Advice about divorcing a high earner

[Fedupnowhadenough]

Hi my husband earns about £400,000 a year plus more in bonuses. I earn £20,000 a year and work part time.

We have 3 school age kids (infant and primary).

I have no savings etc, don’t know about him as we have separate bank accounts. He pays all bills, mortgage etc

If I was to leave him, does anyone know roughly what my financial position would be? He obviously earns so much more than me, and I just don’t know how I would survive financially if I was to leave 😢

He isn’t abusive, just a shit parent and doesn’t help or support me with the children in any way whatsoever apart from financially. We rarely have sex, I do all the parenting etc.

Please don’t do this, you are presenting it as a fait accompli.
if I was on 400k & someone presented me copies of my paperwork with an “or else” threat. I would tell them to piss off there and then

He's a shit parent but brings in £400k. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe earning that kind of amount for the family might keep him a bit busy?

Well, nevermind, you'll soon find out as regardless of whether he has to pay you lots of maintenance and assets or not you're going to be expected to maximise your earning capacity too. You will never learn how hard it is to make money like that so no doubt you will always judge him unfairly but trust me, he probably thinks you're a shit parent too because you're an inadequate provider.

I've also always been the high earner by a country mile.

I've never assumed that made it ok for me to opt out of parenting and take my family for granted.
I've never assumed that my OH as the lower earner was the default house slave/family prop whose role was to burnish and support my career, whilst theirs falters along the sidelines.
I've never kept all the finances tucked away in my name leaving my spouse in ignorance. Not least because if i went under the proverbial bus my family would need access to the money in a hurry.

Its absolute horseshit that high earners do this because they are under soooo much pressure. Its largely driven by selfishness and ego.

How come you don't have joint bank accounts? Has he always been shady with finances? Who buys stuff for the dc? Also on 400k why on earth has he been so reluctant to outsource eg cleaner, more asc clubs, mothers help, housekeeper etc?

Gosh old thread, but this makes me think all high earning men/women shouldn't get married!

@carmenitapink ha! He wasn’t a high earner when we got married, it’s gone up over time.

So what? My income went up after I married too, but the hard work was all the late nights at work and studying the professional qualification before we married. My income had nothing to do with my ex-wife's contribution and based on the divorce settlement, a nanny would have been cheaper (and would have done a better job).

At that salary level you are advised to see a solicitor and to try and gather any and all financial information that you can get your hands on whilst he is out of the house.

50-65 per cent of value of assets accrued during the marriage would be my guess. If you have prove of when his salary took off, why you gave up your job etc, all helps.

If you do want to make the marriage work outsource the daily life stresses such as cleaning/cooking and get a babysitter and make him pay for it.

He's not exactly 'keeping' her if she is doing all the childcare and working part time, while he earns 400k a year which the OP doesn't seems to have much/any access to.

It's amusing how many people here are blinded by the money and think the OP should just shut up and stay put 'for the children'. If her dh was on minimum wage I bet the advice would be quite different 😅

“I have no savings etc, don’t know about him as we have separate bank accounts.”
That is not normal if the man is earning 400k.

She has also hinted that he has tried to look elsewhere and neglects her and the DC.

A good husband with a high salary would spend the money on making his wife’s life easier and supporting her too and being loyal. If he treats her badly, she should leave and take what the law will give her in the circumstances.

I get that you are bitter but you have absolutely NO idea what the OP's husband even does for a living let alone how much stress he's under. It's also not an excuse to opt out of parenting or parental responsibilities- and he will soon find out what those are if he opts for 50/50 childcare.

OP, you are married and therefore will be entitled to a decent share of the marital assets which include savings etc and pension, which I imagine will be significant. Go and see a solicitor (ask for recommendations locally) and go from there. The financial settlement will focus on ensuring that you are both adequately housed.

How is he "opting out of parental responsibilities" when he's providing that kind of income for the family? In the family dynamic, it's just an extreme example of the two parents working to their strengths. If he's a bad parent for not having more time with the children, then the OP is an equally bad parent for not earning enough to allow him to step back! I think that argument is nonsense by the way, but also the logical conclusion of the arguments being made by most people here.

This thread is actually quite old; I was just responding to a stupid, blinkered remark someone directed to me a couple of days ago but I shall not be responding further.

Because earning money is not the measure of being a decent parent?

Two observations:

1. You'll find Family Courts disagree with you; and
2. An awful lot of posters on here judge their exes based solely on how much money they can extract from them rather than their proficiency as a parent in other ways. Lower than expected maintenance is by far and away the most common gripe I read on here.

@BetterFuture1985 you don't seem to have read the OPs responses, and are rather replying to comments as though this is about you.

Making money is clearly very important to you (I mean it's important to me too, I spent a long time at university and put in some solid hours at work now, and I expect appropriate remuneration), but surely you also know that being a good parent is about more than just providing financially? Growing up my father was the provider for the family, but he still took the time to hang out with me and help me with my homework and listen to me about my day and help me with my problems when he was at home. OPs husband does not do that, which is one of the reasons she posted. Her post might have touched a nerve which is why you've gotten so irate with your responses, but jeez, chill out.

