Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide, which can point you to expert advice and support.

should husband's partner's income be taken into account for maintenance calculations?

(71 Posts)
ginger57 Mon 08-Jul-13 11:59:11

Hi, my first post, hoping someone might have some useful tips/info. Sorry if this gets a bit long and convoluted!

H and I separated some time ago but had to go on sharing house and bed platonically for a few years due to financial situation. Things were difficult but as amicable as possible under the circs. About 3 and a half years ago he started an affair with someone a lot younger (we're both 55, she's 40ish). 2 years ago we finally managed to sort out actual physical separation, he rented a flat and went on seeing her, I stayed in the house until we agreed to sell last year. They have now moved into rented accommodation and I have bought a 70% share of a housing association flat with my half of the house sale.

I have been out of work for 2 years now and am on JSA (I went back to uni to improve my work prospects and haven't worked since) and I'm getting less confident of finding work by the day. This means that much as I would love to be completely independent of him he will have to go on paying me maintenance. He does pay me what he can at the moment but it isn't enough - I live very simply but I have to rely on overdraft and credit card (with low limit) to get by.

He runs his own very niche small business which doesn't make him much money - the profits go back into the business - so I know he probably can't afford to give me much more. The 2 year separation is up at the end of July and I want to get on with the divorce asap, so I've sent him a breakdown of my finances and asked him to do the same so that we can present something we've agreed on.

So my question (finally!) is does he have to include his girlfriend's income as well? Will the court take that into account when deciding if our calculations are fair?

I don't know if its relevant but we have two grown up children, DD lives with me as she has AS and dyspraxia, DS is working and house-sharing with friends. DD has just lost a second job because of dyspraxia, she is trying to build up a career as a TEFL teacher but she is also on a low income. H had a baby last year with girlfriend, possible the stupidest thing he's ever done but that's a whole other story, however I am aware that it will probably complicate everything. GF has a son of 20ish at uni.

Pause for breath. Any thoughts? Many thanks in advance.

CogitoErgoSometimes Mon 08-Jul-13 12:02:55

No.

TheWysticManker Mon 08-Jul-13 12:06:03

No they wont. Why on earth do you think another woman should have to support you ?

ImperialBlether Mon 08-Jul-13 12:08:07

Of course not. And you're still young enough to find work - what is stopping you?

onetiredmummy Mon 08-Jul-13 12:09:58

No, & if you are living with a partner then their income doesn't count either.

If you want it done strictly & fairly then go via the CSA smile

peopletalk Mon 08-Jul-13 12:10:03

your husbands new partners wages are nothing to do with you even if you had young kids the csa no longer take a new partners wages into consideration.

KirstyJC Mon 08-Jul-13 12:10:59

No! And I don't get why he should support you at all? Kids yes, if you had any at the age they needed support still, but not you - you are an adult and capable of supporting yourself, or claiming benefits for yourself if not.

I can't believe he has been financially supporting you at all if your kids were not living with you - how on earth did you get him to agree to that? He must be very generous!

ratbagcatbag Mon 08-Jul-13 12:11:35

I didn't think you still got maintenance orders anyway so thought it was entirely up to you to support yourself. With regard to her, they won't (rightly) touch her money, why should they?

peopletalk Mon 08-Jul-13 12:11:41

they have grown up children

ratbagcatbag Mon 08-Jul-13 12:12:28

Onetimermummy - she's referring to main thence for herself, children are grown up.

RobotBananas Mon 08-Jul-13 12:12:44

I dont understand... Does he pay maintenance now? confused

KirstyJC Mon 08-Jul-13 12:12:50

OK, just re-read and seen that your DD is still with you. Is he supporting her - that might be ok, but I still can't see why he should pay for YOU?

onetiredmummy Mon 08-Jul-13 12:13:44

Ah thanks ratbag I got derailed by the stupidest thing the exH has ever done comment.

Apologies & all, apologies OP

brew

By the sound of it, at least one of the adult DC is not capable of independent living, therefore the OP cannot work because she needs to care for the DC. Therefore, morally at least, the man should be contributing financially in the same way as if the DC was still a child. But I don't know what the legal position is on maintenance for DC who are technically adults but need full-time care.

