Anonymous wrote:As a woman who was emotionally abused and attacked throughout her marriage, I did have an emotional affair with a man. I probably would have committed suicide without the support. Kids were young and there was no way I was leaving them 1/2 the time with my husband and his family - I stayed to protect them.

In VA, if you’ve been married 20+ years, and assets are joint, you might not get spousal support but are entitled to 1/2

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Places like WalMart, Target, Joanne are always hiring. If her income is low enough, she will qualify for SNAP benefits and Medicaid. Her lifestyle will take a huge hit but she won't be homeless on the street.

If there's no prenup, she will be entitled to at least some spousal support. The courts in most states don't care if she had a thousand affairs.

In Virginia, they do.

No, VA does not really care.

Yeah, it really does. Proof of adultery = bye-bye, spousal support!

Your premise is that there would be any spousal support in the first place which is almost never the case nowadays.

Exactly. If people get it, it is temporary. And only people with very high income spouse would get enough to live on (and even that may be a few years and not more). Almost everyone would have to get a job.

Wrong and wrong. I have indefinite spousal support. And I also work.

I don't use terms like "high income." I have no idea what that might mean in your world. it's pretty subjective. But I can tell you that at least half of my divorced friends got to keep large marital homes, and they do not work. Or they work part-time as personal trainers or personal shoppers - no benefits or anything. I know one who works in a clothing store. Several who do absolutely nothing except play tennis.

Pretty much like my married friends. Half work, half don't.

Explain to us exactly what incredible thing you did while married that now you should be paid in perpetuity by your former spouse? Are you still doing his laundry? Cooking him meals? Sleeping with him? Doing the job of a SAHM? If you’ve stopped rendering your SAHM services to him, why is he forced to invest his time earning money to pay you while you offer nothing back?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On what planet is a divorced able bodied woman supported by her EX husband? Earth to the clueless: it's year 2020. GET A FULLTIME JOB LADIES. For all intents, is no such thing as alimony anymore.

I don’t think that really happens anymore. I got no alimony and very little child support.

The only men I know who support their ex-wives basically gave up custody because they wanted to move out of state, focus on work, or didn’t enjoy being a parent. So they end up paying a lot more in child support since mom has them full-time. Often they send extra money because they feel guilty.

I think many women don’t realize this until it’s too late. They only read the fiction of fabulous lives and ex’s $.

I don’t know any woman who divorced thinking they would get a ton of money, and they were all happy to give up money for their freedom.

+1

It is not the old days. Women are not being supported post-divorce. People who think otherwise have no clue.

The original question was SAHM.

A woman who is a SAHM in a long-term relationship will get spousal support. Typically for half the length of the marriage and if married over 20 years, lifetime. Especially if the husband is a high earner.

No. Your information is about 60 years old. A SAHM will NOT get long term spousal support and definitely not lifetime spousal support. She will get a full time job and support herself like functioning adults do.
At BEST she will get a couple dollars while she trains her way back into the workforce.

No, honey. My information about this is not 60 years old. It is based on my experience getting separated and divorced in Virginia in the last 18 months.

It really comes down to the judge. Wife is required to work but in cases where she is a SAHM and doesn’t have earning potential, spousal support typically will be awarded for a duration of half the marriage, especially if there is a huge income difference.

I literally just went through this. What is your experience?

I ultimately ended up not having to pay her because I could provide adultery. But that was the only reason.

I am not that poster but your situation is not the norm. Most women in this area are not in this category: "SAHM and doesn’t have earning potential". Most are two income couples and if they are not, one spouse does not often make more than 250k a year to award enough spousal support to live on. And most don't have adultery as a factor where the offending party was the person without any income.

Most people do not get spousal support, and if they do, it is temporary until they can get a job. Especially people with household incomes of less than 250k.

Repeating something endlessly doesn’t make it true. I asked for your basis for your misinformation and you haven’t provided it.

