Advice wanted please, we're talking divorce :(

[ChangeAfoot]

Feeling nervous about posting at all about this - have name-changed for the occasion.

H and I are discussing divorce. He tells me that "what would happen" were we to split is that we would sell the family home, both buy flats capable of housing our two children (both pre-school age), and then have shared custody. He very much wants shared custody; I do not. At the moment there is a sizeable chunk of equity in the house, we have been married 3 years; together for 10. I haven't worked since the children were born (we moved abroad when I was pregnant for his work and have only recently returned). I am very keen to get back to work but being realistic this will have to be in a new area or at a much lower level - my work is completely unworkable with children as I often worked away from home and doing crazy hours (freelance).

THe house is not in my name, it was bought using some money H received.

My two main fears are that he stands a chance of getting joint custody, and that we would have to sell the house and get two flats. I know I need to go and see a family lawyer, am going to set about researching and making an appointment. But in the meantime can someone shed light on what might happen in this instance? He's a hands-on dad but has always worked full-time and frankly hasn't ever bought an item of clothing and barely made them a meal since they were born... ... will I lose my kids to this extent? :(

[larrygrylls]

Change,

I think you need to stop fantasising about your wish list and put your reality hat on.

Divorce is very expensive, both in terms of getting it done, and the relative cost of running two households vs running one. Firstly, I suspect that in your comment above, you are forgetting the equity in the house and the fact that your mortgage is (probably) interest only. The principal does eventually have to be repaid. Also, judging by your comments, you and your husband have assets of around £500k and a joint income of £80-150k. Comfortable but, in London, far far from rich. Out of that you will need to fund two properties. Were you to keep the marital residence, you would still need to find money to buy your husband a decent flat where he could have the children in reasonable comfort (even in a 70/30 arrangement). Secondly, a bitterly contested divorce will probably such 20% of your assets away, even using "high street" firms. It is easy to spend £50k/person on it. And, if you start talking Mishcon de Reya, start doubling and tripling that number.

If you are both completely set on divorce, for the sake of the children I would seek a law firm where mediation is the preferred route and be prepared to empathise and compromise with your husband to get to a fair solution, as seen from both party's perspective.

[ChangeAfoot]

Thanks for that larry :)

You're about right on the assets but (not that it's particularly relevant) his income ranges from £150k - £250k pa, and as he's a contractor/ has a Ltd company, his net income is actually quite high as a %age. Having said all that, currently he's not working!

I don't think it is that unrealistic to want to have my children for a majority of the time, and get to stay in the marital home. I intend to get work of some kind, albeit part-time probably to start with - who knows. Certainly the lawyer I spoke to today, and the barrister I'm seeing tonight, have made reassuring noises regarding my main two wishes, although it might become clearer tonight.

I also hope very much to avoid a costly and bitter divorce, and hope that we can go down the mediation route. Having said this, I am hoping to get some good quality legal advice to take with me into the process and don't think this unduly indulgent on my part.

[ChangeAfoot]

I'd like to clarify btw, that I'm not talking about a vast 6-bed marital home - we've just got 3-beds and I'd happily take in a lodger too - I don't think I'm being ridiculous....

[ivykaty44]

I put the questions up as it is hopefully helpfull to think about what you want and then go from there.

I don't think it is unrealistic for you to want your dc with you the majority of the time - but why should they be with you the majority of the time? They have two parents and a 60-40 spilt or even 35-65 spilt may be far better for the dc.

You are unsure about parenting together and having your lives still rubbing along side together. I will tell you something - your life will be rubbing along side your ex husbands for many a year so far better to try to get along apart for the sake of the children. Just have one rule - never talk about anything but the children, don't pry into each others lives.

( I have friends that do this and it really is the most amicable divorce I know and does work, he works away for 6 weeks sometimes 4 weeks at a time and when he comes home both girls go to his place for two to three weeks until he goes away again, his work is intense and she works part time, but his free time means she gets time to herself and a life)

Your lives will be rubbing along together if you keep the material home as it is likely he will keep a share of it and upon your dc reaching 19/21 you will have to pay him of then - so if you want to cut ties why not sell up now and be done with it?