AnAirOfHope Mon 08-Jul-13 12:19:40

He has a baby to support, why should he support you?

I think im missing something? confused

Also you were seprated so it was not an affair but he started dating.

AnAirOfHope Mon 08-Jul-13 12:23:08

adult child should get DLA!

Does AS and Dispraxia make a person unable to function as a adult? Or unable to live indepenatly?

Vivacia Mon 08-Jul-13 12:25:54

I don't think the daughter requires full time care. She's just unemployed isn't she?
I don't understand why the ex is paying maintenance of any kind.

mumblechum1 Mon 08-Jul-13 12:26:56

I wouldn't expect him to pay anything for your DD, as she isn't disabled, and he isn't on a particularly high income.

You have been lucky to get spousal maintenance for yourself, but unless his business is doing better than it sounds from your OP, I think it very unlikely that spousal mtce will continue. You will be expected to be independent, given the circumstances.

AnAirOfHope Mon 08-Jul-13 12:27:05

sorry I forgot to answer the question: No her income has nothing to do with you.

Vivacia Mon 08-Jul-13 12:27:20

The comment about having the baby being the stupidest thing reads as very unkind.

mumblechum1 Mon 08-Jul-13 12:27:37

Sorry missed the AS bit about your daughter, but my advice still stands.

OnTheNingNangNong Mon 08-Jul-13 12:28:32

If your children are adults then you won't be entitled to much, if at all. You need to support yourself

OnTheNingNangNong Mon 08-Jul-13 12:30:07

Her income is no business of yours, as would any future partner of yours' income be of no business of your stbxh

VBisme Mon 08-Jul-13 12:33:30

No, they definitely won't take her income into account, and if you're expecting another woman to support you rather than get a job then that is just appalling behaviour.

JaquelineHyde Mon 08-Jul-13 12:35:27

NingNangNong What on earth has the op's ex done to deserve you calling him a stupid bastard xh? confused

OP your ex shouldn't have to pay you anything, you need to get yourself a job or continue to live on benefits. That is your lifestyle choice and not something your ex should have to fund. Especially as you have taken your half of the house sale and have spent it buying a share of your flat, you could have used that to live on but you didn't you invested it all and lived off your ex.

Have some self respect and stand on your own two feet.

onetiredmummy Mon 08-Jul-13 12:40:17

Eh jacqueline?

Do you mean the stbxh? I've always thought that meant 'soon to be ex husband'....

VBisme Mon 08-Jul-13 12:43:06

Jaqueline, I think that's soon-to-be xH, not stupid bastard.

ImTooHecsyForYourParty Mon 08-Jul-13 12:52:13

No. The only people who have to pay for a child are the two who created it!

That said, if one of them is doing some creative book keeping to reduce the amount they have to pay then they are an arse of the highest order and I believe the CSA can look into it.

DHtotalnob Mon 08-Jul-13 12:52:28

<thinks the new definition of STBXH has a certain ring to it...>

ImTooHecsyForYourParty Mon 08-Jul-13 12:53:27

grin Jac - it's Soon To Be Ex Husband. STBEXH

ImTooHecsyForYourParty Mon 08-Jul-13 12:55:44

oh. they're all adults. Sorry. blush do the csa get involved in that?

morethanpotatoprints Mon 08-Jul-13 12:57:00

yes, they should be taken into consideration and the man should be made to pay more if the amount awarded was before the new relationship.
I only had this talk last night with sp friend of mine.
Her dd gets hardly anything from her father and now he has half mortgage, half bills etc than was taken into consideration initially.
So he should up the payment now as his wife is responsible for half mortgage and bills, so he has much larger disposable income.
my friend doesn't think the state should pay when he can afford to.

ImTooHecsyForYourParty Mon 08-Jul-13 13:00:26

I'm fairly sure that's not the law, more. Do you mean should be as in morally or do you have a link to the legislation that says current partner's income should be taken into consideration. Cos I've always said when this comes up that no, the law doesn't require that and if that's wrong, it would be good to know.

