Predicting spousal support

[Anonymous]

It doesn't help that she lied to them about the divorce settlement. For years she claimed she was broke and needed the kids to subsidize her living expenses since she'd "sacrificed" so much for them as a "single mom" when they were kids. Finally, one of them asked DH to see the divorce decree and realized she was just trying to mooch off/guilt trip them.

[Anonymous]

OP will be entitled to half of her ex's Social Security when she reaches retirement age since they've been married 20 years. You just need 10 years. When he dies, she'll get full spousal survivor benefits too. Courts rarely account for that in the alimony allocation. I know several older men still paying alimony to cover their ex's living expenses while she's collecting his SS. He has to keep working past retirement age while she double dips.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP will be entitled to half of her ex's Social Security when she reaches retirement age since they've been married 20 years. You just need 10 years. When he dies, she'll get full spousal survivor benefits too. Courts rarely account for that in the alimony allocation. I know several older men still paying alimony to cover their ex's living expenses while she's collecting his SS. He has to keep working past retirement age while she double dips.

If it’s possible to live on half his SS, why does he have to keep working?

[Anonymous]

To make alimony payments to the ex. That money from SD isn't deducted from what he "owes" her.

It's very common for a professional to work to 67 to max out SS payments. Meanwhile, their ex can start collecting as soon as she turns 62.

[Anonymous]

Most people married to a high earner got more than enough in the assets split to cover living expenses through retirement of the primary earner. And at 20 years they almost all get half of his retirement fund or pension. Yet the still get alimony, as if that cash lump sum doesn't exist.

[Anonymous]

OP, if you wanted to work on your marriage but DH just decided not to and there was no abuse or substance abuse and he did this while you were supporting kids and household, get as much as you can from him. Don't go gently

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you wanted to work on your marriage but DH just decided not to and there was no abuse or substance abuse and he did this while you were supporting kids and household, get as much as you can from him. Don't go gently

Yes op by all means be a leach. Or put on your big girl pants like I did and work hard for your own money. I can assure you it’s way more satisfying. -a divorcee that didn’t take handouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you wanted to work on your marriage but DH just decided not to and there was no abuse or substance abuse and he did this while you were supporting kids and household, get as much as you can from him. Don't go gently

Yes op by all means be a leach. Or put on your big girl pants like I did and work hard for your own money. I can assure you it’s way more satisfying. -a divorcee that didn’t take handouts.

Be the leach. He broke his vows now it's time to pay up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people assume every woman who under earned during marriage was contributing to his career or raising kids. There are so many women who just don't even feel like working a retail job when their husband makes enough to cover their expenses. My DH pays lifetime alimony to his ex in VA. He also had to pay the mortgage on the family house and sign over the title to her. Their youngest turned 18 over 15 years ago. They divorced when youngest was 8. IMO the longest alimony should have lasted was 10 years, and she shouldn't have gotten a free house out of the deal. He was a fed worker in his 30s. So, not a high earner. BTW she's an alcoholic who couldn't provide basic care for their 2 kids. He woke, fed, and drove them to school each day til l the divorce, yet she got full custody.

Your husband is lying to you to justify why he didn't see his kids.

+100

Either (1) she got full custody- despite his wishes for shared custody- for valid/documented reasons or (2) he didn’t want custody.

Usually it is option 2. Men know that this “looks bad” so they lie to subsequent partners and claim that the mom “wouldn’t let him” see the kids or complain about court bias. Very very common.

This.

My ex is such a sad clown and tells himself and all girlfriends how I don’t let him see our child.

Reality is I asked for primary custody and he didn’t fight because he didn’t want the expense or responsibility, wanted to be free to earn more, and didn’t want the truth about his violence and alcoholism to come out in court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people assume every woman who under earned during marriage was contributing to his career or raising kids. There are so many women who just don't even feel like working a retail job when their husband makes enough to cover their expenses. My DH pays lifetime alimony to his ex in VA. He also had to pay the mortgage on the family house and sign over the title to her. Their youngest turned 18 over 15 years ago. They divorced when youngest was 8. IMO the longest alimony should have lasted was 10 years, and she shouldn't have gotten a free house out of the deal. He was a fed worker in his 30s. So, not a high earner. BTW she's an alcoholic who couldn't provide basic care for their 2 kids. He woke, fed, and drove them to school each day til l the divorce, yet she got full custody.

You're opinion is irrelevant AND you are getting a biased POV from your now DH.

