Divorce - WMFD (Weapon of Mass Financial Destruction)

[Beridian]

I was divorced in 2008 after 23 years of marriage.  When my spouse asked it was a complete shock but after a while I found that I could see the signs.  I had just been blinding myself saying, "I am happily married, I am happily married" continuously.  Right after our youngest child turned 18 my spouse announced "I want to be on my own before I get too old."

I had no problem at all with splitting our assets 50/50.  We had both started with almost nothing and everything we built, we did together.

My spouse had been SAH for the last 10 years.  Before we filed I asked about maintenance but my spouse said "No".

I hired a lawyer to do the paperwork.  We could have done it ourselves but is was too emotionally draining for me.  On my lawyer's recommendation I wound up giving my spouse around 60% of our assets and nearly 100% of the liquid assets to reduce the risk of my spouse coming back later asking for maintenance. 

Previous posters have mentioned the emotional impact.  I was devastated and an emotional wreck for a long time.  But time heals if you let it.  I focused on work and started volunteering extensively.  There was an empty spot in my heart for years but eventually it filled in.

Was it a big financial hit?  Of course!  We were very close to FI at that time though we had not really thought about it that way.  After the divorce, I had virtually no cash but still had my job (and the dog). 

Fast forward 6 years and my post divorce NW has tripled, I am in a new stable relationship, and I am back to FI.

Not all stories are bad.

I am glad to hear that your life has recovered nicely Threshkin.  I have to say that in my case, aside form what I consider was an unfair settlement, I will likewise be better off in the long run.  I expect you are approaching finances in a much different manner in your new relationship.  Am I correct?  Did you remarry?

[Simple Abundant Living]

I am happily married with two kids, and my wife has been a SAHM for about 4 out of 7 years of our marriage.  Our youngest child is about 13 months now, and she's been at home with him. Lately- i've been asking her about getting back into the workforce.  She is actually in early childhood education and any job she gets is very likely to come with either free or reduced childcare- which would be big for us. 

Anyway- she's been pushing back on me pretty hard, not wanting to go back to work.  Personally, i'm not a huge fan of my job, so i'd love to accelerate our path to FIRE by adding in some more income into the household.  But, she insists that she wouldn't be happy at work right now.  I'll admit it is tough.  At no point when we got married did we say that one of us would be a stay at home parent indefinitely. She wanted to stay at home for the first year for both of our kids, and I totally supported that. And i'd agree with folks that I was only able to reach my full earning potential with her at home taking primary care of the kids.

But now, with the kids getting older, and her being out of work for awhile, I see that it might start getting harder and harder for her to go back.  To be honest, it does worry me a bit, and to be frank, I feel like it puts me in the awkward position of being the "bad guy" by trying to encourage her to work. 

I'm trying to guess how would she feel working with young children while her own child is being watched by someone else?  If she wants to be with him, that might be a really hard job to do. Instead, I would have her consider using her education at home. She could do an in-home preschool or daycare.  I know a lady who makes $40K/year using a room in her basement for a preschool.  Or she could tutor young readers after school.  I also knew of a SAHM who put her energies into landscaping and gardening. They were moving every 3-5 years due to her hubby's work and they always sold their homes for $30-50K more because of her improvements. She gave garden tours and taught others what could be done on a small budget.  There is also value in someone cooking from scratch, doing the house and yard work, running errands, etc.  I'm back to working part time, and the whole family feels the difference when mom's not at everyone's beck and call.

[CommonCents]

But now, with the kids getting older, and her being out of work for awhile, I see that it might start getting harder and harder for her to go back.  To be honest, it does worry me a bit, and to be frank, I feel like it puts me in the awkward position of being the "bad guy" by trying to encourage her to work.

We are in this situation except no kids, yet.  My girlfriend works but she is in a toxic environment working as a international tax accountant.  The thing is she badly needs to pass her CPA exams (yesteryear) to apply elsewhere and she has been unmotivated and lazy for two years!  In those two years she took one month unpaid time off to just study and only passed one section! Two more remain and frankly she refuses to dedicate herself to helping her own situation by studying.  As they say you cannot force anyone to anything to help themselves and such is our situation.  I am changing jobs and looking to relocate as my four hour daily train/walking trip is killing me heart and soul.

erhm.  Dare I say this might be one of those warning signs you'll look back on later?

[momo]

But now, with the kids getting older, and her being out of work for awhile, I see that it might start getting harder and harder for her to go back.  To be honest, it does worry me a bit, and to be frank, I feel like it puts me in the awkward position of being the "bad guy" by trying to encourage her to work.

We are in this situation except no kids, yet.  My girlfriend works but she is in a toxic environment working as a international tax accountant.  The thing is she badly needs to pass her CPA exams (yesteryear) to apply elsewhere and she has been unmotivated and lazy for two years!  In those two years she took one month unpaid time off to just study and only passed one section! Two more remain and frankly she refuses to dedicate herself to helping her own situation by studying.  As they say you cannot force anyone to anything to help themselves and such is our situation.  I am changing jobs and looking to relocate as my four hour daily train/walking trip is killing me heart and soul.

erhm.  Dare I say this might be one of those warning signs you'll look back on later?

Indeed.  I am doing what I can to improve things within my control like changing my job to reduce the commute.  However, I am exasperated when I hear stories about how one partner refuses to go back to work or basically take some personal accountability (like my gf refusal to study for her CPA exams) to improve their own reality.  As for warning signs, yes, I concur and that is why I do not want to have kids and why we are not engaged.  I love her dearly but frankly her actions currently do not match the words she says, namely her desire to change jobs, settle down and relocate.  Only time will tell....

[LDoon]

Anyway- she's been pushing back on me pretty hard, not wanting to go back to work.  Personally, i'm not a huge fan of my job, so i'd love to accelerate our path to FIRE by adding in some more income into the household.  But, she insists that she wouldn't be happy at work right now.  I'll admit it is tough.  At no point when we got married did we say that one of us would be a stay at home parent indefinitely. She wanted to stay at home for the first year for both of our kids, and I totally supported that. And i'd agree with folks that I was only able to reach my full earning potential with her at home taking primary care of the kids.

This is a situation that breeds contempt.  She doesn't want to work because she wouldn't be happy?  That would annoy me because it's not like you working is the greatest experience.  FIRE is a goal for a reason.  I don't think it is unreasonable to get your spouse to contribute income as well as time, just as you do. 

Spouses going in the same direction get to goals faster.  Spouses going in different directions make little progress but generate lots of frustration.

[LDoon]

@ Beridian, Frankling and DoubleDown:  Reading your stories really opens ones eyes to how difficult divorce can be and some of the serious financial implications.  Thank you all for sharing.  Got some questions for you any anyone else if you don't mind sharing your ideas.

1)  If you had a pre-nup where you bring in more assets than your partner prior to marriage, wouldn't that be sufficient to protect your assets (especially if you kept your finances separate)? 
2) Would putting your assets into trusts help protect you?
3) Don't quite understand how or why 401k and IRA accounts should be split especially if one party can prove X amount was saved prior to the marriage.  Any thoughts on this?
4) We have a friend whose wife is the same as your ex, she got fired and now refuses to work; he alone works and pays for everything.  He won't divorce her (almost in his 70s) and is constantly living a life of stress and desperation.  Really feel for him and but there just isn't a support from her and we feel terrible for him.  Big IF they divorced why wouldn't Courts consider her lack of contribution/employment (she is perfect able but chooses not to) especially if there are no children?  You mentioned some reasons in your earlier posts, but wonder isn't there some level of responsibility that both parties need to exhibit?
5)  How do inheritances factor in divorce?  Say the husband gets one before the divorce or after, won't that still be split?

My experienced answers from a community property state:
1. Pre-nups help with pre-marital assets but keep those assets separate (don't co-mingle)
2. Trust should be helpful, but be hands off.  Have a trustee handle the decisions and don't touch or be involved.  Don't want the argument that you seized an opportunity (investment, business) with separate funds but avoided using marital assets.
3. The tax-advantaged accounts same as other assets.  You would calculate the value at date of marriage and the value at date of filing.  Difference is marital property (interest on initial balance may also be calculated but this is the simple answer).
4. Short answer: No, doesn't matter why wife isn't employed.  The fact is husband is employed and wife isn't.
5. Inheritance is separate property as long as it is kept separate. (Again, don't co-mingle).

[foobar]

They still do in NJ: http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2012/12/divorcee_sits_in_jail_while_ua.html

These cases come up all the time. If you look into the details, they are all messy divorces where guy is trying to be vindicative and don't pay any of their court ordered payment. In a year or two of non payment, a judgement is rendered agains them. Their payments get increased and they whine they can't afford to pay anymore. And then the men's right press talk about how the courts set the alimony at more money than the guy makes.