JaquelineHyde Mon 08-Jul-13 13:02:04

Oh hahaha I have always used it as stupid bastard ex husband, which would have been really harsh in this instance...Soon to be ex husband, not so much grin grin

I can't believe the OP expects her ex to keep on supporting her. shock

morethanpotatoprints Mon 08-Jul-13 13:09:00

I'mToo

I mean should in morally, I know its not law.
It seems wrong that just because a person has grown up that a parent wouldn't want to help in times of hardship.
My ds are 21 and 18, both working and doing well financially supporting themselves. However, if anything ever came up that they needed financial support, of course I would help them, its duty as a parent surely?
I know there's a difference between help and still providing for their every whim and fancy. When they need help you should, if you can afford it.

JaquelineHyde Mon 08-Jul-13 13:11:35

More so if an ex should pay more in those circumstances, should they be allowed to pay less if their new partner isn't working and so the ex's wage has to support another adult and possible children etc?

JaquelineHyde Mon 08-Jul-13 13:16:55

Also if the ex chooses to support his adult children then that is between him and his children and has nothing to do with the Mum.

Eddie107 Mon 08-Jul-13 13:17:22

If OP took a career break to bring up children then her earning potential could now be lower than if she had continued working full time. Therefore it seems reasonable that stbexh should contribute some maintenence for OP as she would have reduced income due to caring for their DCs.
Don't know if this is the case for OP or if it is a legal obligation but think it's an important point.

ImTooHecsyForYourParty Mon 08-Jul-13 13:17:39

The difference is that when you are grown up there is no legal obligation to continue to support them. So whether you want to help or not, whether you're able to or not, it's up to the individual and it's not enforceable and it sure as hell shouldn't be expected or demanded!

I disagree that you 'should' bail out your adult offspring. I don't think there should be any expectation to do so, although I agree that it's nice if a parent wants to and is able to help out when needed.

Although the downside to that is you can find that there are some people who never learn how to stand on their own two feet because they expect to be bankrolled by their parents for their whole life and then scoop the jackpot when they pop their clogs.

BrianTheMole Mon 08-Jul-13 13:17:49

Not sure he should be paying for you or dd? She's working towards getting a job just like anyone else, and she's grown up. Obviously it would be nice for him to help her out, but not seeing any legal obligation here, esp if he has a baby and is on a low income himself.

morethanpotatoprints Mon 08-Jul-13 13:18:45

No they shouldn't be allowed to pay less as they had the child with first partner, if they then go on to another relationship with dc or have more dc they have to work harder to provide for the dc.
If you make a child you have to have enough money to pay for them. This is what I am told regularly when I mention top up tax credits.
If its morally wrong to expect the state to provide for dc then you can't have one rule for one situation and another rule for somebody else.

ImTooHecsyForYourParty Mon 08-Jul-13 13:19:53

That's true.

Until they are adults.

You don't have to make enough money to pay for them until they hit retirement age! grin

NatashaBee Mon 08-Jul-13 13:21:26

It sounds unlikely to me that the spousal support will continue once the divorce is finalised. Isn't that only where one partner earns much more than the other (premier league footballers and their wives type of thing). Have you got a contingency plan in place for when the support stops?

Alwayscheerful Mon 08-Jul-13 13:24:38

It is my undertsanding that their total income will be considered when arriving at a divorce settlement, so yes their income and their expenditure will go on the form, as will your income and your expenditure, but I am confused,you state you have sold your joint house and I suspect you have split the proceeds, so do you have any assets to share? Usually the financial settlement and decree absolute and within a few weeks of each other.

Morally, I would say you are on your own now he may choose to contribute or help your children but he is not obliged to do so.

GemmaTeller Mon 08-Jul-13 13:26:19

NO

fabulousfoxgloves Mon 08-Jul-13 13:50:21

>If OP took a career break to bring up children then her earning potential could now be lower than if she had continued working full time. Therefore it seems reasonable that stbexh should contribute some maintenence for OP as she would have reduced income due to caring for their DCs.<

This would have to be argued out in a divorce court, though, and would probably cost more than OP is likely to gain, if STBXH is not wealthy. I am not sure that legally he is required to pay anything in terms of spousal support, though that may depend where you are in Britain. And surely this should all have been agreed before the property was sold. Has anyone actually taken legal advice here?

