And the judge still ruled in his favor??? Where’s the JUSTICE in that??? From the Newspapers, translated…
The seventy-year-old elderly man, Lee, back when he was younger, he’d not taken care of his family, kept the habits of gambling, left his young to his wife to care, and now, he’d become hard of hearing and had diabetes, he’d asked his children to pay for his care; the children said no, and the mother of his children also testified that her husband never worked, and had gone on marches for the political party he was in support of a lot, gotten into fights a lot, and the courts mandated that the children still needed to pay the man money to help him leave, but they didn’t have to pay that much.
When Lee was younger, he and his wife Huang had a son and a daughter together, although he knows carpentry, but he’d gambled all of his earnings away; Huang’s wife worked as a maid, and did laundry for other people, to make the money to feed her young, even the money she’d put up, for him to get a motorcycle had, been used by him, lost, to gambling. Later on, they fought endlessly, and Lee got angry and left home, didn’t care for the young children he has at home, nor had he ever brought money home.
And now, Lee is overcome with illness, couldn’t work, relied on the lower income support of $3,600N.T. and the social securities payment of $722N.T. a month to live off of; he’d started up the lawsuit for his children to take care of him, said that he is broke and elderly, and ill, he couldn’t manage his own rent, didn’t have money for food, demanded each of his children pay him $6,000N.T. a month, until he dies.
Lee’s children told the judge, that before they were ten years of age, when they were still in elementary school, their father had abandoned them, that he’d never shown an inkling of care or concern for them, nor had he ever sent money for child support home, that he’d not done his responsibilities in providing for them at all, and so, based off of the civil laws, they’d asked the judge to reduce or to decline their father’s request of paying for his living now.
Lee’s wife testified in court, that in the past, Lee would take home the $1,000 to $2,000N.T. he had left over from gambling, later on, as he’d left home, he’d focused on marching on behalf of supporting his political party, gotten into fights; but Lee denied it, claimed that as he’d worked as a carpenter, he’d placed the $3,000N.T. he’d earned every single day into his wife’s hands, that it was because his wife is a nag, he couldn’t take it, that’s why he’d moved out, but after he moved out, he’d still brought money home by the month.
The judge believed, that Lee stated that he did pay for the household finances, raised his children, that there’s no doubt about that, plus he’d never caused his wife or children any bodily or mental harms, so the children can’t dodge the responsibilities of paying for his care now; but the judge took in the fact, that the children aren’t well-off, and how their father was never around when they grew up, the judge reduced the payments of alimony and support to $4,000N.T. each.
And so, because you’d never taken care of your child, you weren’t around when your children were growing up, now they don’t feel compelled, to need to take care of you as you’d become an elderly, and you’d SUED them, and this judge still believed that the children needed to pay for their father’s livelihood, because he’d NOT completely abandoned them when they were growing up???
Life, the Obstacle Course 