Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Seems strategic to me on her part that she did this when her kids were older but not yet out of the house. With no kids to house, she'd have zero argument for maintaining the lavish lifestyle. But she had to know she was on thin ground so waited a good long while to try to get out. She doesn't have much of an argument.
A man is not a plan. That is for sure.
I think her argument needs to be, in part, that when the kids are with him, they live in a $125m house in Carpinteria, presumably where they attend school. It's the home she's lived in for the last 20+ years while she stayed home with the children and he left to play in a band and film tv and movies. He's proposing that she live on $38,000 per month in child support (and she also gets a whopping ~ $1m as her total net worth leaving the marriage ). A quick google search suggests that she's not going to find a decent 4-bedroom home in Carpinteria for less than $10,000 per month, and at that price, it is going to feel very different to the kids (and her) than dad's house. How do the kids not hate their dad for doing this to mom? I would - my parents are still married and my dad controls all the money and to this day I still fear for my mom. It's a bad way to treat someone. The cost of living in Carpinteria is very high. They had a traditional, old school marriage where she stayed home with the kids and he did whatever he wanted, but now that it's over, he's kicking her to the curve with relatively nothing (0.25% of assets).
The lawyer who allowed her to agree to this prenup, with no adjustments for length of marriage or number of kids, is to blame in large part.
I also agree that "a man is not a plan". I wouldn't want this for myself or my daughter.