I just went through this. I had the law fully explained to me by two different lawyers — the first one I consulted and the one I retained.

The LAW still grants spousal support and in cases where a SAHM has exited her career to care for children for any length of time, she will be given an imputed income and spousal support will be awarded for half the duration of the marriage based on the income differential. Because let’s be honest: in cases where a woman is just a stay at home mommy and the dad actually works, he is going to have a high income. This is a fairly common scenario, especially in the DCUM demographic.

So you get the dad earning $240,000 and the mom with an imputed income of, say, $60,000, spousal support will be awarded for a duration of half the marriage. If they were married more than 20 years, it can be awarded lifetime.

But if she cheats and it can be proven in court, she gets nothing.

This is the law, at least in Virginia. What you “think” happens isn’t relevant.

You are not getting it. I understand the law. I just divorced an attorney. And I consulted three of my own.

Yes, you are correct—in your case.

What you are not understanding is that your situation is not the vast majority of divorces. It is the minority. Most cases don’t go to court—they mediate or do collaborative law so no judge is involved. (and most people to not have a cheating SAHM). Most people try to stay out of court on purpose. Most people do not get spousal support and it is usually temporary.

I am not disputing the law—I am disputing the fact that you think your case is the norm and it is not.

My ex refused be amicable if I tried to get spousal support despite the fact that I followed his career and had to get out of the workforce for a few years due to moving. I did not want to do that. However, due to my salary history and that I worked most of the marriage, I would have gotten spousal support for a few years if I went to court or if I did collaborative divorce. We did the cheapest and I waived it because spousal support would have meant selling the house (he kept it). I could have insisted but he would be more difficult to deal with long term, kids would have to move, etc., etc. Even in my case, if I got spousal support, it would not have been more than a few years due to my salary history.

More cases are like mine than yours. Most people are not getting the kind of spousal support you think they do. That’s all. Your legally correct in the particular scenario you describe…but that is a minority of divorces. Most don't even see a court room and many people are not SAHMs.

I think the SAHM v high earner is common in DCUM land and even in trying to avoid court most men end up paying spousal support in those cases because they know what the law is and what a judge would rule.

Remember, the question was asked on DCUM and framed entirely about SAHMs.

Yes, they will be expected to get a job. But yes, they will also likely receive support if there is an income disparity.

I just finished a divorce where I declined spousal support to keep the marital home (worth about $800k in equity). I made six figures and my lawyer said I’d still qualify for support. Ex-DH did not want to pay, but negotiated the house in lieu of alimony. I consider that a win.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Places like WalMart, Target, Joanne are always hiring. If her income is low enough, she will qualify for SNAP benefits and Medicaid. Her lifestyle will take a huge hit but she won't be homeless on the street.

If there's no prenup, she will be entitled to at least some spousal support. The courts in most states don't care if she had a thousand affairs.

In Virginia, they do.

No, VA does not really care.

Yeah, it really does. Proof of adultery = bye-bye, spousal support!

Your premise is that there would be any spousal support in the first place which is almost never the case nowadays.

Exactly. If people get it, it is temporary. And only people with very high income spouse would get enough to live on (and even that may be a few years and not more). Almost everyone would have to get a job.

Wrong and wrong. I have indefinite spousal support. And I also work.

I don't use terms like "high income." I have no idea what that might mean in your world. it's pretty subjective. But I can tell you that at least half of my divorced friends got to keep large marital homes, and they do not work. Or they work part-time as personal trainers or personal shoppers - no benefits or anything. I know one who works in a clothing store. Several who do absolutely nothing except play tennis.

Pretty much like my married friends. Half work, half don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On what planet is a divorced able bodied woman supported by her EX husband? Earth to the clueless: it's year 2020. GET A FULLTIME JOB LADIES. For all intents, is no such thing as alimony anymore.

I don’t think that really happens anymore. I got no alimony and very little child support.

