Are my SIL's divorce expectations unrealistic?

GoAdvertFree · 2026-09-04T08:58:38+00:00

In short, my brother and SIL intend to divorce but she wishes to continue being a SAHM. Their children are 19 (away at uni), 14 and 13. They separated 4 years ago and were cohabiting until SIL started dating a new man. My brother has quite a well paid job and managed to buy a 4 bed flat in the nearby city. It needed a lot of work but is finished now. He WFH a fair bit so has the kids there when needed. He does at times have to travel overseas for work. My brother has also recently started seeing someone new. So, brother and SIL have started to discuss selling their marital home (SIL is still living there with the children). SIL has been a SAHM since the children were born and this had been the source of a lot of friction in the marriage as the children got older. My brother had no problem with SIL not being in paid work, but she is a big spender. I have been at their house many times when numerous boxes of stuff arrived from Amazon. My brother eventually set a budget that SIL was not delighted about. She also has some debt of her own, my brother has paid some of it off. SIL went back to work 3.5 days a week when they separated. This job suits her perfectly and she can sometimes work from home. However, a few weeks ago she started talking about 'burn out' and has now resigned from the job. She has no intention of finding a new job but is saying that she wants to sell the house, that her share should be 70% because she has the children living with her, and needs to buy a 4 bed house in the town we live in (which is expensive). She wants a sum of money to put into a savings account and she wants her new mortgage to be paid by my brother. They are amicable (at the moment). My brother told me last night that she is now asking him to go to financial mediation because she thinks he is hiding funds. He has told me that he isn't, and has 2 savings accounts and his pension - which she knows about. AIBU to feel that I've never really heard anything like this? When my exH and I separated, I immediately upped my hours at work to full time and my children were also teens.

MsSquiz · 09/09/2026 08:46

Delatron · 09/09/2026 08:14

He won’t fund it on an ongoing basis no. And it’s always a good idea for anyone of working age to have a job.

My point is we don’t know anything about this situation so I don’t know how anyone can advise or even judge other than state what the basic law is…even lawyers.

Head over to the divorce board and you have SAHMs seeking advice on divorcing husbands with huge salaries and assets. They have younger children but the advice there is actually don’t get a job as you get a larger settlement..

Apart from the fact she will get at least 50% of assets (and he has a flat and a house) plus pensions and savings. We know nothing else. Only the biased view of the OP.

I’m not saying I know their situation. I’ve said, going off the information we have, regardless of the divorce settlement, it’s not wise to have zero income and attempt to rely on the ex or the settlement (no matter how large it is)

of course people can advise based on the information we’ve been given - my advice to the OP’s brother is get a good lawyer asap!

Delatron · 09/09/2026 08:14

He won’t fund it on an ongoing basis no. And it’s always a good idea for anyone of working age to have a job.

My point is we don’t know anything about this situation so I don’t know how anyone can advise or even judge other than state what the basic law is…even lawyers.

Head over to the divorce board and you have SAHMs seeking advice on divorcing husbands with huge salaries and assets. They have younger children but the advice there is actually don’t get a job as you get a larger settlement..

Apart from the fact she will get at least 50% of assets (and he has a flat and a house) plus pensions and savings. We know nothing else. Only the biased view of the OP.

MsSquiz · 09/09/2026 07:34

Delatron · 08/09/2026 16:13

If the divorce settlement is huge that simply isn’t true though.

We may from a moral point of view think that a SAHM should get a job and support herself following a divorce. However the reality is that it really depends on what the divorce settlement is. There is no way the DH will be living a life of riches with assets and a pension and the wife will live in poverty. It doesn’t happen.

Show quote history

You can say it isn’t true but my comments are based on someone I know very well having been through/going through a very similar situation.

no matter how large the settlement, the money isn’t an infinite sum. With no additional income and large expenditure, it will deplete.

I am not claiming that she should live in poverty or she doesn’t deserve anything. I am simply pointing out that it is wrong for her to expect her ex husband to continue to fund the same lifestyle she had when they were married, post divorce. That is common sense.

WhisperingHi · 09/09/2026 06:34

My two cents, is that she needs to see herself as an independent person now. She can no longer expect anyone to subsidise her living costs, she’s fully able to work and should do. She needs to recognise where her life is now and get a work ethic. This comes from a full time working mum of three small children - she really has no reason not to be working.

Your husband also needs to appreciate that his work will need to change too for a few years. He can no longer rely on ex to be around when he isn’t. He needs to parent 50/50 which I don’t get why he can’t if the travelling is infrequent and they’re healthy teenagers.