Also, it's only half six in the UK, shouldn't such a high earner who is extremely busy not have time to be pissing about on mumsnet ;)

I think the OP is long gone to be honest. I was just replying to someone who directed a silly remark at me.

I won't be responding further.

@Fedupnowhadenough with that kind of income you could have easily afforded your choice of childcare to further your own career.

I hate it when women make excuses about having a low paid job stating it's to further their DH career.

It was good whilst it lasted but your best option is to up-skill and get some savings behind you so you are financially ok when battling it out

It's not 'extracting' money, it is contributing to your child's upkeep. CMS payments are notoriously low. Spousal maintenance is not the norm these days.

And no, family courts see that a balance of provision for children (time, parenting, financial) is what should be strived for.

I have no idea about your circumstances or why you are here but good luck to you if you if you see parenting as a financial transaction. 👌

Sorry but the only jobs that pay £400k leave you with v little time to be a super hands on parent.

Women like OP are selfish imo as she'll be thrilled to take his money & it's nonsense that he couldn't have achieved it without OP's support. You can get a full time nanny and part time housekeeper for less than £100k.

Someone who earns as little as OP does and is a SAHM just has no concept of what these type of roles take.

She is only wanting half the £ so she can spend it while with some guy with lots of time on his hands.

No thought for the kids.

This!

Know tons of dual career high earning couples.

This post is completely deranged.

Most people prefer their children not to be raised by nannies and housekeepers purely to allow both parents to earn 100k.

I know many many people in very high earning jobs and whilst some of them work really hard a lot of them don't. With some jobs power and experience also brings flexibility and the ability to delegate. Many people also choose these jobs because they like the power and status it's gives them so they aren't doing it out of pure altruism for the family. Women who take a step back from their career to support men who have these sorts of jobs deserve protection.

Whilst you might be right that two people can have high earning jobs and outsource all of their parental or domestic responsibilities this is surely not optimal.

@carmenitapink and the unbelievable misogyny of saying she will take "his" money and spend it on a man with time on his hands. Just laughable. I honestly can't think of much worse things than ending a marriage with two small children to hang out with some bloke with lots of time on his hands.

You seem like a very strange fish.

@bravetiger

Haha first time I've been called deranged on here

Please tell me about a salaried job that pays £400k that doesn't require a lot of time. I'm not talking about someone who has inherited millions in a trust and lives off the proceeds. I know quite a few salaried people / partners earning that, but all of them don't have a lot of free time.

I'm not saying everything should be outsourced, but it's an absolute fallacy that all of these women step back to support their husband's earning potential, as the point I'm making is that whether or not OP did the cleaning or not, it would get done.

Many women who work full time and put their children in nursery which is normal during working hours, who then have a better sense of what it takes to earn a lot of money.

It just seems ridiculous that she is admonishing him for not being a super hands on parent, when it's typically v difficult to earn that amount and be super hands on at the same time.

@bravelittletiger to quote the OP

"He isn’t abusive, just a shit parent and doesn’t help or support me with the children in any way whatsoever apart from financially. We rarely have sex, I do all the parenting etc."

She is complaining he isn't a hands on parent and they don't have sex enough and she does all the parenting. But she doesn't do all the parenting because providing financially for them is part of parenting, which I bet she couldn't do on a £25k salary alone.

Sorry but the above is a ridiculous reason to break up a family. It would be as ridiculous as him complaining that she's a shit parent because she doesn't earn enough money.

There are so many different contributions that make up parenting!

@carmenitapink

Your argument doesn't follow. You say that senior jobs require a lot of time but yet don't understand why supporting one job that takes a lot of time may have an impact on the other partner. Some examples of senior jobs that allow flexibility; partners in law firms and accountanctcy firms; CFOs and CMOs; business owners. All undoubtedly involve time and effort but it's nonsense to suggest it means you have no time left over for doing your fair share as a parent.

It's not a fallacy to say that women often have to take a step back to support their husbands career. I have historically been the higher paying partner but two maternity leaves have meant my husband has continued to progress whilst my career has stayed stagnant. My husband is now earning twice as much as me with an additional requirement to be in the office more than he had been previously. Without me taking a step back in terms of my career ie by not pursuing a similar promotion and high powered job and large salary, he would not be able to do extra days in the office or overnight stays. Or put more accurately our children and marriage would suffer if I was also working two days a week in the office a long way from where we live. Instead I've got a job that is remote which allows us to ensure there is always one parent available to collect or drop off the children to nursery and to ensure they have a parent to put them to bed. If we paid a full time nanny perhaps they could pick up the slack there and I could continue to forge ahead but that's not the life any of us want and my husband is more than happy to take advantage of me being more present to allow him to be available to his boss and have his work trips. I fail to see how that is a fallacy. It has been actively chosen by both partners but the end result is still that my job is taking a back seat to his.

And yes my children are in nursery and I work so I'm perfectly familiar with the juggle of nursery but the simple fact remains that my career is on pause which we have willingly chosen as a couple.

The OP complained that her husband wasn't hands on and they don't have sex. Why is she expected to have a sexless marriage just because her husband earns more? And why can't he be hands on just because he has a busy job? When you're working obviously you can't be hands on. But when he's not working he should be doing an equal share of childcare. Simples.