Health,
The point here is simple.
I believe that using the fact that you can refuse to sell a service that someone else needs (facilitating a get), in order to get them to buy additional services from you (arbitration of custody etc.), is wrong. Especially if the person is willing to pay you well for the service they are asking for. You disagree. Again if you don’t see how this is wrong I really cannot explain it to you any clearer!
You said,
“When’s the last time you were in court? They will never tell you go for arbitration that’s not under their auspices.”
I never said they would! If you show them that you both want to Arbitrate and ask to do so they will say fine!
You said,
“But the fact remains if one doesn’t want to get divorced -they will be forced by the court to get divorced.
Acc. to your train of thought that one party should never be forced to do anything when it comes to divorce and it’s immoral -where is your outcry on this law???? And don’t tell me B’D forcing the woman who asked for Get is different because we are talking about $ & custody; because the one party is also being forced to talk about $ & custody, even though he/she doesn’t want to get divorced.”
If that’s what you think I am saying I must not have been clear. I apologize, and please allow me to explain.
I do not have a problem forcing someone to talk about custody or assets the same way I don’t have a problem with anyone suing someone else for money that they believe is theirs and forcing them to talk about it.
I have a problem with using the fact that someone in your community needs a service that only you offer, to coerce them into buying more services from you. Especially when the service you are coercing them to buy does not have everything any reasonable person would expect for that service (i.e oversight, right to appeal etc.)
That being said we are going in circles here and apparently I am offending everyone. Maybe we can agree to disagree…. and I just pray you never have to go through this system?