You are legally obligated to SUPPORT YOUR CHILDREN.  You choose to have them (have sex, particularly while not wearing protection or getting sterilized etc) and yes, the state can force you to work to support them rather than walking away.  Because the law thinks they need protection because a 4 yo can't take care of herself. 

People can rack up many thousands of dollars before I've seen incarceration threatened.  The one I mentioned above had gotten over $100k.

To be specific, I am refering to alimony, not child support.  I'll let you reformulate your response.

Because of all of the reasons already put forth in this thread.  First, I'm not actually clear whether they do put people in jail for failure to pay alimony - I only know for sure that they do for child support.  But second, it's because you agreed way back when to support each other in "good times and bad."  Now you've come to the bad, you've decided to split and the state feels they shouldn't be left holding the bag supporting your ex (particularly after a lengthy marriage) by having them go on public assistance.

[CommonCents]

They still do in NJ: http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2012/12/divorcee_sits_in_jail_while_ua.html

These cases come up all the time. If you look into the details, they are all messy divorces where guy is trying to be vindicative and don't pay any of their court ordered payment. In a year or two of non payment, a judgement is rendered agains them. Their payments get increased and they whine they can't afford to pay anymore. And then the men's right press talk about how the courts set the alimony at more money than the guy makes.

You are legally obligated to SUPPORT YOUR CHILDREN.  You choose to have them (have sex, particularly while not wearing protection or getting sterilized etc) and yes, the state can force you to work to support them rather than walking away.  Because the law thinks they need protection because a 4 yo can't take care of herself. 

People can rack up many thousands of dollars before I've seen incarceration threatened.  The one I mentioned above had gotten over $100k.

To be specific, I am refering to alimony, not child support.  I'll let you reformulate your response.

Because of all of the reasons already put forth in this thread.  First, I'm not actually clear whether they do put people in jail for failure to pay alimony - I only know for sure that they do for child support.  But second, it's because you agreed way back when to support each other in "good times and bad."  Now you've come to the bad, you've decided to split and the state feels they shouldn't be left holding the bag supporting your ex (particularly after a lengthy marriage) by having them go on public assistance.

Ok.  Another reason is that the courts don't take it kindly when people disregard their orders.  They take a very dim view of this flaunting of their authority, leading to concerns of whether that can undermine the system.

[forward]

I was divorced in 2008 after 23 years of marriage.  When my spouse asked it was a complete shock but after a while I found that I could see the signs.  I had just been blinding myself saying, "I am happily married, I am happily married" continuously.  Right after our youngest child turned 18 my spouse announced "I want to be on my own before I get too old."

I had no problem at all with splitting our assets 50/50.  We had both started with almost nothing and everything we built, we did together.

My spouse had been SAH for the last 10 years.  Before we filed I asked about maintenance but my spouse said "No".

I hired a lawyer to do the paperwork.  We could have done it ourselves but is was too emotionally draining for me.  On my lawyer's recommendation I wound up giving my spouse around 60% of our assets and nearly 100% of the liquid assets to reduce the risk of my spouse coming back later asking for maintenance. 

Previous posters have mentioned the emotional impact.  I was devastated and an emotional wreck for a long time.  But time heals if you let it.  I focused on work and started volunteering extensively.  There was an empty spot in my heart for years but eventually it filled in.

Was it a big financial hit?  Of course!  We were very close to FI at that time though we had not really thought about it that way.  After the divorce, I had virtually no cash but still had my job (and the dog). 

Fast forward 6 years and my post divorce NW has tripled, I am in a new stable relationship, and I am back to FI.

Not all stories are bad.

Threshkin thats a good story and a testament to healing yourself slowly, that must have been devastating.  We also have events like the BP oil spill, Bernie Madoff, the housing crash (people having principal amounts reduced or loan modifications).  In these cases the results to are also emotionally and financially devastating and the courts say the victims can make claims for fraud, negligence, misrepresentation etc.  In the case of domestic divorce events, when in your case the spouse announces out of the blue (scary!) or chooses another partner etc. it seems there is no recourse.

[MayDay]

Maybe the bigger question is "why do women feel they are supposed to stay at home and give up their careers?"

I've always wondered this. My parents both worked full time raising 5 kids and my mom has said that she feels she is a much better mother because of it (and I think I personally would go batshit crazy if I had to be around my theoretical kids all the time).

As to MayDay- most people here agree that splitting assets is reasonable. I think the ones that don't had other issues with their marriage/divorce having more to do with the spouse than the splitting of assets. And I can understand temporary alimony when everyone agrees to the SAHP situation but I hear too many horror stories of people cheating the system (and thus cheating the ex) just to be spiteful and to get more money (ie. not getting remarried soley to continue recieving alimony). And since I haven't actually known anyone to pay or recieve alimony these stories are what I base my admittely uninformed initial reaction on. And I did say "get away from it" not "get rid of it" since I'm sure there are situations that warrant it.
I do want to add though: you said he should pay temporary alimony since it was a joint decision and he knew what he was getting into...I see it more on the other end (again, probably because I spent most of my life in a state that does not do alimony so I never saw it as an option) that it was a joint decision for you to leave the work force so you knew what you were getting into

Right, but even if he pays me alimony for a couple years. I still will never reach the level of income I would have had if I had worked those 20 years.  So a few years of alimony isn't intended to make up 20 years of career growth, it is intended to get the SAH spouse "a" job.  I absolutely took a huge risk staying at home, and I know it.  The point is that it is a joint risk.

I'm really not trying to be a jerk here, but isn't this the choice people make when they have children?  They have to sacrifice a lot. None of us are "owed" the right to return the workplace for the same pay as someone who continued to work, so why should the courts pretend the Stay-at-home parent should be receiving the same salary as if they were still working?  It's hard to say "I want my cake (kids) and eat it too (valued at the same salary)." Actually, this issue is really a middle class/upper class issue.  Most of the famlies I knew growing up, both parents had to work.  There was no choice financially.  There were very few "housewives" who stayed home.

Right, but my point is that it should be a joint risk. 

My risk is that we get divorced I have little to no earning potential, and I get a few years of alimony to get a job at will definitely be lower in salary than if I had worked the whole time. 

His risk is that we get divorced, and he has to pay me alimony for a few years. 

Both of us benefitted from me staying home all those years.

OK so it is a joint risk, but what if you had no say so in the divorce?   What if it was forced upon you?   

Lets say my spouse and I agree that one parent stays at home.   Fine, we agree, I am to be the breadwinner and my spouse is the homemaker.  Its a contract of sorts (as is the marriage).  Now my spouse decides they want out.  I am still keeping up my end of the contract, I am supporting everybody, I did not break my contract, my spouse did.  So is it then fair that I am required to pay alimony to my spouse?  The divorce was my spouse's decision alone, I was not an equal partner in that decision, it was unilaterally made by my spouse.   I was an equal partner in the marriage decision and the stay at home parent decision.

You will likely say it depends on the circumstances which is reasonable.  If I were abusive towards my spouse I would have some liability.  If my spouse on the other hand found someone else that they liked better, then I should not be held responsible, after all I upheld my end of the bargain.  The problem is that the courts do not want to hear the reason, they just look at the numbers.   Can you see the injustice in that?

I see absolutely no injustice.  [Mod Edit: Personal Attack Removed.]  Getting married is a joint decision, but getting divorced isn't.  File that little fact under "risks you take when you get married". 

[randymarsh]

They still do in NJ: http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2012/12/divorcee_sits_in_jail_while_ua.html

These cases come up all the time. If you look into the details, they are all messy divorces where guy is trying to be vindicative and don't pay any of their court ordered payment. In a year or two of non payment, a judgement is rendered agains them. Their payments get increased and they whine they can't afford to pay anymore. And then the men's right press talk about how the courts set the alimony at more money than the guy makes.

Nothing in that link provides evidence that the husband is being vindictive. Even if we go with his highest ever income: 147K, why should he be paying his ex 70% of his income? That's outrageous. I don't see how alimony should ever be more than 50%.

[Threshkin]

I am glad to hear that your life has recovered nicely Threshkin.  I have to say that in my case, aside form what I consider was an unfair settlement, I will likewise be better off in the long run.  I expect you are approaching finances in a much different manner in your new relationship.  Am I correct?  Did you remarry?

Actually I remarried with no preconditions and with my eyes wide open to the risks.  IMO getting married is a joint commitment to share and care equally, without reservations.  My SO came into the relationship with assets, a job, and a savings ethic that is as good if not better than mine.  My SO also has an abusive Ex who is constantly re-litigating their divorce and custody agreements.  We are in court every couple of months to deal with another motion filed by the Ex and the two minor children are now estranged from my SO.

