Getting seperated...what is fair?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If this was suddenly flipped and the OP was a man, would the advice be the same? Would people be telling him that the soon to be ex wife was trying to screw him over? Somehow, I doubt it.

Yes, I would feel the same if the sexes were reversed. The big red flags are the secret debts, the secret communications with the ex, and the sheer arrogance and lack of caring and respect for OP evident in the initial lousy offers. Women can be as crappy as men, and we women all know it.

[Anonymous]

If this was suddenly flipped and the OP was a man, would the advice be the same? Would people be telling him that the soon to be ex wife was trying to screw him over? Somehow, I doubt it.

yes, if the man stayed home and didnt' put into retirement while the woman put away full retirement AND ran up joint debt and then decided that the reitrement was all hers, but the debt was theirs? and decided that joint custody meant the ex was taking care of the kids whenever it suited her?

OP, do not make a child custody support decision based on what you think your full time hours will be. Make them on what they are now. Jobs are not guaranteed! ALso,make sure there is a clause that you will both share income yearly so that supprt can be adjusted. In 3 years he could be making 300k but not paying any more (and same for you). Anyway, just make sure you really see a regular divorce lawyer.
When did he get in touch with the ex? he might hvae ben planning this a while, which means you need to look out for deceptive monetary practices--do all the debts add up?

[Anonymous]

assuming he has not been squirelling away money (which is a big IF)

I think 'fair' would be something like.....

1800-2k month child support (depending on the medical/special needs you referred to (and kids on his insurance?), yearly revision in case of significant income changes on either part

50% of his retirement up to date of separation

house: sell, if there are any proceeds after paying mortgage, it should go toward paying off debt. If debt remains, he takes that on in exchange for no alimony. If proceeds remain after debt, those are evenly split and you work out alimony until you get a f/t job.


but make sure that the debts acrrued add up--are there receipts for major expenditures, etc?

[Anonymous]

You should get 50% of the retirement. If he is keeping the big ticket items that caused the debt, then he needs to keep the debt associated with the items. If he took trips then he keeps the expense too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP again. I made an appointment with a lawyer. We are not trying mediation exactly. We will have our own lawyers but they agree to work together. We sign contracts to the effect that if it takes an ugly turn they can not represent us at a trial. DH insists that should his lawyer tell him he is dreaming that he will trust it. We'll see I guess. I told him that I would probably running our agreement by a regular divorce attorney, and that he can do the same.

What do you mean that you are using lawyers but will run any potential agreement by a "regular divorce attorney". Please make sure the lawyer(s) you are using are practiced family law attorneys that regularly deal with divorce. There are many, many different details to take are of in splitting debt, assets, home, custody and retirement funds. Only someone who deals with these issues on a regular basis will know all the details that need to be tied up.

Do not just use any old attorney. It has to be someone with experience in this practice area. They don't necessarily need to be divorce litigation specialists (i.e. the kind of divorce attorneys that regularly expect to end up in disputes in court), but you do need to use someone who has extensive experience with divorce.

Just like you wouldn't necessarily use a family doctor for kidney disease, similarly it's not just any old lawyer who can competently handle divorce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, all of this division of money + assets may not be up to him and you to decide on. Ultimately it will be up to the judge when you are in divorce court.

Have you been married for at least EXACTLY ten yrs.? The reason I am asking is because if so, then you are entitled to alimony from your husband which will help you out financially so you will have more of a cushion to live on along w/your own work earnings. Also since you will have primary physical custody of the children, you should also receive a fair amount of child support as well.

It sounds to me as if your husband is trying to negotiate what you will and will not receive. I think this is all going to be better negotiated in a court of law.

I am sorry you cannot afford an attorney. Are there any legal services in your area that can provide legal assistance for you if you don't have the financial means to? Or is there any one in your family that can loan you the money?

I am truly sorry that things have gotten to this point. Emotionally I know you must be feeling so low, but like you stated, you also have to think practically as well and I commend you for taking the bull by the horns + keeping a clear enough mind to try to figure out a road map for you and your children's future.

I know it isn't easy at all and I wish you only the best in your future endeavors.

Hugs to you as well.

