Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Interesting article about the effects of divorce on womens finances, particularly pensions

171 replies

PyongyangKipperbang · 15/04/2025 20:16

And the difference to the effect it has on men. You wont be surprised to read that they are better off than we are after divorce....

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/stay-home-mum-50-divorced-no-pension-3628292

I was a stay-at-home mum - now 61 and divorced, I have no pension

Women aged 55-64 have on average £89,000 less in their pensions than men. Now a generation of 'silver splitters' are finding it financially tough

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/stay-home-mum-50-divorced-no-pension-3628292

OP posts:
towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:14

@Marshtit things have changed

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:15

although I wouldn't say childcare is affordable !

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:15

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:14

@Marshtit things have changed

exactly!

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:16

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:15

although I wouldn't say childcare is affordable !

so what is the solution if childcare is still not affordable?

MidnightPatrol · 16/04/2025 08:17

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:06

my dh made changes, working over time, 60 hours a week
you are wearing rose coloured glasses if you think men can work flexibly.

There’s absolutely no difference in men and women’s ability to work flexibly.

It’s just that women feel obliged to make adjustments, while for some reason men do not.

BlushingBrightly · 16/04/2025 08:17

If the genders were reversed, there'd be posters on here moaning about 'yet another man bashing thread' 'more man hating' but no such complaints when it's women 🤔

Kitchensnails · 16/04/2025 08:17

Neverenoughbiscuits · 16/04/2025 08:14

The attitudes on this thread are utterly depressing. Family, children and balance are out of the window. All about earning money. How very sad that we have come to this.

Well no, it's womens ignorance of the implications of not working that people are commenting on. Not knowing working less hours = a smaller pension pot is wild as its ridiculously obvious; no one is criticising the smaller pension pot itself. Others are simply pointing out why can't men be flexible too, that would surely be a better balance for most families?

Sofiewoo · 16/04/2025 08:19

Neverenoughbiscuits · 16/04/2025 08:14

The attitudes on this thread are utterly depressing. Family, children and balance are out of the window. All about earning money. How very sad that we have come to this.

The literal point of the article is money, women feeling like they have been shafted after a divorce financially.

How on earth can you come on a thread titled finances & pensions and then complain the comments are about money!

smileymileysmiley · 16/04/2025 08:22

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:13

And of course the male partner couldn't possibly have any flexibility at all

where exactly does this happen? @smileymileysmiley

Edited

well it happened in my family - we have both at times taken a step back in our career for the betterment of the whole family. One person working 60 hours and the other nothing is crazy!

IhaveanewTVnow · 16/04/2025 08:23

when i went part time as a result of babies it was a joint decision i suppose. i made the decision and he went along with it. why wouldnt he? i didnt think long term about my pension. i thought i had many years to make it up and anyway we were a couple so would share. and i work in finance……

10 years later we divorced. His pension was poor. at one stage i thought i was going to have to share my pension with him. Thankfully he received some inheritance that helped.

im now looking at retirement and can see the damage done by working part time for 10 years.

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:24

smileymileysmiley · 16/04/2025 08:22

well it happened in my family - we have both at times taken a step back in our career for the betterment of the whole family. One person working 60 hours and the other nothing is crazy!

one person working 60 hours and the other raising the children, not sitting on their arse

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:25

How on earth can you come on a thread titled finances & pensions and then complain the comments are about money!

Quite

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:26

@Marshtit the solution to what?

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:27

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:26

@Marshtit the solution to what?

Grin the issue of child care, working part time having a low pension
Teacaketravesty · 16/04/2025 08:27

It wasn’t about not wanting to work hard, for me. I enjoyed my career. While it was sometimes hard, it was rewarding in ways I’ve missed a lot. But quitting was best for my children, who wouldn’t have thrived in ft chilcare + commute. My husband reduced his hours by 20% but that still left him out of the house 8am-6:30pm mo-Fri and further flexibility either was impossible or felt impossible to him, this is 16 years ago.

I did underestimate the drop-off of stamina when Indecided at 32. Starting again mid 40s is gruelling - I thought I’d just buy a franchise but I’ve not the energy - and I support any woman’s choice but we can’t pretend it isn’t the children that pay the price if great childcare isn’t findable. I could only find adequate so we used it pt only. No family available. In the event, my children wouldn’t have thrived at school, either, so we’ve home educated them. I work pt in a job I could have done at 20. I look at them and it was the right thing to do for them.

