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?

I think it would really help if so many higher earning FT jobs did not have a culture that makes them more like 1.5 FT jobs eg expected to stay late routinely, travel at short notice etc etc. That does make it very difficult to take an equal share of childcare pickups etc and forces the other partner to find a role that fits round children.

@Bumpitybumper
It's not that I view the work as a SAHP as less, it's just that I think it's clumsy & artificial for the law to effectively reward that work on divorce with a financial sum linked to the working parent's salary.

I think that's a great idea on documenting those decisions. I am all for pre-nups becoming legal, and it would make people think these important decisions through a lot more. I believe a lot of the pain of divorce stems from not knowing how much you are 'entitled' to- we need more clarity from the law and express declarations from the couples as to their intentions would help with this massively.

I think that there is a lot to be reformed aboit divorce law. Perhaps now that more women are facing some of the financial unfairness of our current system we may see a movement towards a more balanced approach that I think men have been wanting for a while.

I suppose a question to be asked is does the current law mean that wealthy people with good jobs are actively deterred from marrying their partner. Does this then leave the partner in the cohabitation or nothing position. Yes they can walk away but many don’t. We have heard testimony on here from women who knew the deal but wanted children.

If there was an option to pre and post nup, then would some women gain protections they otherwise wouldn’t have?

@fontofnoknknowledge so I am a minority and therefor discriminated against...is that OK? Maybe the law, enforced by judges who consider every case, needs to have one view for a couple who consciously consent to one being a SAHP and another for a situation where both work.

People have different incomes that reflect different skills and abilities and if both work then why should it be a 50:50 split? Why should the property vow take precedence over all others? I am better off using childcare but keeping my own income that I was sharing income and parenting with my ex. Of course the settlement will hit me for six, though.

The view that SAHPs would all be FTSE 100 directors if only they had not decided to devote themselves to parenting does not help the cause of women in the workplace.

This system is propping up the gender pay gap and enforcing the thinking that women don’t need the same income as men because they have a husband to take care of them. How many times have I heard men say of women colleagues “oh, but what does her husband do?” This skews wages - in theory that’s illegal but in practice it happens.

Women can have good jobs and work part time, the trick is to hold onto them in those early years however you can, even if a lot of income goes in childcare and even if you just work a day or two a week. Children are for life and they (and you) will be better supported financially later if you pick up those hours again in the teenage years. Obviously if you spend ten years out of the workforce you won’t have the same CV as someone who has kept going. Is that the “fault” of the spouse who has funded that break?

As someone said earlier, it’s not easy to be the WOHP and the workplace is not all business lunches and bantering! One thing that has struck me on this forum is how the SAHPs are desperate to hand over their kids to their exes for “me time”. But I enjoy being with my kids and have never seen them as a chore, having had very little “me time”. They are the best way to spend my free time!

@Notbeingrobbed
This system is propping up the gender pay gap and enforcing the thinking that women don’t need the same income as men because they have a husband to take care of them

Preach!

Family law may safeguard women in the short term as it responds to protect those who are already in the situation of having suffered career setbacks due to starting a family, but by doing so it perpetuates that status quo.

We will not have equality until we are supported in making our own income, an income that has every chance of being as high as a man's. To do this I think we've got to rip the plaster off, by limiting spousal maintenance much more and in a much clearer fashion so everyone knows what the rules are.

The message we send to women and girls cannot be 'get yourself a job if you like, sweetcheeks, but don't worry your pretty little head too much as your higher earning husband will be your safety net even if he leaves you'.

@unclemontyscrumpets

Yes! Too many girls and women still live as if it’s the 1950s. Focus on “beauty”, snare a rich man at uni, work for a couple of years then give it all up to raise the kids. I know some of them. Half way through living the “dream” they split from the guy but still lived off his earnings. Then suddenly the kids are all grown up and they realise they can’t get a job because they haven’t worked all that time and the maintenance has come to an end. This isn’t helping them either.

Too many friends of my daughter still imagine Prince Charming will come along and they’ll be set up for life instead of realising you’ve got to look after yourself, girl!

Welcome to what us men have had to deal with for decades!! There is no benefits to marriage anymore. I will be telling my son's to stay well clear of marriage, it's just toxic for everyone involved.

M0vin, please don’t breed more men who think women are out to get them. Simply breed good men who look for an equal partner and someone who they can build a good marriage with.

You really have a wrong and damaging approach.

Hideandgo..did I say women were to blame? No my point is that the current institution of marriage is broken. I don't feel it's of benefit to anyone right now. Significant changes need to be make to safeguard participants in modern society. Until such a time as I see those changes I will advise those closest to me to avoid marriage, both male and female.

Divorce was the most awful thing I've been through and I was at rock bottom mentally & financially with a newborn. Awful. I was told a clean break was my only option so had to sell the house for next to nothing. My 'perfect' idea of marriage has been completely shattered.
That was four years ago, I found my feet and worked my ass off for what I have now, I have a great partner who has fathered my second child we have a house together, life insurance policies and are saving to get a will written. I see no need for a wedding.