The only men I know who support their ex-wives basically gave up custody because they wanted to move out of state, focus on work, or didn’t enjoy being a parent. So they end up paying a lot more in child support since mom has them full-time. Often they send extra money because they feel guilty.

I think many women don’t realize this until it’s too late. They only read the fiction of fabulous lives and ex’s $.

I don’t know any woman who divorced thinking they would get a ton of money, and they were all happy to give up money for their freedom.

+1

It is not the old days. Women are not being supported post-divorce. People who think otherwise have no clue.

The original question was SAHM.

A woman who is a SAHM in a long-term relationship will get spousal support. Typically for half the length of the marriage and if married over 20 years, lifetime. Especially if the husband is a high earner.

No. Your information is about 60 years old. A SAHM will NOT get long term spousal support and definitely not lifetime spousal support. She will get a full time job and support herself like functioning adults do.
At BEST she will get a couple dollars while she trains her way back into the workforce.

No, honey. My information about this is not 60 years old. It is based on my experience getting separated and divorced in Virginia in the last 18 months.

It really comes down to the judge. Wife is required to work but in cases where she is a SAHM and doesn’t have earning potential, spousal support typically will be awarded for a duration of half the marriage, especially if there is a huge income difference.

I literally just went through this. What is your experience?

I ultimately ended up not having to pay her because I could provide adultery. But that was the only reason.

I am not that poster but your situation is not the norm. Most women in this area are not in this category: "SAHM and doesn’t have earning potential". Most are two income couples and if they are not, one spouse does not often make more than 250k a year to award enough spousal support to live on. And most don't have adultery as a factor where the offending party was the person without any income.

Most people do not get spousal support, and if they do, it is temporary until they can get a job. Especially people with household incomes of less than 250k.

Repeating something endlessly doesn’t make it true. I asked for your basis for your misinformation and you haven’t provided it.

I just went through this. I had the law fully explained to me by two different lawyers — the first one I consulted and the one I retained.

The LAW still grants spousal support and in cases where a SAHM has exited her career to care for children for any length of time, she will be given an imputed income and spousal support will be awarded for half the duration of the marriage based on the income differential. Because let’s be honest: in cases where a woman is just a stay at home mommy and the dad actually works, he is going to have a high income. This is a fairly common scenario, especially in the DCUM demographic.

So you get the dad earning $240,000 and the mom with an imputed income of, say, $60,000, spousal support will be awarded for a duration of half the marriage. If they were married more than 20 years, it can be awarded lifetime.

But if she cheats and it can be proven in court, she gets nothing.

This is the law, at least in Virginia. What you “think” happens isn’t relevant.

You are not getting it. I understand the law. I just divorced an attorney. And I consulted three of my own.

Yes, you are correct—in your case.

What you are not understanding is that your situation is not the vast majority of divorces. It is the minority. Most cases don’t go to court—they mediate or do collaborative law so no judge is involved. (and most people to not have a cheating SAHM). Most people try to stay out of court on purpose. Most people do not get spousal support and it is usually temporary.

I am not disputing the law—I am disputing the fact that you think your case is the norm and it is not.

My ex refused be amicable if I tried to get spousal support despite the fact that I followed his career and had to get out of the workforce for a few years due to moving. I did not want to do that. However, due to my salary history and that I worked most of the marriage, I would have gotten spousal support for a few years if I went to court or if I did collaborative divorce. We did the cheapest and I waived it because spousal support would have meant selling the house (he kept it). I could have insisted but he would be more difficult to deal with long term, kids would have to move, etc., etc. Even in my case, if I got spousal support, it would not have been more than a few years due to my salary history.

More cases are like mine than yours. Most people are not getting the kind of spousal support you think they do. That’s all. Your legally correct in the particular scenario you describe…but that is a minority of divorces. Most don't even see a court room and many people are not SAHMs.

I think the SAHM v high earner is common in DCUM land and even in trying to avoid court most men end up paying spousal support in those cases because they know what the law is and what a judge would rule.