Just a few thoughts for you. Good luck for all of you

[ChangeAfoot]

Thanks ivy - I really do appreciate all thoughts. Well okay, most of them

I hear you re. the custody thing. As I said I'm a novice with the whole percentage split and how that actually pans out in terms of days/nights/weekends; BUT my main concern right now is that the DC consider that they have ONE constant home which is their mainstay of routine and stability. They are very small, and very close to me as I have been their main breadwinner. We used to live abroad until recently, and H would spend first thing Monday morning to very late Friday night working in London - we were effectively a single-parent family then good practise so you can maybe understand that I feel particularly close to them. I've also had to deal with several "turns" from DH over the years since they've been born - a particular favourite being the time he locked himself in the spare room for almost a week when I had small babies to look after (think 2 week old twins) and refused to eat, just shouting out the door occasionally that he thought I should just "move back to your mum's in England, I'll have nothing to do with the babies and we can just pretend they were never mine". Yes, that kind of thing. I'm starting to get angry, now I think about it.

[ChangeAfoot]

Oops, meant to say 'main carer' there. H would be spluttering into his decaf at the mere suggestion of any breadwinning on my part...

Also - just to say that I really am keen to hang onto the house because it has been a particularly good investment so far and we have an excellent mortgage deal which will probably never be repeated. We are lucky enough to see it almost double in value over the past 7 years and as someone who stands to inherit next to nothing from her parents, I am very keen indeed to feel like I have something of value, even if I only own part of it. Who knows, maybe in time I could buy him out.

[solittletimeandsomuchtodo]

Hugs
Good luck with your drink tonight, hopefully you can get some answers.
Is he still not home?

[ChangeAfoot]

Thanks. He got home about an hour ago. Had the bloody gall to send me a text this afternoon saying that we should "start the joint custody now so you can get out and about and do things" after I'd spent the whole day feeling abominable, not knowing where he was or where he spent the night (he would never bother to tell me) and trying to do a half-decent job of parenting while he sauntered around town seeing lawyers/doing whatever he fancied to bolster his case before the weekend. He must think I was born yesterday if he thinks that now, at the 11th bloody hour and just prior to it being noted, he's going to start playing a full and proper role in their lives. Twat. (Sorry, am getting angry, having up until now tried desperately hard to make this work..)

[ivykaty44]

Perhaps he should be left in charge of the dc, sit back and let him take over till next Monday - sod the weekend being his. Actually no, think Tuesday and when he comes and asks abut work look blank

He may not have thought this through so possibly a good trail run thrown in at the deep end could help him know whether this is how he wants to do things...

[splintersinmebum]

So ... you want to stay in the house that was purchased with his money; you don't want to get a job so presumably you want DH to support you and you want full residency of your children? And you want to use his MH problems against him - which would get you flayed alive on MN if you were a man trying to use MH issues against a mother.

[ChangeAfoot]

Thank you for that marvellous contribution, splinters. No, I am not using his MH issues "against him"; I am using them for my children. Who, after all, I am trying to put at the forefront of concern. But thank you for assuming that any concerns I might have about his MH (repeated episodes of schizophrenia?) should NOT be taken into consideration when thinking about the welfare of my own children.

[MOSagain]

splinters so the OP doesn't work, having given up her career to be a trailing spouse, she is the main carer of two very young children and has no income. For her to even get a job now would involve a considerable amount of childcare costs which would probably make it not a viable option. So where would you suggest she lives with the two children?

Very interested in what her options are?

[RedHelenB]

Well he's not working either at the moment so he can't provide for her! A word of warning, it is unreasonable to expect to be able to carry on as you are - every separated/divorced woman I know has had to get a job within a year when they were previously SAHMs. Also, he may enjoy this time with the children & decide on a less well payed job that might be better for stress levels & his mental health.

[larrygrylls]

Change,

I don't think that it is positive to start thinking of him as a "twat", regardless of his behaviour to date. It may be a good idea from both your and your children's perspective to acquiesce to his demand to start joint parenting from now. It could be a huge wake up call to him when he has to do the mundane things when they are needed and not at a time of his choosing, regardless of his state of health/fatigue. Welcome to the real world of parenting! If he is genuinely up to it and enjoys it, you may have to accept 50/50 is the best and fairest solution. Chances are that he will quickly back down though when he realises the reality. In addition, if he is doing more parenting in the short term, it will give you the time to both seek legal advice and decide what you want to do going forwards in terms of work, housing etc.

