Glossary items: (these are not ads.)
End of list.
Financial risk in relationships
Property settlement - the elephant swept under the carpet
Asset stripping and skirting
A general term for government programmes that aim to bring about a mass transfer of financial assets from men to women. The transfer is achieved through various discriminatory policies and legal practices.
Australian financial companies are being given strategic presentations telling them how a large portion of the nation's assets will soon transfer, and be consolidated under sole female control - through either divorce, or the husband's early death. This will concentrate accumulated assets from both family lines - i.e. both the husband's and wife's inherited assets - into female hands. See sample presentation slide (company details removed)
Country risk
Country risk is a concept used in investment risk analysis. It aims to compare the relative risk of investing in each country. Each country gets a risk rating covering risks that may result in significant losses to investors. The rating covers risks such as a country's government defaulting on its debts, or nationalising an industry or business in which you have invested.
The risk to personal and family 'investments' in a county can be rated in this way as well. In some countries, there is high risk of significant losses from biased practices in government agencies - such as relationship law or asset stripping and skirting programmes.
The solution, in a global employment and residential market, is to have much better disclosure of relationship law, and gender based employment and asset transfer practices. This will allow men to understand the relative risks of investing their time and efforts, in various countries and relationships. Such risk analysis is especially important before deciding to have children in a particular country.
Divestment risk
Many men spend a lot of time trying to build up financial assets and reduce risk from market forces. They might check various prospectus documents, look at risks compared to expected return, and compare the risk profile of investments. Often financial planners are engaged to prepare reports on investment strategy under various scenarios.
However, these men give little thought to the biggest financial risk in their life. That is being in a relationship, having children and then being processed through the Family Court. These men become targets of the government's asset stripping and skirting programme.
The Family Court's approach to property settlements is deeply flawed and anti-father. It is also unregulated, Judges can do whatever they want.
The last Parliamentary Inquiry into family breakdown investigated child access and child support. The Inquiry found that a large part of what men were saying about child access and child support was true and discriminatory, and some changes were made.
However, property settlements were excluded from the Inquiry. Financial settlements remain parochial, outdated and discriminatory. Men get very little. Often a father's contact with his children, and the expense of legal action, are used as extortion to extract a "generous financial settlement".
While this situation exists, men should be much more careful about their choice of partner, and particularly about having children.
Consider very carefully the stability of your partner and how she conducts her relationships with her friends and family. Are these relationships turbulent with people being ostracised for long periods? Does she have periods of mood swings, lack of social control and substance abuse?
Don't be bullied or manipulated into getting married, or especially having children, until you've thought through the incredible risk that you are taking on.
You might also like to rethink whether accumulating assets is such a good idea since you won't be getting them. In many ways you might be better off to consume more now, rather than save for later.
This might mean you rent a better quality house rather than struggle to buy one. Take a holiday now, rather than save for a holiday house or overseas trip that may never happen. Spend money on your children's education now, rather than saving an education fund.
Value that you've already consumed can't be taken away from you and your children.
Divestment risk, via their own family, is the biggest financial risk that most men will face. However, compared to other risks, divestment risk is hidden away, unregulated, and rarely thought about until it's too late.
Parents of sons also have a responsibility to see their children are well informed. After all, any funds your son inherits will be skirted as well.
Property Settlement - The elephant swept under the carpet
The Family Court's approach to property settlements is deeply flawed and anti-father. It is also unregulated, Judges can do whatever they want.
The last Parliamentary Inquiry into family breakdown investigated child access and child support. The Inquiry found that a large part of what men were saying about child access and child support was true and discriminatory, and some changes were made.
However, property settlements were excluded from the Inquiry. Financial settlements remain parochial, outdated and discriminatory. Men get very little. Often a father's contact with his children, and the expense of legal action, are used as extortion to extract a "generous financial settlement".
It was reasonable to investigate child access as the priority, if that is what Parliament wanted to do. But that isn't the end of the job.
Biassed methodologies and unfair property settlements continue to prevent many men from moving forward in their lives.
It's time for unfinished business. It's time for the Parliamentary Inquiry into property settlements.
Super Delusion
Australian men have gone along with the Government's superannuation agenda. The Government promotes superannuation heavily - you are providing for your future after you stop working. But in reality you don't get much choice - payments are compulsorily deducted from your salary, and other payments are encouraged through tax concessions.
A current estimate of total superannuation assets is $1,200 billion, and growing at 10 to 20% per year.
This is probably about 20% of total private wealth - i.e. $6,000 billion.
Assume about 70% of this is in the hands of couples - i.e. $4,200 billion.
About 30% of this will end up under the control of the divorce industry and the Family Court - i.e. $1,260 billion. And this ignores any future growth. Most of this will be taken away from men using outdated concepts and prejudiced methodologies.
The size of the amount that will fall under the control and discretion of the divorce industry, even without future growth, is equivalent to:
- 4,345 times the $290 million that AWB paid to Iraqis in the oil for food scandal. AWB was investigated in the Cole Inquiry, and received daily front-page coverage by the media. Money belonging to farmers is important and must be handled responsibly.
- 237 times the $5.3 billion in debt left by the HIH collapse. HIH was investigated by a Royal Commission under Justice Owen, and received daily front-page coverage by the media. Money belonging to investors is important and must be handled responsibly.
The last Parliamentary Inquiry into family breakdown excluded property settlements. Why isn't this money important and in need of responsible handling?
The last Inquiry found problems with the way child custody and child support was being assessed. Men's complaints that they were being discriminated against were found to be true. Does anyone really think there aren't similar problems with property settlements?
See also:
Examples of bias in property settlements.
Need for documentation and disclosure in relationship contracts.
Help by sending your story
You may have experienced, or you know about, some of the tricks to bring about bias in property settlements.
If so, send us your story. No breaches of privacy, or inappropriate identifying details, please.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
End of Section
Copyright © 2007-2008, Max Rollins. All rights reserved.