Anonymous wrote:It's not worth the time to consider because you can't extrapolate out from individual couples. In other words, it's all micro, no macro. I'm sorry your husband had mental problems and you got divorced but that has nothing to do with me. Every marriage is different and no one knows what goes on inside a marriage except the two people in it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think that a woman should always keep her foot in the door but because of the price of child care and the stress of being a working mom, some women feel the need to stay at home for their own sanity. Perhaps the bigger issue is how can we make motherhood and working compatible.
Well said.
+1, very good point. The labor force participation rate amongst mothers in the US is shockingly low compared to other developed countries. That's a problem when the courts aren't providing much for the stay at home partner (usually the woman) after a divorce.
Division of marital assets and support depends a great deal on the length of the marriage. It is still generally the case in marriages of twenty or more years duration, wherein the working spouse is very successful, that the non-working partner will be awarded at least half the assets, as well as generous child and spousal support based on the accustomed standard of living. For some ex-spouses, that settlement will be more than enough to see them through a comfortable retirement (i.e., they are in no worse a position than if they had worked and saved for retirement themselves).
Didn't work out this way for me.
Then either your marriage was not one of sufficiently long duration (i.e., 20 or more years), OR, there was not enough financially at issue in terms of marital assets and current income (i.e., your ex-spouse was not a longtime, big earner). If the marriage was not a long one, or the working spouse did not earn enough to support two households, then the non-working spouse will certainly be financially hurt by a divorce. If, however, the marriage was a sufficiently long one, and the working spouse is a high earner, then the non-working spouse will likely be well compensated in a divorce.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think that a woman should always keep her foot in the door but because of the price of child care and the stress of being a working mom, some women feel the need to stay at home for their own sanity. Perhaps the bigger issue is how can we make motherhood and working compatible.
Well said.
+1, very good point. The labor force participation rate amongst mothers in the US is shockingly low compared to other developed countries. That's a problem when the courts aren't providing much for the stay at home partner (usually the woman) after a divorce.
Division of marital assets and support depends a great deal on the length of the marriage. It is still generally the case in marriages of twenty or more years duration, wherein the working spouse is very successful, that the non-working partner will be awarded at least half the assets, as well as generous child and spousal support based on the accustomed standard of living. For some ex-spouses, that settlement will be more than enough to see them through a comfortable retirement (i.e., they are in no worse a position than if they had worked and saved for retirement themselves).
Didn't work out this way for me.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think that a woman should always keep her foot in the door but because of the price of child care and the stress of being a working mom, some women feel the need to stay at home for their own sanity. Perhaps the bigger issue is how can we make motherhood and working compatible.
Well said.
+1, very good point. The labor force participation rate amongst mothers in the US is shockingly low compared to other developed countries. That's a problem when the courts aren't providing much for the stay at home partner (usually the woman) after a divorce.
Division of marital assets and support depends a great deal on the length of the marriage. It is still generally the case in marriages of twenty or more years duration, wherein the working spouse is very successful, that the non-working partner will be awarded at least half the assets, as well as generous child and spousal support based on the accustomed standard of living. For some ex-spouses, that settlement will be more than enough to see them through a comfortable retirement (i.e., they are in no worse a position than if they had worked and saved for retirement themselves).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I married in my early 20s, had 2 kids and stayed home for 5 years, then went back to school, received masters degree and was hired off campus by a very prestigious consulting firm.
So perhaps it makes more sense to have the kids and stay home earlier in life because if something happens to your marriage, you are still young and hot, and other men and employers still want you a lot
Yeah, I'm sure "young and hot" are the absolute best attributes a mom can have, and they are super-critical to being a good parent.![]()
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Not all men are abusive and drug addicts. I was raised where women work and my mom for your logic was horrified that I stayed home. It was unheard of in our family. I have a masters degree but if I go back now - 5 years out, my income will be small and I'd basically have to start all over so its not worth it to me. Plus, our children have some very mild special needs that still require therapy and support. It works for our family and my husband is very supportive. We've talked about me going back but I also have some health issues. I am ok with knowing my husband will take care of me as it is his second marriage and despite how he was treated by his ex, he was always supportive of her and the kids. If I look at his patterns of behaviors, he'll still be there for me and our kids. but in your case, if he had a pattern, no way I would have stopped working.
I don't have daughters but if I did, I would insist they get their education and work at least 5 years and then make the choice for themselves. I see the benefits for our family of me being home, but having both my parents working was no big deal either so I think its more important for the mom to be happy and ok with her decision as long as they can afford it.
I think you missed OP's point. He didn't have those issues when she first married him. It happened over time.
I think the point is that even if you have a great marriage right now, you never know how things could change. an inlaw of mine is facing divorce. She didn't see it coming. No one did. they had a great marriage. He even admits it was great. He just happened to meet another woman. You just never know.
My advice to a woman who decides to stay home to care for children is to get a pre or post-nup. It doesn't matter if you have an education and "work at least 5 years." Once you are out of the workforce for 5 years, it can be difficult to get back in, especially at the salary you made before. OP's point is long term being able to support yourself.
The other issue is death. Most employer-provided life insurance plans aren't enough for a family to live on indefinitely without the wife having to go back to work at some point. I don't think people pay enough attention to that sort of thing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think that a woman should always keep her foot in the door but because of the price of child care and the stress of being a working mom, some women feel the need to stay at home for their own sanity. Perhaps the bigger issue is how can we make motherhood and working compatible.
Well said.
+1, very good point. The labor force participation rate amongst mothers in the US is shockingly low compared to other developed countries. That's a problem when the courts aren't providing much for the stay at home partner (usually the woman) after a divorce.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Personally, I think that a woman should always keep her foot in the door but because of the price of child care and the stress of being a working mom, some women feel the need to stay at home for their own sanity. Perhaps the bigger issue is how can we make motherhood and working compatible.
Well said.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I married in my early 20s, had 2 kids and stayed home for 5 years, then went back to school, received masters degree and was hired off campus by a very prestigious consulting firm.
So perhaps it makes more sense to have the kids and stay home earlier in life because if something happens to your marriage, you are still young and hot, and other men and employers still want you a lot
Yeah, I'm sure "young and hot" are the absolute best attributes a mom can have, and they are super-critical to being a good parent.![]()