I accepted this when I entered the relationship and fully support my SO in this, emotionally and financially. This is what a committed relationship is all about.  I believe you are either completely committed or you are not committed at all.

[marty998]

I think that's a little harsh MayDay. The guy has just had is ex get one over him and screwed him big time and you think it's fine that the court forces him to support his ex as if they were still married?

Appreciate the intention behind alimony, but there are some cases where I feel it is not deserved.

Basically if you fuck someone else and divorce is a consequence, I find it wholly unreasonable that it is incumbent on the other spouse (of whatever gender) to keep supporting you.

#my 2c

[momo]

@ Beridian, Frankling and DoubleDown:  Reading your stories really opens ones eyes to how difficult divorce can be and some of the serious financial implications.  Thank you all for sharing.  Got some questions for you any anyone else if you don't mind sharing your ideas.

1)  If you had a pre-nup where you bring in more assets than your partner prior to marriage, wouldn't that be sufficient to protect your assets (especially if you kept your finances separate)? 
2) Would putting your assets into trusts help protect you?
3) Don't quite understand how or why 401k and IRA accounts should be split especially if one party can prove X amount was saved prior to the marriage.  Any thoughts on this?
4) We have a friend whose wife is the same as your ex, she got fired and now refuses to work; he alone works and pays for everything.  He won't divorce her (almost in his 70s) and is constantly living a life of stress and desperation.  Really feel for him and but there just isn't a support from her and we feel terrible for him.  Big IF they divorced why wouldn't Courts consider her lack of contribution/employment (she is perfect able but chooses not to) especially if there are no children?  You mentioned some reasons in your earlier posts, but wonder isn't there some level of responsibility that both parties need to exhibit?
5)  How do inheritances factor in divorce?  Say the husband gets one before the divorce or after, won't that still be split?

My experienced answers from a community property state:
1. Pre-nups help with pre-marital assets but keep those assets separate (don't co-mingle)
2. Trust should be helpful, but be hands off.  Have a trustee handle the decisions and don't touch or be involved.  Don't want the argument that you seized an opportunity (investment, business) with separate funds but avoided using marital assets.
3. The tax-advantaged accounts same as other assets.  You would calculate the value at date of marriage and the value at date of filing.  Difference is marital property (interest on initial balance may also be calculated but this is the simple answer).
4. Short answer: No, doesn't matter why wife isn't employed.  The fact is husband is employed and wife isn't.
5. Inheritance is separate property as long as it is kept separate. (Again, don't co-mingle).

@ LDoon.  Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.  We are in California also a community property state.  Wondering if trusts need to be hands off, how does one spouse access/draw on those funds in retirement situations?  Based on our research it seems like one would need the assistance of the attorney correct?

[MayDay]

I think that's a little harsh MayDay. The guy has just had is ex get one over him and screwed him big time and you think it's fine that the court forces him to support his ex as if they were still married?

Appreciate the intention behind alimony, but there are some cases where I feel it is not deserved.

Basically if you fuck someone else and divorce is a consequence, I find it wholly unreasonable that it is incumbent on the other spouse (of whatever gender) to keep supporting you.

#my 2c

To clarify, I think the "I had no say in the divorce,  I held up my end of the cintract" is the nonsense.  He comes off as sounding like as long as he brings in the income, she should have stayed married to him. 

Maybe his wife is a total bitch who took him to the cleaners, or maybe he was a crap husband and she wanted to leave for years.  We have no idea.  I don't care either!  All I am side-eyeing is the idea that divorce should be a joint decision, that the marriage contract precludes one spouse from deciding to leave. 

[sheepstache]

This has been a lot of really interesting discussion.

I do definitely see non-working spouses putting in a ton of work at home, keeping money in the household, and "investing" in the other's career by helping their partner reach their full potential.  I know a lot of musicians and if one person gets a job in a prestigious orchestra then, by god, they are moving to where that orchestra is.  The other spouse finds a new job, but essentially their career takes a back seat. 

The thing is, if your finances are unequal, then it seems you believe you're compensated in other areas, otherwise you wouldn't stay, no?  So while you may believe your spouse has failed to pull their weight in the past few years and that's why you want a divorce, all the time before that they were equally contributing, so why wouldn't they get an equal share of the results of that.

All that said, I'm worried about it in my own situation.  My spouse and I earn equally but I'm saving like crazy with the goal of FI, and they barely save at all.  I don't feel used by any means.  We've agreed on certain things, most notably housing, that gives us low fixed expenses, so that's a benefit to me (but equally a benefit to them).  I've offered to pay their students loans but been refused.  However, if we divorced today, the assets would be all mine, and it doesn't really make sense that they would be split 50/50 when I've been saving towards a goal but they've preferred to eat out all the time.

[LDoon]

@ Beridian, Frankling and DoubleDown:  Reading your stories really opens ones eyes to how difficult divorce can be and some of the serious financial implications.  Thank you all for sharing.  Got some questions for you any anyone else if you don't mind sharing your ideas.

1)  If you had a pre-nup where you bring in more assets than your partner prior to marriage, wouldn't that be sufficient to protect your assets (especially if you kept your finances separate)? 
2) Would putting your assets into trusts help protect you?
3) Don't quite understand how or why 401k and IRA accounts should be split especially if one party can prove X amount was saved prior to the marriage.  Any thoughts on this?
4) We have a friend whose wife is the same as your ex, she got fired and now refuses to work; he alone works and pays for everything.  He won't divorce her (almost in his 70s) and is constantly living a life of stress and desperation.  Really feel for him and but there just isn't a support from her and we feel terrible for him.  Big IF they divorced why wouldn't Courts consider her lack of contribution/employment (she is perfect able but chooses not to) especially if there are no children?  You mentioned some reasons in your earlier posts, but wonder isn't there some level of responsibility that both parties need to exhibit?
5)  How do inheritances factor in divorce?  Say the husband gets one before the divorce or after, won't that still be split?

My experienced answers from a community property state:
1. Pre-nups help with pre-marital assets but keep those assets separate (don't co-mingle)
2. Trust should be helpful, but be hands off.  Have a trustee handle the decisions and don't touch or be involved.  Don't want the argument that you seized an opportunity (investment, business) with separate funds but avoided using marital assets.
3. The tax-advantaged accounts same as other assets.  You would calculate the value at date of marriage and the value at date of filing.  Difference is marital property (interest on initial balance may also be calculated but this is the simple answer).
4. Short answer: No, doesn't matter why wife isn't employed.  The fact is husband is employed and wife isn't.
5. Inheritance is separate property as long as it is kept separate. (Again, don't co-mingle).

@ LDoon.  Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.  We are in California also a community property state.  Wondering if trusts need to be hands off, how does one spouse access/draw on those funds in retirement situations?  Based on our research it seems like one would need the assistance of the attorney correct?

Definitely have an attorney prepare the trust.  If it's done wrong there could be tax issues and defeat the purpose of remaining separate property.  Regarding accessing funds, you would still be the beneficiary (and hence receive the payouts).  The benefits (I believe) would be considered community property once mingled, but the trust (i.e., principal) remains separate.  Also, there are numerous types of trusts (revocable, irrevocable, discretionary, preset benefits, etc).  If you're interested, do some research before meeting with an attorney, understand the basics and the terms, and whether this might fit for you.

[LDoon]

@sheepstache

All that said, I'm worried about it in my own situation.  My spouse and I earn equally but I'm saving like crazy with the goal of FI, and they barely save at all.  I don't feel used by any means.  We've agreed on certain things, most notably housing, that gives us low fixed expenses, so that's a benefit to me (but equally a benefit to them).  I've offered to pay their students loans but been refused.  However, if we divorced today, the assets would be all mine, and it doesn't really make sense that they would be split 50/50 when I've been saving towards a goal but they've preferred to eat out all the time.

I think this part loops back around to the discussion typically brought up in many threads as to why it is important to find a SO with mutual beliefs / opinions.  It also hits the point of why some people are against marriage, or feel unfairly treated in a divorce.  In the court system, it doesn't matter that your spouse spends and enjoys her money.  If you get divorced, she'll get the enjoyment of eating out all the time AND half the savings.  Common goals and common beliefs are so important to a healthy relationship.  As you note, even thinking about it makes you worried.

[marty998]

I think that's a little harsh MayDay. The guy has just had is ex get one over him and screwed him big time and you think it's fine that the court forces him to support his ex as if they were still married?

Appreciate the intention behind alimony, but there are some cases where I feel it is not deserved.

Basically if you fuck someone else and divorce is a consequence, I find it wholly unreasonable that it is incumbent on the other spouse (of whatever gender) to keep supporting you.

#my 2c

To clarify, I think the "I had no say in the divorce,  I held up my end of the cintract" is the nonsense.  He comes off as sounding like as long as he brings in the income, she should have stayed married to him. 

