@[email protected]’s presentation is scary – no doubt purposefully so – but all it suggests is that some believe that contracts entered into within the purview of family law should be treated as contracts, and not be some handwavvy thing that cannot be understood or predicted upon until a court makes an arbitrary decision. I expect most see family law as something that has become a complete joke.
You don’t have to enter into contracts. Having someone hold a gun to your back wouldn’t satisfy a court’s determination that you ended into a contract willfully. These are only applicable to people who actually want to be bound by such terms. No different than any other contract situation outside of the purview of family law, such as an agreement made between business partners.
This is true and scary. I would like to see polling to find out how people truly feel about the issue by political faction.
@[email protected]’s presentation is scary – no doubt purposefully so – but all it suggests is that some believe that contracts entered into within the purview of family law should be treated as contracts, and not be some handwavvy thing that cannot be understood or predicted upon until a court makes an arbitrary decision. I expect most see family law as something that has become a complete joke.
You don’t have to enter into contracts. Having someone hold a gun to your back wouldn’t satisfy a court’s determination that you ended into a contract willfully. These are only applicable to people who actually want to be bound by such terms. No different than any other contract situation outside of the purview of family law, such as an agreement made between business partners.