The problem with divorce (and I have witnessed it with both my parents and my in laws) is that it takes a huge force of will to keep the interests of one's children (and oneself) at heart and not to see the whole thing as an exercise in revenge and vindication of how you feel about your soon to be ex. Lawyers are never (in my experience, there must be at least one that is!) helpful in this regard, encouraging one to have unrealistic expectations and constantly up the ante. The best thing to do (if still possible) is to have a calm conversation with your husband as to how best to manage the divorce in such a way as it best benefits your children and puts you both in a position where you can be amicable co-parents after the divorce. Much harder said than done.

[Collaborate]

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. Unrelistic expectations start when people ask for advice on here and then listen to unqualified people say what someone might acheive financially on a divorce. Would you go into a pub and ask a bunch of strangers how to treat an ailment?

Lawyers are qualified people with (usually) a wealth of experience in their field.

[larrygrylls]

Collaborate,

Absolutely not. On the other hand, have you ever met a doctor paid by the hour?

[ChangeAfoot]

Thanks all again. So met with the barrister friend last night, who was very positive. I feel a lot better, although in a way think her verdict on my position might be too good to be true, so am trying to remain conservative with my optimism.

I'm not one of those people who view lawyers with great suspicion; like a bunch of circling vultures. Although having said that, I was shocked at the ease with which things I said last night were able to be twisted to possibly be used against my husband to his great disadvantage. I have no wish to do that, only to protect my and my children's interests. But interestingly she thought there would be almost no chance (given our assets and other circumstances) that I would not be able to continue living in the house at the very least - either with a Mesher order or by splitting the assets and handing the equity of the house over to me. IMO the latter option is overly optimistic. I was surprised/shocked to hear that if I have the majority residence of the children and there isn't sufficient money in the pot, it's not considered "essential" that both of us have a house/flat big enough to house the children. I do not wish to see my husband living in a place small enough such that this isn't possible.

Re. work - I would LOVE to get back to work. I honestly think this divorce could be the making of me (terrible cliche). I have been so completely worn down by the strain of living with an unhappy, depressed man; whilst also looking after two small children and moving country/etc, that I have found it next to impossible to give the thought required to restarting my career. Nothing against SAHMs at all, but really - it isn't for me long term. The thought that I could get back to work, in time full-time once the DCs are at school, and stay in the house and pay either part or all of the mortgage - feels incredibly exciting. Fingers crossed - now off to phone a couple of the lawyer recommendations my friend gave me last night, both of whom do legal aid. But I was also told not to be too frightened of the fees otherwise (although these are not Misch de Reya types - based in Bromley/Croydon ) because there are options available including paying in instalments or paying upon settlement.

[ChangeAfoot]

The thing is larry - I don't want 50:50 residency. I just absolutely don't want it. I don't want to commit to having to live within a mile of each other, or whatever, for the duration. That doesn't mean I'd ever up sticks and move to another city either.

[larrygrylls]

Change,

I don't think coming up with the money to pay a lawyer will be a problem, given the joint assets. As you said, they don't mind when you cross their palms with silver, as long as you do so and include interest rolled up on fairly generous terms (to them). Again, clearly given your joint assets and income, you should be able to remain in the house. If you do, though, the £350k of equity will be offset against some of the remaining income and the amount that you will receive from your husband in maintenance.

This is where I am suspicious of lawyers (and not just because I have seen two sets of couples blow in excess of £200k in legal fees fighting over assets of less than £2.5 mio in total). I suspect if your husband were to visit a barrister, he would be told something far more optimistic to him based on what he brought into the marriage etc. And, I suspect the courts will settle somewhere in the middle, with the only happy people being the lawyers. Clearly the court's priority will be to see the children properly provided for. Given your joint assets and income, I cannot see any way a court would say that your husband should receive so little that he cannot put up his own children in reasonable comfort. Of course, if it ends up that you are the main carer, he could make do with a 2 bed flat, with them sharing a room.

