To think LTB is not always financially possible?

[BigupPemberleyMassive]

Especially with so many people struggling on dual incomes, is wanting the kids to be in a dual income, but frosty home unreasonable?

I'm not talking about things like alcoholism or violence, but threads where OP says husband flirted with a co worker by text etc. Obviously not acceptable, but if the choice is separate, move to a smaller more affordable place, an area with bad schools or stay and put up with it but kids have more financial stability?

Median UK salary is £30,000 and often less for women who have taken time out of paid work to have children.

AIBU to think sometimes financial reasons mean one can't LTB?

Or is it better to be struggling financially, and the kids can't do karate anymore or whatever, but you have dignity?

what is LTB?

I actually stayed for seven years because I thought that that was true and actually by staying with him I’ve ended up significantly financially worse off so what I would say is when your children are little take the hit then because then by the time you’re in the teen years which is when it gets really expensive you will be in a better place I absolutely promise you.

Also please don’t forget if your ex is being difficult for the sake of it you can get costs awarded against him or her

@VelvetChairGirl

what is LTB?

Leave the bounder [or fill in b word of your preference]

It's never 'just' texting a co-worker and you can't put a price on your own mental health.

It's not at all clear cut, OP.

IME - and leaving aside obvious abuse - there comes a tipping point where leaving is slightly less bad than staying. Until that point, it's better to stay.

I think there is a sweet spot where it's financially doable and then after that more emotionally and practically difficult.

2 years in - you've maybe had an expensive wedding, bought a house where you'd sell for what you paid plus have fees and stamp duty on your separate places. Maybe a baby just starting the 2 years or no-funding for nursery.

15 years in like me - childcare costs minimal, £70k equity each, not in London. We could afford a small house each if working full time.

Late 50s - you're maybe having health issues (my mum was diagnosed with something then), short term only if you needed a mortgage now prices are so high, it'd cut your time with grandchildren down.

Obviously like others caveating that nothing is worth staying to be abused.

I stayed in my last LTR at least 2 years too long. Wasn't financial at all. Some times it's easier to stay.

Not “some times” no, most people staying in unhappy/toxic/dead marriages do so for pure financial reasons.

I would say that the vast majority of people who says they are staying just for the sake of the children are actually staying for financial reasons, as at the end of the day, who would put the children through being raised in a bad marriage if they could afford to leave and keep the children well provided for?

You can LTB with money or without, but it is surprising that it is perfectly acceptable to stay put in toxic marriages for financial reasons when it is highly condemned to marry for money.

@Sn0tnose

It’s always financially possible.

The difference is that it’s not always financially desirable.

It is not always financially possible. I did financial calculations for 2-3 years and no matter which way I looked at it, I was always £300-500 per month short on income vs outgoings even allowing for all benefits I was entitled to. How is someone meant to sustain that??

And this already excluded hobbies, subscriptions, haircuts etc. There was nothing in there for luxuries or extras.

I only managed to leave when I got an extra qualification and a better paid job, but that took 4 years to achieve.

I always think this is why famous movie stars are always getting divorced. The finances are never an issue and so as soon as it isn't happily ever after, tbey head for the door. Normal people can't really act like that though.

It is not always financially possible. I did financial calculations for 2-3 years and no matter which way I looked at it, I was always £300-500 per month short on income vs outgoings even allowing for all benefits I was entitled to. How is someone meant to sustain that??

I think if it is truly necessary to leave, you do so. It may mean giving up your car, living in a grotty rented hovel, putting the kids in the local 'sink' school, whatever. It is always possible.

I can see a big barrier at first would be not having the deposit for a rental, so perhaps you would have to go and stay with a friend and be technically homeless, or go stay in a shelter/hostel or similar. Or even live in your car with the kids until you got emergency accommodation (I understand single adults without kids or disabilities get no help at all).

Medium-longer term, there may be a shortfall on rent if the housing benefit doesn't cover it all, but by then hopefully your life will have moved on and the situation changes again.

But that is the worst case. In many cases, if you can stay for a few years and get some financial prospects before you leave, that can be better all round. Just don't stay too long- keep the plan alive.

It's always financially possible, it just sometimes takes longer to get to a position where it is. It's not always, or even mostly, easy though.

I am bringing my girls up with the view that they should always work and be able to be self-sufficient. I wouldn't want either them or their children to be trapped in a bad or worse, toxic, relationship.

Just remember: if it's anywhere near abuse (and really I suggest having a conversation with a DV organisation or a well informed close friend before making that judgement), the children are being abused too. In some way shape or form - at the very least by sensing mummy's fear/lack of power. It has long last negative effects

I didn't have any choice in the matter. But with hindsight, my children are FAR better off with us having split. Not financially, obviously, mental health wise.
My parents stayed together and I've had a lifetime of mental illness, and a patchy work record, to show for it. I did get horse riding lessons though...