If I am poorer post a divorce I will not necessarily regret it. The failure is systemic, not mine, and my life is about more than money. But I am talking in the context of still likely having enough to get by, with some treats. I’ve been poor and do not romanticise it. Like all the lower MC and working class mothers I know who do pt jobs to fit around their kids and families, I am a grafter, not a pigging lady who lunches - no offence to them. My husband benefits from my work, but the primary beneficiaries are my kids.

Abra1t · 16/04/2025 08:27

MidnightPatrol · 16/04/2025 08:17

There’s absolutely no difference in men and women’s ability to work flexibly.

It’s just that women feel obliged to make adjustments, while for some reason men do not.

There is no way that my husband would have been allowed to keep his jobs on a flexible or part-time basis when my children were born in 1997’and 1998. Just wasn’t on the corporate landscape.

I have always worked part time, sometimes full time, 10 weeks maternity leave each child.

He shared the difference in wealth with me.

Sofiewoo · 16/04/2025 08:28

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:24

one person working 60 hours and the other raising the children, not sitting on their arse

You’re only actively raising children until they are 4 years old, then they are in school and there’s simply no childcare need for not working or working at a hugely reduced rate.
If someone chooses that then they are making the decision to bring in less money, but it’s certainly not needed by the family when children are in school.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 16/04/2025 08:29

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:27

Grin the issue of child care, working part time having a low pension

The solution is for men and women to share responsibilities equally with regard to childcare and earning a living.

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:31

Sofiewoo · 16/04/2025 08:28

You’re only actively raising children until they are 4 years old, then they are in school and there’s simply no childcare need for not working or working at a hugely reduced rate.
If someone chooses that then they are making the decision to bring in less money, but it’s certainly not needed by the family when children are in school.

so you get a term time only job that fits around school hours? holy grail

unsync · 16/04/2025 08:31

I suspect there's a generational aspect to this. Women now in their late 50s, 60s and upwards were raised in a society that bears no resemblance to that of today.

Marriage was for life, you stuck it out no matter what and divorce was seen as something shameful and not to be discussed openly. Single parent families were rare and to be pitied, as it usually meant widowhood. It was very much still a man's world.

I was a teen in the early 80s and it was very much expected that you had a 'little job' until you settled down in your 20s to breed and keep house. When the kids were old enough, you could get a part time job, but it was rare for girls from average backgrounds to be pushed towards a career. Unless you were in grammar school or top stream at a good state school, University was not really an option either. We could leave education at 15 and many did.

It's a completely different mindset now.

Marshtit · 16/04/2025 08:34

@unsync
divorce has been around for years, i wouldnt say women in their 50s and 60s believed marriage was for life, single parents were not looked down on
i think your suspicions are out date, my own dm aged 90 divorced, now that was more unusual.
so i think you are a couple of decades out in your analysis

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:34

@Marshtit hence why I asked...the solution to expensive childcare is obviously more affordable childcare, more government initiatives etc. The solution to a better pension provision & financial security & being able to afford childcare is for a mother to have their own financial security & to have dc with a partner willing to share the load.

towelonfloor · 16/04/2025 08:36

Marriage was for life, you stuck it out no matter what and divorce was seen as something shameful and not to be discussed openly

I think you must be confusing generations because don't baby boomers have the biggest divorce rates @unsync?

Neverenoughbiscuits · 16/04/2025 08:38

Sofiewoo · 16/04/2025 08:19

The literal point of the article is money, women feeling like they have been shafted after a divorce financially.

How on earth can you come on a thread titled finances & pensions and then complain the comments are about money!

I'm not complaining about comments about money. It's the attitude that I find sad.

Jellycatspyjamas · 16/04/2025 08:38

The attitudes on this thread are utterly depressing. Family, children and balance are out of the window. All about earning money. How very sad that we have come to this.

Earning money is important for family stability - there’s no honour in not being able to house and feed your kids. All too often the woman is left financially vulnerable in the event of a split and carries the bulk of childcare, reducing her earning capacity even further. Throw in a man who walks away paying the absolute minimum of child support and you have a perfect storm.

Yes there needs to be balance, but it’s usually the woman providing that balance to her own detriment.

Swipe left for the next trending thread