Boyfriend still supporting ex-wife

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. There are a ton of people commenting who are not comprehending the information in my post. And no, I am not desperate to marry this man, been there and done that, so I understand what a marriage entails.

Yes, after 3 years, we have discussed our finances and I do know the details. It sounds like a lot of you are still upset or angry over your own divorces or in poor financial situations after your divorces.

The issues that we are having are normal for a logical progression of a relationship.

If he hasnt married you in 3 years, it aint gonna happen.

Keep your finances separate and forget about what he is doing for his exwife.

[Anonymous]

My BIL is divorced and supports his ex-wife financially to a significant extent. Yes, it could create problems for him if he remarries - I'm sure a future wife would not appreciate it.

I understand you're upset, OP, but if you want to stay with this person you'll have to hash out a clear agreement between you two. You can agree on a having a certain percent of his income go to his ex-wife, and put it in writing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He can do whatever he wants for his ex and kids, but OP should not have to subsidize that.

I agree with this. It sounds like the only way he can maintain his current "lifestyle", however noble it may be, is to have OP subsidize him.

He's not living with the OP now, so very obviously he is able to maintain his current lifestyle without any "subsidy".

Anonymous wrote:The problem with that plan is that it sounds like he hasn't had an honest conversation with OP about that being where the finances are headed.

She knows an awful lot about his finances for someone who hasn't had an honest conversation about it. I think she just doesn't like the answers she got from that conversation because she's all about me, me, me, me, me.

OP says he has borrowed money from her.

[Anonymous]

OP you're not married you have no say in this. Keep your finances separate and your expectations firm. And don't lend him any money because you will resent it. Problem solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. There are a ton of people commenting who are not comprehending the information in my post. And no, I am not desperate to marry this man, been there and done that, so I understand what a marriage entails.

Yes, after 3 years, we have discussed our finances and I do know the details. It sounds like a lot of you are still upset or angry over your own divorces or in poor financial situations after your divorces.

The issues that we are having are normal for a logical progression of a relationship.

They are certainly normal issues. However, it is also normal for some divorced spouses to still have financial entanglements when there are children involved. I posted earlier that a gracious way to address these issues you are having would be to discuss the structure of the current arrangement and determine how much longer it will continue. That will give you a lot more answers than anyone here can provide.

As for the progression of your relationship, I think that it's reasonable to hope for both spouses to come into the marriage as free of entanglements as possible. If you are not comfortable with your money being used for this purpose, then that's something you should state up front. Consider not mingling finances, since it sounds like you both have kids from previous marriages and it may be difficult for you to agree on how to pay for those kids' expenses. What happens if he disagrees with something you want to do for your kids? Will your larger income be the deciding factor in that disagreement?

Also, what is his employment situation? It sounds like maybe he should try to find a job that pays more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He’s not the guy for you. That’s not an indictment of either of you.

This discussion could have ended right here.

[Anonymous]

I dont understand why people with kids both to get remarried? why not just date/live together forever. Seems overly complicated to combine everything, again, and put your kids thorugh a nother major upheaval in their lives. Keep everything seperate, have sex, go on dates but dont get remarried. its not all its cracked up to be. you would think divorced people would get this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You won't like this answer but IMO it shows that he is a good guy.

He cares about the welfare of his kid, which means making sure the kid's mom is ok.

I would leave it alone. It won't make you look good in his eyes to criticize how he spends his money.

I think he’s a good guy, too, and I’m a second wife. We do have a lower standard of living because my husband pays both support and extras. Not for his ex, but if it was required to keep his kids in a stable position, I’d support it 100%. Kids matter first. I matter second. I am fully independent and I’m ok with being second to kids. To an ex wife? Definitely not. But that doesn’t sound like what’s going on here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wouldn't be ok with me. Child support? Of course. Ex-wife support? Hell no.

Don't date divorced men with children then.

I married a divorced man with kids. When his ex couldn't pay the mortgage (despite child support of 2800 a month) she lost her house. And we gained physical custody of the children. Grown ups support themselves.

You just don't get it. There is nothing wrong with this man supplementing the mortgage on the house where his children live. Zero. He seems to be doing that willingly and beyond what is court ordered.

Are you really proud of yourself for gaining custody over something like "mom couldn't afford the house?" If the judge gave you custody solely based on that, shame on him and shame on you.

Actually, men who get divorced and move out may decide to subsidize the mortgage in order to keep their kids in the same school district, which a parent couldn't afford on one income. If the man pays part of the mortgage and gets part of the equity acquired over time when the house is sold after the kids move out other own, then this can be an investment and a form of child support that will return equity, not "ex-wife support". Also some men do this because they are upside down on the mortgage and if financially able, continuing to pay the mortgage until equity is accrued so house can be sold w/o loss, is a smart move.

[Anonymous]

Op—I faced a similar situation. DHs ex wife did not work at all. She was a SAHM till the youngest graduated HS. She now works and makes enough to live on but DH still pays the mortgage on her house.