This is a complicated set up that needs to go to court. She has gained and lost from her SAHM position. Your husband also has to consider the consequence of agreeing to the family set up. I’m assuming she wasn’t not working against his will and she’s clearly invested into the family too in different ways.

Only a judge can determine how this can be split and ongoing arrangements.

Id stay out of it. Id support my brother but just stay neutral to her. She has her only family support. If she asks for your opinion, I’d just say you don’t really want to comment as you know it’s complicated.

She isn’t about to listen to you and suddenly go back to work. It’s also likely that you hear more from him than her and your opinion will be someone skewed as you have the same work ethic and values as your brother. Easier for everyone to just let the court process run through without too much input from others.

WhistPie · 09/09/2026 00:34

Delatron · 08/09/2026 21:47

I’m not arguing that she should get more but she will get at least 50% and probably more of assets. That’s the law.

There will be lots of cases with wealthy husbands on 6 figure salaries with property, shares and pensions that 50-60% of marital assets would be enough that the wife doesn’t have to find work.

Show quote history

prh47bridge is a lawyer, so I don't think you need to explain the law to him

Delatron · 08/09/2026 21:47

prh47bridge · 08/09/2026 21:36

In deciding the wife's needs, the courts look at her earnings potential, not her actual earnings. Unless there is some good reason she is unable to work, she will not get more just because she chooses not to work no matter how rich her ex is. It may be that the asset split will be such that she won't have to work, but that only happens in a minority of cases.

Show quote history

I’m not arguing that she should get more but she will get at least 50% and probably more of assets. That’s the law.

There will be lots of cases with wealthy husbands on 6 figure salaries with property, shares and pensions that 50-60% of marital assets would be enough that the wife doesn’t have to find work.

prh47bridge · 08/09/2026 21:36

Delatron · 08/09/2026 16:13

If the divorce settlement is huge that simply isn’t true though.

We may from a moral point of view think that a SAHM should get a job and support herself following a divorce. However the reality is that it really depends on what the divorce settlement is. There is no way the DH will be living a life of riches with assets and a pension and the wife will live in poverty. It doesn’t happen.

Show quote history

In deciding the wife's needs, the courts look at her earnings potential, not her actual earnings. Unless there is some good reason she is unable to work, she will not get more just because she chooses not to work no matter how rich her ex is. It may be that the asset split will be such that she won't have to work, but that only happens in a minority of cases.

Delatron · 08/09/2026 16:13

MsSquiz · 08/09/2026 15:00

We are speculating on the assets, but in reality, refusing to have a job/give yourself an additional income alongside any divorce settlement really isn’t helping yourself, unless you plan to live a frugal lifestyle, which based on the OP’s description, doesn’t sound like the case here.

Show quote history

If the divorce settlement is huge that simply isn’t true though.

We may from a moral point of view think that a SAHM should get a job and support herself following a divorce. However the reality is that it really depends on what the divorce settlement is. There is no way the DH will be living a life of riches with assets and a pension and the wife will live in poverty. It doesn’t happen.

Delatron · 08/09/2026 16:06

user593 · 08/09/2026 15:10

More than 7 years when you take into account the principal sum would accrue interest of £31,500 a year based on an interest rate of 4.5% (based on a good bank savings rate with no risk attached). If she invested in the market, and was willing to accept a bit of risk, it could earn much more than that.

It’s wild to me someone could say £700,000 wouldn’t last long when there’s no mortgage or rent and child maintenance on top of that.

Edited

Show quote history

Yep it’s wild to me too. I think it’s because it suits the narrative that she doesn’t deserve anything and needs to live in poverty.

FullLondonEye · 08/09/2026 15:16

GoAdvertFree · 04/09/2026 12:46

How could he? He has a job to go to. I am not sure how he could be at home with them and be at work?

Show quote history

What? If it's not possible for him then presumably you can't expect it of her though? I don't believe kids of that age need a stay at home parent, to be honest, but you can't say that he can't do much parenting because he works, but then expect her to do what he apparently can't. It doesn't make sense.

user593 · 08/09/2026 15:10

Delatron · 08/09/2026 09:00

Well it would be £700k left plus access to his pension and any other savings.

She would be mortgage free so that’s a huge cost gone. He will obviously need to pay towards the kids proportionally more I guess and one is an adult.

She could pay herself £50k a year and it would last for 14 years…do we know how old she is? Then she has an £800k house as an asset that could be sold when the kids are older, then she downsizes and releases more funds.

I know I’m speculating about assets but it’s an example.

If I was 50ish I’m pretty sure I could live off 1.5 million plus access to a pension.

Sure she should get a part time job. But realistically it will be low paid. How much do we think she was earning as a part time employee in a florists? Around min wage?

My point is it won’t be the min wage job that will be giving her the most funds going forward. It would be helpful and a worthwhile thing to do but she will be also getting a settlement figure. She’s not going to be destitute.

Show quote history

More than 7 years when you take into account the principal sum would accrue interest of £31,500 a year based on an interest rate of 4.5% (based on a good bank savings rate with no risk attached). If she invested in the market, and was willing to accept a bit of risk, it could earn much more than that.

It’s wild to me someone could say £700,000 wouldn’t last long when there’s no mortgage or rent and child maintenance on top of that.

MsSquiz · 08/09/2026 15:00

Delatron · 08/09/2026 09:00

Well it would be £700k left plus access to his pension and any other savings.

She would be mortgage free so that’s a huge cost gone. He will obviously need to pay towards the kids proportionally more I guess and one is an adult.

She could pay herself £50k a year and it would last for 14 years…do we know how old she is? Then she has an £800k house as an asset that could be sold when the kids are older, then she downsizes and releases more funds.

I know I’m speculating about assets but it’s an example.

If I was 50ish I’m pretty sure I could live off 1.5 million plus access to a pension.

Sure she should get a part time job. But realistically it will be low paid. How much do we think she was earning as a part time employee in a florists? Around min wage?

My point is it won’t be the min wage job that will be giving her the most funds going forward. It would be helpful and a worthwhile thing to do but she will be also getting a settlement figure. She’s not going to be destitute.

Show quote history

We are speculating on the assets, but in reality, refusing to have a job/give yourself an additional income alongside any divorce settlement really isn’t helping yourself, unless you plan to live a frugal lifestyle, which based on the OP’s description, doesn’t sound like the case here.

MsSquiz · 08/09/2026 14:58

user593 · 07/09/2026 21:19

You don’t think £700,000 would last long? Her minor children are 13 and 14, they’re not toddlers, and she’ll get child maintenance for them, and if she invested the £700,000 at 4.5% she’d get an income of £2,625 a month + whatever child maintenance she’s entitled to. She’d have to pay tax on the interest, but it still doesn’t make any sense to me that £700,000 ‘wouldn’t last long’ if she’s mortgage free!

Edited

Show quote history

No, it wouldn’t last long when not having any other source of income. It would be used up on necessities, outgoings relating to the home (which on an £800k house won’t be cheap!), on holidays, and whatever else she wishes to spend it on.

from the OP, it doesn’t sound like she is one to live a frugal life and save/invest wisely

Delatron · 08/09/2026 09:02

user593 · 07/09/2026 21:19

You don’t think £700,000 would last long? Her minor children are 13 and 14, they’re not toddlers, and she’ll get child maintenance for them, and if she invested the £700,000 at 4.5% she’d get an income of £2,625 a month + whatever child maintenance she’s entitled to. She’d have to pay tax on the interest, but it still doesn’t make any sense to me that £700,000 ‘wouldn’t last long’ if she’s mortgage free!

Edited

Show quote history

Exactly! And she has the house on top of this as an asset and access to his pension.

She can downsize and release more funds in the future…

Delatron · 08/09/2026 09:00

MsSquiz · 07/09/2026 20:53

What you’re describing is her living off her split off the assets, post divorce.
that is different to expecting her ex husband to fund her lifestyle.

if she received £1.5m, bought a house for £800k and tried to live off the remaining funds, it wouldn’t last long considering household bills, costs relating to the children and everything else you need money for.

Show quote history

Well it would be £700k left plus access to his pension and any other savings.

She would be mortgage free so that’s a huge cost gone. He will obviously need to pay towards the kids proportionally more I guess and one is an adult.

She could pay herself £50k a year and it would last for 14 years…do we know how old she is? Then she has an £800k house as an asset that could be sold when the kids are older, then she downsizes and releases more funds.

I know I’m speculating about assets but it’s an example.

If I was 50ish I’m pretty sure I could live off 1.5 million plus access to a pension.

Sure she should get a part time job. But realistically it will be low paid. How much do we think she was earning as a part time employee in a florists? Around min wage?

My point is it won’t be the min wage job that will be giving her the most funds going forward. It would be helpful and a worthwhile thing to do but she will be also getting a settlement figure. She’s not going to be destitute.

Notmycircusnotmyotter · 07/09/2026 23:10

What the hell has this to do with women's rights? I was with you until TERFs

Eumaybe · 07/09/2026 21:36

GoAdvertFree · 07/09/2026 14:16

'impossible for them to regain their own careers' if you actually read my posts, and I don't know how many times I have to write this...

She had a job - she resigned from it.

3.5 days per week.

Fitted in around school hours.

So many posters on here who are not properly reading anything I have written.

And what you have stated it also untrue in most cases. I went straight back into work where I left off after 3 years as a SAHM, most people I know did, too. It doesn't even matter if she does the career she did before being a SAHM, she just does not want to go out to work.

To @fundamentallyauthentic who has actually asked a sensible question (do I like her?). That is my problem, really. I really am very fond of her but yes, I am struggling to respect her now. She could work to help support their children but just refuses to. She is not 'burnt out', she's never wanted to work, she is lazy.

I shall not be posting again on this thread because people are not reading posts properly and I am having to go over things over and over again. Or posters are angry at me for judging another woman's work ethic.

As always, pretty sure those TERFS would have a lot to write if the sexes were revered in this instance! Can you imagine?

Show quote history

TERFS?

user593 · 07/09/2026 21:19

MsSquiz · 07/09/2026 20:53

What you’re describing is her living off her split off the assets, post divorce.
that is different to expecting her ex husband to fund her lifestyle.

if she received £1.5m, bought a house for £800k and tried to live off the remaining funds, it wouldn’t last long considering household bills, costs relating to the children and everything else you need money for.

Show quote history

You don’t think £700,000 would last long? Her minor children are 13 and 14, they’re not toddlers, and she’ll get child maintenance for them, and if she invested the £700,000 at 4.5% she’d get an income of £2,625 a month + whatever child maintenance she’s entitled to. She’d have to pay tax on the interest, but it still doesn’t make any sense to me that £700,000 ‘wouldn’t last long’ if she’s mortgage free!

MsSquiz · 07/09/2026 20:53

Delatron · 06/09/2026 09:03

It depends on the assets though doesn’t it. If they have say 3 million pounds of assets the starting point for her is 1.5 million. So she buys a house for 800k and lives off the rest.

We don’t know how much money the DB has so there’s no point in speculating what she will end up with.

But many on here are acting like the husband with the 6 figure salary gets to swan off in to the distance with his huge salary and earning power and the lazy, good for nothing SAHM who has sat on her arse for 19 years must Iive in poverty and get a minimum wage job. Unfortunately for you lot who agree with that narrative it doesn’t work like that. As a starting point she’ll get 50 % of all marital assets probably more. She will have access to his pension. None of us know how much any of that is.

If they have a 19 year old I’m guessing they’re not that young. Maybe the mortgage has been paid off. Maybe he has a huge pension. She won’t get spousal maintenance but she might not need it. She might need to get a part time job. She must be nearing 50? That’s way different to getting divorced in your 30s. Plenty of time to build up assets and pensions….

Show quote history

What you’re describing is her living off her split off the assets, post divorce.
that is different to expecting her ex husband to fund her lifestyle.

if she received £1.5m, bought a house for £800k and tried to live off the remaining funds, it wouldn’t last long considering household bills, costs relating to the children and everything else you need money for.

WhistPie · 07/09/2026 18:06

GoAdvertFree · 07/09/2026 14:16

'impossible for them to regain their own careers' if you actually read my posts, and I don't know how many times I have to write this...

She had a job - she resigned from it.

3.5 days per week.

Fitted in around school hours.

So many posters on here who are not properly reading anything I have written.

And what you have stated it also untrue in most cases. I went straight back into work where I left off after 3 years as a SAHM, most people I know did, too. It doesn't even matter if she does the career she did before being a SAHM, she just does not want to go out to work.

To @fundamentallyauthentic who has actually asked a sensible question (do I like her?). That is my problem, really. I really am very fond of her but yes, I am struggling to respect her now. She could work to help support their children but just refuses to. She is not 'burnt out', she's never wanted to work, she is lazy.

I shall not be posting again on this thread because people are not reading posts properly and I am having to go over things over and over again. Or posters are angry at me for judging another woman's work ethic.

As always, pretty sure those TERFS would have a lot to write if the sexes were revered in this instance! Can you imagine?

Show quote history

I was with you all through this thread, but what have terfs got to do with it? Unless your SIL is really a bloke wearing a dress and lipstick

AllSlugsAreBastards · 07/09/2026 15:31

GoAdvertFree · 07/09/2026 14:16

'impossible for them to regain their own careers' if you actually read my posts, and I don't know how many times I have to write this...

She had a job - she resigned from it.

3.5 days per week.

Fitted in around school hours.

So many posters on here who are not properly reading anything I have written.

And what you have stated it also untrue in most cases. I went straight back into work where I left off after 3 years as a SAHM, most people I know did, too. It doesn't even matter if she does the career she did before being a SAHM, she just does not want to go out to work.

To @fundamentallyauthentic who has actually asked a sensible question (do I like her?). That is my problem, really. I really am very fond of her but yes, I am struggling to respect her now. She could work to help support their children but just refuses to. She is not 'burnt out', she's never wanted to work, she is lazy.

I shall not be posting again on this thread because people are not reading posts properly and I am having to go over things over and over again. Or posters are angry at me for judging another woman's work ethic.

As always, pretty sure those TERFS would have a lot to write if the sexes were revered in this instance! Can you imagine?

Show quote history

What on earth have 'TERFs' got to do with this situation? FWIW I voted YANBU because your SIL sounds like a nightmare but bringing into it women who think that bio sex exists and matters is a bit random.

Original poster

GoAdvertFree · 07/09/2026 14:16

Wingingit73 · 06/09/2026 07:43

Politely, its not really your business. Women for have been sahms enabling husbands to drive successful careers have committed themselves to the role. They have taken on every household and child related responsibility. Sadly, this can make it impossible for them to regain their own careers when marriages end and their earning potential is not very good.
Stay out of their business.

'impossible for them to regain their own careers' if you actually read my posts, and I don't know how many times I have to write this...

She had a job - she resigned from it.

3.5 days per week.

Fitted in around school hours.

So many posters on here who are not properly reading anything I have written.

And what you have stated it also untrue in most cases. I went straight back into work where I left off after 3 years as a SAHM, most people I know did, too. It doesn't even matter if she does the career she did before being a SAHM, she just does not want to go out to work.

To @fundamentallyauthentic who has actually asked a sensible question (do I like her?). That is my problem, really. I really am very fond of her but yes, I am struggling to respect her now. She could work to help support their children but just refuses to. She is not 'burnt out', she's never wanted to work, she is lazy.

I shall not be posting again on this thread because people are not reading posts properly and I am having to go over things over and over again. Or posters are angry at me for judging another woman's work ethic.

As always, pretty sure those TERFS would have a lot to write if the sexes were revered in this instance! Can you imagine?

OP posts:

Somethinggg · 06/09/2026 09:21

GoAdvertFree · 05/09/2026 22:22

I absolutely agree. I think she was wrong to quit the job. I think she was not putting her dc first in doing so. The ideal job that fitted in with the dc.

It’s the expectation that her STBXH, new boyfriend or the taxpayer will fund her life after divorce. I cannot respect that , unfortunately which is irrelevant and just means I need to keep my distance from her a bit which is making me sad as I am very fond of her, she’s really fun to be around.

Show quote history

If you're struggling with sensible boundaries to the extent that even the way she and a new partner might manage their finances is bothering you, I agree keeping her at arms length will probably be of benefit.

Delatron · 06/09/2026 09:06

ThatCyanCat · 06/09/2026 07:46

Well, she'll soon be crystal clear on it. You needn't worry.

Show quote history

Yes she’ll get a nice starting point of at least 60% of all marital assets including property (his flat is part of this), shares, savings, pensions….

Delatron · 06/09/2026 09:03

MsSquiz · 05/09/2026 14:32

Oddly, I feel like this woman is the one devaluing SAHMs.
she asked him to leave the family home they were sharing whilst separated because she found a new partner.
she wants him to continue funding her lifestyle in the same way despite being separated and having a new partner - that is not realistic.

and I say that as a SAHM. If DH and I were to separate, of course assets should and would be split accordingly, but I would not expect my exH to fund my lifestyle in the same post separation/divorce.
I would also need to get a job to financially support myself.

it’s wildly unrealistic to expect your lifestyle to be the same post divorce, whether you’re a SAHP or not!

Show quote history

It depends on the assets though doesn’t it. If they have say 3 million pounds of assets the starting point for her is 1.5 million. So she buys a house for 800k and lives off the rest.

We don’t know how much money the DB has so there’s no point in speculating what she will end up with.

But many on here are acting like the husband with the 6 figure salary gets to swan off in to the distance with his huge salary and earning power and the lazy, good for nothing SAHM who has sat on her arse for 19 years must Iive in poverty and get a minimum wage job. Unfortunately for you lot who agree with that narrative it doesn’t work like that. As a starting point she’ll get 50 % of all marital assets probably more. She will have access to his pension. None of us know how much any of that is.

If they have a 19 year old I’m guessing they’re not that young. Maybe the mortgage has been paid off. Maybe he has a huge pension. She won’t get spousal maintenance but she might not need it. She might need to get a part time job. She must be nearing 50? That’s way different to getting divorced in your 30s. Plenty of time to build up assets and pensions….