Maybe his wife is a total bitch who took him to the cleaners, or maybe he was a crap husband and she wanted to leave for years.  We have no idea.  I don't care either!  All I am side-eyeing is the idea that divorce should be a joint decision, that the marriage contract precludes one spouse from deciding to leave.

I actually interpreted his remarks differently, hence the different response. I don't think he is saying she should have stayed married to him because he brings in the income. His point is that she has chosen to leave, so why should she take half AND he keeps supporting her.

But fair point, there are 2 sides to every story and we are only hearing one.

Courts/system isn't perfect, everyone acknowledges that. Lots of room to improve it, however courts are trying to apply a logical reasonable split of assets devoid of emotion at a time when people are at their most emotional, illogical and unreasonable selves.

[Unionville]

OK so it is a joint risk, but what if you had no say so in the divorce?   What if it was forced upon you?   

Lets say my spouse and I agree that one parent stays at home.   Fine, we agree, I am to be the breadwinner and my spouse is the homemaker.  Its a contract of sorts (as is the marriage).  Now my spouse decides they want out.  I am still keeping up my end of the contract, I am supporting everybody, I did not break my contract, my spouse did.  So is it then fair that I am required to pay alimony to my spouse?  The divorce was my spouse's decision alone, I was not an equal partner in that decision, it was unilaterally made by my spouse.   I was an equal partner in the marriage decision and the stay at home parent decision.

You will likely say it depends on the circumstances which is reasonable.  If I were abusive towards my spouse I would have some liability.  If my spouse on the other hand found someone else that they liked better, then I should not be held responsible, after all I upheld my end of the bargain.  The problem is that the courts do not want to hear the reason, they just look at the numbers.   Can you see the injustice in that?

Excellent point!

[Unionville]

I'm no sociologist, but I am a woman and I  can't imagine giving up all my financial autonomy to stay at home.  I think psychologically it puts you in a vulnerable position. I would at least want to bring half the income in or get out of the house for that matter.  In this modern day, where a lot of people get divorced, it seems like a new family model should develop.  People tend to fall back on believing "he can make more money, therefore he should be the bread winner"(why not have mom work and live on less?) or "there are no part time jobs so each parent cannot work part time" (Yes there are if you look for them)

I truly believe in living your priorities. Most things are possible if people are willing to live on less.  We don't need to resort to what we are told to believe. We don't have to spend a ton of money on cars, houses and Christmas. MMM is perfect example of that.  I'm sure he had 100's of people telling him he could not do what he is doing.  That's why I think he's a great example of what a dad can do. 

Imagine growing up with your dad at home.  How wonderful!

[foobar]

You can google the case to get the wife's/judges point of view which was pretty much
a) He was making 200k/yr but he quit in order not to make payments. There are some questions of the tax returns
b) He dragged out the lawsuit for 5 years and ran up a 100k lawyer bill be that he didn't pay. I am guessing the wife helped out:)
c) He never paid the 3300 (some places have this per year others have it per month. both seem odd) any of the child support
d) he then tried to file for bankruptcy
e) didn't maintain health insurance or pay his son's medical bills
f) supposedly did some asset hiding and went to Guatemala
and so on. It was a very entertaining case to follow.

For fun read this thread: http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2012/12/state_supreme_court_order_lays.html and look for the posts by toleeward52 who is supposedly our dude.


What the truth? I tend to side a bit more with the judge (who has a heck of a lot more details than we do) than groups with political agenda but I will not pretend that is anything other than a guess.  I feel pretty comfortable saying though that when every you see an article like this, that it is a heck of a lot more complicated than a judge deciding that some guy should pay  more than his salary to his wife.

They still do in NJ: http://www.nj.com/hunterdon-county-democrat/index.ssf/2012/12/divorcee_sits_in_jail_while_ua.html

These cases come up all the time. If you look into the details, they are all messy divorces where guy is trying to be vindicative and don't pay any of their court ordered payment. In a year or two of non payment, a judgement is rendered agains them. Their payments get increased and they whine they can't afford to pay anymore. And then the men's right press talk about how the courts set the alimony at more money than the guy makes.

Nothing in that link provides evidence that the husband is being vindictive. Even if we go with his highest ever income: 147K, why should he be paying his ex 70% of his income? That's outrageous. I don't see how alimony should ever be more than 50%.

[CommonCents]

Re b, sounds like he got rid his lawyer and filed an excessive amount of motions then on his own that the wife had to respond to. A lawyer who files frivolously can get in trouble.  Looks like the judge imposed costs in him in response.

[Beridian]

I think that's a little harsh MayDay. The guy has just had is ex get one over him and screwed him big time and you think it's fine that the court forces him to support his ex as if they were still married?

Appreciate the intention behind alimony, but there are some cases where I feel it is not deserved.

Basically if you fuck someone else and divorce is a consequence, I find it wholly unreasonable that it is incumbent on the other spouse (of whatever gender) to keep supporting you.

#my 2c

To clarify, I think the "I had no say in the divorce,  I held up my end of the cintract" is the nonsense.  He comes off as sounding like as long as he brings in the income, she should have stayed married to him. 

Maybe his wife is a total bitch who took him to the cleaners, or maybe he was a crap husband and she wanted to leave for years.  We have no idea.  I don't care either!  All I am side-eyeing is the idea that divorce should be a joint decision, that the marriage contract precludes one spouse from deciding to leave.

Sometimes its easy to misconstrue things written on internet forums.  I never meant to imply that since I bring home the bacon she should stay married to me.  Anyone is free to leave a relationship whenever they deem it necessary.  What I was trying to convey is that it was her decision to leave, and apart from misconduct on my part I should not be forced to finance her new life when the decision was entirely her own. I look at it like breaking a contract.  When you break a contract (without just cause) I think it is wrong to then penalize the other party in the contract for your decision to back out.  And I am not talking about a fair property settlement or child support, I am talking about alimony.

It would be  like attending school at a certain university with a scholarship,  You then later decide this school sucks and want to transfer to another university, but you demand that the first school pay your tuition at the new school.  The first school did nothing wrong and was willing to continue your education.  It was your decision to transfer.  Maybe the first school does suck, but at some point in the past you found it acceptable enough to attend.   Its fine if you want to transfer, just don't expect the first school to continue the scholarship agreement (that you broke) at a different school.  That's the best analogy i can think of.

[Insanity]

Sometimes its easy to misconstrue things written on internet forums.  I never meant to imply that since I bring home the bacon she should stay married to me.  Anyone is free to leave a relationship whenever they deem it necessary.  What I was trying to convey is that it was her decision to leave, and apart from misconduct on my part I should not be forced to finance her new life when the decision was entirely her own. I look at it like breaking a contract.  When you break a contract (without just cause) I think it is wrong to then penalize the other party in the contract for your decision to back out.  And I am not talking about a fair property settlement or child support, I am talking about alimony.

It would be  like attending school at a certain university with a scholarship,  You then later decide this school sucks and want to transfer to another university, but you demand that the first school pay your tuition at the new school.  The first school did nothing wrong and was willing to continue your education.  It was your decision to transfer.  Maybe the first school does suck, but at some point in the past you found it acceptable enough to attend.   Its fine if you want to transfer, just don't expect the first school to continue the scholarship agreement (that you broke) at a different school.  That's the best analogy i can think of.

Unfortunately..  That "without just cause" is really had to define in a marriage.

[JennieOG]

I got a divorce, my ex-husband became an alcoholic and basically abandoned a pretty successful business.  I was fortunate in a sense, because in the two years leading up to everything hitting the fan I saved money like a banshee because I knew we were going to be in crisis, eventually.   So, when he finally totally freaked out (after numerous trips to detox and rehab) and started running up our credit cards staying in $300 a night hotels, I filed for divorce, moved $30k out of our joint bank account, hired a lawyer, sold the house (had to bring $10k to closing) and basically started "Operation Dirvorce".  Lest anyone think I was living high on the hog with the money I got, I had to pay off both of our cars to get out of the loans, moving fees, and a $7000k credit card balance he had run up to get out of a joint card as well.  So, I didn't have any of the money left, but I did get out of my divorce debt free, so I was proud of that. 

Now I work, and my ex doesn't.  He does not pay child support for our two young kids and lives with a girlfriend who gets disability payments.  I am extremely fortunate in that his parents are angels from heaven and help me and the kids tremendously with child care, etc.  Life is so much better even though the years around the divorce were extremely rocky.  I don't think I'll ever marry again, not that I think all men are evil by any means, I just don't want to be that financially vulnerable ever again. 

