Long-term relationship with a guy with 15 years of alimony payments

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You can be in a LTR without getting married having kids and combining finances. Are you ready for that?

OP here. Yes, I am just trying to work out the logistics of all of this. He is a lovely man.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

LOL...so much for empowering feminism that brings us CHOICE. Didn't realize it was my husband who was "allowing" me to be a SAHM.

+1

PP is bitter because her DH doesn’t allow her the choice to stay home. Hence her vitriol and anger towards all SAHMs.

Not that poster but I get it. While “allow” might not be the right word, unless the SAHP is independently wealthy, the person bringing in the income has to agree that they are comfortable being the only one bringing in the income for the other person to stay at home. You can’t live off love alone and need a way to pay for food and shelter.

And there may be some truth to the bitterness but more so in imagining the future situation. Because if your are the SAHM, that may not have been an option financially if your DH was previously married and paying a lot of alimony to his ex. How would you feel going to work everyday and preferring to SAH with your children knowing that you can’t financially afford to do so as a household because your DH will be paying alimony until your joint kids are almost in high school to support his ex when his kids with her are already out of high school?

To OP, in terms of discussing details, what is your motivation in discussing the details? Are you worried that you will indirectly be taking on this amount? At a certain point, it’s similar to someone that has huge student loan payments, you accept that a financial decision they made prior to you means they have salary minus x available to contribute to the household now. Either you can accept it or you don’t. Then you have to look at adverse changes, like if he loses his job (he still has those obligations) or if you get divorced or something changes with the alimony (like she breaks the terms of the agreement or somehow lawyers need to get involved again) - can you be with this person and still somehow financially protect yourself? No everyone is a fan or a prenup or separate finances.

Thanks for your thoughts. OP here. Realistically speaking, if he lost his job and were still due the alimony payments, we would need to think about this. The same with an illness that incapacitated him. I expect that we would go back to court to reduce the payments. The payments are such that a person in the DC area could live comfortably on them; especially since she does not have a mortgage payment. She is very well educated too. Everyone in the situation is. Since she doesn't need to rely on additional personal income, she is not aggressive in moving her career along. The ex is in her mid-50s.

[Anonymous]

I’d have a hard time trusting a man who left a marriage where he was required to pay alimony. With a SAHM and kids I think you’ve signed up for life. Unless his ex wife cheated, I’d be very weary. The men who have left their families who I know are NOT good guys. They may come across as good guys but from the details I know about their previous marriages, they are not.

On a positive note, you probably don’t have to worry about them leaving their next wife because they won’t be able to afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

LOL...so much for empowering feminism that brings us CHOICE. Didn't realize it was my husband who was "allowing" me to be a SAHM.

+1

PP is bitter because her DH doesn’t allow her the choice to stay home. Hence her vitriol and anger towards all SAHMs.

Not that poster but I get it. While “allow” might not be the right word, unless the SAHP is independently wealthy, the person bringing in the income has to agree that they are comfortable being the only one bringing in the income for the other person to stay at home. You can’t live off love alone and need a way to pay for food and shelter.

And there may be some truth to the bitterness but more so in imagining the future situation. Because if your are the SAHM, that may not have been an option financially if your DH was previously married and paying a lot of alimony to his ex. How would you feel going to work everyday and preferring to SAH with your children knowing that you can’t financially afford to do so as a household because your DH will be paying alimony until your joint kids are almost in high school to support his ex when his kids with her are already out of high school?

To OP, in terms of discussing details, what is your motivation in discussing the details? Are you worried that you will indirectly be taking on this amount? At a certain point, it’s similar to someone that has huge student loan payments, you accept that a financial decision they made prior to you means they have salary minus x available to contribute to the household now. Either you can accept it or you don’t. Then you have to look at adverse changes, like if he loses his job (he still has those obligations) or if you get divorced or something changes with the alimony (like she breaks the terms of the agreement or somehow lawyers need to get involved again) - can you be with this person and still somehow financially protect yourself? No everyone is a fan or a prenup or separate finances.

Thanks for your thoughts. OP here. Realistically speaking, if he lost his job and were still due the alimony payments, we would need to think about this. The same with an illness that incapacitated him. I expect that we would go back to court to reduce the payments. The payments are such that a person in the DC area could live comfortably on them; especially since she does not have a mortgage payment. She is very well educated too. Everyone in the situation is. Since she doesn't need to rely on additional personal income, she is not aggressive in moving her career along. The ex is in her mid-50s.

Of course she isn’t. She signed up to stay at home and raise his kids. Then the DH changed his mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d have a hard time trusting a man who left a marriage where he was required to pay alimony. With a SAHM and kids I think you’ve signed up for life. Unless his ex wife cheated, I’d be very weary. The men who have left their families who I know are NOT good guys. They may come across as good guys but from the details I know about their previous marriages, they are not.

