That marriage is just a financial transaction that serves many women badly and want to warn others before they take the leap?

[thinkingmakesitso]

I just don't think it is made clear enough that marriage is all about money and that people who marry people who do not earn as much as them stand to lose so much and do not realise it.

My stbex was a sahd but had never had a career before he met me - he didn't want one as he sees himself as a musician/writer/free-spirit/free-loader. I am a teacher and have struggled over the last 8 years to excel as a mother and a teacher, cramming as much work as I could into my dc's sleeping time and devoting all my free time to my children, pretty much.

Following his infidelity, which I cannot divorce him for due to not 'getting my head around it' during the designated 6 months the law allows, partly as a result of his failure to disclose the whole truth, I must apparently give him half my pension and, though our house has insufficient equity to make it worth selling it, should consider him a primary carer as he still takes the children to school and picks them up. Yes. Because he has no job as he doesn't want one. I have had three child-free days this week and have spent them working, Christmas shopping, cleaning dc's bedrooms and buying them bedroom furniture and rearranging their rooms to accommodate it. I am exhausted. He has spend his child-free days (6 days) writing his novel and hanging out with friends. Yet he is the main carer because he takes them to school and picks them up. WTF. All organising, thinking, planning is done by me. Yet if he wanted the dc (I am almost certain he doesn't, but will find out for sure when I raise the 'd' word with him) I should accept that he may well get them and I would therefore have to subsidise him to enable that to happen.

I have a friend who is about to enter into a very similar arrangement that I had with ex and I want so much to warn her. Of course, she and her dp are happy and in love now, but I did not marry and procreate with ex thinking that he was a shit who would do me wrong, yet he is and did. I know I WBU to say this to her, but I really think many people enter into marriage unknowingly.

Nrft but we have a similar set up to ops.

That's why I choose not to marry.

I'd be daft to.

Any career woman would be.

I totally agree with you OP.They should take into account his potential earnings before he became a SAHP. Its shit, but there is not much you can do about it

As someone said upthread, you need a good solicitor.

Every case will be considered on its own merits, so regardless of what usually happens, each case is different.

In your shoes I would take the matter to court. More expensive, definitely, more likely to bring a result you are happy with, likely.

Appreciate I'm replying to an OP a day old and things may have moved on, but it's such a shame you bought into his free spirit bullshit before marrying him, OP.

You may have married a cocklodger who cheated on you. Many marriages are far more positive than that and, even when they go belly up, there can be some, even grudging, appreciation for the sacrifices one partner may have made to make the family work.

I'm in a situation where I did have a career when I met DH, albeit one I was unhappy with. Various circumstances have led to me having to be a SAHM. We have no one who can care for either of the boys out of school time and there have been periods where one of them hasn't been able to attend school full time. If DH did have a personality transplant and buggered off with another woman, I quite appreciate that the law does give me some financial protection.

I just hate. hate hate that he is seen as the primary carer

My understanding of your situation is that you used to live together (married), he was the SAHD, he had an affair, he now lives by himself, the children and you continue to live in the marital home, he takes them to school and collects them while you work. Have I got that right?

So who sees him as the primary carer? Maybe he used to be, but not now. Does your solicitor say this?

YANBU to warn people!! Far from it! I think this needs to be flagged up much more to people so they make an educated decision before entering into arrangements. The courts now see each parent as totally equal and this puts career mothers in a very vulnerable position

I worked hard to get a good career that I could do part time. I never worked more than 3 days/ week. ExH by contrast had a job that took him away for weeks at a time and even when he was home he preferred to spend any free time with his friends
I am divorcing him due to horrible emotional abuse that left me profoundly depressed
First thing he did was drop his hours/fiddle his tax return so he only has to pay nominal maintenance. And now he is dropping his work so much in order to claim "shared care" (he is going for 50/50)

I don't know what I could have done differently. I worked to enable an escape route and then to keep a roof over my kids head, but now I could be punished for that as he chooses to opt for minimal work/ cheating the system

Not sure what the answer is but the current situation feels very unjust. I was 10x the mum to them that he was, he barely bothered with them at all until after we split. Even when I begged him to help I was so tired

msVestibule it is highly likely the courts would see him as primary carer, they seem to look purely at times/facts and not on the hard to quantify stuff

Why are you having a " no fault" divorce, btw?

OP - as a matter of interest, was it just your dh's infidelity that was the cause of your break up? Would you still happily be supporting him financially if it weren't for that?

But throwing, if I've read this correctly, he's not even living with his children now, so how can he be considered the primary carer?

throwingpebbles your situation sounds nightmarish and I really hope you get a positive outcome in the end. What a shit your ex sounds .

I agree with your second post and that is what infuriates me. A local teenager could do what my h does, yet according to the two solicitors I have seen, it means that he is the primary carer. it is utter, utter madness. There seems to be some very knowledgeable people on this thread. Does anyone know whether h's two term-time holidays he has taken (while paying me no money) and one of them at very short notice, would be held against him in any way?

roundaboutown Our marriage was not great over the last few years and, while I did not suspect infidelity, it was not a huge surprise to me that he been unhappy. I would not have been happy to keep supporting him, no. Our youngest was 5 when we split, and for the 3 years before then I had suggested h getting part time work and he had always been indignant: "You just want me stacking shelves in ASDA don't you?" One idea he had, mentioned in the last couple of months before he left, was that, with both dc at school he would like to do an MA in creative writing, and would I mind that? It filled me with dread and dismay, and I would not have stood for it, and I think that type of shit would have broken us in the end, even had he not cheated.