[Unionville]

I got a divorce, my ex-husband became an alcoholic and basically abandoned a pretty successful business.  I was fortunate in a sense, because in the two years leading up to everything hitting the fan I saved money like a banshee because I knew we were going to be in crisis, eventually.   So, when he finally totally freaked out (after numerous trips to detox and rehab) and started running up our credit cards staying in $300 a night hotels, I filed for divorce, moved $30k out of our joint bank account, hired a lawyer, sold the house (had to bring $10k to closing) and basically started "Operation Dirvorce".  Lest anyone think I was living high on the hog with the money I got, I had to pay off both of our cars to get out of the loans, moving fees, and a $7000k credit card balance he had run up to get out of a joint card as well.  So, I didn't have any of the money left, but I did get out of my divorce debt free, so I was proud of that. 

Now I work, and my ex doesn't.  He does not pay child support for our two young kids and lives with a girlfriend who gets disability payments.  I am extremely fortunate in that his parents are angels from heaven and help me and the kids tremendously with child care, etc.  Life is so much better even though the years around the divorce were extremely rocky.  I don't think I'll ever marry again, not that I think all men are evil by any means, I just don't want to be that financially vulnerable ever again.

If you don't mind me asking...I'm always curious how people end up marrying into a situation like this where they missed all the warning signs.  Did you pick it up early on that this person was irresponsible and had addictions?  This person sounds like a real loser, but I'm sure when you married him you thought he was great.  I'm not passing judgement on you. I'm just curious in terms of advice you might give to others on "what to watch out for" before you marry someone. Knowing this might prevent others from going through such financial hardships.

[MissPeach]

I love it when people who get or got divorced say "she took half of MY net worth" when really, far more often than not, she only took her half of what the two of you accumulated together while married.

This. Reminds me of when men talk of "babysitting" their own children.

That all said, my friend (a woman--gasp!) has to pay alimony to her deadbeat ex. He had a high-paying job and gave it up after they got married. Since he never bothered to get another job, my friend has to pay alimony to him at least until their very young child is 18. Another 9-10 years. And the child doesn't live with the dad either. So, the money goes to support the ex's life with his new girlfriend.

I would need some serious therapy to get through the above situation.

This happened to me too. EX lost his business and racked up tons of debt. He never worked again even though He thought about going to college and me encouraging him. He was a SAHP but only for 5% of our marriage. The rest of the time he refused to do much work. The children with with me and I pay for most of their clothing, supplies, etc. it's supposed to be 50/50 but he always claims poverty. He got alimony (which I negotiated down time-wise for extra assets) and 20% of my salary in child support. It is a calculation and since I made so much more I had to pay a lot.

Ex was a spend thrift so I am better off now financially but a limited to what I can save. When married we were always broke but I have been able to save so much even with the obligations.

Sometimes I wish I could switch to another field that was more flexible to spend more time at home but I couldn't afford the pay cut and have any chance at FIRE or even FU money without my higher paying job. From what I understand, since I can make x at the higher paying profession, I'll always be assessed that.

[anotherAlias]

I got a divorce, my ex-husband became an alcoholic and basically abandoned a pretty successful business.  I was fortunate in a sense, because in the two years leading up to everything hitting the fan I saved money like a banshee because I knew we were going to be in crisis, eventually.   So, when he finally totally freaked out (after numerous trips to detox and rehab) and started running up our credit cards staying in $300 a night hotels, I filed for divorce, moved $30k out of our joint bank account, hired a lawyer, sold the house (had to bring $10k to closing) and basically started "Operation Dirvorce".  Lest anyone think I was living high on the hog with the money I got, I had to pay off both of our cars to get out of the loans, moving fees, and a $7000k credit card balance he had run up to get out of a joint card as well.  So, I didn't have any of the money left, but I did get out of my divorce debt free, so I was proud of that. 

Now I work, and my ex doesn't.  He does not pay child support for our two young kids and lives with a girlfriend who gets disability payments.  I am extremely fortunate in that his parents are angels from heaven and help me and the kids tremendously with child care, etc.  Life is so much better even though the years around the divorce were extremely rocky.  I don't think I'll ever marry again, not that I think all men are evil by any means, I just don't want to be that financially vulnerable ever again.

If you don't mind me asking...I'm always curious how people end up marrying into a situation like this where they missed all the warning signs.  Did you pick it up early on that this person was irresponsible and had addictions?  This person sounds like a real loser, but I'm sure when you married him you thought he was great.  I'm not passing judgement on you. I'm just curious in terms of advice you might give to others on "what to watch out for" before you marry someone. Knowing this might prevent others from going through such financial hardships.

I'm not the op and I'm not even married but I watched my parents marriage strain when my father became an alcoholic so I have an outsiders opinion on this.  My father is a pretty great guy, when he's sober and he was sober for the first 20yrs or so of their marriage.  He worked hard, had a side hustle fun job on the weekends, did the 'man' chores around the house, played games and did stuff with me.  Then he started having problems at work because of a new owner and he started having a drink at night to deal with the stress.  Over time, that nightly drink became a couple and then several and then half a bottle of vodka.  It really was a case of him turning into a completely different person than the man my mom married and I grew up with as a small kid.  Sometimes people don't marry into a bad situation, the bad situation evolves over time a you wake up one day and realize this is not normal and this sucks and it's time to do something about  it.

[Gray Matter]

I have to say this thread is scaring the crap out of me!  I have been married for 20 years and believe we have a strong marriage, but yes, things can change.  My husband is on a nine-month assignment in Australia and while he was gone, two of his retirement accounts went to a zero balance (from about 98K).  My first thought was, "Is he syphoning off money because he's met someone in Australia and is planning on leaving me?"  It was a fleeting thought, and luckily was not the case (his firm stopped offering a certain type of retirement account and transferred the balances to other accounts), but to think it can never happen to you is naive.  Even strong marriages can fall apart, though there is usually some advance notice.

There are often red flags early in relationships that people tend to ignore because of those rose-colored glasses handed out so freely by Love.  My parents talked to us early and often about the importance of marriage, what made someone marriage material, that one doesn't "fall" in love, you can have influence over your emotions, etc.  So even at 22, I knew enough to find out certain things about DH:  had he ever been with someone while in another relationship, did he have any debt, family history of divorce and substance abuse.  Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior, so I learned as much as possible about his past and we also talked a lot about the future, recognizing that shared values and a vision of our future were important.  Not that this guarantees a successful marriage (it ain't over yet, folks!), but it does bring to light some risks that you can either knowingly take or walk away from.

If you are unsure of whether or not your current BF/GF/spouse is good for you, your friends and family (assuming they're not completely dysfunctional) can probably tell you.  Research has shown that friends and family are much better at predicting the long-term success of a relationship than the people in it are.

Now excuse me while I go tell my DH how awesome he is and that I hope he never changes!

[CHOPAG]

We are in this situation except no kids, yet.  My girlfriend works but she is in a toxic environment working as a international tax accountant.  The thing is she badly needs to pass her CPA exams (yesteryear) to apply elsewhere and she has been unmotivated and lazy for two years!  In those two years she took one month unpaid time off to just study and only passed one section! Two more remain and frankly she refuses to dedicate herself to helping her own situation by studying.  As they say you cannot force anyone to anything to help themselves and such is our situation.  I am changing jobs and looking to relocate as my four hour daily train/walking trip is killing me heart and soul.

erhm.  Dare I say this might be one of those warning signs you'll look back on later?

Indeed.  I am doing what I can to improve things within my control like changing my job to reduce the commute.  However, I am exasperated when I hear stories about how one partner refuses to go back to work or basically take some personal accountability (like my gf refusal to study for her CPA exams) to improve their own reality.  As for warning signs, yes, I concur and that is why I do not want to have kids and why we are not engaged.  I love her dearly but frankly her actions currently do not match the words she says, namely her desire to change jobs, settle down and relocate.  Only time will tell....

It sounds like your girlfriend is depressed, so I hope she is doing something to address that. Having an awful job can suck the life and will out of a person. Some outside help might enable her to turn those words into actions.

On the other hand, your comment about not wanting kids jumped out at me. I never wanted kids, for a whole host of reasons, and I think that lead to me devaluing reliability and maturity as important qualities in my first husband. I knew that he wasn't mature enough to take care of a child, but I thought I didn't need him to be. I could take care of myself, surely he could at least take care of himself, so we would take care of ourselves together, right? Wrong. Laughably wrong. It is shocking to what extent another person can wreck your life despite all of your best efforts. Picture one of those skiers in ski cross who gets clipped by someone else and wipes out in spectacular fashion. That was me. If you think that someone is too unreliable and immature to be a parent, they might also be too unreliable and immature to be a serious partner.</doomandgloom>

[MrFancypants]

And this is one of the reasons, that's why I support limited alimony.
SAHP: Gave up a certain sum of lifetime earnings - will start it at a longer rung on the ladder, giving up a permanent amount of career growth. 
WP: Gives up a limited cash for a few years.  Domestic duties now fully on WP.

