Worst decision a woman could make

[Notbeingrobbed]

As a working mother with two children to support, my divorce has made me see that getting married was the worst financial decision I ever made.

I have been the higher earner so will lose a big chunk of the money that I have made throughout my life. I also have the kids to support (happy to).

My ex will get a big payout having benefitted from my income as well as his own for years.

Why would any modern woman marry? Oh, because we are all influenced by society (and hormones) to think it’s a good thing.

People say I am arguing like a man. But the law was surely designed to protect a stay-at-home mother with children from a husband who leaves. Not to protect a layabout-at-home father?

Sounds like it’s time for that marriage to end.

I don’t buy into measuring the role of partners in terms of financial value. I think that is where we differ. I don’t think a SAHP has to show they are worth £10m in the circumstances described. That is a hideous way to look at marriage IMO.

I have no agenda here in the sense that both I and my DH work full time and as it happens earn similar amounts. Not that it should make any difference.

Above all I think it demonstrates the need to marry with care and ensure you have a compatible mind set and view of the world. Although clearly people can be fooled and do change.

Yes a great parent is worth more than any salary. But staying at home doesn’t pay the bills. And some people are begging their partners to find at least some work but the partners refuse even when the kids are well into secondary school. That’s not a fair and equal partnership.

People can exit the marriage. But the costs and price are enormous -plus the stress! At least the disapproval from friends and family has mainly gone, unless they are very religious or old fashioned.

Here’s a thought. It’s possible to be a great mum or dad and earn a salary.

I wouldn’t disagree at all that people have to make choices in a marriage which suit everyone and no one should assume that their partner is happy to be the sole breadwinner forever (or indeed the home maker forever). On the other hand some couples are very happy with this set up. Horses for courses. Exploiting your partner whether as the earner or the home maker is clearly not a good marriage.

But going back to the original OP, how divorce settlements are to distinguish between these different scenarios I don’t know. Whilst I appreciate that sharing assets with someone you feel hasn’t pulled their weight is aggravating/exploitative I don’t necessarily think that means the principle of sharing our marital assets is wrong just because the SAHP didn’t bring in the ‘£10m per year’ or their role isn’t of that value apparently (as some seem to suggest).

Btw I like to think I am a great mother even if I earn a salary (and my husband is equally a great father). But if we think the answer to the problem of achieving fair divorce settlements is that everyone works and there are no more SAHP then I think that is a great shame. In that I agree with GreenBeret.

Sort of a great mother at least

I tend to agree that it is strange that the higher earner should top up the lower earner forever more

Joint lives Spousal Maintenance is quite rare. If SM is awarded at all it may only be for a defined period. Refer to the "Get a Job Ruling" made by Lord Pitchford in 2015.

In Scotland

Higher earner doesn't pay past 3 years.

*In Scotland

Higher earner doesn't pay past 3 years*

So there is no Joint Lives Spousal Maintenance in Scotland?

Going back to the OP. The husband may have earned a lot less than the wife and then maybe spent a lot more of the total income on things that destroyed the marriage e.g. gambling or porn or hookers or drugs.

To split the total 50:50 (or even more for the “weaker” earner) would rub salt in the wound.

Some people are decent and do the best for their family whether in the workplace or at home. But others don’t. They tend to conceal their addiction for as long as they can. bu But they are just out to use their partner and take all they can.

@MissedTheBoatAgain

No JLM in Scotland. it's called the clean break principle.

But essentially the Maintanence part is lumped into a 3 year payment.

This is why some people will deliberately file north of the border.

To split the total 50:50 (or even more for the “weaker” earner) would rub salt in the wound

Men have been saying that for Decades. Women fought for equal rights for decades too, but seem to think they are entitled to more favourable treatment in a Divorce.

WHY ?

Why? Normally because we are the ones who end up looking after the kids. In the past awards were made to SAHMs so the wife and children were provided for. But now money is taken from working mothers with children to support and is paid to men who have let down their families and upped and left. This doesn’t seem just or equal.

I would have to disagree. When DH and I married in our mid 20s I earned slightly more than him both in professional roles. Then his career took off and I eventually stopped work to be a SAHM. I’ve worked part time on and off since then but his salary now dwarfs anything I could make. If we were to split up tomorrow (and I hope we don’t. We are very happy afaik), I would be loaded. Half our assets, half his pensions etc.

So yes, some people might regret marrying or be worse off because of it but no one can predict the future and if you live your life making the long term protection of money your primary focus you run the risk of ending up the loneliest millionaire in the carehome.

Oops. I just realised how late I’ve come to this thread. Ignore me if I’m going over old ground.

Slinks off to rtft

Plus (and possibly most significantly) I can earn per day what she can earn per month. So although she never paid towards any of the assets during the marriage, she received about 70% of total. At first that sounds horrendous. However, it will only take me 2 or 3 years to make up the full 70%. After that I will be storming ahead of the Ex.