I knew this going in. It was ok with me. I supported our household for many years. He has 2 kids from his first marriage and 2 from ours.

We all get along very well. The kids get along and there is no resentment between them that the little kids get xyz because I work and their mom did not. We treat all 4 kids fairly. And yes, sometimes a little kid has to give up something for a big kid—but that’s true in any family.

DH and I have been together for 20 yrs. His 2nd child was 5 when we started dating. Two are now out of college and we still help them out. We are helping the oldest with the down payment on his house. Our oldest daughters wedding is next summer and we are paying for that. And even though we are paying for it, her bio mom is fully involved and I take the back seat. I bore 2 children but I have 4 and I work to support all 4.

If you’re in this for the long haul, a few years or even a lot of years of helping the ex-wife out is no big deal. It creates harmony within the family structure.

[Anonymous]

Just keep your finances separate if you get married. I would happily be supportive of him contributing to child costs and paying for college, but not contributing to the mortgage for the ex once the kids have moved out. Once that happens, she can go get an apartment she can afford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op—I faced a similar situation. DHs ex wife did not work at all. She was a SAHM till the youngest graduated HS. She now works and makes enough to live on but DH still pays the mortgage on her house.

I knew this going in. It was ok with me. I supported our household for many years. He has 2 kids from his first marriage and 2 from ours.

We all get along very well. The kids get along and there is no resentment between them that the little kids get xyz because I work and their mom did not. We treat all 4 kids fairly. And yes, sometimes a little kid has to give up something for a big kid—but that’s true in any family.

DH and I have been together for 20 yrs. His 2nd child was 5 when we started dating. Two are now out of college and we still help them out. We are helping the oldest with the down payment on his house. Our oldest daughters wedding is next summer and we are paying for that. And even though we are paying for it, her bio mom is fully involved and I take the back seat. I bore 2 children but I have 4 and I work to support all 4.

If you’re in this for the long haul, a few years or even a lot of years of helping the ex-wife out is no big deal. It creates harmony within the family structure.

You sound like a very lovely, well grounded person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wouldn't be ok with me. Child support? Of course. Ex-wife support? Hell no.

Don't date divorced men with children then.

I married a divorced man with kids. When his ex couldn't pay the mortgage (despite child support of 2800 a month) she lost her house. And we gained physical custody of the children. Grown ups support themselves.

You just don't get it. There is nothing wrong with this man supplementing the mortgage on the house where his children live. Zero. He seems to be doing that willingly and beyond what is court ordered.

Are you really proud of yourself for gaining custody over something like "mom couldn't afford the house?" If the judge gave you custody solely based on that, shame on him and shame on you.

Actually, men who get divorced and move out may decide to subsidize the mortgage in order to keep their kids in the same school district, which a parent couldn't afford on one income. If the man pays part of the mortgage and gets part of the equity acquired over time when the house is sold after the kids move out other own, then this can be an investment and a form of child support that will return equity, not "ex-wife support". Also some men do this because they are upside down on the mortgage and if financially able, continuing to pay the mortgage until equity is accrued so house can be sold w/o loss, is a smart move.

+1000 and some men don't want their kids to be forced to move because one parent cannot afford the mortgage. All of the threads I see here operate under the assumption that the man is the lowest form of scum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wouldn't be ok with me. Child support? Of course. Ex-wife support? Hell no.

Don't date divorced men with children then.

I married a divorced man with kids. When his ex couldn't pay the mortgage (despite child support of 2800 a month) she lost her house. And we gained physical custody of the children. Grown ups support themselves.

You just don't get it. There is nothing wrong with this man supplementing the mortgage on the house where his children live. Zero. He seems to be doing that willingly and beyond what is court ordered.

Are you really proud of yourself for gaining custody over something like "mom couldn't afford the house?" If the judge gave you custody solely based on that, shame on him and shame on you.

Actually, men who get divorced and move out may decide to subsidize the mortgage in order to keep their kids in the same school district, which a parent couldn't afford on one income. If the man pays part of the mortgage and gets part of the equity acquired over time when the house is sold after the kids move out other own, then this can be an investment and a form of child support that will return equity, not "ex-wife support". Also some men do this because they are upside down on the mortgage and if financially able, continuing to pay the mortgage until equity is accrued so house can be sold w/o loss, is a smart move.

+1000 and some men don't want their kids to be forced to move because one parent cannot afford the mortgage. All of the threads I see here operate under the assumption that the man is the lowest form of scum.

OP here. The do respect his decision to provide for his kids. It has become apparent that he cannot afford to maintain the two separate households though. I suspect that he wanted to partner with me, based upon his money borrowing, to help make things more affordable for him to live separately from his ex-wife.

[Anonymous]

OP—then you have a decision to make. Do you want to help him or not? If yes, you do it graciously. If not, it’s time to end this.