I live in California and I just found out that there is no more common law. I was living with my boyfriend for 14 years and when we broke up and went to court about then kids, I found out that I have no rights as far as alimony. Do you think that There should be common law?
2007-03-12 12:48:32 · 10 answers · asked by Teslajuliet 4 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
I don't know the rules that apply in California, but I think that what happened to you is a real crime. But, it is a lesson and proves one thing, that is why there is a marriage contract, because it protects the woman from terrible situations like this. That is why I do not believe in living with someone without the benefit of marriage, because you have no financial rights. But I am disappointed in your boyfriend, because obviously you did not know what kind of man you were living with, because if he was a good man with a conscience, he would provide for you in some way. I think if you get a good divorce lawyer, ask his advice, see what are your options. In the meantime, if you have no means of support, go to social services, and if the children are his, he has to provide and support them even if you were never married. Check out all your options, and you may be entitled to more than you think. I wouldn't take back this clown if I were you. Best of Luck to you and your children.
2007-03-12 12:58:30 · answer #1 · answered by cardgirl2 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Common Law Marriage depends on the state you live in. I feel it is a cop out and I'm sorry, I do not think you are in titled to alimony. Child support and visitation rights are something else entirely. I feel bad for you, but you did never marry.
2007-03-12 12:58:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You should have certain property rights and child support, but alimony.. no. If you two did not legally marry then there is nothing legally saying that either of you planned on making any type of permanent commitment to each other. Having kids is about the only bond that you two share now.
2007-03-12 12:54:59 · answer #3 · answered by 2007 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am not in favor of common law marriage. A man and a woman who profess they love each other should get married first before they even have children. That is the right thing to do.
2007-03-12 12:54:40 · answer #4 · answered by Belen 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No there should not be a common law, its the choice you make when you decide to be with someone for a long time and NOT get married ..no one owes anyone spousal support , you need to forget about his money and think of ways to make your own, and in CA the child support laws are this 450 per child good luck.
2007-03-12 12:53:26 · answer #5 · answered by Gina 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, b/c what common law does is degrade marriage and says that you can do whatever you want and not have to make a commitment to anyone. Your b/f never made the official commitment to take care of your family, so now he doesn't have to. Be smart about it next time and get married.
2007-03-12 12:53:42 · answer #6 · answered by emerys4christ 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No I think people should get married if they want the benefits of marriage and the outcomes of divorce.
2007-03-12 12:51:35 · answer #7 · answered by Poppet 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sorry i agree with the others about this one.. and i am in the same boat as you .. i live with my bf.. but i look at it this way.. when i buy my property he cant take it from me like my ex hubby did
2007-03-12 12:56:13 · answer #8 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
no, 'common law' is fornication, nothing more.
2007-03-12 12:57:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, I do not...
2007-03-12 12:53:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