Jilted Would-Be Bride Sues Her Ex & Wins

I just finished reading a news story about a woman in Georgia who successfully won a judgment against her former "fiance" because he broke off the engagement. Apparently he committed a breach of promise to marry, & he has to pay her $50,000. When I first read that, I was appalled that a court would hand down such a judgment. But then I read on....

Turns out that the guy gave her a $10,000 engagement ring after he had been seeing another woman, & he continued to see that same woman after he gave the ring to his "fiance". Shame, shame, shame, right? So he promised his "fiance" (whom he claimed in court to have never formally proposed to...guess the ring was just a fancy way of being friendly) that he would break off contact with the woman, & he did just that. Everything worked out well then, right? Hardly....

photo credit: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/wwarby/4859185569/">wwarby</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/">cc</a>

So then seven years later, he had a fling with another woman. Mind you, he STILL had not married the woman who was the mother of his child & whom he had asked to quit her job so she could stay home & raise their child. One starts to think the guy is a total louse, with no intention of ever marrying this woman, because clearly, when someone moves in with the mother of his child, gives her an engagement ring, asks her to quit her job to raise that child, yet fails to make that proverbial walk down the aisle & marry her, he has some sort of commitment issues, right?

Never mind the fact that he is already legally obligated to support his child or the fact that he was already living as husband & wife with the child's mother. For whatever reason, this man did not want to formalize his relationship through marriage. Perhaps he thought if they divorced, she would get half of all that's his. Perhaps he thought that if he married her, he couldn't have his cake & eat it too, by claiming to be single & having affairs with other women. Who knows?

All I know is that a court ruled that he must pay his former "fiance" (whom he claims to have never asked to marry nor brought up the subject of marriage) $50,000 AND he is also currently paying child support for their child. Would it not have been far less painful to have married the woman & tried to work out their problems or even marry her, get divorced if he wanted to cheat on her, & then let her keep the house that was in her name anyway (I'm not advocating the latter choice)? All he would have had to pay at that point might have been child support & perhaps some sort of wage loss settlement since he asked her to quit her job to raise their child (not sure if alimony is allowed when couples are not married). Now he's having to pay far, far more than he would have had to pay, if he had just "manned-up" & married the woman.

photo credit: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/safari_vacation/6260723020/">SalFalko</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/">cc</a>

Oh but wait!......

Turns out the woman cheated on him too! Oh yes, now this turns into a soap opera. Good thing she didn't cheat on her "fiance" with his own brother...or better yet, his father, or else it would have been the Jerry Springer Show instead! 

So here's the thing.....the woman moves in with the man, has a child with him, & accepts an engagement ring as a man's intention to marry her. By anyone's definition of common sense, a gift to a woman that one is in a romantic relationship with, of a ring that costs $10,000 would in fact give the impression that the man's intentions are to make her his wife. If he had no intention of marrying her, then he should have told her that the ring was NOT an engagement ring, but rather just a very blingy & expensive gift. But he didn't do that, so the ownership is on him for this one. No judge in their right mind should allow his excuse that he never "formally proposed" & therefore did not "breach his promise" to marry. 

Ah but here's where one stops feeling sorry for this woman & starts to see things from the man's point of view.... 

I mean, if marriage is what the woman was expecting from the man, why did she allow seven years to go by without heading to that altar? She should have acted sooner, by either accepting the fact that he would never marry her & learn to live with it (that's the worldview), or by having the self-respect to move out & break up with him, if he wouldn't marry her as she thought he intended to (which is what I think she should have done). Instead, she cheated on him too, then when he told her he wanted to be with the woman he was having an affair with, & he asked her & her two children to move out (the first child was from her previous relationship), THEN she decided to take legal action against him. 

One has a hard time feeling sorry for her at this point, & instead it's hard not to view her as a vindictive woman bent on hurting the man she allowed to hurt her. That's right - she allowed him to. That's because there comes a point in time when someone continues to take you for granted, hurt you, let you down, abuse you or whatever the case may be, that it's no longer "shame on them" for doing that to you. It is now "shame on you" for allowing them to continue doing it! And then to get a court involved because your relationship didn't work out, that's beyond ridiculous! I mean, getting a court involved in cases of divorce or child custody is one thing. But to sue someone & win because they broke your heart? That's messed up. What I mean is that the court system is messed up if it would actually consider such a lawsuit.

photo credit: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/wolfsoul/2223713451/">WolfS♡ul</a> via <a href="http://photopin.com">photopin</a> <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/">cc</a>


The woman quit her job at the man's request, sure. He asked her to do that, she did it, & she suffered from the loss of income apparently. Or did she? Nobody else truly knows except the people involved in this situation. But here's the thing: she didn't "have to" work. She got to stay home to raise her children, while he worked outside the home. Many women would give anything to have that privilege. Furthermore, she spent seven years since she received that ring, not working outside the home, allowing him to provide for her & her children, when she could have been preparing herself for marriage (including getting into couples counseling with him if he didn't want to marry her) if that was what she expected out of their 10-year relationship. 

