Divorce ? keeping the house

[gwynne]

We both do those things, and we both work. It’s completely manageable. I don’t do any less than my significant other. We’re both university educated. We both make about the same. Neither of us is dependent on the other. We’re together because we want to, not because one is financially dependent on the other.

Are you both active duty, or is just one of you serving? Branch?
Because the lifestyle you describe sounds a lot like the many options civilians are blessed to enjoy.

 

[RamblingMad]

Are you both active duty, or is just one of you serving? Branch?
Because the lifestyle you describe sounds a lot like the many options civilians are blessed to enjoy.

Neither of us are in the military. That’s not the life either of us wants. My significant other’s career is just as important as mine.

 

[chiefmickeymouse]

Neither of us are in the military. That’s not the life either of us wants. My significant other’s career is just as important as mine.

You have that option because of the sacrifice of others. My ex-husband cheated on me, and left me in a bad position, but I won't blame this on "toxic masculinity". This poor little ghost thread has become quite controversial.

 

[Nancyg56]

Even if you get the house, you still need to be able to afford it. The reality is that you’re most likely going to have to downgrade to a smaller home.

Also, you want to figure out how you’re going to support yourself. I’m surprised that you’re a stay at home mom. I thought those went away in the 70s. My significant other has always worked and has a university degree.

Finally, I’m pretty sure the military has rules around paying debt or risk being discharged. I’d explore these options with your attorney.

Wow. I am pretty shocked that you are so comfortable that your way is the only way.

Interesting thought process. No, SAHMs did NOT go out with the 70's. I was a SAHM, still at home. I was first married at 22, had two kids, divorced when I was 32. Went to work ft as soon as the kids were old enough to be at home alone after school, worked pt until then. Remarried at 42, had a third child at 44. I stopped working when I had her. Now, 29 yrs later, I'm in the middle of a nasty divorce. My dh didn't want me to work, said he liked having me home and that if I worked, even pt, it would get in the way of my visits to dd (in the past 5 yrs or so). I am now 70. For my 70th birthday, I found divorce papers, two months ago. He has been cheating and lying for over two years. My earning potential is not good. I could work at Target, but that isn't going to support me. So, he's going to have to dig in and do the right thing. He promised to support me when he walked out. He told our dd the same thing. Now, he is trying to get away with doing nothing. I will be getting some of his ss payments, as well as his pension, once we find it. He has been hiding money for several years. Because we live in a no-fault state, none of this makes any difference. He gets to what he wants to do, and I'm left holding the bag, with nothing.
We were in the process of downsizing...wish that had happened. But, although he wants to get rid of the house, and have me pay for it, that won't happen. It will be sold, as soon as we can come to some kind of settlement agreement. At 70, I'm not sure I should be expected to work. He didn't want me working when we were married. At my age, this is very complicated. Your way of thinking is archaic.

I am so sorry. I hope the judge sees that the choice for you to tend home and family was mutual and he ends up paying his fair share.

We both do those things, and we both work. It’s completely manageable. I don’t do any less than my significant other. We’re both university educated. We both make about the same. Neither of us is dependent on the other. We’re together because we want to, not because one is financially dependent on the other.

I am with my DH because I want to be there as well, however I can see the other side of this conversation. I was a STAH mom, a working Mom, a STAH wife, and a working wife, but I was also a woman who listened to the stories other women told me, and I saw where their choices led them, as well as the lives of their children. You see, no matter how superior you feel your your vision is, breaking up marriages over principles does not work for every woman, and the consequences for the children involved can be horrible. I would never question the decisions a woman made that were based on trust and made with the best interests of the family in mind.

 

[mousefan73]

women ( and men) need to be smarter these days . If it’s decided within a marriage one stays home then get your financials in order. I’m all open to anyone deciding what is best. Just don’t complain later if things go bad I am screwed. You decided. I highly suggest if one decides to be a SAHM you should also have a private retirement fund and have the same amount added as the spouse that works. Real money aet aside. Prenups whatever. By not working decades anybody is making themselves non-hireable for job that pays a living.

