Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like her spouse was a high earner. She will get a nice payout, negotiate college payment, and get half of his retirement. Plus she's rid of a cheater and has a nice cushion to either train for a new job or pick up her old one. Doesn't sound all that negligent to me.

All depends upon what you consider a "nice payout". A friend just got divorced in Maryland from a worthless SAHM (they type who didn't cook, clean or take care of the kids). His ex got half the marital portion of the 401k, and half the house equity. 50-50 custody. She will get a little short term alimony, and that's it. She'll walk away with $500k but if she spends it there's no retirement, and no home ownership in her future. No college education for the kids, and she gets no health care.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really does depend on the state. Many states, it's just a formula. He makes x, she makes x and child needs x and parents each contribute x depending on income.

She should look for a job now. She has no idea how long its going to take her to get a job. She will probably move out at some point during the separation, and in some states, the separation period can't even begin until you're living apart. Does she plan to keep the house?

When she does get a job, he can just go and ask for the support numbers to be changed to reflect her income. It is really futile at this point.

And we all "deserve" the maximum amount of support.

+1. And from his perspective, he has been supporting her for a number of years already.

What kind of crap is this? You could easily rephrase that to read "and from her perspective she's been raising his kids for a number of years already." Why do people seem to think that men are "owed" someone raising their children and then act like the mom has been sitting on her ass "being supported." Presumably, this was a joint decision the couple made, but now that the marriage is tanking he's been "supporting her." BS.
Signed, a WOHM but this is crap.

It's 2017. Imagine your H was a SAHD and you were paying him alimony. Could you even imagine a grown man/woman getting money for just being married to you. It's bull. Get a job, support yourself. Child support is a different story.

Alimony needs to go away.

I'm not even really saying if alimony should or shouldn't go away. It's this BS about he's been supporting her as if he was forced into it and now she's going to pay for being such a slacker. It's that attitude I can't stand. "I'm done with you now, hit the curb" after they apparently made the joint decision that she would remove herself from the workforce. He didn't "support her" out of the goodness of his heart - he was supporting a family while she stayed at home with the kids.

You're acting like all pregnancies are completely planned and orchestrated. Do you know many friends I've heard say 'oops' and giggle when discussing their newest? Please. Male or female, no one should be stuck paying half their income to support another full-grown adult for 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 years. Child support is fine. Alimony = going the way of the dinosaurs.

You are beyond warped. So many mental gymnastics to fuel your view of the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It really does depend on the state. Many states, it's just a formula. He makes x, she makes x and child needs x and parents each contribute x depending on income.

She should look for a job now. She has no idea how long its going to take her to get a job. She will probably move out at some point during the separation, and in some states, the separation period can't even begin until you're living apart. Does she plan to keep the house?

When she does get a job, he can just go and ask for the support numbers to be changed to reflect her income. It is really futile at this point.

And we all "deserve" the maximum amount of support.

+1. And from his perspective, he has been supporting her for a number of years already.

What kind of crap is this? You could easily rephrase that to read "and from her perspective she's been raising his kids for a number of years already." Why do people seem to think that men are "owed" someone raising their children and then act like the mom has been sitting on her ass "being supported." Presumably, this was a joint decision the couple made, but now that the marriage is tanking he's been "supporting her." BS.
Signed, a WOHM but this is crap.

It's 2017. Imagine your H was a SAHD and you were paying him alimony. Could you even imagine a grown man/woman getting money for just being married to you. It's bull. Get a job, support yourself. Child support is a different story.

Alimony needs to go away.

I'm not even really saying if alimony should or shouldn't go away. It's this BS about he's been supporting her as if he was forced into it and now she's going to pay for being such a slacker. It's that attitude I can't stand. "I'm done with you now, hit the curb" after they apparently made the joint decision that she would remove herself from the workforce. He didn't "support her" out of the goodness of his heart - he was supporting a family while she stayed at home with the kids.