If the assets were purchased while you were together, then she also paid towards them - since she was at home being the carer.

So glad you will be storming ahead of your ex eventually .

I’m quite tired of explaining now...but my point at the start was times have changed and not all of us live fit into these Stepford roles - wife at home, husband at work. I’ve been wife and main earner and main carer. Times change but the law doesn’t reflect that.

@shepherdspieisminging the wish for proposals, to find the right partner, get married etc now seems like some ludicrous thing from a Jane Austen novel. I

can’t actually understand WHY I got married. I suppose I wanted what I thought others had - a happy home and family. My parents achieved this and both of them worked. But maybe I was too desperate to “achieve” and get married.

I certainly didn’t understand then that I would be ripped off for 22 years by a man who freely wasted my money and then would be ripped off again when it came to the divorce.

We still see engagement and marriage as a happy event and a life goal achieved. I think we shouldn’t see it that way. There is no benefit in marriage for modern women who work and no protection. None at all.

since she was at home being the carer

Wrong. Child was mostly looked after by Grandparents while Ex went to her native Country. A fact that was established in the courts by looking at her passport. Thank the Lord the Judge was female and could see through the lies being made by another woman.

Yes I will be much richer in the future than Ex wife, but is that not the point that NotBeingRobbed is trying to make? Why should the non earner be better off than the one that does earn?

don't see with hindsight why women are so desperate for proposals etc

If they get a free life out of it until they Divorce and get a big slice of unearned assets the attraction is obvious.

Why should the non earner be better off than the one that does earn?

Obviously I don’t know the ins and outs of your case. During my relationship with my ex I worked for the first 6 years, was a SAHM to our 3 dc for 13, then had been back at work for 3 years by the time we were in the financial remedy process. Both of us low earners - roughly 50/50 split of assets. Ex verbally and emotionally abusive and had been for many years, and I often walked on eggshells. He thinks I now have what is his (despite the fact that an inheritance of mine paid off the mortgage as part of the settlement).

“Did the bitches who advised you also sit on their fat arses doing nothing” he shouted at me in front of one of our dc, among other horrible horrible things - thick cow, stupid bitch etc...

For this and many other things (including getting together with someone new while we were still in the same house going through the divorce - obvious late night loved up phone calls - showering and going out - bastard - I was instantly replaced, though I have no idea if he is still with this person) I will never forgive him.

And now I feel as if I am living in his house even though I moved into it with him and have lived in it for about 21 / 22 years now.

Ex was “left” with several other assets which amount to a similar value to the house (of course nobody knows about values long term) including a retail property which he bought about 4 years ago and hid from me for about a year until I found out -and then was not at all remorseful or sorry.

And yet I still somehow feel guilty.

Fuck that .

Barrister at FDR (during which we settled - after 7.5 hours) said to me “no more walking on eggshells and finally something in your name” - because the house which he refused to put in my name as well as his for so many years, is now mine. Being married to him was like playing a supporting role in a film in which he was the director as well as the main actor - no joint financial decisions - he was in charge.

This is the same barrister that he referred to as a “big nose” (she is Jewish) while referring to my always polite and reasonable solicitor as a dog. Don’t know why I am surprised since he had also called me that in the past.

And yet still sometimes I miss him - I need to get my head checked .

@MissedTheBoatAgain I didn’t get a free life! I contributed more than my fair share and now I’m being fleeced. It’s not about the money really - although the financial situation feels a bit precarious. It’s about the fact this man has legally robbed me of a vast sum and wants more. And he has twisted all natural justice to argue it’s “equality” in a way that is pure misogyny.

Plus the fact the family life I thought I had was an illusion as the true revolting nature of this man has become apparent.

I tried to work hard and was bumping my head on the glass ceiling. Meanwhile my friends who has no career to speak of but married “well” end up with free houses. They were not “better” mums than me - just had a lot more time for the fun stuff. That feels incredibly wrong.

That’s right - the day before the FDR he also emailed my solicitor saying that I had never known how to look after the best interests of the dc, and he told me that he had cared for them, not me .

The same dc that I devoted life and soul to for many years.

What an unpleasant, lying bastard. That’s my mantra when I feel sad or hopeless - and my life now is not easy - I just think

BASTARD.

In the end, as in Jane Austen times, we women are only worth as much as the man we marry. That’s the thing about this law I really hate.

I was Lydia - a bit ugly and desperate and married a cad who used me mercilessly. Others get their Darcy, live well and then when they bore of him get a fortune to live off.

I always hated the idea that marriage was the most important “career” for a woman. I tried to be different and have my own career but I was clearly deluded. I should have known my place!