You do need to take good legal advice. I am not for one moment arguing against that. On the other hand, both you and your husband need to remember that the lawyers do work for fees and a bitterly contested divorce is far more lucrative than one which is relatively amicable and the financial settlement fairly negotiated (with the help of professional intermediaries). If you imagine a divorce lawyer as a financial advisor paid on commission, I think you will see where I am coming from. Of course they are experts and can give good advice. On the other hand, they are hardly going to ignore what they are being paid to do the job. And it only takes one set of sharkish lawyers to set the spiral off. Even if you get fair and decent lawyers, if your husband gets the biggest sharks in town who set the ball rolling with a super aggressive letter full of unreasonable demands, your lawyers will need to respond equally aggressively and it goes from there.

The above is why I advise any couple who still have a working relationship in terms of communication to try and manage the process together with the help of professional intermediaries.

[larrygrylls]

Change,

Regardless of what you want, what residency do you think would be best for your children and fair to your husband? If you were to put yourself in his position, would you also believe it to be fair?

The thing is, from his perspective, he probably saw the marriage as one in which he worked in order to see his family when he came home in the evenings and at weekends. Once you split up, he may prefer to find part time work (which, if he is a contractor, may be possible) and see his children more. Do you see that as completely unreasonable?

[ChangeAfoot]

Good advice larry, thank you. I have no problem with him seeing the children after work/every day/etc, it's where they sleep that I have issue with. And I do believe that is in their best interests.

I'm open to thinking about what may happen in the future. But for now, the roles have been that he is the breadwinner, I am the SAHM. So it is unrealistic, surely, to suddenly think that those roles can be changed and we can both be breadwinner? As I say I am not averse to getting a job, but since I don't have one to go back to and my previous industry (TV production freelancer) is next to impossible to manage around children; I'd say it's not a good bet for the short to medium term that I'd be able to contribute much at all to the pot. Unlike my husband, who were he to actually bother to apply for any jobs is capable of easily earning six figures.

(PS I agree it's not useful to start thinking of him as a twat. Although I am starting to get angry about the unfaithfulness, non-stop misery, and constant blaming of me for all his ills over the past ten years.)

[ChangeAfoot]

PS: quite reassured to check the hourly rate of the recommended sols I have, which top out at £240 per hour. Phew.

[toosoppyforwords]

i think you need to give some serious thought with regard to proper access to the children. I understand you wish to keep the children with you. I understand the emotional ties and the rationale to provide them with a stable home.

However, INMVHO it is not realistic to say that he can come round after work, every night and that the children sleep in their own bed all the time....he has every right to see the children without you being there and provide a stable home life with himself at his own property too.

It would be far better to actually (in as far as possible) to set days/times so that everyone knows where they stand. Yes your children are young, but young children also adapt very well as long as they feel loved and secure. A routine helps children because they know what is happening (btw i'm not saying 50;50 is right or anything) just that practically speaking saying you he can see them after work/every day etc wont work.

You also said 'I don't want 50:50 residency. I just absolutely don't want it. I don't want to commit to having to live within a mile of each other, or whatever, for the duration.' yet you now talk about him being able to come round every day to see the children....Where will you be if he did this? Will you go out everynight so he can spend time with them alone?

I think the courts will agree he has every right to them at his property so you should start to prepare yourself now for when the time comes that you have to hand them over to him for a weekend - that will happen

You should also start giving some serious thought as to how you will support yourself medium to long term. Its easy to say you will go back to work full time when the children are at school - but you will need to ensure you have proper childcare for before, after school and half term/summer holidays etc. I do think you will be expected to support yourself. In my experience (only with friends and relatives) each one was expected to find work to be able to support themselves...long gone are the days when husbands were expected to support their ex wives indefinitely.

Just more food for thought. And i think Larry talks alot of sense.

[RedHelenB]

No court can force him to work in the job he is in now though. Of courser barristers are going to post a rosy picture but common sense should tell you that after their costs & the costs of two houses there will be less money to play with. If for the cost of the marital home you could fund two dwellings of sufficient size for your children to spend time with both parents that would be seen as preferable to one parent living in a house & the other in lodgings for example.

Of course you want to take legal advice but I wouldn't dismiss other people's experiences either.

[RedHelenB]

Actually, you may talk to someone who has been through similar health issues as you & take on board their experience as well as the doctors.