Separating after 20+ years married. Alimony?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

I have never in my life met a man who wanted a SAHW. I've known many men who complain about their deadbeat SAHW who won't get a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

I have never in my life met a man who wanted a SAHW. I've known many men who complain about their deadbeat SAHW who won't get a job.

Really? I am a hard working, successful woman and have met many men who are looking to "put their wives out of work."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

I have never in my life met a man who wanted a SAHW. I've known many men who complain about their deadbeat SAHW who won't get a job.

Seriously? I'm a SAHM and I've known plenty of other SAHMs. I only know of a very small handful of SAHPs who were staying at home against the wishes of their working spouse. That is something you either agree upon or you both continue to work and outsource the domestic duties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

I have never in my life met a man who wanted a SAHW. I've known many men who complain about their deadbeat SAHW who won't get a job.

Really? I am a hard working, successful woman and have met many men who are looking to "put their wives out of work."

And I've known plenty of hard working, successful women who would be thrilled to have a SAH husband.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

When my friend got divorced in Montgomery County, Maryland, after a 21 year marriage where his wife never worked (he wanted her to work, but she refused) he got stuck paying her $5,000 a month for 5 years in alimony. He got the house (had to pay her some equity) and custody of the kids. She got half his retirement savings, but no on-going benefits like life insurance, health insurance, etc.

My friend thinks if his wife had been smart enough to figure out how little she would have after the divorce, she never would have moved out and filed for divorce. My ex-wife was the same way--she decided that when I was in my early 50s I had maxed-out my husband value and she'd get rid of me, and have all the money but no husband. She ended up with neither.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My Sister was married for close to twenty years.

When she divorced, she got 1/2 of what her husband earns plus 1/2 his retirement.

The alimony is forever unless she re-marries.
She lives in CA which is hugely a property state.

The state should compel her to work the same number of hours per week as her ex husband. Even if that’s a minimum wage Walmart job, it is unconscionable to think that a State can force a man to work while a woman does no work. Regardless of how great she might have once been as a SAHM, once those child duties are complete (ie kids are in school full time) she has NOT done anything to earn a lifetime of free income with zero work hours.

Uhhh...and most divorced SAH spouses DO go back to work. They need health insurance and they have bills to pay like everyone else does. They also get alimony to help them make ends meet plus half of the marital assets. They don't just get kicked to the curb while the bread winning spouse keeps it all. That's not the way it works.

Uhhh... there's no way then for PP's claim that she gets 1/2 of what her husband earns could be true. I am all for rehabilitative alimony while a divorced spouse gets back on her (or his) feet to re-enter the workforce and support her (or him)self. But on no planet should a spouse EVER (for ANY reason) collect even 1 cent of alimony who does not her (or him)self work a THE SAME # OF HOURS/WEEK in a paying job (or is actively being trained/educated to do so).

Depending on the ages of the people and assets involved, it may not make sense to put money into job training when the couple is already approaching retirement age. You have to look at the big picture. It's not a one size fits all. Why should the husband be able to retire in 5 years while the wife is required to work retail until she's 80?

maybe she should have thought of that before quitting the workforce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

I have never in my life met a man who wanted a SAHW. I've known many men who complain about their deadbeat SAHW who won't get a job.

Seriously? I'm a SAHM and I've known plenty of other SAHMs. I only know of a very small handful of SAHPs who were staying at home against the wishes of their working spouse. That is something you either agree upon or you both continue to work and outsource the domestic duties.

Take this thread to heart, PP. tale as old as time...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My Sister was married for close to twenty years.

When she divorced, she got 1/2 of what her husband earns plus 1/2 his retirement.

The alimony is forever unless she re-marries.
She lives in CA which is hugely a property state.

The state should compel her to work the same number of hours per week as her ex husband. Even if that’s a minimum wage Walmart job, it is unconscionable to think that a State can force a man to work while a woman does no work. Regardless of how great she might have once been as a SAHM, once those child duties are complete (ie kids are in school full time) she has NOT done anything to earn a lifetime of free income with zero work hours.

Uhhh...and most divorced SAH spouses DO go back to work. They need health insurance and they have bills to pay like everyone else does. They also get alimony to help them make ends meet plus half of the marital assets. They don't just get kicked to the curb while the bread winning spouse keeps it all. That's not the way it works.

Uhhh... there's no way then for PP's claim that she gets 1/2 of what her husband earns could be true. I am all for rehabilitative alimony while a divorced spouse gets back on her (or his) feet to re-enter the workforce and support her (or him)self. But on no planet should a spouse EVER (for ANY reason) collect even 1 cent of alimony who does not her (or him)self work a THE SAME # OF HOURS/WEEK in a paying job (or is actively being trained/educated to do so).

Depending on the ages of the people and assets involved, it may not make sense to put money into job training when the couple is already approaching retirement age. You have to look at the big picture. It's not a one size fits all. Why should the husband be able to retire in 5 years while the wife is required to work retail until she's 80?

maybe she should have thought of that before quitting the workforce.

Obviously, her SAH was of value to both Op and her husband throughout the course of their marriage. It's not like he can wait for the youngest to graduate HS and say "Buh-bye, sucker!" That isn't the way it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

I have never in my life met a man who wanted a SAHW. I've known many men who complain about their deadbeat SAHW who won't get a job.