Remember, the question was asked on DCUM and framed entirely about SAHMs.

Yes, they will be expected to get a job. But yes, they will also likely receive support if there is an income disparity.

Anonymous wrote:^^^ I mean, I get that some women are pushovers and roll over, waiving their right to spousal support to avoid a contentious divorce. But that’s stupid. Of course, so is cheating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On what planet is a divorced able bodied woman supported by her EX husband? Earth to the clueless: it's year 2020. GET A FULLTIME JOB LADIES. For all intents, is no such thing as alimony anymore.

I don’t think that really happens anymore. I got no alimony and very little child support.

The only men I know who support their ex-wives basically gave up custody because they wanted to move out of state, focus on work, or didn’t enjoy being a parent. So they end up paying a lot more in child support since mom has them full-time. Often they send extra money because they feel guilty.

I think many women don’t realize this until it’s too late. They only read the fiction of fabulous lives and ex’s $.

I don’t know any woman who divorced thinking they would get a ton of money, and they were all happy to give up money for their freedom.

+1

It is not the old days. Women are not being supported post-divorce. People who think otherwise have no clue.

The original question was SAHM.

A woman who is a SAHM in a long-term relationship will get spousal support. Typically for half the length of the marriage and if married over 20 years, lifetime. Especially if the husband is a high earner.

No. Your information is about 60 years old. A SAHM will NOT get long term spousal support and definitely not lifetime spousal support. She will get a full time job and support herself like functioning adults do.
At BEST she will get a couple dollars while she trains her way back into the workforce.

No, honey. My information about this is not 60 years old. It is based on my experience getting separated and divorced in Virginia in the last 18 months.

It really comes down to the judge. Wife is required to work but in cases where she is a SAHM and doesn’t have earning potential, spousal support typically will be awarded for a duration of half the marriage, especially if there is a huge income difference.

I literally just went through this. What is your experience?

I ultimately ended up not having to pay her because I could provide adultery. But that was the only reason.

I am not that poster but your situation is not the norm. Most women in this area are not in this category: "SAHM and doesn’t have earning potential". Most are two income couples and if they are not, one spouse does not often make more than 250k a year to award enough spousal support to live on. And most don't have adultery as a factor where the offending party was the person without any income.

Most people do not get spousal support, and if they do, it is temporary until they can get a job. Especially people with household incomes of less than 250k.

Repeating something endlessly doesn’t make it true. I asked for your basis for your misinformation and you haven’t provided it.

I just went through this. I had the law fully explained to me by two different lawyers — the first one I consulted and the one I retained.

The LAW still grants spousal support and in cases where a SAHM has exited her career to care for children for any length of time, she will be given an imputed income and spousal support will be awarded for half the duration of the marriage based on the income differential. Because let’s be honest: in cases where a woman is just a stay at home mommy and the dad actually works, he is going to have a high income. This is a fairly common scenario, especially in the DCUM demographic.

So you get the dad earning $240,000 and the mom with an imputed income of, say, $60,000, spousal support will be awarded for a duration of half the marriage. If they were married more than 20 years, it can be awarded lifetime.

But if she cheats and it can be proven in court, she gets nothing.

This is the law, at least in Virginia. What you “think” happens isn’t relevant.

You are not getting it. I understand the law. I just divorced an attorney. And I consulted three of my own.

Yes, you are correct—in your case.

What you are not understanding is that your situation is not the vast majority of divorces. It is the minority. Most cases don’t go to court—they mediate or do collaborative law so no judge is involved. (and most people to not have a cheating SAHM). Most people try to stay out of court on purpose. Most people do not get spousal support and it is usually temporary.

I am not disputing the law—I am disputing the fact that you think your case is the norm and it is not.

