the same non-divisible item to 4 people.)
**
**
Disagree here. The issue of how much the kids get is controlled by law that and cannot reduced via the contract (although it could be increased). The issue of how much the partner gets is up to the signing parties. In other words, the kids get a %, but the spouse, regardless of children gets a seperate amount. The spouse who gets the kids has access to the kid’s percent for the kid’s purposes. In other words, I’m doing my best (and it’s not very good at the moment) trying to keep child-support as far as possible from alimony.
**
The first paragraph is perfect and, with an imperious wave of my Bejeweled Battle-Sceptre, <poof> it now one of the required clauses.
Re the second paragraph: probably unnecessary, since the kids get the benefits regardless of their parents marital status, but I’l mull it over.
**
I like it, mostly!
note new titles ----->His Royal Tyrantness and Ultimate Supreme Potintate, Fenris the First
Glad you liked it. Thanks for adopting a bit of it… (who woulda thunk that I, having been thrown in reform school at 13, would someday be making laws, ha.)
I meant the sliding scale of benefits to refer only to tax breaks. Child support should certainly be separate from alimony.
I do understand the need for lawyers to ensure an equitable dissolution of partnerships. My priorty was and is the children. I like very much that their well-being is ensured by law in Fenris-topia. I may move.
Glad you liked it. Thanks for adopting a bit of it… (who woulda thunk that I, having been thrown in reform school at 13, would someday be making laws, ha.)
I meant the sliding scale of benefits to refer only to tax breaks. Child support should certainly be separate from alimony.
I do understand the need for lawyers to ensure an equitable dissolution of partnerships. My priorty was and is the children. I like very much that their well-being is ensured by law in Fenris-topia. I may move.