Why do I feel bad/guilty asking for a lump sum?

[Rainbowshine12]

So my ex partner and I co parent our son well, we are amicable, he has him most weekends and goes to all our son's appointments and school meetings etc
We are still married but have been separated and living apart for almost 2 years.
He is still in the family home ( he bought it before we met and my name is not on the mortgage)
I left because of his issues mainly which made me fall out of love with him. I am private renting a tiny flat that costs a ridiculous amount of money for how tiny it is.
Basically I know I'm entitled to a lump sum from the family home, and I would like to get divorced but he has always been stingy with money and I know once I start talking about money and what I am entitled to , I feel like it will really get his back up and the amicable thing we have at the minute will just go out the window. He will resent me so much if he.has to give me money.
At the same time , I want to try and get a mortgage and get somewhere better for me and my son to live and would use any money I get as a deposit.
My friend has said to not try and claim anything as it is more important to keep the amicable relationship for the sake of my son and that she doesnt think i would be entitled to much anyway as it was my ex's house before i met him. But if I do that, I will forever be in limbo and not able to progress with where I want to be for fear of upsetting my ex and destroying what is currently a good co parenting relationship.
Any advice? I'm really torn

She hasn't contributed. Zero !!! She has looked after their JOINT child. Have you not seen the cost of childcare ?

Yes I think some people are forgetting that we have a young child together and it is partly my ex's responsibility to make sure he has a roof over his head that is stable. There's also no way he would have been able to work md earn the money he did had I not looked after our son while he went to work. Also he was not forced to marry me or have a child with me. He wanted both and our son was planned

The house was there before there was a child...
You can rent with a child no problem.
He should pay child maintance

I don’t think it is immoral when you’ve lived together, tried to make a go of a marriage and had a child with a person to then be entitled to some of the wealth built up during the partnership and marriage. She would have been contributing to the household bills and took on all of the health and financial risks and burden of having their child. She was clearly invested in the marriage and it was due to his unreasonable behaviour that it ended. Morally she should be entitled at least to half of the equity built up in the house during the marriage as she contributed to the household in that time.

100% agree. For the equity build up DURING the marriage.

if you read it properly he had the house before they were together that’s the bit there had been zero contribution to the assets before they even knew each other
anything gained /acquired during there marriage is joint and yes a chunk of that

as for the cost of child care its often cheaper to pay 50% of bills and 50% of child care
than 100% off bills with other partner doing child care

So you HONESTLY believe that a woman who married (legal contract) and has looked after someone's joint child deserves no compensation for lost earning /pension/ promotion /potential for overtime... and she should get nothing. ?

I'm pretty bloody glad the law isn't quite as misogynistic. (Although it took a few centuries to get there) . Never mind. There are always enough women around who believe raising a child should be at the sole cost of the mother. So I think you are in good company.

So yes. She is deserving of a 'chunk' .. that chunk is usually worked out to include cohabitation before the marriage.

Yes I believe she should get ZERO of any asset value accrued before they know each other (and so should he). Is it like that anywhere else on the world including Scotland. She should get child maintenance based on the income of the father.

Poor guy probably didn't understand that it's suicide to marry a pennyless houseless woman that leaves him after a few years..

Generally men with assets. Do not marry!!

Just get what you are legally entitled to and whats right for you. You have a child. In the UK if you have assets you know you are taking a risk marrying someone who doesn't. Im sure you didnt plan for your relationship to go south. Life happens sometimes and most people dont plan to get divorced when they get married.

I do agree with othet posters that the current legal system rewards the feckless (male or female) and can be a tad unfair on those with more assets, and those with good jobs. However you are not responsible for the legal system or the rights or wrongs of it, legal advice is needed so you can find out what you csn reasonably expect. Your earning potential is likely to be hampered by childcare responsibilities, as will be your pension, so you need to get your share from your ex for financial stability

Where you live us important. In Scotland the house (based on the info here) would not count as a marital asset so you wouldn’t be entitled to a lump some from it.

Give it a rest.

Do you think before you speak at all? Use any of your braincells or just yap like an unhinged dog?

If the "poor man" chooses to have a child with someone who then either shares the cost of living with them or looks after said child, yes the "poor man" is expected to ensure the child is provided for and the partner has a quality of life.

OP could have spent that time or money or making her own assets instead of contributing these resources to the family.

Honestly read a book before you come back with more nonsense.

Lol. This is such BS.
A poor men will still get assets from the rich woman if they have a child. In England you Essentially can't marry someone with significantly less assets than you without taking a huge risk.

Yeah. And he was happy to take this risk.

And now he needs to pay OP whatever she's legally owed. Hope this helps!

For all you know maybe he treated her like shit yet you have the audacity to bring the fact that she left into the equation?

Should she stay with him forever just because he had some assets and she didn't? It's not that difficult to just think.

Hopefully she is in Scotland. And what she is legally owed is somewhat fair!

Yeah it would also be fair if she was in England.

A consenting adult decided to join his finances and life with her, legally. No one was holding a gun to his head. Men get away with doing close to no child care and paying close to none child maintenance a lot of the time, yet the one legal thing that protects women seems unfair?

Maybe you're just very young and confused.

Not confused. I guess my main complaint is that if you have assets English law is quite unfair to you. Not to marry a woman who you have children with I understand could be "unfair" too. But sadly there is no alternative if you understand the implications.but you are right in general no one holds a gun to you, so the clear answer must be not to marry.

I certainly don't believe having a baby equates to half a working life, no. And the assumption the weaker financial party is doing more childcare just makes me laugh cynically given what I see at the school gate day in day out. Incidentally, the going rate for a surrogate in the US is a lot less than half a house! And a Nancy would have been a lot cheaper and a lot more competent than my ex wife!

I actually believe the lost earnings is a semi myth. I say semi myth because women in professions do lose out but in those cases they normally get bugger all compensation for it because the divorce is based on their earning capacity and they're expected to just get on with it. It's only parents who never bothered having a career and are a lazy so and so who get compensated for it ironically enough.

Exactly the system basically incentives lazyness.

Are you for real ?? !!

Yup. It doesn't make sense to me to have to give away a house that I bought by myself before I knew someone should a relationship break down. Is that crazy?

Op you will be entitled to something yes
you do have a short marriage so courts will generally look to reset people back to how they were pre marriage and will consider what each party brought to the marriage in terms of assets

however, as you have a child together, they will also look to ensure this is considered

if you’re after 50% + you’re probably onto a losing battle ( rightly ) but you shoujd be entitled to something

a solicitor can guide you
it will be dependent on many factors, not least how many assets there are and your housing needs /abilities.