Second Wives - any thoughts?

[Amanda1]

Message withdrawn

What if it was the mother who couldn't keep her pants on and ran off with several other men? And if in 10yrs time we could afford to send our DC to private school, should they not be able to go because we couldn't afford to send the first wives child as well?

I suppose tension is inevitable because most people don't make enough money for two families.

I think there has been some confusion with another article to another website This as I can't find another story on that site.

I think it was significant that the second wives had no children. I think they'd appreciate the connection their new partners feel towards the old family. And maybe understand why the first wife was so tense about their presence.

Yes, they seemed quite young second wives without children so you can understand them not understanding children. I liked the line about the second wife keeping the £1000 breast enlargement surgery secret. If he can't pick a decent looking second wife without having her cut her chest open for his pleasure you wonder what he's doing.

Of course the first wife might be responsible for the divorce. My ex never wanted a divorce (although I did have to pay to him and he doesn't pay the children anything). But even so I think as a general principle first families financially should come first and if peopole who form second families whether they are men or women cannot afford another lot of children then they should buy dogs and cats instead but not make the first family suffer.

Xenia -agree that you can't think that first families should suffer - its an obligation and one that shouldnt be shirked just cos your life circumstances change.

Take it you don't think that applies to maintenance for ex wives though... One thing to divide the assets in my opinion, another to have lifetime of payments (unless remarry etc) but I suppose I am speaking as someone who always thought that you should support yourself

I thought payments to the ex-wife came to an end (usually around last child leaving school). And the payments to the ex-wife are really about maintaining the children in the situation they were in before divoce. That was my impression. So if first wife's salary couldn't cover the mortgage and it was thought that children should stay in the home, husband had to pay money so that could happen. Similarly private education. It's considered unreasonable that they should leave their school just because he is not married to their mother any more.

The solution is simple. Divorced men should only marry really rich women.

Depends how much money there is. My ex husband wanted 50% of joint assets, maintenance around what he would have had as his wife (earning 10x what he did) for life plus no obligation to support the children or pay their school fees. Remember this is a completely sexually neutral issue and many women pay out to husbands on divorce if they earn more.

I think in general lower earners are paid maintenance for a limited period but some get it for life. Mrs McFarlane in one case gave up the chance to be a partner at a law firm she worked at where partners earn £1m a year. She stayed home for 17 years minding children and wiping bottoms etc and her husband went on to earn £750k a year. He has been ordered to pay her £250k per year for life, plus half their assets, plus school fees plus £20k per year per child.

I certainly don't approve of the situation where both sides work full time as in my divorce. Both pay higher rate tax. Both will have enough cash post divorce to buy a house yet just because the lower earner married the higher they also get a lot more money. Why can't you be returned to your previous life/income as a teacher, nurse etc. Why are you elevated for life to a standard of living because your other half did well? I am talking about full time workers here on both sides neither of whom sacrificed anything.

I'm a second "wife" (not married but only for tax reasons) and have two stepsons aged 12 and 9 and a daughter with my partner of 2.6.

I think there are myriad pitfalls to second families, not least financial issues. But resenting the first family is a surefire way to unhappiness.

I don't agree with Xenia that you should avoid having a second family though, in order to avoid financial hardship. Our daughter is the making of our second family (we went through a lot of pain until she came on the scene) and I know lots of second families who say the same - the stepsister/brother reconciles the children from the first family to the final ending of their parents' relationship and creates a shared bond of joy between all of us. I don't love my stepsons in the way I love my daughter, and they don't love me the way the way they love their parents, and that is normal and right and I wouldn't want it any other way, but we all unite in a common love of my daughter.

What's more, it makes me a better stepmother (which I would have been in any case) to have a child of my own, more tolerant of children's foibles and individuality.

But basically we all get on very well anyway. I'm very lucky.