Look, I'm not a SAHP.  I don't have kids, I do have a career.  I have no intentions of being a SAHP.  I'd consider it, but DH has expressed more interest in it than me (but less aptitude for it, consider I do 90% of the domestic work now...).  This discussion isn't about my life or whether I personally had a negative experience.  But, this is how I feel things are fair.  Clearly you disagree.  As with all forums, some folks value things like money over other things.  Some families here value time with kids or homecooked meals or clean houses or whatever else it is, and choose to have a stay at home spouse and I think it is MORE of a screw over to tell the non-working spouse that you get no time to find a job, no time to train for a job, instead jump back into a workforce you left long ago if you can, get a lesser paying job, never reach the same career heights (in the amount of time left for you to work), than it is to say to the working spouse that they have to support for a limited time.  FWIW, I agree that permanent alimony, other than for a super long marriage, would skew things back in favor of the stay at home parent and screw over the working parent.

Except you don't just give up cash, you give up freedom. 

The thing is, if the homemaker brings value to a relationship, and courts are attempting to divide value and award it to the other person to compensate for that loss in coming years, then the homemaker should also be expected to provide something if the person bringing in the money is expected to keep financing the other person's existence.

Because I firmly believe that my wife, who stays at home, very much adds value to our relationship through the work that she does, if it is expected that I continue to provide for her on divorce then I feel like it is fair to expect her to continue to provide a portion of the services she provided in the past.  A court order for her to spend a couple of hours a week doing my laundry or cleaning my home is no different than a court order that requires someone to work XX number of hours a week to fund the other's existence.  If not that, then the WP is getting hit with a double-whammy, not only do they have to spend extra time working (freedom lost) to fund another person's existence, but they also have to spend extra time working to replace the lost labor in their own home (even more freedom lost).

I understand that doing the laundry doesn't pay the bills.  But there's an extremely strong chance that doing so for whatever amount one is receiving in alimony payments would make anyone a very well paid clothes washer.

[Sweet Betsy]

I am happily married with two kids, and my wife has been a SAHM for about 4 out of 7 years of our marriage.  Our youngest child is about 13 months now, and she's been at home with him. Lately- i've been asking her about getting back into the workforce.  She is actually in early childhood education and any job she gets is very likely to come with either free or reduced childcare- which would be big for us. 

Anyway- she's been pushing back on me pretty hard, not wanting to go back to work.  Personally, i'm not a huge fan of my job, so i'd love to accelerate our path to FIRE by adding in some more income into the household.  But, she insists that she wouldn't be happy at work right now.  I'll admit it is tough.  At no point when we got married did we say that one of us would be a stay at home parent indefinitely. She wanted to stay at home for the first year for both of our kids, and I totally supported that. And i'd agree with folks that I was only able to reach my full earning potential with her at home taking primary care of the kids.

But now, with the kids getting older, and her being out of work for awhile, I see that it might start getting harder and harder for her to go back.  To be honest, it does worry me a bit, and to be frank, I feel like it puts me in the awkward position of being the "bad guy" by trying to encourage her to work.

Hey pokercab,
I just wanted to share my perspective on your situation.  I am a stay at home mom and have been for almost 11 years (with about 3 years of part-time work mixed in there).  Having a 13 month old can be even harder than a newborn.  Really listen to your wife's reasons for not being ready to reenter the workforce.  She probably has just as many valid reasons for her side as you do.  It's a hard decision to make and it can take time for both of you to settle on the "right" decision for your family.  And the "right" decision for your family can change many times before your kids are grown.  We are getting ready for me to go back to work part-time.  The timing is right and we are all happier that we haven't forced things.  Sure we could have made a bit more money over the past several years but there is a lot more to life than money. 

[Sofa King]

It is a proven fact that marriage is the leading cause of divorce.

Those going through a divorce may find this site very helpful.  I know I did.

Good luck.


http://www.divorcesupport.com/divorce/Divorce-Support-Forums-3029.html

[thepokercab]

I am happily married with two kids, and my wife has been a SAHM for about 4 out of 7 years of our marriage.  Our youngest child is about 13 months now, and she's been at home with him. Lately- i've been asking her about getting back into the workforce.  She is actually in early childhood education and any job she gets is very likely to come with either free or reduced childcare- which would be big for us. 

Anyway- she's been pushing back on me pretty hard, not wanting to go back to work.  Personally, i'm not a huge fan of my job, so i'd love to accelerate our path to FIRE by adding in some more income into the household.  But, she insists that she wouldn't be happy at work right now.  I'll admit it is tough.  At no point when we got married did we say that one of us would be a stay at home parent indefinitely. She wanted to stay at home for the first year for both of our kids, and I totally supported that. And i'd agree with folks that I was only able to reach my full earning potential with her at home taking primary care of the kids.

But now, with the kids getting older, and her being out of work for awhile, I see that it might start getting harder and harder for her to go back.  To be honest, it does worry me a bit, and to be frank, I feel like it puts me in the awkward position of being the "bad guy" by trying to encourage her to work.

Hey pokercab,
I just wanted to share my perspective on your situation.  I am a stay at home mom and have been for almost 11 years (with about 3 years of part-time work mixed in there).  Having a 13 month old can be even harder than a newborn.  Really listen to your wife's reasons for not being ready to reenter the workforce.  She probably has just as many valid reasons for her side as you do.  It's a hard decision to make and it can take time for both of you to settle on the "right" decision for your family.  And the "right" decision for your family can change many times before your kids are grown.  We are getting ready for me to go back to work part-time.  The timing is right and we are all happier that we haven't forced things.  Sure we could have made a bit more money over the past several years but there is a lot more to life than money.

Thanks sweetbetsy for that perspective, and I've found other folks' perspective interesting as well.  My wife and I talked and her apprehension is about half feeling like she is too busy at home to go back to work full time and half that she simply doesn't really want to work in child care anymore.  I understand on both counts.  We're going to explore some alternative part time options, and see what might make sense.  But ultimately, i told her that she should do whatever she feels is right. 

I think you're definitely right about things being more important than money.  Since I found MMM and the frugal path i've definitely made great strides in saving money, and being more cognizant about finances in general and how to optimize.  But I think I have a tendency to become a bit obsessive about the numbers.  When I thought about my wife getting back to work, all i was really thinking about was the added income and how much faster we could get to FIRE-  but there really is a host of other considerations.  Also, I think I tend to project my own frustration with my job situation on to my wife staying home.  As opposed to re-examining my choices, and thinking about how I can make my situation better, its really just easier to think "well, if she could get a job I could quit sooner." 

[nawhite]

We have a post-nuptial agreement stating that I get 50% his gross salary until retirement. I also would get child support. This is to guarantee I will be provided for if he flakes on the marriage. Because of this I am comfortable with my decision to be a permanent stay at home mom/homeschool mom.

I guess I'm curious about this agreement and the fine print. Is there a stipulation that you only get those things if he initiates the divorce?

Just to clarify, I'm not saying that you are the kind of person who would think this way, but without stipulations, this agreement seems like a pretty nice golden parachute to me. If you decided, "you know what, this whole marriage thing isn't really doing it for me anymore" or "that pool boy looks awful cute, my husband wouldn't want to get a divorce so I can sleep around without consequences." You get everything you want and 50% of his salary, he watches you sleep around or loses 50% of his salary.

Again I'm not saying that you would do these things, just that the agreement seems awfully unfair to your husband (to the point that if I were his divorce attorney I'd argue that it shouldn't be allowed because he didn't know his rights when he signed it).

[momo]

We are in this situation except no kids, yet.  My girlfriend works but she is in a toxic environment working as a international tax accountant.  The thing is she badly needs to pass her CPA exams (yesteryear) to apply elsewhere and she has been unmotivated and lazy for two years!  In those two years she took one month unpaid time off to just study and only passed one section! Two more remain and frankly she refuses to dedicate herself to helping her own situation by studying.  As they say you cannot force anyone to anything to help themselves and such is our situation.  I am changing jobs and looking to relocate as my four hour daily train/walking trip is killing me heart and soul.

erhm.  Dare I say this might be one of those warning signs you'll look back on later?

Indeed.  I am doing what I can to improve things within my control like changing my job to reduce the commute.  However, I am exasperated when I hear stories about how one partner refuses to go back to work or basically take some personal accountability (like my gf refusal to study for her CPA exams) to improve their own reality.  As for warning signs, yes, I concur and that is why I do not want to have kids and why we are not engaged.  I love her dearly but frankly her actions currently do not match the words she says, namely her desire to change jobs, settle down and relocate.  Only time will tell....