Seriously? I'm a SAHM and I've known plenty of other SAHMs. I only know of a very small handful of SAHPs who were staying at home against the wishes of their working spouse. That is something you either agree upon or you both continue to work and outsource the domestic duties.

Take this thread to heart, PP. tale as old as time...

Yeah. Divorce sucks. It's expensive and nobody comes out richer for it....aside from the divorce lawyers, of course. If you are going to split try to do so amicably, fairly and decently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My Sister was married for close to twenty years.

When she divorced, she got 1/2 of what her husband earns plus 1/2 his retirement.

The alimony is forever unless she re-marries.
She lives in CA which is hugely a property state.

The state should compel her to work the same number of hours per week as her ex husband. Even if that’s a minimum wage Walmart job, it is unconscionable to think that a State can force a man to work while a woman does no work. Regardless of how great she might have once been as a SAHM, once those child duties are complete (ie kids are in school full time) she has NOT done anything to earn a lifetime of free income with zero work hours.

Uhhh...and most divorced SAH spouses DO go back to work. They need health insurance and they have bills to pay like everyone else does. They also get alimony to help them make ends meet plus half of the marital assets. They don't just get kicked to the curb while the bread winning spouse keeps it all. That's not the way it works.

Uhhh... there's no way then for PP's claim that she gets 1/2 of what her husband earns could be true. I am all for rehabilitative alimony while a divorced spouse gets back on her (or his) feet to re-enter the workforce and support her (or him)self. But on no planet should a spouse EVER (for ANY reason) collect even 1 cent of alimony who does not her (or him)self work a THE SAME # OF HOURS/WEEK in a paying job (or is actively being trained/educated to do so).

Depending on the ages of the people and assets involved, it may not make sense to put money into job training when the couple is already approaching retirement age. You have to look at the big picture. It's not a one size fits all. Why should the husband be able to retire in 5 years while the wife is required to work retail until she's 80?

maybe she should have thought of that before quitting the workforce.

Unfortunately there are numerous reasons that women drop out of the workforce. The workplace was designed by and FOR men. Many women can’t handle leaving a young infant with someone else so they can return to work. Then they get stuck with all of the household chores and child raising. If they return to work they will now have everything at home plus a job. Returning to work can mean a paycut and/or their spouse balking at childcare costs. They have less flexibility since they are starting a new job. Wait...here comes another baby. Same issue again. Now they have been out of the workforce for 5-7 years. Kids are busy in activities and need transportation. Kids get in trouble and need supervision. Elderly parents need assistance and the male children typically shirk most responsibilities.

I agree women should stay in the workforce. But anyone with common sense is going to understand how and why women quit their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alimony is for the pathetic . Support yourself. Gravy train is over. Don’t you have any pride?

....said the angry disgruntled exDH.

Actually I’m a happily married working woman who takes full responsibility for my own financial life. And manages to be an excellent mom at the same time. There are a million of us out there, and a million of us on these boards.

HOW have you managed to be so successful when your thinking is so black and white, so lacking in insight, emotional intelligence or compassion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes she can try to get a job but age discrimination is rampant and women in their 50s are particularly hard hit. She is not likely to find anything well-paying with her experience unless she has useful current skills from her work with her husband.

OP what skills do you have from the business?

You are missing the point entirely. It doesn't matter how much she earns. It doesn't matter what skills she has, or not. What matters is she must work (the same # hours/week) as her alimony paying husband.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alimony is for the pathetic . Support yourself. Gravy train is over. Don’t you have any pride?

....said the angry disgruntled exDH.

Actually I’m a happily married working woman who takes full responsibility for my own financial life. And manages to be an excellent mom at the same time. There are a million of us out there, and a million of us on these boards.

HOW have you managed to be so successful when your thinking is so black and white, so lacking in insight, emotional intelligence or compassion?

I'm a divorced working woman. When I was married, I was the high earner. Since the divorce, my ex is outearning me by x2. I didn't ask for alimony or child support-and STILL I think that if you get married, make vows, and build a life together, when you divorce you should split all of your assets evenly and you do have a responsibility to support a former spouse. Otherwise, what exactly is marriage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes she can try to get a job but age discrimination is rampant and women in their 50s are particularly hard hit. She is not likely to find anything well-paying with her experience unless she has useful current skills from her work with her husband.

OP what skills do you have from the business?

You are missing the point entirely. It doesn't matter how much she earns. It doesn't matter what skills she has, or not. What matters is she must work (the same # hours/week) as her alimony paying husband.

You keep saying that, but that’s not actually the standard for spousal support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What state are you in?

Maryland

Why the divorce? Maryland looks at fault but is not an alimony friendly state. The length of the marriage, your need for support will be considered but unless you are in your 70s the Jidge is going to expect that you work. Your situation is a reminder to women whose DHs want them to SAH to get a pre or post nup covering alimony

I have never in my life met a man who wanted a SAHW. I've known many men who complain about their deadbeat SAHW who won't get a job.

Seriously? I'm a SAHM and I've known plenty of other SAHMs. I only know of a very small handful of SAHPs who were staying at home against the wishes of their working spouse. That is something you either agree upon or you both continue to work and outsource the domestic duties.

I know man men who have accepted that their wives would not work, so they SAH. The divorced ones paying alimony also sing a different tune.