My ex refused be amicable if I tried to get spousal support despite the fact that I followed his career and had to get out of the workforce for a few years due to moving. I did not want to do that. However, due to my salary history and that I worked most of the marriage, I would have gotten spousal support for a few years if I went to court or if I did collaborative divorce. We did the cheapest and I waived it because spousal support would have meant selling the house (he kept it). I could have insisted but he would be more difficult to deal with long term, kids would have to move, etc., etc. Even in my case, if I got spousal support, it would not have been more than a few years due to my salary history.

More cases are like mine than yours. Most people are not getting the kind of spousal support you think they do. That’s all. Your legally correct in the particular scenario you describe…but that is a minority of divorces. Most don't even see a court room and many people are not SAHMs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Places like WalMart, Target, Joanne are always hiring. If her income is low enough, she will qualify for SNAP benefits and Medicaid. Her lifestyle will take a huge hit but she won't be homeless on the street.

If there's no prenup, she will be entitled to at least some spousal support. The courts in most states don't care if she had a thousand affairs.

In Virginia, they do.

No, VA does not really care.

Yeah, it really does. Proof of adultery = bye-bye, spousal support!

Your premise is that there would be any spousal support in the first place which is almost never the case nowadays.

Exactly. If people get it, it is temporary. And only people with very high income spouse would get enough to live on (and even that may be a few years and not more). Almost everyone would have to get a job.

Wrong and wrong. I have indefinite spousal support. And I also work.

I don't use terms like "high income." I have no idea what that might mean in your world. it's pretty subjective. But I can tell you that at least half of my divorced friends got to keep large marital homes, and they do not work. Or they work part-time as personal trainers or personal shoppers - no benefits or anything. I know one who works in a clothing store. Several who do absolutely nothing except play tennis.

Pretty much like my married friends. Half work, half don't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I think therapists should be ethically bound to tell a spouse their health is at risk. If they know their client us having unprotected sex and still screwing the spouse I think that should be required disclosure. I sure as hell wish somebody had told me.

The therapist’s ethical obligation is to maintain client confidentiality. Who would trust a therapist if they knew the therapist could randomly decide they should share the patient’s confidences with others the therapist felt had a significant interest in the information?

The client gave wife disclosure, signed agreements for records/discussions to be released. Therapist is not betraying patient-client confidentiality. The client knows and asked therapist to do the contact so they don’t have any contact with the AP themselves. Nobody in this situation owes the AP any confidentiality. No violations are being made. This is often done in MC.

No, it isn’t. Leaving aside client confidentiality issues, no ethical therapist would do this if for no other reason than because they don’t know enough about the AP, their spouse, the marriage, etc., to know whether this is a prudent course. For all the therapist knows, the AP is married to an abuser who will actually kill the AP upon learning of the affair. No rational therapist is going to risk that for moral and legal reasons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Places like WalMart, Target, Joanne are always hiring. If her income is low enough, she will qualify for SNAP benefits and Medicaid. Her lifestyle will take a huge hit but she won't be homeless on the street.

If there's no prenup, she will be entitled to at least some spousal support. The courts in most states don't care if she had a thousand affairs.

In Virginia, they do.

No, VA does not really care.

Yeah, it really does. Proof of adultery = bye-bye, spousal support!

Your premise is that there would be any spousal support in the first place which is almost never the case nowadays.

Exactly. If people get it, it is temporary. And only people with very high income spouse would get enough to live on (and even that may be a few years and not more). Almost everyone would have to get a job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I think therapists should be ethically bound to tell a spouse their health is at risk. If they know their client us having unprotected sex and still screwing the spouse I think that should be required disclosure. I sure as hell wish somebody had told me.

The therapist’s ethical obligation is to maintain client confidentiality. Who would trust a therapist if they knew the therapist could randomly decide they should share the patient’s confidences with others the therapist felt had a significant interest in the information?

The client gave wife disclosure, signed agreements for records/discussions to be released. Therapist is not betraying patient-client confidentiality. The client knows and asked therapist to do the contact so they don’t have any contact with the AP themselves. Nobody in this situation owes the AP any confidentiality. No violations are being made. This is often done in MC.