Oh OP I totally get where you are coming from. He isn't the primary carer so much as 'the childminder'. The law is there to protect the contribution of the person who SAH. It sounds as though his contribution is/was negligible. I am so sorry. You really do need an excellent lawyer. In your situation I would certainly shop around for legal advice. And I have a feeling that he may not get as much as you think. I would consider changing the dynamic and perhaps starting some external childcare before you start divorce proceedings.

Ultimately Anyfucker is right, you are potentially paying a particularly high price for being the person who does all the shitwork. And in that sense you are no different from millions of women who have gone before you (myself included). My heart goes out to you.

and best of luck to you. I hope you have brilliant friends to lean on through this crap. You will get through this.

A divorce is as reasonable as the people getting it.

If the children live with you, OP, are fed and clothed by you and have their laundry done by you, I do not believe that the courts will decide he is currently their primary carer. He can't be if he doesn't live with them. Is he actually saying he wants to live with them under his roof?

So will you be giving up work so that you no longer need to pay him maintenance?

In other words, is he really being an utter shite about the whole thing? Or are you just taking initial warnings about worst case scenarios as immutable legal fact?

Op I think you are married to my ex. The similarities are uncanny , right down to the creative writing course. In the early days I was happy to share my very hard earned cash and he was indeed at home with the children doing the early years ( and did a good job ) but when they went to school and I encouraged him to get a job - any job - and he continued to do very little round the house and spend all his spare time on his expensive sporting hobby . I just lost all respect , and love. Thankfully we were NOT married , the split was amicable and we now do 50:50 child care .

roundabout that is the point I am making, current case law is changing very fast and without any sensible debate and two things in particular shock and alarm me:

• I have been advised that "past history" doesn't matter, so you can't really use arguments amount what you/he did in the past

-mother and father are viewed as totally equal, and there doesn't seem to be any interest in the quality of parenting, just in the quantity

It drives me mad when women on here go on about wanting to get married to protect themselves in the event of a split ! I am sure their make counterparts often feel exactly as the OP does.
And I absolutely despair of the advice banded about to " get a shit hot lawyer and take him to the cleaners "
Somewhere out there the OP's husband is probably being given exactly that advice.

That should read MALE counterparts

Op I feel sorry for you. He's a shit and you are having to pay. Can you get a childminder and kick him out. How good is your legal advice? Is it worth keeping a record of the stuff you do as opposed to his contribution. Is the child benefit in your name?

"But why does marriage have to protect the lower earner, if they were ever thus and passed up no, absolutely no, opportunities to become a SAHP. In fact, it suited them very well, as they got a few years off from feeling like they should be doing something they weren't? "

This , exactly , from op upthread

Aliceinwondelust you asked if op would be in the same position if not married.

No she wouldn't.
In my unmarried similar situation I became a legal experts on the rights of cohabitees. Fortunately for me they are limited. In Scotland there IS limited provision for some kind of lump sum payout to the lower earner if they can prove that their position in the relationship ( read : sahp) disadvantaged them financially.
The highly recommended family lawyer I consulted knew less about this than I did , ( but still charged me £150 for half hour off me asking questions she couldn't answer ) and explained there had never been a significant case since the amendment to the family law act Scotland but she would love to take on my PARTNER'S case

Yes, marriage changes it all and gives the lower earner huge entitlements such as regular maintenance which is why my ex got more than half our assets.

To the original poster, you say you could afford the childcare that is good (my ex withdrew all child care on divorce as the only way to hurt me as he had no obligation to pay anything was not to help with the children any more). I would have been happy for him to continue to do things with the children but he chose not to. That is not really factored into divorce financial settlements. I remember he wanted an extra £200k which he got because he wanted to be able to take the children on similar holidays etc to when he was married to me and yet since then they have not had in 10 years a single holiday from him. Our situation is different from yours as we always both worked very very hard indeed and full time so he was never lazy but there are still some parallels. I had to take out a much bigger mortgage than we had to buy out his claims and to get a clean break without my having to pay him maintenance and I want that - that the financial claims were over and done.
If you cannot get the remortgage you need could you do the traditional order - mesher order - that your husband gets his share of the house once the children are 18 or you remarry? Only useful of course if you "get" the children to live with you.

I would prioritise keeping the children over most other aspects. Has he moved out? I've forgotten. If so and I was his lawyer I'd have him move back home.

I really wouldn't spend time worrying about who is seen as the "primary childcarer". You have both made a contribution - he has looked after them full-time before they went to school, and that is an important job. You were the provider for the family, and that is an equally important job. It seems likely that you will be given joint custody.

I'm not sure why people are calling him a "cocklodger", when stay at home mums aren't called "fannylodgers"!

I definitely wouldn't look into childminders if he is willing to keep looking after them - the children I'm sure would much rather be with their parent. If you can both stay sensible, it would be a really good thing for the kids to see a modern way of doing things, with a career woman mum and a domestic dad, rather than just seeing the typical stereotypes.