On a positive note, you probably don’t have to worry about them leaving their next wife because they won’t be able to afford it.

You have a very narrow view of life, either that, or you believe that women can have no faults. People evolve.

[Anonymous]

OP, would you be having kids with this man?

If not, then you could certainly keep moving forward with the relationship and see how you feel. If you start to feel the strain of his debt, and you start to resent her, you can try to work through it or back off.

But, if you're older and want children, you could be entangled in a situation you hate well before you've had that time to think about it.

His money will never be all his, even ten years from now. He has children, and he will have grandchildren. And while he could have the same with you, he will also be buying birthday/Christmas gifts and helping with grad school or downpayments or traveling to see grandkids with a family you don't know very well. If he's not willing to talk about money, you can't do this.

[Anonymous]

Look it doesn't matter what caused their divorce.

He has a legal obligation to her.

Either accept it or don't.

I'd treat it like any other debt, like a student loan repayment.

He can't get out of this. You can either choose to accept it or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d have a hard time trusting a man who left a marriage where he was required to pay alimony. With a SAHM and kids I think you’ve signed up for life. Unless his ex wife cheated, I’d be very weary. The men who have left their families who I know are NOT good guys. They may come across as good guys but from the details I know about their previous marriages, they are not.

On a positive note, you probably don’t have to worry about them leaving their next wife because they won’t be able to afford it.

You have a very narrow view of life, either that, or you believe that women can have no faults. People evolve.

Where did I say this?!?!

I simply think you don’t walk out on your family because your wife had faults. We all do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

This is not true. You sound like a bitter no nothing.

I have LIFE LONG alimony to the tune of 10k a month and I have a job. My getting a job has no bearing on my alimony payment. It was calculated from his annual earnings at the time of the divorce with the idea that since I had supported him through the length of our entire marriage, I have a right to a % of his future earnings. Plus half of our net worth. He also had to agree to pay for the kids to finish private school and college (though to his credit, that is not something he fought and something he gladly pays because he is a good father).

We live in CT.

The only caveat to my alimony agreement is that I cannot remarry or combine my finances with someone else.

[Anonymous]

Child support wouldn't bother me. Anyone with kids will have to pay child support. If you can't handle that, don't date anyone with kids.

I'd be stressed out by the alimony, though. Alimony means that he is paying another woman not to work. Alimony means that I will be paying more money for shared expenses so that another woman doesn't have to work, or gets to work part-time. I would resent that. Someone else would have a better lifestyle at my expense, and I'm not cool with that.

But that's me. Your results may vary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Child support wouldn't bother me. Anyone with kids will have to pay child support. If you can't handle that, don't date anyone with kids.

I'd be stressed out by the alimony, though. Alimony means that he is paying another woman not to work. Alimony means that I will be paying more money for shared expenses so that another woman doesn't have to work, or gets to work part-time. I would resent that. Someone else would have a better lifestyle at my expense, and I'm not cool with that.

But that's me. Your results may vary.

I don't think that's true. I know people with 50/50 agreements. Neither pays child support and they see their kids equally. Which is how I think it should be.

It gets to be a hairy situation when the kids of the second wife can't afford to do anything because the kids of the first wife receive much more child support. I have friends (now grown) who were in that situation. Their dad had to pay the first kid's colleges, but couldn't afford it for the second family's kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

LOL...so much for empowering feminism that brings us CHOICE. Didn't realize it was my husband who was "allowing" me to be a SAHM.

+1

PP is bitter because her DH doesn’t allow her the choice to stay home. Hence her vitriol and anger towards all SAHMs.

Not that poster but I get it. While “allow” might not be the right word, unless the SAHP is independently wealthy, the person bringing in the income has to agree that they are comfortable being the only one bringing in the income for the other person to stay at home. You can’t live off love alone and need a way to pay for food and shelter.

And there may be some truth to the bitterness but more so in imagining the future situation. Because if your are the SAHM, that may not have been an option financially if your DH was previously married and paying a lot of alimony to his ex. How would you feel going to work everyday and preferring to SAH with your children knowing that you can’t financially afford to do so as a household because your DH will be paying alimony until your joint kids are almost in high school to support his ex when his kids with her are already out of high school?

To OP, in terms of discussing details, what is your motivation in discussing the details? Are you worried that you will indirectly be taking on this amount? At a certain point, it’s similar to someone that has huge student loan payments, you accept that a financial decision they made prior to you means they have salary minus x available to contribute to the household now. Either you can accept it or you don’t. Then you have to look at adverse changes, like if he loses his job (he still has those obligations) or if you get divorced or something changes with the alimony (like she breaks the terms of the agreement or somehow lawyers need to get involved again) - can you be with this person and still somehow financially protect yourself? No everyone is a fan or a prenup or separate finances.