It sounds like your girlfriend is depressed, so I hope she is doing something to address that. Having an awful job can suck the life and will out of a person. Some outside help might enable her to turn those words into actions.

On the other hand, your comment about not wanting kids jumped out at me. I never wanted kids, for a whole host of reasons, and I think that lead to me devaluing reliability and maturity as important qualities in my first husband. I knew that he wasn't mature enough to take care of a child, but I thought I didn't need him to be. I could take care of myself, surely he could at least take care of himself, so we would take care of ourselves together, right? Wrong. Laughably wrong. It is shocking to what extent another person can wreck your life despite all of your best efforts. Picture one of those skiers in ski cross who gets clipped by someone else and wipes out in spectacular fashion. That was me. If you think that someone is too unreliable and immature to be a parent, they might also be too unreliable and immature to be a serious partner.</doomandgloom>

@ CHOPAG: She actually is depressed and taking one prescription, but she refuses to attend counseling.  She has a very hard time expressing herself honestly.  Also you raise a good point about children and if she might be unreliable/immature as a parent.  I am still struggling with this and I appreciate your thoughtful candor.

@ flostache, those are great ideas that both genders should apply prior to committing to anyone.  Would also add a few other observations, if one partner lacks the ability to empathize and express compassion towards others.  Run.  Also, if one partner treats the other as their verbal and emotional punching bag, run.  Our good buddy recently experienced this.

@ All, wondering are there Mustachians who do not combine their incomes and keep their finances separate?  This could be the property or assets brought into the relationship, incomes and adding into a shared account for expenses, etc.

If you separate finances, how did you raise the topic and come to an agreement with your partner?  Also, interested if you don't mind sharing what motivated you to want to keep finances separate?  Thanks for sharing!

[KMMK]

@ All, wondering are there Mustachians who do not combine their incomes and keep their finances separate?  This could be the property or assets brought into the relationship, incomes and adding into a shared account for expenses, etc.

If you separate finances, how did you raise the topic and come to an agreement with your partner?  Also, interested if you don't mind sharing what motivated you to want to keep finances separate?  Thanks for sharing!

We have a pre-nup and keep separate finances. Basically if we decide to own things jointly like our car and our house, they are 50/50. Otherwise we just leave them in our own accounts that we had prior to marriage. It works well for us because we both prefer it that way, are both good with saving money, and have full disclosure with each other. It's just about day to day management, not about hiding anything. If either of us died, the other gets all the money.

How was the topic raised? - Before we got married he had about twice the net worth that I did, but I was more financially savvy. I asked him if he wanted a pre-nup as I wanted to be very clear that I wasn't with him for his money. I would never stay with someone just to avoid financial difficulties and would always be able to pay my own way. (No kids for us.)  After that we discussed how we would manage money, especially in situations such as one of us intentionally working less, going back to school, etc. Initially it was me who wanted to go back to school and he felt that was too risky. He is very risk adverse. It ended up him going back to school and losing more income than I. 

We just both preferred to continue managing our own money. We can work as little as we want as long as we can still pay our share of the bills; we can buy whatever we want without asking the other person (but we never actually do this except with small amounts.) We also have very different ideas about investing and would drive each other crazy if our money was together in that way. Retirement accounts have to be separate anyhow. We chose to each do our own thing with our investments and spending. We are both happy that way. If our money was combined and we had to agree on every decision we'd both be unhappy all the time. That's certainly not what I want for my life/marriage.

[nyxst]

No matter what, divorce sucks. In retrospect, there are usually signs of trouble in the future... But, even with potential signs, there is no really no way to see it coming sometimes since you can't tally it all up until you see what actually causes the end.. I am 3 years out now, after a 7 year marriage (dated for 3 years before we even got married). Still going through the fight... I wish it would just end already so I could move on with my life. Hardest part is trying to make sure the kids are as unaffected as possible. I am happy that the relationship is over and I can direct my own life now. I know in the end it will all be fine. I know that my kids are seeing/learning a lot of things that I had hoped they would never have to learn... It is really really hard to have to see them through the tough spots without getting really angry. But, outside of the affect on the kids, the worst part for me is the lack of desire for any new relationship. It is a double edged sword of sorts... I get sad thinking of growing old alone and I worry about when times come that a partner would really help (illness/old age) and I am terrified of being in a relationship, knowing that its possible to wake up with a whole new life in one day because of your partners choices...bummer. 

I had to buy him out of the house when we divorced.  As far as money goes, we were "poor" then, and I have become substantially richer since my divorce.. mostly because there isn't any more bleeding :)  I remember just after my separation, I was terrified by the idea of paying the bills and would I have enough for everything.  Then, my savings account kept growing and growing, and I realized my kids and I are actually not very spendy :) Saving money is fun for us, and the kids each have their own portion of the budget to handle (my teen handles her own needs, my 8 year old son is in charge of the household entertainment budget, and the 4 year old collects the change in the money jar).  It is amazing how bad a spendy person can be for a household budget.  All fixed now :)

[CommonCents]

@ All, wondering are there Mustachians who do not combine their incomes and keep their finances separate?  This could be the property or assets brought into the relationship, incomes and adding into a shared account for expenses, etc.

If you separate finances, how did you raise the topic and come to an agreement with your partner?  Also, interested if you don't mind sharing what motivated you to want to keep finances separate?  Thanks for sharing!

Before engagement, we first discussed getting a prenup.  I told him I was willing to sign one if it was fair.  (In that he had a condo which was partially an early inheritance, and if he wanted to protect that, I wanted to protect any inheritance I might receive, which would likely be larger.  I also wanted it to protect a spouse that stayed home - which given this conversation, is apparently far, far more critical than I would have even thought, because I am flat out astonished at how many here disagree with basic rehabilitative alimony.)  We opted not to have one in the end.  We've actually both earned more (substantially) than the other at times over the past 5.5 years, and depending on choices we make, could reverse again, so we don't have a "you're the breadwinner" perspective. 

We were open about finances while dating.  We discussed how we'd keep finances while engaged.  Essentially, we got married old enough (30s) that we already had ways of doing things.  Neither one of us wanted to get rid of "their" bank because we liked them for various reasons.  More specifically, I like USAA and think they are a great bank in terms of customer service and ease of things like free atm withdrawals anywhere.  He likes his bank for having a physical presence in this state  (helpful with check depositing) and thinks they've done ok by him.

So officially, we've put our names on each other's accounts.  If something happens (death to divorce) they are mingled.  But practically, our finances are separate though linked (can push/pull money through them).  Generally we'll talk about expenses of things we're buying (usually shop together for the most part, so it's often only things online like presents for family that are bought separate), particularly anything large, but we're not obligated to do so.  For the most part we're on the same wave length of spending, but we do have our own foibles.  We just bought a house about 2 months ago, and we have yet to actually figure out how we're paying the bills for it.  We're in the process of selling the condo right now and once that's done I think we'll figure out more concretely.

For now, we'll just ask the other if they need money and tell them to take it from the accounts if so.  It's completely hodge podge right now because of buying the house and things for the house (e.g. floors sanded, buying appliances, plans to buy certain decorative/practical items).  Prior to the house, he's tended to pay more bills because he earns a bit more and because he was already paying them when I first moved in (so I took over things like cable, which we had switched because I negotiated better, groceries, etc).  If we have kids we would need to rework it.

Not sure if that fully answers your question, but if not, feel free to ask more questions.

[momo]

@ Kestra and CommonCents, thank you both for sharing why you agreed on pre-nups and kept your finances separate.  Thank you!

@ ALL:  Would really like to hear from others on this topic.  Are there other readers who considered separating your finances and implementing a pre-nup?  How did you raise the delicate topic?  Was your partner offended?  If so how did the conversations/topics progress?  Thank you all in advance!!

Conversely, if you decided against pre-nups and keeping your finances separate, do you mind sharing why?  We're trying to gain better understanding on a often unspoken topic.  Thank you.

[forward]

'If' I am ever in a position where I am thinking about marriage I will be exploring the concept of a prenup and separate finances with perhaps some combined pools of money.  I have seen instances where you ask someone their stance on an issue or how they react under certain circumstances, and they give you an answer, then the circumstance happens and they are 180 opposite of what they said!

It can really shake your core beliefs when this happens, in a bad way.   

[momo]

Removed previous link to questionable content.  Thanks to Elaine for pointing it out.

[Elaine]

We don't want to hijack this thread but our friends shared this link with us http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/read.php?2,335815,page=1  has anyone read it before?  Curious on thoughts since it is somewhat related to the OT.  Thank you.

Wow, just a heads up to anyone going over there: it's suuuuuuuper sexist. Refers to SAHM's as typically "nasty monsters" and "teenage princesses", c-word is everywhere, women referred to mostly as "females", and multiple references to "c*** work".