I wonder if OP really accepted that the separation meant that the marriage was over (if they were still sharing a house and bed for several years, that is not separated, really, what about the sofa?), and still this went on for 18 months after he met someone else (which she terms an affair). That doesn't sound very separated in my book.

I do think there is a point here that the OP really has to accept that the marriage ended, she has got half the proceeds of the house, he has been supporting her beyond what was necessary, and the new GF's money is the new GF's money. The situation sucks because she is unemployed and looking after the adult daughter, whilst he is playing happy families with the new baby, but unfortunately that is life. I would let ex-hubby get on with it, and focus on your own life, simple as it may be.

lulubear1 Mon 08-Jul-13 14:05:21

I agree with most of the posts. Her income doesn't come into it andwhy should he have to pay for you? You already stated he is on a low income and has a baby, why would you add to the pressure by demanding maintenance off him which is totally undeserved.

I also agree with airofhope he did not have an affair, you stated you had seperated and the only reason in the same house was due to finances. So he as a single man started a relationship, no wrong doing on his part.

Time to stand on your own.

UptheChimney Mon 08-Jul-13 14:34:24

If OP took a career break to bring up children then her earning potential could now be lower than if she had continued working full time. Therefore it seems reasonable that stbexh should contribute some maintenence for OP as she would have reduced income due to caring for their DCs

This.

I can't believe how harsh the responses are here to a woman whose exH cheated on her, and has been left to support a DD with AS and dyspraxia at an age when we all know how difficult it is to get a job.

I agree that the exH's GF's income is nothing to do with the OP, except that it means that her exH probably has very low living expenses. Whereas she (OP) has been left supporting a daughter with disabilities which are likely making it difficult to find reasonable employment in the current climate.

But still, I think a bit of compassion wouldn't go amiss here. Maybe those of you responding so harshly are much younger? I hope none of you is left by your DH when you've spent most of your adult life raising your children, and have lost out financially & career wise. It's a pretty shit position for women, despite some attempts at evening up the imbalances, and I'm just really surprised at the lack of "sisterhood" feeling.

VodkaJelly Mon 08-Jul-13 14:37:31

morethanpotatoprints what are you on about? The DD is an adult and has lost 2 jobs already. She should be either claiming DLA or JSA. Even if the exh still lived with the OP the DD could still claim DLA or JSA. The state would be providing for her regardless of the divorce of the parents.

The OP wont be claiming tax credits because the DD IS AN ADULT.

The maintenance the OP is getting is SPOUSAL MAINTENANCE AND NOT CHILD MAINTENANCE.

Vivacia Mon 08-Jul-13 14:50:40

The husband didn't cheat on the OP. They were separated before his relationship began. I also disagree that parents have a moral obligation to financially support their adult children. Regardless of this, the OP is asking about money for herself, not the (adult) children. As it is, I think his new baby and even partner have more right to his money than his ex or adult children.

toosoppyforwords Mon 08-Jul-13 14:52:29

The answer to your OP i believe is no, GF earnings wont be taken into consideration.

With regard to yours and STBXH finances, was legal advice sought when splitting the assets of the house and deciding what share each got? Generally speaking (and there are lots of variables here!) if you had not worked the length of your marriage due to raising a family it is likely you would get a larger share of the assets to compensate for that or in order to achieve a clean break settlement. it is likely he would have to pay interim spousal maintenance at least, and possibly longer term depending on the assets and income available - none of which we know here. Are there any pensions involved for consideration as well?

Seek legal advice with regard to the divorce finances.

Whether he morally should have to pay spousal maintence (possibly not) and whether legally he will have to (maybe?) are 2 separate issues.

I also agree with others that it wasn't really an affair and it seems odd you refer to it as such - unless we are misinterpretating your OP.

With regard to job hunting there are many many women in the workplace who have returned at 45, 55, 60 etc after children are grown up. Maybe the jobs might not be exactly what you want and or are trained for but it is far easier to get a job when you already have one. Good luck in your search

YellowTulips Mon 08-Jul-13 15:37:27

Nope - her income won't be taken into account.

I think you need legal advice.

Given he runs his own business his financial affairs will be more complex.