Thanks for your thoughts. OP here. Realistically speaking, if he lost his job and were still due the alimony payments, we would need to think about this. The same with an illness that incapacitated him. I expect that we would go back to court to reduce the payments. The payments are such that a person in the DC area could live comfortably on them; especially since she does not have a mortgage payment. She is very well educated too. Everyone in the situation is. Since she doesn't need to rely on additional personal income, she is not aggressive in moving her career along. The ex is in her mid-50s.

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Child support wouldn't bother me. Anyone with kids will have to pay child support. If you can't handle that, don't date anyone with kids.

I'd be stressed out by the alimony, though. Alimony means that he is paying another woman not to work. Alimony means that I will be paying more money for shared expenses so that another woman doesn't have to work, or gets to work part-time. I would resent that. Someone else would have a better lifestyle at my expense, and I'm not cool with that.

But that's me. Your results may vary.

I don't think that's true. I know people with 50/50 agreements. Neither pays child support and they see their kids equally. Which is how I think it should be.

It gets to be a hairy situation when the kids of the second wife can't afford to do anything because the kids of the first wife receive much more child support. I have friends (now grown) who were in that situation. Their dad had to pay the first kid's colleges, but couldn't afford it for the second family's kids.

Then he shouldn't have had another family he can't afford????

I'm truly astounded by how many of you think a man should be able to blow off his first set of commitments just because he's having sex with someone new. Why should the first wife and kids suffer because of that?! Sorry until his prior obligations are met, he's not available to make another family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

LOL...so much for empowering feminism that brings us CHOICE. Didn't realize it was my husband who was "allowing" me to be a SAHM.

+1

PP is bitter because her DH doesn’t allow her the choice to stay home. Hence her vitriol and anger towards all SAHMs.

Not that poster but I get it. While “allow” might not be the right word, unless the SAHP is independently wealthy, the person bringing in the income has to agree that they are comfortable being the only one bringing in the income for the other person to stay at home. You can’t live off love alone and need a way to pay for food and shelter.

And there may be some truth to the bitterness but more so in imagining the future situation. Because if your are the SAHM, that may not have been an option financially if your DH was previously married and paying a lot of alimony to his ex. How would you feel going to work everyday and preferring to SAH with your children knowing that you can’t financially afford to do so as a household because your DH will be paying alimony until your joint kids are almost in high school to support his ex when his kids with her are already out of high school?

To OP, in terms of discussing details, what is your motivation in discussing the details? Are you worried that you will indirectly be taking on this amount? At a certain point, it’s similar to someone that has huge student loan payments, you accept that a financial decision they made prior to you means they have salary minus x available to contribute to the household now. Either you can accept it or you don’t. Then you have to look at adverse changes, like if he loses his job (he still has those obligations) or if you get divorced or something changes with the alimony (like she breaks the terms of the agreement or somehow lawyers need to get involved again) - can you be with this person and still somehow financially protect yourself? No everyone is a fan or a prenup or separate finances.

Thanks for your thoughts. OP here. Realistically speaking, if he lost his job and were still due the alimony payments, we would need to think about this. The same with an illness that incapacitated him. I expect that we would go back to court to reduce the payments. The payments are such that a person in the DC area could live comfortably on them; especially since she does not have a mortgage payment. She is very well educated too. Everyone in the situation is. Since she doesn't need to rely on additional personal income, she is not aggressive in moving her career along. The ex is in her mid-50s.

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

Because if she supported him in his career that is high earning, she is entitled to a slice of his future earnings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

This is not true. You sound like a bitter no nothing.

I have LIFE LONG alimony to the tune of 10k a month and I have a job. My getting a job has no bearing on my alimony payment. It was calculated from his annual earnings at the time of the divorce with the idea that since I had supported him through the length of our entire marriage, I have a right to a % of his future earnings. Plus half of our net worth. He also had to agree to pay for the kids to finish private school and college (though to his credit, that is not something he fought and something he gladly pays because he is a good father).

We live in CT.

The only caveat to my alimony agreement is that I cannot remarry or combine my finances with someone else.

You are describing an archaic concept of alimony that is (almost) eliminated across the country, thank god! The modern version of "spousal support" is to provide payments for a limited period of time sufficient to let the low income spouse get back into the workforce and become self supporting.

"Half of net worth" is not alimony, that's just basic divorce finances. Also anything involving the kids is entirely separate matter. I am talking only about spousal support (previously known as alimony).