Spousal ?

[Whatonearth2021]

Asking for a friend…how likely is spousal to be awarded where children are not dependent and 50% of estate is around 550k? What other factors would be relevant?

I'm curious to know why you say she cannot claim that her pausing her career to stay home with the kids didn't elevate her husband's salary?

They both decided it would be best to have a parent at home with the children. If they'd taken joint responsibility for that he'd have had to reduce his hours surely?

Anyone (male or female) who takes the primary carer role is surely likely to facilitate the other partner's career and earnings.

• cannot claim that her pausing her career to stay home with the kids didn't elevated her husband's salary?

I was, am primary carer yo 2 children. Didn’t stop me working and earning and increasing earnings! Nonsense that it had to impact a career, only on mn where women generally claim they can’t work when they have children. Nonsense
i know many people who have managed their careers in spite of a person by at home, nothing to do with being facilitated ! Such a cop out

I think you misunderstood @millymollymoomoo. They had one very decent income as a family so chose to have one parent stay at home - very common amongst my now 50 year old friends - to facilitate all the house, pets, children etc. It worked very well for them. Only now, as she faces 12 years before state pension age on £25k in a career where, had she not stopped working, she might reasonably expect to be on £60k +. That's where the imbalance is. The erosion of her earning capacity.

Tough, I guess, but must be common.

But she made that decision freely. She didn’t have to sacrifice anything. All decisions have consequences. Now I get that the decision was made in a different context but the risks were known for a 50 year old. Divorce rates have been high for. Generation.

Advise her the job centre is that way.
>>>

But she’d be balanced out by most likely receiving higher share of capital ..

Surely he could counter argue that he was happy for the child to be in a nursery but she insisted on staying at home? That's what happened in my marriage. I wanted my ex-wife to go back to work but she refused. It wasn't a mutual decision. And she made no contribution to my increases in salary because I could have paid for a nursery anyway (which would have been a damn sight cheaper than what she walked away from the marriage with).

You're ignoring what actually happens these days. It's not the 1950s anymore, where the minute a woman gets a ring on her finger she's expected to give up work to iron her husband's underpants.

What actually happens in most couples is that both spouses have to work in order to pay the bills. In the situations where there has been a SAHP, it happens because one spouse earns enough to support the family, so the other spouse thinks "aha, I don't have to work and I can bring my child up which is what I would prefer to do." It's not a sacrifice, it's a luxury made possible by the other spouse's earnings. And when divorce happens, that luxury is often no longer possible, because income needs to fund two houses rather than one. Even where it is possible, it is often morally wrong because the weaker financial party should be expected to stand on their own two feet to the greatest extent possible.

No it's not fair to sponge off ex husband for the rest of her life , this shouldn't even be a thing tbh . She will need to get a job and live within her means like everyone else has to ffs

...Well, yeah, that's the risk you take when you quit work for years and everybody knows it. She wasn't forced to do so, she wanted to. When you SAH, you are doing it in the knowledge that you have probably fucked your long term earning potential and therefore you are taking a big gamble on your marriage not ending in divorce. It doesn't seem to me that that is something that needs remedied by the courts when a parent has freely chosen it, unless you want one member of every marriage with a child to be capable of holding the other hostage long-term by quitting work.

@ShiverOfSharks I think you're quite right that there would be a real issue if one parent could just quit work and refuse to work after the first child arrived, holding the other hostage in event of divorce. Unfortunately though, from my experience, to an extent this does happen, albeit more in the division of assets rather than spousal maintenance. My wife decided to quit work to become a SAHM without agreement from me and despite the obvious pitfalls. She made the usual dubious arguments about school holidays, cost of childcare etc whilst ignoring the glaring problems like not saving for a pension or building her career and therefore income for the long term. It was a luxury she could have by putting all of the pressure on me to earn the money, to the point that I had to get on a career track I didn't want (demanding hours, long commute) in order to earn enough to buy a house on a single salary.

Unfortunately though when it came to divorce apparently it was my fault she didn't save a pension so she got half of mine. Fortunately I was still able to force through the sale of the house but she fought mighty hard to try and get a mesher order. She even had the cheek to ask for spousal maintenance because of her "sacrifices" (apparently sitting around ignoring the children and playing games on your mobile phone all day is a sacrifice) although luckily she didn't get it.

Sadly women make that often times regrettable decision to become a SAHM when there is enough spousal earning power to support them. In many instances it is a poorly thought thru decision. Most often it in no way facilities the husband's career mobility, as the husband could easily have paid his share of nursery or child minder costs .

No one should have to support or provide for support of another fully functioning adult. If the adult has chosen to
opt out of the workforce or to not get adequate education or training to provide for themselves, that is an affirmative statement about the lifestyle that they think to adequate and sufficient for themselves and their children.

Both parents should expect and be prepared to adequately provide for their children. There should be no exceptions when it comes to providing for your children even if that means working significant over time or finding a second source of income .

I don't think that spousal support should be required except in extreme cases. Asset distribution should be equal, but adults should be expected to and should actually want to be self supporting.

I think one of the most insulting accusations I have had aimed at me since my divorce has been the claim that it is me rather than my ex-wife "playing the benefits system." The argument goes that because I earn well and my ex-wife doesn't, it should be up to me rather than the state to provide for her.

My counter-argument is that it is not me who is refusing to maximise my earning capacity or improve my career prospects.I do those things and I pay my taxes and I pay a heck of a lot more child maintenance than the average person too. If my ex-wife refuses to work as much as she can or to use her education and skills to even a reasonable extent (let alone a stellar one), then it is her and not me who is "playing the benefit system." I should not be expected to fund her lazy lifestyle choices out of my own pocket when the reasons for her dependency are entirely outside of my control and within her own abilities to resolve.

My ex-wife depends on the benefit system not because I don't pay her enough but because she doesn't work enough and she doesn't do the job she was trained to do. It's as simple as that and I feel no guilt whatsoever that she relies on universal credit.

I think American tv shows have a lot to answer for with people's expectations regarding divorce. Unlike the US , spousal maintenance is very rarely awarded in the Uk and Ireland. The starting point is more often than not 50% of assets and savings and then both partners are on their own to support themselves and rightly so. However it's often why you see many mature woman have to return to very entry level jobs in their 50s having been a sahp for years. It's the risk you take however .