50/50 split of assets with SAHM

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are ridiculous.

Even if the genders were reversed, they built their life - home, kids, work, finances - together as a team. Both spouses are absolutely entitled to half.

Don't want to have to shell out half to a non working spouse, don't have a stay at home spouse.

+1
That ship has sailed.

+2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are ridiculous.

Even if the genders were reversed, they built their life - home, kids, work, finances - together as a team. Both spouses are absolutely entitled to half.

Don't want to have to shell out half to a non working spouse, don't have a stay at home spouse.

+1

[Anonymous]

What are you complaining about, op. Give me a million and I will turn it to 3 million by June 2024.
There is no much money in the world. You don't get time back or missed opportunities. Pay up and triple what's left.
We had to sell a condo after death and the person in charge came up with a number that nobody would pay. They lost 6 months waiting for the buyer and then got what I told them the place would go for. Meanwhile, I'm doubling my own money in the market while waiting for the sale . "We want to get the best price", they said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read it and weep OP:

“It was stated by Justice O’Conner, in his opinion in Conner v Conner, that that equitable distribution encompasses a partnership, no matter what the proportionate share of capital advances and personal services, and that the wife's marital contributions as a homemaker are presumed equal in value to the husband's contribution as an income earner.”

Although “equitable” does not mean “equal,” the NY Courts start with the presumption that it means 50-50 then apply a set of statutory criteria. I haven’t seen a case where a homemaker with 3 kids in a long marriage gets less than 50% but I suppose it is possible. But the scenario would be something like the wife was an objectively terrible parent/spouse (like, refused to work, did no housework or childcare, abused kids, abandoned the household) and the husband is taking full custody of the minor kids. Or if there were no kids at all and wife had high earning potential but refused to work.

You’re screwed, buddy.

Well not really the crazy wife in that case said that his degree was marital property (insane) and it was ruled it was not.

She tried to pretend she made it possible for him to get the degree because she worked full-time, even though he made more money part-time than she did full-time.

The good news is his future earnings are not going to her and he will bounce back quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is exactly why men shouldnt let their wives be a SAHM

Too late!

His kids are watching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this is fair in cases where the husband made all the money and the wife stayed home with the kids? Net worth of around 10 million, 3 kids who are grown or teens, 20 year marriage.

Wife is fighting for a 50% split plus alimony. Hasn’t worked in over 17 years.

She’s not getting alimony but I don’t think she should get 50% of the money. Maybe 10-20% so she is not destitute but even that is generous.

Ooooh this sound like the second wife. Say goodbye to the money, it ain't yours.

Ha that’s true and that makes it even funnier. Why the hell would the second wife think she is more deserving than the one who raised the guy’s children???

[Anonymous]

You signed the contract, bro. You can't back out of it 20 years later!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of crazy lazy women posting.

Of course a SAHM did not contribute to the success of OP and should not get 1/2, that’s insane.

Then why did OP get married?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You signed the contract, bro. You can't back out of it 20 years later!

This. People like OP should not got married. They simply don’t understand that it is a legal arrangement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of crazy lazy women posting.

Of course a SAHM did not contribute to the success of OP and should not get 1/2, that’s insane.

Then why did OP get married?

And why is OP posting, if it is not a real concern?

OP sounds like a scorned, broke second, third or fourth wife, who thought she was going to get her dirty hands on someone else's money. Hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think this is fair in cases where the husband made all the money and the wife stayed home with the kids? Net worth of around 10 million, 3 kids who are grown or teens, 20 year marriage.

Wife is fighting for a 50% split plus alimony. Hasn’t worked in over 17 years.

She’s not getting alimony but I don’t think she should get 50% of the money. Maybe 10-20% so she is not destitute but even that is generous.

Wow just reading this we know why she is leaving you.

Look closely. It's "the husband" and "the wife", not "I" and "my STBX".
This is a new wife or the guy's mother.

[Anonymous]

This needs to be exhibit A for why SAHMs need a postnup before deciding to stay at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what state but typically she would get 50% of assets and probably alimony for 8 or 9 years (half the length of your marriage). Plus child support, if there are children.

I am sure you have a different idea of what is “fair” but what I describe is the most likely outcome, unless you are in Virginia, she had an affair and you can prove that in court. Know you are at risk to have to pay her legal costs too if you go contentious.

If you get to 20 years of marriage you are at risk to have to pay lifetime alimony.

We’re in NY which is not a community property state. I hope to keep her distribution under 30%

I hope you get destroyed in court and your ex laughs the whole way to the bank.

Why? 30 percent makes sense to me. It is generous. I say this as a woman.

I also don’t understand why people assume that OP would not have made that much money without the contributions of his SAHM wife. Some people are capable of managing multiple things in life.

[Anonymous]

Law says 50% so she gets 50%. You don’t have to like it but that’s the way it is

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of crazy lazy women posting.

Of course a SAHM did not contribute to the success of OP and should not get 1/2, that’s insane.

It is true that raising kids does not entitle someone to 5 million dollars but you don’t think SAHMs who take care of their husbands’ children contribute to their success? At all? Do you think that if an especially lazy SAHM did nothing and the working spouse still had to do all the diapers, cooking, housekeeping, getting kids off to school, etc, in addition to working, his career wouldn’t be impacted at all?

Not that it matters because a marriage is a contract like any other and has financial implications, but its so weird to me that someone can say with their whole chest that a the work of a SAHM contributes nothing to the career of h