You say he needs to plough all the profit back into the company - is that really true. I know people who have done this as a way of "hiding" income and reducing support payments whilst getting the benefit of a growing business. Just how much is he claiming on business expenses for example? Put enough through the business and you don't need a large income.

How well do you get on with him? Are you in a position to have an honest conversation about your finances?

I totally agree with upthechimney and am shocked at the vehemence and lack of compassion being shown.

I totally reiterate all that upthechimney said and wish to add that unless you have brought up a special needs child, you really have no clue how difficult it is, or how much it might impede on your freedom to get a job and if you gave up a career to stay home and look after children, that both you and DH wanted, then spousal maintenance is often paid.

She says he is on low income becasue he is putting much of it back into his business but if this is building up a successful or high value business rather than support his first family, then again there may be an opportunity for her to have a claim against the business, particularly if she contributed to the business.

The law still does take into account his whole household income (i.e. his gf's as well if they live together) but they will also take into account the fact they have a child.

my ex who had been living with his gf for a year rented a room somewhere else while we were divorcing in order to avoid having her high income taken into account when our divorce went through. I didn't want her money, but i wanted the inequality of our situations to be taken into account. He managed to avoid that.

my advice is get some legal advice, about what you could expect and then negotiate with your ex, who sounds fairly reasonable and come up with a plan that works for you all.

i wish you all the best, pm me if you need a sounding board.

UptheChimney Mon 08-Jul-13 16:46:44

I doubt the OP will be back: it was her 1st post and she got quite an uncompassionate response.

I don't disagree with a lot of the factual advice: the OP should be getting financial & legal advice, and moving towards a clean break, and her daughter with disabilities should be looking at JSA and DLA, but, but but

Don't other posters know how difficult jobs are to find at the moment? Doubly so for someone on the ASD spectrum and with physical disabilities? And also difficult for a woman of 57 (if that's how I read her screen name?) to find a job, particularly of she's been a SAHM for most of her marriage. My advice to younger women is "Never give up your job" -- because look at what can happen. If a long-lasting "traditional" (man breadwinner; woman SAHM) marriage breaks up, things are so badly stacked against the woman, it's a disgrace.

Spousal maintenance is unusual, and the very fact that the OP received it suggested to me that it was recognition that she had sacrificed her earning capacity to look after the family.

OP I hope you find something of use to you in this thread, even if it's feels like an uncaring thread. (Is this what people mean by the 'nest of vipers'? I'm quite new to MN)

burntpaper Mon 08-Jul-13 17:29:55

I was awarded spousal maintenance in divorce, which I agree is unusual, but I also have an adult DS on the autism spectrum and this was taken into account in my reduced earning capacity. I was claiming Carers Allowance for DS and it was argued in my case that, although getting CA meant that I'd be eligible for income support, it wasn't appropriate for me to be depending on income-related benefits when Ex-H had a duty to support me.

I believe that his subsequent partner's income was taken into account to some extent, as it meant that he didn't need to contribute the full amount to their household bills etc, so had more disposable income to pay out in spousal maintenance. If he'd been living on his own and having to run the whole household by himself - well, he would still have been able to afford to pay out maintenance as he has a high income, but probably not quite as much. I think it's quite complicated to deal with self-employed exes when it comes to divorce finances though - as someone else mentioned, it's easy enough to hide income that way. I'd get advice from the legal bit of the forum or another one such as Wikivorce, you'll also find posters there tend to be a bit more understanding!

Incidentally, many posters are getting confused with DLA and JSA and this shows that they're unlike to have much of an idea about the impact of disabilities like ASD, or the disability welfare system. DLA/PIP isn't an out of work benefit, it can be claimed by disabled people who work, but is meant to pay for their additional care/mobility needs, not general living expenses. If the OP's DD's dyspraxia is severe enough to affect her employment, I'd say she should be getting it, if she isn't already. DS is high functioning and has a degree but he still gets it. Have you sought help from the NAS about benefits for your DD? They can also offer support with helping young adults on the spectrum into employment or HE.

LookingForwardToMarch Mon 08-Jul-13 17:42:37

Wait if you were seperated and just living together then how was it cheating/ an affair?

And HAHAHA no the gf money does not come into it at all, she didn't make the children, she doesn't have to pay for them.