You are giving OP the impression that the judge decides everything, which really is not true. In almost all courts, if both parties come to an agreement and both parties have been represented by competent counsel in making that agreement, then the court will usually just rubber-stamp the agreement. Only if there is a dispute will the court step in and make decisions.

[Anonymous]

OP again. Thanks to everyone for your thoughts. I am definitely going to a family law attorney...not just a general attorney. We each will have a lawyer to represent our interests, but agree to work together. If no agreement can be reached, those lawyers are no longer allowed to be our counsel. My husband really wants to do it this way as it is easier and cheaper when appropriate. I get a second opinion before I sign anything. My hope is that his lawyer is going to let him know how far out in left field he is with his notions, and advise him that he will have to wake up if he doesn't want this in court. I don't think he is likely to want to lose his shirt fighting that fight, and I don't want to put my kids through it. I have found more work for starting this fall that won't take me away from the kids too much. That part actually worked out much better than I had imagined. Panic is dissipating, and I thank everyone for their support in that! It will be tough, but we will be okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP again. Thanks to everyone for your thoughts. I am definitely going to a family law attorney...not just a general attorney. We each will have a lawyer to represent our interests, but agree to work together. If no agreement can be reached, those lawyers are no longer allowed to be our counsel. My husband really wants to do it this way as it is easier and cheaper when appropriate. I get a second opinion before I sign anything. My hope is that his lawyer is going to let him know how far out in left field he is with his notions, and advise him that he will have to wake up if he doesn't want this in court. I don't think he is likely to want to lose his shirt fighting that fight, and I don't want to put my kids through it. I have found more work for starting this fall that won't take me away from the kids too much. That part actually worked out much better than I had imagined. Panic is dissipating, and I thank everyone for their support in that! It will be tough, but we will be okay.

OP...who cares what your husband wants, when he has made it so clear that he only cares about coming out way ahead and giving you as close to nothing as possible?

Also, you don't seem to understand that lawyers fight for their clients and try to get them as much as possible. Your husband's attorney won't be looking out for you if your husband is the one paying his bills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again. Thanks to everyone for your thoughts. I am definitely going to a family law attorney...not just a general attorney. We each will have a lawyer to represent our interests, but agree to work together. If no agreement can be reached, those lawyers are no longer allowed to be our counsel. My husband really wants to do it this way as it is easier and cheaper when appropriate. I get a second opinion before I sign anything. My hope is that his lawyer is going to let him know how far out in left field he is with his notions, and advise him that he will have to wake up if he doesn't want this in court. I don't think he is likely to want to lose his shirt fighting that fight, and I don't want to put my kids through it. I have found more work for starting this fall that won't take me away from the kids too much. That part actually worked out much better than I had imagined. Panic is dissipating, and I thank everyone for their support in that! It will be tough, but we will be okay.

OP...who cares what your husband wants, when he has made it so clear that he only cares about coming out way ahead and giving you as close to nothing as possible?

Also, you don't seem to understand that lawyers fight for their clients and try to get them as much as possible. Your husband's attorney won't be looking out for you if your husband is the one paying his bills.

+1000

Yeah, I think it's pretty clear that Husband is used to getting what he wants, and isn't particularly concerned with your well-being.

And PP is right -- his lawyer is not going to be concerned with what's fair -- his lawyer is going to be working on his behalf to get away with as much as possible.

PLEASE do not neglect the step of running it through a conventional divorce attorney. Although by then you'll have sunk a lot of money into the collaborative route, and won't want to start over -- but at least maybe you'll know what you're giving up.

[Anonymous]

I know you're going to do what you're going to do, OP, and you sounds accustomed to deferring to your husband, even now. But he has clearly shown himself to be someone who's not at all interested in playing fair. He's pretending to concede to you so you'll go the route he wants. He'll win, you'll lose - he's better at this game than you. Your respective personality types, combined with "collaborative divorce," will end with you at a real disadvantage. But it sounds like you don't really mind as long as you can keep him from being too angry with you?