[warfreak2]

Ugh, misogyny :-(

[FrugalZony]

@ Kestra and CommonCents, thank you both for sharing why you agreed on pre-nups and kept your finances separate.  Thank you!

@ ALL:  Would really like to hear from others on this topic.  Are there other readers who considered separating your finances and implementing a pre-nup?  How did you raise the delicate topic?  Was your partner offended?  If so how did the conversations/topics progress?  Thank you all in advance!!

Conversely, if you decided against pre-nups and keeping your finances separate, do you mind sharing why?  We're trying to gain better understanding on a often unspoken topic.  Thank you.

We have a prenup (which I am now very grateful for, as we are going through separation right now and are most likely headed for divorce down the road)
My parents got divorced when I was little, but I remember my Mum stressing over things and getting a postnup, as my biological dad had a lot of debt and she had assets (albeit not huge) that she wanted to protect.
I have also seen a bunch of messy divorces over the years.

When we got married (after many years of living together), I owned a partially paid off apartment and had some saving while he owned a business with a family member of his and had practically no savings. There were also inheritance considerations on my side

So I brought up the subject, that this was important for both of us and would protect both sides.
The business never took off, but it could have and he may have been forced to sell in order to pay me out, had I insisted, the same was true for my apartment/savings.

From a very early stage I sensed we had different ways to handle finances and I would have not been comfortable having shared accounts
But even had we been on the same page spending wise and asset wise, I am not sure if I'd want joint finances. I have always valued my independence.
I know a lot of people think that's odd, but I have seen some really crazy things over the years.

That said, with very few exceptions, I was the one who earned more, the one who usually took care of living quarters, furniture, larger purchases etc.
I have no problem with sharing on a voluntary basis, but in hindsight, I should have probably asked for a fair share of contribution based on relative salaries

[Insanity]

@ Kestra and CommonCents, thank you both for sharing why you agreed on pre-nups and kept your finances separate.  Thank you!

@ ALL:  Would really like to hear from others on this topic.  Are there other readers who considered separating your finances and implementing a pre-nup?  How did you raise the delicate topic?  Was your partner offended?  If so how did the conversations/topics progress?  Thank you all in advance!!

Conversely, if you decided against pre-nups and keeping your finances separate, do you mind sharing why?  We're trying to gain better understanding on a often unspoken topic.  Thank you.

I never thought of a pre-nup before my wife and I got married, and I really don't regret it with the way our marriage currently is - no matter what the fall out.  We tried doing separate accounts to start (when we first moved in together we were engaged) and it just became a pain in the ass to manage and do budgeting.  I also hated the concept of separating who had to pay what bills.  I found it easier to pool our money.  This isn't to say it is not possible or that it can't be done easily - but my fear was if she decided to stop paying some bills or did pay them all, how would I know?   Or how would I handle it if she stopped contributing to our joint account for bills?

As far as the assets going into the marriage, well, I didn't have a whole lot.  Yes, inheritance money will be a factor -- but she'll have that on her side, too.  Money was never an object with either of us.  For me, it is all about the kids.  I can always make more money doing what I enjoy.  Would I like being taken advantage of? Of course, not.  But, I personally don't see having a pre-nup as being all in.  If you are going to have one, why bother getting married? (and I'm not saying that be condescending to those who do believe in them, I understand some like to have the protection).  But then again, I also waited until I was 21 to drink, never did drugs, and my wife is the only women I've been with.

[DoubleDown]

But, I personally don't see having a pre-nup as being all in.  If you are going to have one, why bother getting married? (and I'm not saying that be condescending to those who do believe in them, I understand some like to have the protection).

I think that's a fair question, and even though it was posed rhetorically, I'll venture an answer from my perspective: I see it much as the same thing as preparing a will or proper estate planning. You could die without one, and leave it to the courts to decide where your assets and benefits go. But that's really giving up all control with the misguided hope that the laws or judge in your locality will agree with or even know what your intentions were. Similarly in a divorce, the likelihood that the laws in your area will align with what a couple would have chosen are slim and none, and certainly divorcing couples often have differing views on what should happen. Putting it all in writing when the parties can have a less emotionally charged and non-confrontational discussion helps prevent disagreements down the road, and takes the guesswork out of how things should be split if the marriage doesn't work out for whatever reason (just like an estate plan takes the guesswork out after a death).

I think you're right, it's less than an "all in" mentality, but in the cold statistics of reality, nearly half of all marriages will end in divorce. Those are really high odds, I think it reasonable to realize any of us could be the one out of two who finds themselves on the wrong side of the odds and therefore have a plan rather than leaving it to the whims of local laws or court, which are decidedly imperfect and often even unfair, as pointed out by some of the stories here.

Ha, at the time of my divorce I had $6500/month in take home pay, and according to the state formulas and with no prenup, was ordered to send my ex-wife $6400/month in alimony and child support and maintaining the marital residence for three years. For those challenged with math, that left me exactly $100/month to live on in my own apartment and for my two kids with me half-time for three years, in expensive Wash. DC. That is no exaggeration. And that was all on top of splitting the assets and my future pension and social security 50-50. This despite the strong evidence that my wife was cheating on me, and it was her who drove the divorce, but none of that matters as far as the law is concerned. Of course I howled that it was unfair and impossible to sustain, and the lawyers and judge all told me what a "good" deal I was getting according to the law and had better settle. So, I lived off credit cards for three years, and thanked God when it was finally over.

[LadyMuMu]

You know, if you want the SAHP to return to work, may I make a suggestion? Sit down and write out everything the SAHP is responsible for...and don't forget to include things that don't have visible deliverables like staying on top of whether there is milk in the fridge/shoes that fit for the kids/etc. Before asking the SAHP to find a job, start doing at LEAST half of those chores. In fact, do more than half because having two working parents in the home means that there will be MORE, not the same, amount of things to track in the household. Also, you be the one to research and secure alternative childcare options when kids are sick/out of school/etc. Otherwise, asking a SAHP parent to find and start a job means you've just doubled their workload.

[jscott2135]

Ahhh Franklin, we could talk about this for years...or not...depends on how may drinks I have I guess.  I married my first DH poor and divorced him and we SHOCK AND AWEE managed to divorce and separate our assets fairly with no court fight.  He didn't owe me anything and I was raised by a man, who let me know that I owed no one anything and they owed me nothing in return.  I took a chance, and lost. Its life, not free paycheck time.   Anywhooo.  Second dh and I married and he got his ass handed to him in court and we now pay 950/mo in child support.  As a woman and I'm generally in the minority but I'll put it out there anyways, I hate alimony and child support and have no time for people that feel ENTITLED to either.  Life is like Vegas...you make a bad gamble, you lose, you aren't owed anything.  Nobody forced you to marry the turd that you divorced or that divorced you.  I have a low tolerance for folks that can't take a measure of accountability and find a solution rather than becoming bitter and always finding excuses....but I again digress.  We pay $950/mo in child support.  Every year, mommy pulls up in a new vehicle, this year it was a Hummer.  And step daughter who is now 13 is always talking about how POOR they are.  POOR.  But in the next sentence will discuss how mom is going to buy a new camper/trailer/boat.  In the last two years we have been asked to cover braces fully, and pitching coaching for DSD.  We never give two thoughts to that kind of stuff, we just cover it and move on...kind of like the child support.  I don't even think about anymore to be honest.  If I did I would get bitter.  Instead I just chose to ignore it and in a way feel bad for them.  Mom depends on child support for income to pay mortgage and car payments, snow mobile payments, etc., which will evaporate when daughter turns 18 and then she will be in a world of hurt with no options.  I should add in before anyone blasts me on here, I am in no way against supporting your child, I am just fully against the design of our system as it is now.  One sized fits all solutions imposed by a court which magically seem to always screw the guys and favor women is a step back for everyone involved. Don't tell me you pulled yourself up by your bootstraps while receiving cash payments from someone you are no longer seeing. Dh and I have discussed expectations of divorce if the worst were to happen. And there will be no court ordered anything.   Frankly I'd be embarrassed as a man or woman to know someone else was supporting me after our legal connection/emotional connection was severed...as for your ex and her now dh apparently they like having a sugar daddy?   But you needn't dwell on that, you're just smart enough now to be so secure that you support 3 adults.  That's big time...so virtual high five :D  I would say though, marriage is risky and you go into it knowing the risks.  For those of you that are scarred from prior divorces and not wanting to mingle finances this baffles me.  Why ever even get into a relationship again then?  What's the point?  Marriage is about commitment and taking a chance?  Not judging though, if you guys can make it work then more power to you.  If I was ever dating again and someone said that to me, I'd be out...I like a man who can go all in.  Life is a crazy ride and I need a co pilot who isn't jumpy ya know :D