Um and this isn't to you op but the idea that maintenance shouldn't go down if the husband goes on to have more kids?!

Ridiculous. So your saying that the new children should live in poverty while the first kids get the same amount as before?

What planer are you on. Luckily the system doesn't work like that for a reason!

UptheChimney Mon 08-Jul-13 17:48:05

I just don't get why this OP has received such aggressive responses?

And a general note: on what planet is it a good thing for any person to start a second family when they can't support their first family adequately?

Do none of you read the information about the general levels of poverty many women with main residence/care of children are left in after divorce? Particularly if they were SAHM or took a career break to do the domestic work/child care for the family?

I just find the tone of many of the answers on this tread to be almost gloating and certainly most unsympathetic.

TeamSouthfields Mon 08-Jul-13 17:58:27

Why should he support u?

What the hell has the gf 's wages got to do with u?

They have s young baby together, u have adult children......

Are u being for real?

Get a job!!!!

allnewtaketwo Mon 08-Jul-13 18:01:59

"And a general note: on what planet is it a good thing for any person to start a second family when they can't support their first family adequately?"

So on this basis a Pwc should never have more children if this means her existing children getting less. Or indeed any couple having more than 1 child, as, unless they're loaded, each additional child means less money for the first

NameThatTuna Mon 08-Jul-13 18:07:28

There are a few questions the OP needs to answer before anyone can get a true picture of what she is/could be entitled to.

At the moment, it is reading like she is trying to live off her ex as her job & financial situation is shit.

She is asking about money for her, not their DD. As her DD is an adult and will be entitled to her own money.

As for OP, she needs to clarify if she was a SAHM while the children were little and if it affected her future job prospects before anyone can say she should be entitled to his income.

OP has said they have been separated for years but continued to live together. Who paid the bills/mortgage during that time?

OP went back to uni to improve her job prospects 2 years ago, who supported you financially then? Was it your EXDH even when you were no longer a couple?

He began a relationship with his now GF, when he was separated. Not cheating, even though they were still legally married. Would OP feel she was having an affair if it was the other way round?

From what I've read of the OP's post, the impression i'm getting is that of sour grapes.

He's moved on, she hasn't. The lack of job is not his or his GF's problem, it is to do with the current climate or the OP's unwillingness to take any job she can get.

They separated years ago, how many more years should he financially support her.

Looks like OP won't be back to answer the questions though......

LookingForwardToMarch Mon 08-Jul-13 18:09:52

Oh it only counts if the children are with a new woman Allnew!

Didn't you know, the pwc can have children when they feel like it, they don't have to keep earning more and more money with each subsequent child to make sure that ALL their children never ever have a penny less than the first wink

It's just the nrps job to do that.

Some bitter exs on here methinks

UptheChimney Mon 08-Jul-13 18:27:13

There are a few questions the OP needs to answer before anyone can get a true picture of what she is/could be entitled to

I agree, but unlike this:

At the moment, it is reading like she is trying to live off her ex as her job & financial situation is shit
I prefer to give a woman in her mid-fifties, who's raised a family, the benefit of the doubt.

Not that her exH's new partner should be expected to contribute to the OP's income, but that her situation is an example of the way that women -- particularly in late middle age -- are often very very disadvantaged financially by making sacrifices of their careers and incomes in a marriage.

It's fine if you know that you will be together literally till "death do us part." But who can ever be 100% sure of that? So when a woman makes a decision for the good of the family to curtail her ability to earn an equal income to either that of her husband or of someone similarly qualified to her, I think that needs to be acknowledged and compensated for.

VodkaJelly Mon 08-Jul-13 18:29:25

"And a general note: on what planet is it a good thing for any person to start a second family when they can't support their first family adequately?"

What planet are you on? DP was 18 when his eldest was born, he bought a house and worked hard to support his partner and the child. Partner then cheated on him and threw him out of the house. So DP should have lived the rest of his life without having more children incase his maintance dropped due to having another child? Wow.

But I was ok to carry on having more children when i divorced my ex? Even though my disposable income dropped with every new child born?

