Anonymous wrote:I would get a divorce.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Adult children. I have a demanding career. I’m sorry if I could not be there 100 percent.
This is pretty flippant for not supporting your spouse during a life threatening disease. You should stop worrying about the life insurance and realize he's getting his ducks in a row to leave you.
If I got cancer after our kids were out of the house and my DH's response to asking why he didn't fully support me was "ohhhh, sorry, I was busy at work, what did you expect from me?" I'd 100% bounce after I recovered. No point living out the rest of your life with someone who can't step up when needed. You're shocked that you're off the policy? He's shocked that you're a selfish and bad person.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He sounds deeply entitled, immature and ungrateful. I would start looking for someone who wants an equal partner and not a nurse.
Amazing.![]()
Reminder that DCUM women often say that women are the more "empathetic" sex and that men are trash because they are likely to abandon their wives if they become seriously ill.
That’s not something DCUM says, it’s something statistics say
[Reading what women post on DCUM Relationships gives me very serious doubt about those "statistics". Total lack of empathy, total lack of interest in anything other than "what is my husband doing for me right now."]
OP fed and sheltered her spouse while he underwent chemo. Now he’s (after the fact) saying she didn’t do enough and wants to punish her by leaving her without money when he dies. Meanwhile she never restricted his access to her money while he lived.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He sounds deeply entitled, immature and ungrateful. I would start looking for someone who wants an equal partner and not a nurse.
Amazing.![]()
Reminder that DCUM women often say that women are the more "empathetic" sex and that men are trash because they are likely to abandon their wives if they become seriously ill.
Anonymous wrote:He sounds deeply entitled, immature and ungrateful. I would start looking for someone who wants an equal partner and not a nurse.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Adult children. I have a demanding career. I’m sorry if I could not be there 100 percent.
This is pretty flippant for not supporting your spouse during a life threatening disease. You should stop worrying about the life insurance and realize he's getting his ducks in a row to leave you.
If I got cancer after our kids were out of the house and my DH's response to asking why he didn't fully support me was "ohhhh, sorry, I was busy at work, what did you expect from me?" I'd 100% bounce after I recovered. No point living out the rest of your life with someone who can't step up when needed. You're shocked that you're off the policy? He's shocked that you're a selfish and bad person.
So you’d let your spouse financially support you through your illness and then leave them because they didn’t do as much as you wanted emotionally.
If OP is the breadwinner she could have restricted access to money and it doesn’t sound like that happened, and even with good insurance co-payments for cancer treatments aren’t nothing. She also could have chosen to divorce *him* as many men do their partners when they get cancer.
If you can’t rely on your partner for much when you’re sick and ill with something situational- not life long- why stay married at all. Damage is done.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Adult children. I have a demanding career. I’m sorry if I could not be there 100 percent.
This is pretty flippant for not supporting your spouse during a life threatening disease. You should stop worrying about the life insurance and realize he's getting his ducks in a row to leave you.
If I got cancer after our kids were out of the house and my DH's response to asking why he didn't fully support me was "ohhhh, sorry, I was busy at work, what did you expect from me?" I'd 100% bounce after I recovered. No point living out the rest of your life with someone who can't step up when needed. You're shocked that you're off the policy? He's shocked that you're a selfish and bad person.
So you’d let your spouse financially support you through your illness and then leave them because they didn’t do as much as you wanted emotionally.
If OP is the breadwinner she could have restricted access to money and it doesn’t sound like that happened, and even with good insurance co-payments for cancer treatments aren’t nothing. She also could have chosen to divorce *him* as many men do their partners when they get cancer.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Pp - wow I had a lot of typos above sorry. Most insurance companies require a spouse to sign away their consent if you did not sign the document and I think legally it has to go to you.
Insurance broker here - this is totally wrong. So long as her husband is the owner of the policy as well as the insured (which is how it's usually set up), he can change the beneficiary of the policy at any time for any reason, and she does not even have to be made aware that this change was made.
Only by a court decree during divorce proceedings can it be required that one spouse shall maintain insurance, for a specified time period, with the other spouse as beneficiary.
Anonymous wrote:Pp - wow I had a lot of typos above sorry. Most insurance companies require a spouse to sign away their consent if you did not sign the document and I think legally it has to go to you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Adult children. I have a demanding career. I’m sorry if I could not be there 100 percent.
This is pretty flippant for not supporting your spouse during a life threatening disease. You should stop worrying about the life insurance and realize he's getting his ducks in a row to leave you.
If I got cancer after our kids were out of the house and my DH's response to asking why he didn't fully support me was "ohhhh, sorry, I was busy at work, what did you expect from me?" I'd 100% bounce after I recovered. No point living out the rest of your life with someone who can't step up when needed. You're shocked that you're off the policy? He's shocked that you're a selfish and bad person.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Going forward, make sure you save your earned income in accounts that are in your own name, like your 401k and maybe a brokerage account. Possession is 9/10 of the law.
Well yeah but when it comes to the divorce settlement everything goes in a big pile and gets divided by two regardless of whose name is on it.
Not in Maryland. If he is disabled, the split may not be 50-50 and the court may order lifetime alimony.
So is she financially better off staying married to him, but depleting his assets on his care [by this, I just mean accounts that are in his name only, if there are any] and keeping her assets separate? Or is she better off divorcing him with the possibility of lifetime alimony? Clearly they have issues - just wondering how OP and other women in a similar situation (meaning women who have terminally ill husbands who need care but are concerned their spouse will not adequately provide for them in his will or with life insurance) could protect themselves in situations like this?
Why should women be protected? Life happens. Some husbands die. Some wives die. A friend's dad is having a bad retirement because his wife died while in her 50s, and he was counting on her pension to pay half of his retirement.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Going forward, make sure you save your earned income in accounts that are in your own name, like your 401k and maybe a brokerage account. Possession is 9/10 of the law.
Well yeah but when it comes to the divorce settlement everything goes in a big pile and gets divided by two regardless of whose name is on it.
Not in Maryland. If he is disabled, the split may not be 50-50 and the court may order lifetime alimony.
So is she financially better off staying married to him, but depleting his assets on his care [by this, I just mean accounts that are in his name only, if there are any] and keeping her assets separate? Or is she better off divorcing him with the possibility of lifetime alimony? Clearly they have issues - just wondering how OP and other women in a similar situation (meaning women who have terminally ill husbands who need care but are concerned their spouse will not adequately provide for them in his will or with life insurance) could protect themselves in situations like this?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Going forward, make sure you save your earned income in accounts that are in your own name, like your 401k and maybe a brokerage account. Possession is 9/10 of the law.
Well yeah but when it comes to the divorce settlement everything goes in a big pile and gets divided by two regardless of whose name is on it.
Not in Maryland. If he is disabled, the split may not be 50-50 and the court may order lifetime alimony.