You're acting like all pregnancies are completely planned and orchestrated. Do you know many friends I've heard say 'oops' and giggle when discussing their newest? Please. Male or female, no one should be stuck paying half their income to support another full-grown adult for 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 years. Child support is fine. Alimony = going the way of the dinosaurs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like her spouse was a high earner. She will get a nice payout, negotiate college payment, and get half of his retirement. Plus she's rid of a cheater and has a nice cushion to either train for a new job or pick up her old one. Doesn't sound all that negligent to me.

All depends upon what you consider a "nice payout". A friend just got divorced in Maryland from a worthless SAHM (they type who didn't cook, clean or take care of the kids). His ex got half the marital portion of the 401k, and half the house equity. 50-50 custody. She will get a little short term alimony, and that's it. She'll walk away with $500k but if she spends it there's no retirement, and no home ownership in her future. No college education for the kids, and she gets no health care.

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like her spouse was a high earner. She will get a nice payout, negotiate college payment, and get half of his retirement. Plus she's rid of a cheater and has a nice cushion to either train for a new job or pick up her old one. Doesn't sound all that negligent to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like her spouse was a high earner. She will get a nice payout, negotiate college payment, and get half of his retirement. Plus she's rid of a cheater and has a nice cushion to either train for a new job or pick up her old one. Doesn't sound all that negligent to me.

You're dreaming. Nice payouts are what pre-nups are for. Idiots who fall into SAHM territory are more like sink-or-swim.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4412890/Hunter-Biden-s-wife-sobs-court-judge-grants-divorce.html

What is the relevance of the link. Each process is unique.
We were waiting in court for the judge to rubber-stamp our divorce while listening to the couple fighting in front of the judge (lawyers doing most of the talking).The They were arguing about whether her 6 hours a week at a library counts as a job and if she can get more hours. The breadwinner husband was making more an hour than she was in a year, three kids. It went on and on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like her spouse was a high earner. She will get a nice payout, negotiate college payment, and get half of his retirement. Plus she's rid of a cheater and has a nice cushion to either train for a new job or pick up her old one. Doesn't sound all that negligent to me.

You're dreaming. Nice payouts are what pre-nups are for. Idiots who fall into SAHM territory are more like sink-or-swim.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4412890/Hunter-Biden-s-wife-sobs-court-judge-grants-divorce.html

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like her spouse was a high earner. She will get a nice payout, negotiate college payment, and get half of his retirement. Plus she's rid of a cheater and has a nice cushion to either train for a new job or pick up her old one. Doesn't sound all that negligent to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She's only known a few weeks and she already knows for sure she wants to divorce? What does the DH want to do?

I know she is in shock, but I think she should totally slow play this, go to counseling, etc. and give herself time to get her ducks in a row before demanding a divorce.

OP here- DH wants to continue his long-time multi-year affair/s. That's why she's almost 100% sure of divorce. Her head is spinning it's all happening so fast. He hasn't moved out, so the financial situation hasn't changed yet.
Yes, she knows she has to go back to work. 10+ years ago, he was the one who wanted her to quit to stay home with the kids. Then he ramped up his "travelling" for work, and she handled almost 100% of everything at home for years.
She really doesn't think he'll want split custody- he barely wants to see his kids as it is.

IMHO, she definitely deserves the max financial support from him. He ruined her life. She could have kept working years ago and been so much better off now, but he took that away from her. She will need to work her way back up, which will take years. I know- I'm a high level manager now. I want to help her network again- but at the right time.

No, she ruined it herself. She made those choices for herself. He can want whatever he wants, and she can always say no, but he didn't force her to do anything for 10+ years.

I seriously doubt she chose for him to have a long term affair.

She didn't personally prepare for her/ her kids' futures. She left that to the husband. She chose to do that.

Hey if she knew the law perhaps she already knew she was protected via alimony and child support and retirement.


But if youd rather blame her for her husbands cheating that up to you.