Words really do fail me. My ex went on to have more children after we divorced and my money from him dropped, but I didnt care as he had found happiness and had more kids.

littlemisssarcastic Mon 08-Jul-13 18:54:18

OP, the answer to your question, as many others have said is no, your stbxh's partners income will not be taken into account.
Is she financially comfortable and this is why you ask?

I can see the predicament you are in. Your standard of living appears to have dropped substantially by your stbxh moving out. Please correct me if that assumption is wrong btw.)

Tbh, from my perspective, the stbxh's partner is indirectly supporting you atm, because you have had a settlement, yet your stbxh still financially supports you, and on the information you have given, he probably has no legal obligation to do so, so that money is being taken from his 'family pot' which means his girlfriend and their DC.

You appear to have very little belief that you will find work soon, if ever. How long do you think your stbxh should support you financially?
You are 55 now. From your OP, you don't seem at all confident that you will find work anytime soon. Do you think your stbxh should continue to financially support you for possibly the next 13 years until you retire?

What about the impact that will have on his new family and their finances?

I think he has been kind to support you since he moved out 2 years ago, but how long do you expect this to continue?

And how do you manage to claim JSA and receive an income from your stbxh at the same time? confused

NameThatTuna Mon 08-Jul-13 19:19:18

I hate this assumption that every woman is forced to give up work when they have children. In some cases yes, but there is no evidence in the OP that she was forced to sacrifice her career/job.

The same could be said for a man. He may be forced to work all hours he can get, missing out on his kids growing up because it is a 'man's role'. Not all men prefer to work while the woman stays at home but they don't have a choice.

As for compensating the OP for loss of future job prospects/earning potential, no one knows she has sacrificed anything as she hasn't been back to answer that question.

Even still, he has already supported her for the last 4 year's at least, through uni too. He has already helped financially to increase her job prospects.

It is now down to the OP to support herself. Mid fifties or not. She still has another 13 years to retirement age (not everyone retires when the time comes). Surely no one expects him to support her forever.

As for not expecting the marriage to end, well of course no one expects that. But nowhere in the OP does it suggest he was the reason the marriage ended. Could have been the OP who wanted it to end because she no longer loved him.

Whatever the reason, he shouldnt be supporting her financially for the rest of her life.

itwillgetbettersoon Mon 08-Jul-13 20:45:17

I think any woman who gives up a career to look after children needs to understand that financially they are incredibly vulnerable. Often the decision to stay at home is a joint one and often enables the working partner to put 100% into their career and move up the ladder.

To say that a woman in her 50s who gave up her career years ago can just go out and get a job that pays enough to live is unrealistic .

Personally I think the law should be changed to respect woman who do stay at home to look after the couples kids. I know this impacts on 'second families' . The decision to stay at home was a joint one at the time. I would suggest to young girls that they don't give up their careers to have children otherwise you could end up in poverty later in life.

Glad to see woman supporting other woman on this thread!

littlemisssarcastic Mon 08-Jul-13 22:04:06

itwillgetbettersoon How would you like to see the law changed? How long would you like to see the law enforcing men such as the OP's stbxh supporting a woman in the OP's position?

blackbirdatglanmore Mon 08-Jul-13 22:22:21

The problem is, as far as my reading of the OP is concerned, the husband did not walk out and leave a shocked, vulnerable woman behind: it was a mutual decision and she appears to have been treated fairly, has benefited from the house sale which was split in half and has had spousal maintenance.

It's all very well talking about the issues of being a SAHM but to be honest in most cases I know where the woman works part time or not at all it hasn't been thrust on her by a domineering husband, it's been a decision the woman made and the husband went along with (not suggesting that the woman is some sort of bully, just that in my experience a lot of men leave things like childcare and organisation of the home to their wives.) Certainly, the OP has had opportunities through further study to try and start some sort of paid work, and does not have dependent children - the daughter's dyspraxia is difficult but not unmanageable given she has been able to work.

I just don't think what this lady wants is reasonable - sorry, but I don't.

LittleFrieda Mon 08-Jul-13 23:15:09

Does the consent order state a sum of spousal maintenance, or a percentage? And is it in a series of lump sums or periodical?

mumblechum1 Mon 08-Jul-13 23:27:37

There is no consent order, I don't think they[ve even filed the petn yet.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now