[Anonymous]

OP here. It isn't really about him getting angry with me...at this point what he thinks about CAN'T matter and doesn't. I admit to some fear that he would be low enough to use our kids as pawns in this game (fight for joint custody to be spiteful or pay less etc). While I don't see how anyone would say joint physical custody would be in their best interest, he does have me trumped in the ability to get a good lawyer department. I don't want my kids to have to go through a nasty fight in order to end up at his house half the time (undoubtably planted in front of computers and I-pads, feeding themselves junk meals, and staying up until midnight while STBX does what he wants to do). I also don't want to condemn my kids to poverty by allowing myself to get totally screwed. It isn't that I don't understand or appreciate the points everyone has made. I am just concerned that by getting into a battle could cost more than money. My kids are better off struggling a few years with me than under his control even part of the time.   Maybe a better idea is for me to consult my own lawyer before going to the collaborative one. That way I would have an idea going in if it is totally bogus or not. If what they tell me seems totally off, I won't just roll over. I think the deals that previous posters have mentioned sound reasonable, and would accept something along the lines of: splitting the house, not asking for alimony in leiu of him taking all debt, more child support, and a half the retirement for the years we were married. His terms, as they stand now, are a deal breaker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would question any man that didn't want their kids 50% of the time out of the gate. If my DW wanted a divorce and said "I only want the kids every other weekend", I'd push for sole/legal custody and keep her away.

That's silly. I give credit to the man that says he isn't able to care for the kids full time, for whatever reason, like the mother can.

How are you not able to care for your children? They are your kids. It isn't an option. When you decide to have a child, you pretty much say I'm willing to do what it takes to take care of this child no matter what happens in life.

So any man willing to say "Hey my job and social life is more important than my kids, so DW can have them most of the time" is a shitty father.

Now if the courts decide it is in the best interest of the child to be with the mother most of the time, then so be it. But I'd be back in court a million times until I was given the right to see my child 50% of the time.

You are absolutely right on this! He's saying I don't want my standard of living to decrease because I now have to take care of kids 50% of the time.
It is well know that because of divorce, a dad's standard of living improves while the mom's standard of living deteriorates. Please make sure you get a good lawyer to prevent this from happening.

[Anonymous]

If he's not wanting 50% custody, make sure he provides well $$$$$$$ for you and your children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. It isn't really about him getting angry with me...at this point what he thinks about CAN'T matter and doesn't. I admit to some fear that he would be low enough to use our kids as pawns in this game (fight for joint custody to be spiteful or pay less etc). While I don't see how anyone would say joint physical custody would be in their best interest, he does have me trumped in the ability to get a good lawyer department. I don't want my kids to have to go through a nasty fight in order to end up at his house half the time (undoubtably planted in front of computers and I-pads, feeding themselves junk meals, and staying up until midnight while STBX does what he wants to do). I also don't want to condemn my kids to poverty by allowing myself to get totally screwed. It isn't that I don't understand or appreciate the points everyone has made. I am just concerned that by getting into a battle could cost more than money. My kids are better off struggling a few years with me than under his control even part of the time.   Maybe a better idea is for me to consult my own lawyer before going to the collaborative one. That way I would have an idea going in if it is totally bogus or not. If what they tell me seems totally off, I won't just roll over. I think the deals that previous posters have mentioned sound reasonable, and would accept something along the lines of: splitting the house, not asking for alimony in leiu of him taking all debt, more child support, and a half the retirement for the years we were married. His terms, as they stand now, are a deal breaker.

That sounds reasonable to me. It really does sound like this guy intends to play hardball, and I really hate to think of you going in there trying to placate him. That's not in your kids' best interest, either. And yes, he probably will try and use the kids as leverage. Do you think he really wants the responsibility though? If not, there's a good chance that he's bluffing.

How does one find collaborative lawyers to work together? This doesn't involve him choosing your lawyer, does it?

[Anonymous]

OP,
I got separated under similar circumstances. My ex had secretly been spending down our assets. Just so you know, I ended up with more than half the retirement money, child support and alimony. He was responsible for all the debts he racked up as well.

We tried the collaborative route, but it was awful. I felt bullied and belittled during the mediation. I switched to another attorney and felt so much better taken care of. I wanted to do the collaborative thing, but when one party is not grounded in reality, it is not an easy thing to accomplish. This is the one time in your life that you must stand up for yourself and not try to make everyone happy.

It's not easy. Hang in there. Good luck.