To ask what you think about this situaton?(11 Posts)
A collegue has confided in me regarding his home situation. TBH, I'd rather not know, but we were working alone together and he was visibly upset and wanted to talk.
He and his wife have grown apart and agreed that they should probably split, but their DS is to start a new school in Sep and they have agreed that FTB they will continue to live together whilst DS settles into school and they are preparing finances etc.
His DW does 2 jobs, one 3 days PW which is her main and reliable income and another freelance which is her preferred career path, but which makes much less money. He has a clerical grade office job, so is not a big earner. They have 2 DS, but one is adult.
Since this was all agreed (few weeks) she has announced that she hates the reliable job and will be resigning to concentrate on the other. He feels that this means he'll be broke for the rest of his life, as he'll have to support her as well as DS. Is that right? Is her action reasonable? If so, it's no wonder men complain about EX-DWs bleeding them dry
IMO he's a decent bloke who's always done the best for his family. Large age gap between DCs and low income has meant they've been struggling financially for 20 years - things had been improving since DS2 started school and DW has been doing the 3 day job
i am not sure he will have to support her.. it depends on the set up when they were together.
so they need to get started on the divorce proceedings and dividing of assets asap as in the eyes of the law they're probably not even officially separated yet.
He only "has" to pay maintenance in line with the CSA calculator however it would be difficult to force the sale of the family home etc until the youngest has left school or his STB ex remarries or similar.
He should see a solicitor.
It is right that he should financially support his child. Or have custody of his child, of course. Or they could go for joint custody.
I don't know what the law is about supporting your spouse after divorce. I know men used to have to, but no idea what the situation is now.
Like I say, he should speak to a solicitor to know the situation, but yes, it's going to continue to cost him a lot. He will still have a child to support, whether he lives with the mother or not! The only question is - how much, if anything, is it going to cost him to support his wife.
I don't know why I thought spousal maintenance had disappeared. Maybe it hasn't.
To be clear he is absolutely not wanting to avoid supporting his son - would like to buy her out of the marital home and have the two sons with him if he can, but his wife will obv have another idea. His concern is that his D?W should also be supoprting herself and her son, as she is able.
Well at the boys' ages he can certainly try that angle, if he can afford to buy her out etc why not. they will be sent to mediation and it's an option.
he will have to pay spousal maintenance i believe which is fair if she is the primary carer and always has been for their children enabling him to work full time will she has taken care of the bulk of of domestic responsibilities. it is to stop women after long marriages from leaving having nothing when they have provided important roles within the marriage that need to be recognised.
though spousal maintenance can be wavered in exchange for things like equity on the house or a one off payment etc.
I get that Spooks, she's had a career break etc, but the reason she's working p-t now is to free up time for her freelance projects. He gets home from work c. 4:30, to be able to do all the after school running about and dinner etc. ATM they earn roughly the same, as her hourly rate (for the employed job) is higher than his. If she resigns from the job, she will have deliberately made herself depandant on him. Is that relevant?
Not sure create, he needs to speak to a solicitor.
its sort of irrelevant, how long have they been married? how old is there youngest child? is she now taking this time to try and build back up her career?
so now they are breaking up she wants to take the opportunity to fast forward her better job because she wont have the husbands finances to count on any more tbh i think this is fair enough. spousal maintenance wont be the same as a monthly income.
just because they have broken up does not mean they dont still have responsibilities to each other, i think is derogative to women to say that they are bleeding their ex dry.
Yes I hate the "bleeding them dry" phase too, but I do see his point. She has a job, which would pay better than his if she did it full time, but she wants to do something else. He'd love to re-train as a nurse, but can't afford to be without/reduce his income while he does it. Certainly not if they (jointly) lose her income
The new career is one where very few get very rich and the rest struggle to scrape a living. If it was about making herself secure financially, she'd stick with the job she's got and increase her hours. I understand why she doesn't want to do that, but to just pack up work without and alternative income is a luxury most people can't have.
They've been married 20+ years, youngest is 11.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.