Predicting spousal support
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Trust me. I am. - OP |
Anonymous
Kudos to you. Not everyone has guts to do it. |
Anonymous
Yea, nobody wants to give up 50% of joint assets and legally guaranteed alimony by a legal contract. These are not “handouts”. Op can get what’s due to her and still work after . One doesn’t exclude the other. She doesn’t need to make her life poorer or worse off financially out of some whimsical ethical considerations about her cheating stbx |
Anonymous
“It’s” not “Its” you ignorant fool. Hahaha. Classic. |
Anonymous
Were you working? |
Anonymous
I worked the first 5 years and was home next 15. Worked last 5 years in retail. So not a big earner. He fought tooth and nail to give me as little as possible. I couldn’t fight back. |
Anonymous
These aren't handouts. What would anyone give up assets they had a claim to? I know I certainly wouldn't. And fyi, I was the breadwinner wife until I retired. And even then, I went on to start a business. |
Anonymous
Yea- why would the wife give up her legal rights- for him and his next partner/their bio kids to enjoy the fruit of her free contractual labor ? He entered into legal contract/marriage if he was against the term he cools divorce her a long time ago |
Anonymous
Sibling in MD got lifetime alimony.. |
Anonymous
How much per month? |
Anonymous
Was the sibling employed and if so, what was the salary gap? |
Anonymous
No clue. Id never ask. Her ex was loaded. Sure its a decent amount. |
Anonymous
As some have already said, it can be both. A woman is not a leech when she collects what is due to her. Marital property is not a handout. Or if it is like you claim, why does a man want a handout? It's like saying please loan me 10K and I'll pay you back... and when it's time to pay back, it's don't be a leech I want all the money for myself! The man can "work hard for his own money" once he's divorced and doesn't get free household work and childrearing. In fact if money was so important, he shouldn't have gotten married in the first place. Sure, perhaps then he wouldn't have had the opportunity to have children either, but he'd have his money! See how that works?! You don't get kids raised to adults and then kick the woman out to the curb when the work is done. |
Anonymous
You're arguing against a position nobody made. Nobody said marital property is a handout. Most people support dividing marital assets. That's the $10,000 being repaid in your analogy. The disagreement is over the additional the $100,000s paid over decades after the assets have already been divided and the marriage has already ended. And your entire argument rests on an old stereotype: the selfless wife raising the children while the husband contributes little more than a paycheck. That simply isn't reality for many families. Millions of fathers work full time while also changing diapers, attending school events, coaching teams, helping with homework, cooking meals, cleaning the house, getting kids to appointments, and sharing custody after divorce. Pretending child rearing is something men merely receive from women is as outdated as claiming women belong in the kitchen. Marriage isn't a pension plan. If two adults build a life together, they should divide the assets fairly when it ends. What many people object to is the idea that one capable adult is entitled to remain on the other's payroll for decades after the partnership is over. By your logic, if money is so unimportant, why is lifelong access to someone else's income so important? |
Anonymous
|
Op here. By my quick calculation, in the years I have been part time, I have probably lost at least a million in income, plus the interest I would have earned by investing.
And it most certainly would have been more because I would have advanced to higher level positions. I will have no shame taking his money. |