Reply to Kevin Costner divorce

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Kevin Costner divorce"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I can’t believe all these people saying 1.6M is good money for 20 years of work for a middle aged woman who has no pension, no 401k, and gave up her career.   I think fair would be 5-10M.  I agree with PP that prenups should have force but I think in the family law context the judges can look to whether the terms are unconscionable in context.   If I were KC’s lawyer, I’d advise settling it out in the 5-10 range.  It’s possible they’ve tried that and she’s holding out for more.  [/quote]

She didn’t give up a career though. She never had one.[/quote]

Her career was raising their kids and other family needs while he was gone for months.  [/quote]

Oh please, don’t be disingenuous! We are not talking about a run of the mill SAHP who stays at home and gives up their career because

a) it makes financial sense because of childcare costs;

b) parents decided at least one of them should stay home to provide care for their children in lieu of (extended) family, hired help, etc;

c) parents decided at least one of them should be home for their kids because the other parent couldn’t be as present.

I can understand b and c in their case, but that doesn’t change the HARD fact that this couple STILL had a ton of hired help, despite the fact that one parent was home 100% of the time. “They” (she) had personal assistant, nanny, maid, chef, and a chauffeur too (I bet).

Besides being emotionally and physically available, NOTHING else correlates to the typical SAHP experience: no cleaning, laundry, cooking, driving kids to and from while juggling multiple schedules and activities, no grocery shopping, errands to run. You know… stuff regular people do.

And having all this help is ok - I don’t see anything wrong with it if you have the means. I mean, what can be better than being able to enjoy time with your children without having to do the grind work? Anyone (or almost) who can afford would want that!

But once that 13y old began K, there was no reason for the mom to not work if that was her desire/goal… her kids were in school at least 6 hours per day and she had the luxury of a professional support system to deal with the other 2 or 3 hours of a typical work day (remember: nanny, personal assistant, chef, maid).

Or even work part time and start establishing a name for herself.

[/quote]

Who cares if they had tons of hired help?  They could afford it.  He was gone for months at a time.  And, they had plenty of money so there was no need for her to work.  So, she goes and works for $100K a year.  You really think that's going to impact their lifestyle in any way?

Your value is for women to work regardless of the situation.  That was not theirs nor their agreement when they got married and have kids.

I have teens and SAH.  It's far more work with teens given they have 1-2 activities every day after school, some at 3:30 and then they are the every few week ortho appointments, etc.  Its great if you have a flexible job but when I worked I didn't nor does my spouse.  And, what I'd earn would cover a driver/nanny.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics