AIBU to want half of the pension after divorce?

I know many women of OPs age (and younger) who never went back to work after kids even when the children were adults. Their husbands were high earners and the amount they would have earned was not worth the hassle that it would have caused to the household set up.

If he earns enough the money that the wife may bring in after a few years of working (none of these women were high flyers particularly before children, they would have been retraining and working in low to mid-paid careers) is not worth it.

The kids are gone but he still wants dinner on the table every day, he doesn’t want to fend for himself two nights a week because she’s on lates. He wants to go on holiday when it suits him and his business, he doesn’t want to depend on his wife’s manager approving her annual leave. And he wants to socialise and relax at the weekend, he doesn’t want his wife running around sorting out vets appointments and the opticians and the big shop because that’s the only time she has all week.

She doesn’t particularly want to work either, and their resources as a family are such that the extra money is really neither here nor there.

It’s not the lifestyle for me, my career is a priority to me, but I can completely understand why both members of a couple could be completely happy continuing a traditional gendered split past the child years, with neither having been taken advantage of. And part of that set up is the principle that money, including investments and pensions, is shared.

I'm not sure that's anyone who thinks divorce laws so should be changed so that they will usually be less favorable to women is a feminist…

It wasn't just teachers - I think I stated that. It was a mixture of family help and childcare.

Mt mum didn't have family help for me after she returned, my parents relied on paid wraparound childcare (1980s).

How do you know the people with that attitude are women though? That could be as many men on this site as women

You previously said the 1970s not the 1980s

There is a certain kind of feminist perspective (and maybe these women would not call themselves such) that seems to despise the idea of a woman being in a traditional marriage and foregoing paid work to be 100% available for all the labour that manages the domestic sphere.

I don’t get it. I truly don’t get the spite on some of these persons that seem to think it shouldn’t be allowed for a woman to not care about “building a career”.

It reminds me of Simone De Beauvoir famously saying women shouldn’t even be allowed to be housewives. And unlike the other PP I do think it’s female posters saying this. Men don’t tend to oppose housewives per se - they just oppose any equitable share of assets in the case of divorce.

I only ever come across this level of vitriol for a woman not working outside the home from women. Men complain about a 50/50 division of assets while somehow also thinking the woman should be the primary carer and do all domestic labour (!!!). But nothing posted here seems at odds with how I have heard very career focused and feminist women speak over the years.

Oh I definitely do. Or rather - to be specific, a certain subset of feminists. To be clear I am loudly and proudly feminist and don’t hold said view. But that tends to be where I hear this specific form of narrative that women should be pressured to work outside the home.

Really? I have friends who work and friends that don't and nobody ever mentions it.I would certainly consider myself a feminist.

Not everybody wants to hand their kids off to strangers in those early years.

I guess I tend not to restrict what I see and learn from the handful of people in my immediate circle.

Well it seems to be quite a personal conversation. Why would you want to discuss it with a stranger?

It's always a no fault divorce these days so you will get what you are suggesting. Only 25% of the pension can be taken as a lump sum tax free.

I'm 66. I had colleagues who were asked about their childcare arrangements at interviews for jobs in secondary schools...even though such a question was illegal.

Correct me if I’m wrong but what ‘paid wraparound childcare was available in the 1980’s ? There wasn’t much for women wanting to return to work full time after having kids.

Makes sense. The way you describe this sounds like an extreme version of a process huge numbers of people go through. Effort v reward calculation.

I suspect most of us don't know anyone in this direct situation (I don't) but the majority probably know/are people who've at some point decided the extra money from making a particular work decision doesn't justify the faff. Not increasing hours to do Fridays because we go to the caravan a lot and like to get off early. Not bothering to go for a promotion right now because it'd push me over the CB threshold and we'd need extra childcare. Sticking with the part time job that worked around school hours even once the kids are at secondary because it makes life easier in the evenings. That sort of thing. Same principle.

My mum worked in the’70s and ‘80s but she started to work after my sister and I started school, and then she worked part-time. I think this was quite common. She was always at home after school. We didn’t have any childcare. We children had to be quiet because after-school hours were the busiest for her. She was generally self-employed and worked at home (piano teacher), though did work in schools teaching music too.

Wow don't hold back,say it like you think it is.
Very judgemental, how do you know the OP has completely wasted her life.Perhaps you are completely wasting your life now!

TBH, all the noise (which I have been part of) around women working after marriage or not is immaterial. OP deserves a fair share of assets, which starts at 50%.

She has no right to STBXH future earnings, inheritances or Lottery wins. This may result in her not having the sort of lifestyle she has been used to, but you pay your money and take your choice. She wants out, this is going to be the deal.

I damaged my pension prospects by 'retiring' at 57 to care for my DH, who has been bedbound for most of that, but there was no other option, so have limited sympathy for someone who is going to get a fair settlement of many 100s of 1000s from the divorce they want.

ETA have more than enough years for the state pension though, I don't think people realise who important that is, at least at the moment.

Hence the phrase "latch key kids". From about 8 or 9 you were trusted to let yourself in and do your homework til your mum got in. Before that there were childminders.

I've seen accusations of jealousy and envy pop up a lot in this thread.

Seriously? OP has been schlepping around the house for 40 years. Her whole adult life. Doesn't like to travel. Her husband's been flitting around the globe shagging other women and refuses to quit work and spend time with her.

What exactly about that scenario do you find enviable?

Some days I dislike my job, or dislike the fact I have to work for a living. But I wouldn't trade my life for the OP's in a million years.

That's a very unpleasant response.

@Sugarnspicenallthingsnaice So why would working for money have made any difference to what her DH did? There’s still quite a lot to be done when running a house and family life. I felt I did rather a lot with dc when DH did nothing!

This is true. It's possible to construct a scenario where OP might've got fulfilment from work, but there's no guarantee there. She could alternatively have ended up stuck in jobs she found unenjoyable and/or that exacerbated the health issues she mentioned.

He might have done, he might not. They might have a cleaner, a nanny, child care.

Mens careers are really not determined on whether they have a non working partner at home.