Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would treat it like any other long-term debt, like a student loan or medical bills.

Same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

+1

Alimony should last no more than five years. That’s enough time to get back into the workforce. You’re already getting half of the assets. Women today have the choice to SAH or work outside the home. I understand when the children are young, or are special needs, but once they are in school full time, being a SAH is a choice.

A choice that couples make together and that still benefits the working spouse’s career.

In reality, many women pressure their husbands to agree to let them be a sahm. Middle class sahms in particular usually push their way into the lifestyle. It's not so black and white.

Pushing is correct. My young cousin is learning this lesson. Total bait and switch after marriage.

Yes how dare women want to stay home and nurture children! If only we could be more like men and go around sexually assaulting and murdering innocent people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

+1

Alimony should last no more than five years. That’s enough time to get back into the workforce. You’re already getting half of the assets. Women today have the choice to SAH or work outside the home. I understand when the children are young, or are special needs, but once they are in school full time, being a SAH is a choice.

A choice that couples make together and that still benefits the working spouse’s career.

In reality, many women pressure their husbands to agree to let them be a sahm. Middle class sahms in particular usually push their way into the lifestyle. It's not so black and white.

Pushing is correct. My young cousin is learning this lesson. Total bait and switch after marriage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

+1

Alimony should last no more than five years. That’s enough time to get back into the workforce. You’re already getting half of the assets. Women today have the choice to SAH or work outside the home. I understand when the children are young, or are special needs, but once they are in school full time, being a SAH is a choice.

A choice that couples make together and that still benefits the working spouse’s career.

In reality, many women pressure their husbands to agree to let them be a sahm. Middle class sahms in particular usually push their way into the lifestyle. It's not so black and white.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

+1

Alimony should last no more than five years. That’s enough time to get back into the workforce. You’re already getting half of the assets. Women today have the choice to SAH or work outside the home. I understand when the children are young, or are special needs, but once they are in school full time, being a SAH is a choice.

A choice that couples make together and that still benefits the working spouse’s career.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

+1

Alimony should last no more than five years. That’s enough time to get back into the workforce. You’re already getting half of the assets. Women today have the choice to SAH or work outside the home. I understand when the children are young, or are special needs, but once they are in school full time, being a SAH is a choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

+1

Alimony should last no more than five years. That’s enough time to get back into the workforce. You’re already getting half of the assets. Women today have the choice to SAH or work outside the home. I understand when the children are young, or are special needs, but once they are in school full time, being a SAH is a choice.

Many men have not learned this lesson. Hopefully they will counsel their sons differently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

+1

Alimony should last no more than five years. That’s enough time to get back into the workforce. You’re already getting half of the assets. Women today have the choice to SAH or work outside the home. I understand when the children are young, or are special needs, but once they are in school full time, being a SAH is a choice.

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

Anonymous wrote:

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

+1,000.

Agree!

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

LOL...so much for empowering feminism that brings us CHOICE. Didn't realize it was my husband who was "allowing" me to be a SAHM.

+1

PP is bitter because her DH doesn’t allow her the choice to stay home. Hence her vitriol and anger towards all SAHMs.

Not that poster but I get it. While “allow” might not be the right word, unless the SAHP is independently wealthy, the person bringing in the income has to agree that they are comfortable being the only one bringing in the income for the other person to stay at home. You can’t live off love alone and need a way to pay for food and shelter.

And there may be some truth to the bitterness but more so in imagining the future situation. Because if your are the SAHM, that may not have been an option financially if your DH was previously married and paying a lot of alimony to his ex. How would you feel going to work everyday and preferring to SAH with your children knowing that you can’t financially afford to do so as a household because your DH will be paying alimony until your joint kids are almost in high school to support his ex when his kids with her are already out of high school?

To OP, in terms of discussing details, what is your motivation in discussing the details? Are you worried that you will indirectly be taking on this amount? At a certain point, it’s similar to someone that has huge student loan payments, you accept that a financial decision they made prior to you means they have salary minus x available to contribute to the household now. Either you can accept it or you don’t. Then you have to look at adverse changes, like if he loses his job (he still has those obligations) or if you get divorced or something changes with the alimony (like she breaks the terms of the agreement or somehow lawyers need to get involved again) - can you be with this person and still somehow financially protect yourself? No everyone is a fan or a prenup or separate finances.

Thanks for your thoughts. OP here. Realistically speaking, if he lost his job and were still due the alimony payments, we would need to think about this. The same with an illness that incapacitated him. I expect that we would go back to court to reduce the payments. The payments are such that a person in the DC area could live comfortably on them; especially since she does not have a mortgage payment. She is very well educated too. Everyone in the situation is. Since she doesn't need to rely on additional personal income, she is not aggressive in moving her career along. The ex is in her mid-50s.

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

Because if she supported him in his career that is high earning, she is entitled to a slice of his future earnings.

Not really, according to modern laws of spousal support. It's more like "if she sacrificed her own career during the marriage, she is entitled to support while she gets back on track".

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t merge households or finances with someone’s paying alimony or child support, because I really don’t want the drama of the ex-wife and her children (and there is always drama). I also wouldn’t merge households or finances while I still had children living in my home.

But I am fine on my own, financially, emotionally, and otherwise. YMMV.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would not date any man who was stupid enough to allow his wife to be a long term SAHM who has zero skills and is unemployable. That’s the only way alimony is awarded these days.

LOL...so much for empowering feminism that brings us CHOICE. Didn't realize it was my husband who was "allowing" me to be a SAHM.

+1

PP is bitter because her DH doesn’t allow her the choice to stay home. Hence her vitriol and anger towards all SAHMs.

Not that poster but I get it. While “allow” might not be the right word, unless the SAHP is independently wealthy, the person bringing in the income has to agree that they are comfortable being the only one bringing in the income for the other person to stay at home. You can’t live off love alone and need a way to pay for food and shelter.

And there may be some truth to the bitterness but more so in imagining the future situation. Because if your are the SAHM, that may not have been an option financially if your DH was previously married and paying a lot of alimony to his ex. How would you feel going to work everyday and preferring to SAH with your children knowing that you can’t financially afford to do so as a household because your DH will be paying alimony until your joint kids are almost in high school to support his ex when his kids with her are already out of high school?

To OP, in terms of discussing details, what is your motivation in discussing the details? Are you worried that you will indirectly be taking on this amount? At a certain point, it’s similar to someone that has huge student loan payments, you accept that a financial decision they made prior to you means they have salary minus x available to contribute to the household now. Either you can accept it or you don’t. Then you have to look at adverse changes, like if he loses his job (he still has those obligations) or if you get divorced or something changes with the alimony (like she breaks the terms of the agreement or somehow lawyers need to get involved again) - can you be with this person and still somehow financially protect yourself? No everyone is a fan or a prenup or separate finances.

Thanks for your thoughts. OP here. Realistically speaking, if he lost his job and were still due the alimony payments, we would need to think about this. The same with an illness that incapacitated him. I expect that we would go back to court to reduce the payments. The payments are such that a person in the DC area could live comfortably on them; especially since she does not have a mortgage payment. She is very well educated too. Everyone in the situation is. Since she doesn't need to rely on additional personal income, she is not aggressive in moving her career along. The ex is in her mid-50s.

Why does an educated mid 50s woman need 15 years of alimony to get herself back into the workforce and be self supporting? She sounds like a lazy abuser of ancient alimony laws. It's crazy this can still happen in 2018, thank god for alimony reform laws.

He should go back to court and have her fair market value income imputed against his payments, and the term greatly reduced based on a reasonable career trajectory.

Because if she supported him in his career that is high earning, she is entitled to a slice of his future earnings.