IMO a SAHM is worst financial decison anyone could make unless you allocate funds aside specifically for that person who stays home.

I feel for couples where this decision was one-sided. It goes both ways. I know a guy, he wanted his colleges educated wife to work, at least part-time. She insisted on being there 100% for the kids, even when the kids were older, no longer needed her. They got divorced. He has to pay half his pension to her. He’s always saying I told her to get a job for decades so she’s have some retirement savings.

 

[Searc]

Neither of us are in the military. That’s not the life either of us wants. My significant other’s career is just as important as mine.

Yes, we get it. You're all for equal opportunity/choices for women, but only if they choose to work outside the home.

 

[DuskKodesh]

Edit: Yeah, probably just better to leave this one alone.

This is the best post since this thread got resurrected. I'm right there with you.

 

[jen7233]

It likely would have stayed dead had ramblingmad not taken an opportunity for a dig. Who randomly says they thought staying at home went out in the 70s, and then also didn't notice it was a ghost thread? Someone looking to take a dig.

 

[RamblingMad]

It likely would have stayed dead had ramblingmad not taken an opportunity for a dig. Who randomly says they thought staying at home went out in the 70s, and then also didn't notice it was a ghost thread? Someone looking to take a dig.

I’m a terrible person that loves strong, independent women. That’s so controversial.

 

[Floridaman999]

 

[jen7233]

I’m a terrible person that loves strong, independent women. That’s so controversial.

You proved my point of your intent once again.

 

[RamblingMad]

You proved my point of your intent once again.

My intent is that women should look out for themselves, rather than hope that public courts will when things turn south.

 

[jen7233]

My intent is that women should look out for themselves, rather than hope that public courts will when things turn south.

That's a better way of saying it.

 

[Nancyg56]

I’m a terrible person that loves strong, independent women. That’s so controversial.

I probably should walk away, but once again I am shocked that you believe that a person who contribution to the partnership in the relationship is to care for the children and home equals a person who is neither strong or independent. You also have not seen that there are often circumstances that contribute to the decision that are not as easily solved as "daycare" "nanny" or any other type of child care that many can avail themselves to. This narrow minded view of others baffles me and is so disrespectful IMO. (BTW, men are also staying home these days, MY DSIL was my DGD's caregiver. My DD's job provided better benefits and money at that time)

 

[goofy4tink]

But being dependent on a spouse for money isn't archaic?

Perhaps archaic was the incorrect term.

And telling a woman to not work is toxic masculinity on steroids.

In my case, every time I suggested I get a pt job, my spouse told me fine, if I really wanted to, but it would certainly put a stop to the trips to Florida to see our dd. Hindsight being 20/20, I now know why he wanted me traveling.

Can we flip this around?

What if my spouse depends on me to do all of the child care,
the grocery shopping,
all the cooking,
the cleaning,
the laundry,
arrange car care,
house care,
yard care,
pay all the bills,
handle the taxes,
manage a rental property,
handle all dog care,
manage all birthdays and christmas for his huge family,
arrange doctor visits,
prescription drugs,
manage a social couple's life with themed dinner parties.

What if he shows up at an office to work 8 hours and bring home money but I'm the one who works from 6:30 am until 11pm seven days a week with no holiday break?

Who's dependent on whom?

I see it as a team. He contributes and I contribute.

We both need each other.

That was the way we handled things, except he took care of the yard and taxes. I handled all the bills because he was so bad with money.

That’s a choice you made. You prioritized your ex’s career over your own. You chose to marry someone in the military. What I’m saying is that when it comes time to divorce, no one cares about the circumstances. You have to protect your own interests. Don’t expect the court system to care.

What I’m saying is that modern women need to look after their own interests today. Toxic masculinity is a serious problem when half of all marriages end in divorce.