So maybe myofb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people assume every woman who under earned during marriage was contributing to his career or raising kids. There are so many women who just don't even feel like working a retail job when their husband makes enough to cover their expenses. My DH pays lifetime alimony to his ex in VA. He also had to pay the mortgage on the family house and sign over the title to her. Their youngest turned 18 over 15 years ago. They divorced when youngest was 8. IMO the longest alimony should have lasted was 10 years, and she shouldn't have gotten a free house out of the deal. He was a fed worker in his 30s. So, not a high earner. BTW she's an alcoholic who couldn't provide basic care for their 2 kids. He woke, fed, and drove them to school each day til l the divorce, yet she got full custody.

I think most people understand that things fall across a spectrum.

Patriarchy and misogyny aren't about whether an individual woman or man sucks. It's about how we, as a society, devalue women and their contributions. The weirdness is when we stop viewing marriage as a business arrangement and tell women they don't get their fair share because they should have been better or known better. That's internalized misogyny.

Your husband is a person with agency who can revisit the settlement via the legal process if it's grossly unfair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people assume every woman who under earned during marriage was contributing to his career or raising kids. There are so many women who just don't even feel like working a retail job when their husband makes enough to cover their expenses. My DH pays lifetime alimony to his ex in VA. He also had to pay the mortgage on the family house and sign over the title to her. Their youngest turned 18 over 15 years ago. They divorced when youngest was 8. IMO the longest alimony should have lasted was 10 years, and she shouldn't have gotten a free house out of the deal. He was a fed worker in his 30s. So, not a high earner. BTW she's an alcoholic who couldn't provide basic care for their 2 kids. He woke, fed, and drove them to school each day til l the divorce, yet she got full custody.

I think most people understand that things fall across a spectrum.

Patriarchy and misogyny aren't about whether an individual woman or man sucks. It's about how we, as a society, devalue women and their contributions. The weirdness is when we stop viewing marriage as a business arrangement and tell women they don't get their fair share because they should have been better or known better. That's internalized misogyny.

Your husband is a person with agency who can revisit the settlement via the legal process if it's grossly unfair.

"Agency" for the man, "systemic" for the women...we know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you wanted to work on your marriage but DH just decided not to and there was no abuse or substance abuse and he did this while you were supporting kids and household, get as much as you can from him. Don't go gently

Yes op by all means be a leach. Or put on your big girl pants like I did and work hard for your own money. I can assure you it’s way more satisfying. -a divorcee that didn’t take handouts.

Be the leach. He broke his vows now it's time to pay up.

Its "leech" you ignorant fools.
We get it, you're too stupid to earn your own money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you wanted to work on your marriage but DH just decided not to and there was no abuse or substance abuse and he did this while you were supporting kids and household, get as much as you can from him. Don't go gently

Yes op by all means be a leach. Or put on your big girl pants like I did and work hard for your own money. I can assure you it’s way more satisfying. -a divorcee that didn’t take handouts.

Be the leach. He broke his vows now it's time to pay up.

Its "leech" you ignorant fools.
We get it, you're too stupid to earn your own money.

Oops, thanks for the correction, multitasking here. i'm actually an attorney and earn more than DH but thanks anyway

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I will never understand why people assume every woman who under earned during marriage was contributing to his career or raising kids. There are so many women who just don't even feel like working a retail job when their husband makes enough to cover their expenses. My DH pays lifetime alimony to his ex in VA. He also had to pay the mortgage on the family house and sign over the title to her. Their youngest turned 18 over 15 years ago. They divorced when youngest was 8. IMO the longest alimony should have lasted was 10 years, and she shouldn't have gotten a free house out of the deal. He was a fed worker in his 30s. So, not a high earner. BTW she's an alcoholic who couldn't provide basic care for their 2 kids. He woke, fed, and drove them to school each day til l the divorce, yet she got full custody.

I think most people understand that things fall across a spectrum.

Patriarchy and misogyny aren't about whether an individual woman or man sucks. It's about how we, as a society, devalue women and their contributions. The weirdness is when we stop viewing marriage as a business arrangement and tell women they don't get their fair share because they should have been better or known better. That's internalized misogyny.

Your husband is a person with agency who can revisit the settlement via the legal process if it's grossly unfair.

"Agency" for the man, "systemic" for the women...we know.

Yeah, just like I'm a white person but I can acknowledge the reality of racial bias in our culture and systems. It's funny how you can benefit from an injustice and think it's unjust all at the same time, because you try to imagine and acknowledge experiences other than your own.