When years passed by with no nuptials taking place, something inside of her should have spurred her to either get into couples counseling, prepare to enter the workforce again, or both. Maybe she did do those things, but one doesn't sue a man for failing to marry you. Everyone has the choice to stay in a relationship or leave it. You don't sue someone because they failed to marry you. An exception might be if a great expense of money had been spent on the wedding, & the other person broke things off after non-refundable expenses were made. There might be a case for that type of situation, but that was not the case here.

Instead, she allowed the relationship to take its course & then asked a judge to step into her relationship & reward her money because her heart was broken & she had no job. That's just wrong. She chose to have no job outside the home. He didn't force her to quit her job - he asked her to & she agreed - at least according to what the media was reporting. She chose to stay in a relationship that was clearly, after seven years, not heading for marriage, when marriage was what she wanted & expected. 

So now, after this man spent $10,000 on a ring for her which she could easily sell to at least recoup some of its value, & after this man provided for her & her children, she thinks a judge should punish the man financially because he broke her heart, & the court should make him pay her about half the value of the home which was in her name only, even though he was paying all the bills. Bear in mind that the man is also paying child support. 

Photo by: all-free-download.com

Why am I writing a post about such nonsense? I'm writing about this because we in the United States have lost our reason & our morality. We have become a nation of sue-happy, over-sensitive, overly-politically correct, government-dependent people who have lost our common sense & we expect our courts & the government to fix the problems which we ourselves created! That's ridiculous! 

I get really tired of news stories like this because such stories reflect the direction our nation is headed. It's headed for collapse. We can't even trust our government anymore. We can't trust our courts either, because apparently people can sue for the most ridiculous things & win their case in court! It appears that many people in this country also can't even trust their own common sense, & they need others to hold their hand & walk them through every stage of their lives, & lift them up & support them when they mess up. 

People gripe & complain about those with conservative values, & they say that we are intolerant, judgmental or bigoted somehow. They claim that the conservative "religious fanatics" are ruining the country with our attempts to bring back "old-fashioned" values & doing things the way that the Bible suggests instead of doing what we want, how we want, & expecting others to accept it. The result of the decay of moral values is that morality itself hasn't been the only victim of change, but so has integrity. People think nothing of shoplifting if they don't get caught. I know - I used to work in retail, & it's crazy how rampant the shoplifting problem is.

Many people don't think twice about cheating on their taxes or lying to get their way. Kids today grow up thinking that disrespecting their parents & others is okay. The value of life is lessened too, as people are no longer shocked at suicide or people committing self-harm. Mad at someone? Some people will just take a gun & shoot them, or they'll shoot others just because they are unhappy at life itself. They do it in the movies & in video games. It's crazy. Kids taunt each other on social media & they take bullying to a whole new, often deadly level. Morality, integrity & doing the right thing, are becoming things of the past. That's sad. When it comes to the conduct of people & the lack of integrity & morality in today's society, if I could ask the question that Dr. Phil usually asks people in crisis, I would ask: "how's that working for you?".

Look - I'm not judging the people in this story. I don't feel I have the right to judge anyone, about anything, because I too am human & make mistakes. I also don't have all the facts of the situation, & am basing my opinions only on the limited information presented in the news. So I would not like anyone to blast me for my views, as they are my  viewpoints only, & people are free to disagree. There's no denying that the man behaved very badly though. Even so, the woman's no saint either, obviously. How can this man provide for his child when he is not only paying child support, but now has to come up with $50,000 to pay his ex because he broke her heart? I can just see it now. This court case could spur other would-be brides to sue their exes for "breach of promise to marry". I'm sure that happens all the time anyway, but now with the publicity of this case, I can just see an explosion of "broken heart lawsuits". 

This doesn't bode well for our nation, because sadly, these types of stories no longer shock us, since they are becoming the norm. So what are we going to do about it? Why not try to impact others for good, one person at a time? If enough people start standing up for what's right again, then positive change can happen. Just a thought....


**Have an opinion about this post? I would truly appreciate your feedback in the comment section below, or in the confidential feedback form on this page.**