Here's the thing...when I got married, I trusted my partner. There were times when I probably should have left the marriage, but I took those marriage vows pretty seriously, so stayed in order to help and support my dh with his struggles. If I had had even an inkling of what would happen 29 years later, I would have done things differently. But only a completely jaded person goes into a marriage with thoughts to it ending.

My intent is that women should look out for themselves, rather than hope that public courts will when things turn south.

I don't expect the court to look out for me. But, I do expect my cheating, money hiding soon to be ex-dh to man up and do the right thing. It should be considered wrong to cheat for years, hide tens of thousands of dollars in secret accounts, drain your retirement funds. But no, it's all no fault now. So, cheaters/liars get to just up and walk away from a 70 y/o wife, of almost 30 yrs, and try to get away with not providing any support for her. I'm sure you will lay all the blame at my doorstep, since I'm the woman. I obviously didn't prepare myself or my finances for being dumped at 70....silly me. Bottom line here is that he is at fault, not I.

 

[RamblingMad]

I probably should walk away, but once again I am shocked that you believe that a person who contribution to the partnership in the relationship is to care for the children and home equals a person who is neither strong or independent. You also have not seen that there are often circumstances that contribute to the decision that are not as easily solved as "daycare" "nanny" or any other type of child care that many can avail themselves to. This narrow minded view of others baffles me and is so disrespectful IMO. (BTW, men are also staying home these days, MY DSIL was my DGD's caregiver. My DD's job provided better benefits and money at that time)

What’s your plan if things go bad? These relationships are based on wishful thinking. Half of my friends who married are now divorced at least once.

How about if the working spouse paid the stay at home spouse money for staying at home? This would at least allow them to build a safety net in an account that is not jointly held if things go bad.

 

[Nancyg56]

What’s your plan if things go bad? These relationships are based on wishful thinking. Half of my friends who married are now divorced at least once.

How about if the working spouse paid the stay at home spouse money for staying at home? This would at least allow them to build a safety net in an account that is not jointly held if things go bad.

It does not help on a resume and while the funds are important it is all about the work history I am afraid. It also can lead to that old financial issue of who pays the bills and what share? Does the working spouse now charge the STAH spouse rent? A share of internet? I am well aware of the crevasse people who elect to stay home can fall into, but my point is that despite all of your concerns about women who are homemakers, you are forgetting that when people make these decisions the reasoning is personal and is based on circumstances more complex than looking at education and earnings capacity.

You commented pretty cavalierly about a military spouse who followed her husband. You and your partner are not active military, therefore it is pretty easy to dismiss the decision to place the military spouse's obligation over that of the non military. My niece is in that situation. She is active military and will give birth any day now. Her DH will have to determine what is more important to him: his job or whatever decision is made regarding her placement after the baby is born. Go with her or ditch the child and her. She is legally obligated to fulfill her commitment. He is not. Life is simply not black and white and it is never possible to really know what you would do under specific circumstances unless you are presented with them. What do you hold most dear?

 

[Searc]

It does not help on a resume and while the funds are important it is all about the work history I am afraid. It also can lead to that old financial issue of who pays the bills and what share? Does the working spouse now charge the STAH spouse rent? A share of internet? I am well aware of the crevasse people who elect to stay home can fall into, but my point is that despite all of your concerns about women who are homemakers, you are forgetting that when people make these decisions the reasoning is personal and is based on circumstances more complex than looking at education and earnings capacity.

You commented pretty cavalierly about a military spouse who followed her husband. You and your partner are not active military, therefore it is pretty easy to dismiss the decision to place the military spouse's obligation over that of the non military. My niece is in that situation. She is active military and will give birth any day now. Her DH will have to determine what is more important to him: his job or whatever decision is made regarding her placement after the baby is born. Go with her or ditch the child and her. She is legally obligated to fulfill her commitment. He is not. Life is simply not black and white and it is never possible to really know what you would do under specific circumstances unless you are presented with them. What do you hold most dear?

It is also incredibly easy to say "women should do this" when there are no children involved.