This is a very interesting discussion! I must say I completely agree with the view women should be cautions about giving up work even if they have young children. This is simply not a very smart decision and doesn’t have a great future security potential. My DH’s ex doesn’t work and is fully reliant on him paying all her and their children’s expenses. She has a term order for global maintenance and that will obviously finish at some point. Why doesn’t she want to work when the kids are now in their late teens - I have no idea. I on the contrary was a lot more cautious about my career - I returned to work after 18 months and now getting promoted (and I work 4 days a week too). My decision was not easy and I have had a lot of guilt since. I have had to manage work and childcare and often felt absolutely drained. Both decisions - hers are mine - were completely our own life choices (my DH when married to her could afford to cover childcare). I don’t understand why she should be compensated for the fact she chose to have an easier life? We all should earn our own living. Having said that I understand this view is very common in the UK but is an absolute norm in other parts of the world ( Nordics, Russia, China etc)

Is not very common - I should have said

Mumoftwo, there’s a whole thread of reasons why wills and life insurance are still nowhere near as important as marriage, maybe have a search for it?

M0vin we’ll have to disagree. Marriage is working extremely well for many people. And provides many important rights to people who choose to make a commitment to each other. Not least in the case of illness or death of one side in terms of next of kin and finances and taxation of inheritances. So it’s a bit sweeping and simplistic to say something like ‘marriage is of no benefit to anyone right now’. No need for such dramatic statements especially when incorrect.

My original point was do any of us realise at the beginning what we’ve really signed up for? There are the vows, of course, including “til death us do part”, “love and to cherish”, “honour”, “in sickness and in health” “forsaking all others” and “with all my worldly goods I thee endow”. And we all want to believe it will last too.
^

Problem is, most women are more bothered about the dress, party and Prince Charming and the idea of a wedding, rather than the legalities of a marriage.

They see it at age 20, rather than age 50.

As for wills and life insurance...everything goes to my children. I have no partner now so it’s not an issue at all. And I’ll never marry again.

Don't blame you op.

As someone who has built up significant assets, pensions and property I would want to safeguard my life's work before I'd even consider marriage. With 50% divorce rate it's a risk many are unwilling to accept. As prenups are not legally binding in the UK, the only option is not to marry. Setting the romantic part aside, marriage is a business arrangement in more ways than one and currently the risks outweigh the rewards. I think if you ask most people with assets they will express the same sentiment.

Hideandgo, you are right that there are broad benefits for people covered by marriage law and divorce rights.

However if you do not want and never intend to make your romantic partner your heir then marriage becomes a complication. Especially if they are of the same view and need to protect their pre-existing wealth from the obligations of marriage. This is not meanness btw. If either or both parties have dependents or business entanglements (usually family) then they have to balance off the benefits with the risks and impact on others. Not least of all for children of partners remarrying who can be inadvertently disinherited.

Reform needn't sweep away protections for parents who salary sacrifice but they should give people the opportunity to protect pre-existing assets. Also if post nups were standard then couples could assess the long term financial implications of having a child and career sacrifice. The problem is that both parties don't do this until separation or divorce. Only then and far too often do they realise that they have barely saved enough for a single household never mind 2.

Young couples today rely on family and government loans to get a deposit for a home. They are unlikely to see big rises in house prices and most can't save for old age because of the cost of mortgages and rent. Assuming a divorce settlement will give you security if one of you career sacrifices is falsehood and becomes an untenable risk for the other party.

Lets be real, yes there is unavoidable career sacrifice associated with having children. But after maternity leave and the early years, you are into the realms of choice and what may well be called an avoidable career sacrifice (exemptions for SEN, ill-health and disability). Where there are no children, there are adults in relationships who make unilateral choices to limit or reduce their earning potential for personal betterment at the expense of their partner and without their consent.

Divorce Laws need to limit the extent to which a partner is expected to make good the consequences of this choice, if at all.

More & more court cases are showing the financial risks of marriage for anyone who comes into it either earning more or having more assets than the other party. The way forward may be pre-nups, unromantic, yes, but accepted by courts. It is probably critical to have a legal document confirming one party paid the deposit for the marital home, or setting out the actual share of finances each party contributes. Really wealthy people, with trusts & so forth, have these.
After my rather brutal divorce, I decided never to marry. My current partner lives with me in my house & contributes to the bills with a written agreement as to what he Is entitled to, but at some point we are going to have to formalise this I think. I want the wealth I have created thru enormously hard work go to my children, not to his ( who will inherit thru their mother) due to some legal fluke. It is actually s complete minefield.

The previous two posters have pretty much summed up my feelings on marriage, having had more time to type than I had. Thank you.

Why on earth are people paying money to exes if they (ex) dont have custody of the children? Surely it should be child maintenance and thats it?

@LEMtheoriginal there’s the lump sum for the house, the cars, the savings, all of which one person may have contributed a lot more to than the other.

Exactly. My exw was financially irresponsibile before I met her, didn't save, didn't take out a pension. I had to pay pretty much everything, ie cars mortgage etc...yet she had the right to make a claim on pensions I'd built up BEFORE I'd even met her....how's that fair in any way? All it means is feckless people can get a pass for their poor behaviour and lack of responsibility. Thank God we don't live in America where you can be forced to pay Alimony for LIFE....and you all though slavery was abolished.