Ignoring money, an imperfect marriage can still be a good family. It just depends on what those low level problems actually are. So no, even though I have plenty of money, I wouldn’t blow up my child’s whole life if I felt on the balance things we better keeping the family whole.

As for not being able to afford to leave because it is a LTB situation, I think we as a society need to teach our daughters that this isn’t a position you can let yourself get into. It’s incredibly important to be able to take your kids and walk out that door. Yes, they might not have karate lessons anymore, but every mother needs to feel confident she can provide a safe roof and a full belly. I grew up in an abusive home and I still have nightmares about being trapped living in that situation. Just to be clear, I’m not criticizing SAHMs. I actually was a SAHM myself when my dd was younger. I just made sure I had an emergency fund and an easy jump back to a good paying job, plus had full access to all of Dh’s earnings and accounts. That is what I want to teach my own daughter, that she has to always be able to LTB. If she can’t afford to do that, she can’t afford to live together and definitely can’t afford to have a child.

Sn0tnose
It’s always financially possible

The difference is that it’s not always financially desirable.

It is not always financially possible. I did financial calculations for 2-3 years and no matter which way I looked at it, I was always £300-500 per month short on income vs outgoings even allowing for all benefits I was entitled to. How is someone meant to sustain that??

And this already excluded hobbies, subscriptions, haircuts etc. There was nothing in there for luxuries or extras.

I only managed to leave when I got an extra qualification and a better paid job, but that took 4 years to achieve

How do you think people on benefits and minimum wage and zero hours contracts manage to do it then? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not criticising your choices. I do understand why you might not want to. If you have a nice home in a nice area and a car and your DC go to a good school, and you can have your hair done and buy new clothes when you need them, then renting in a rough area, catching the bus, sending your DC to the local comp and going without is not going to be a palatable choice, especially if you can cope with it for another four years. But you did have a choice.

Honestly don’t even know how to vote here.

I ended a more than decade long relationship when my son was about 7months old, which obviously financially wasn’t the best decision, looking at cold hard maths. But I’d rather be where I am now, even if it is a struggle, than turn the other cheek.

It’s very much “your mileage may vary”. I get very sad when I think of all the women who are just gritting their teeth through their kids childhoods because they don’t think they can leave.
And I think it probably doesn’t set the best example for the kids of how people should treat/allow themselves to be treated in a relationship.

I left because I thought it was best for me and my kid. I imagine a lot of people stay for the same reason. I don’t think you can definitely say which is right.

I think a lot more couples than would care to admit it are only together because splitting up for financial / child care / whatever mean it's just the best option of a series of generally shitty options.

I've known a few men to stay till the last child is 18 then seek divorce knowing they won't have to shell out for child support or down size etc etc. It seems to have hit the woman like it's come out of the blue. If she had spent most of her life raising kids whilst he was at work it means they're starting with nothing at middle age.

The one thing I wish I’d done/known about when I was a SAHM was to get my DH to pay into a private pension for me.

Prioritising money sounds so cold and grabby.

I don’t think of it as prioritising money - more prioritising stability, in a lot of cases.

There are many reasons- every case is individual—there is a reason Nigella Lawson could be seen leaving her ex the day after he was filmed grabbing her by the throat— because she could call a posh agent, say what have you got empty now on rental in xxx (posh area) — put 6 months down immediately and bobs your uncle— no ‘your income doesn’t work on 30x monthly rent or trying to get a current landlord ref without your husband knowing etc’ — there are multiple obstacles in the way usually— unless you have a separate high full time income , pots of cash lying around or plenty of generous minded family and friends to move in with short term.

It really really depends on the reasons for one or other partner being no longer committed to the marriage.

If it's that everything is calm and amicable, but maybe one partner has got bored, or a couple have drifted apart and no longer have in common the things that brought them together, I can believe that separating might not be everyone's choice if it leads to penury & massive life disruption for one/both parties.

Its essential however that both parties are respectful and amicable.

I wouldn’t be able to afford rent if I LTB and wouldn’t be able to buy until the house sold. How do you sell a house if one of you wants to and the other doesn’t?

Someone suggested you could just go and live in a shelter or hostel. If you’re not leaving abuse are these even available?

I’m not in this situation but just thinking about my circumstances I can see that it would be hard/impossible for some women to instantly work out the door.

I think people are probably right that it would be easier with some long term planning behind the scenes unbeknownst to the partner.

Really interesting thread btw