Divorcing gambling addict

[Tempfortodayhelp]

I’m nearly two years out from a separation and so relieved I amn’t in it any longer.

Together for 20 years and married for 15. Two kids. Both in the same employment area - self employed. Both have always had same earning potential but he has had very significant addictions and didn’t progress to same extent. As a result of gambling has never retained any assets apart from a house purchased before marriage. Has been a functioning alcoholic probably all his adult life. Still earns decent amount. Childcare was equal with kids going to creche.

Family home was purchased with substantial deposit from me and apart from two years where he paid half monthly mortgage repayments everything else paid by me. On separation he moved out. He now lives in a house that has effectively no mortgage that he bought before marriage. That house is worth 50% of family home. I also have a house that is let that was purchased before marriage. When I was paying for family home he was gambling large sums of money unbeknownst to me. I knew about gambling but not extent.

From long and very bitter experience I know that any funds he gets by way of settlement will be gambled.

After refusing to engage he has now said that he will be seeking 50% of the family home and 50% of my pension. He has never paid for a pension as all of his available funds were always gambled.

So here’s my AIBU - I naively thought he wouldn’t come looking for money from me given everything that happened. I’m not wondering what the ultimate legal determination is. I’m wondering about my own moral/ethical position is. Should I agree to giving him money? Selling the house? Half of pension? This is someone with a profound addiction. The money will be gone. I’m talking someone who has gambled a lot of money in a short time previously when he had access to that kind of money. But even leaving that aside do I owe him? And again I don’t mean legally as such. I’m prepared to contest any settlement fully even though I know the pitfalls.

Our boys are good. I mind them most of the time as he doesn’t want more than minimal contact and neither do the boys.

Morally he should get a little bit of the equity in the family home.

How much is your property (the one purchased before marriage) worth?

When did you start paying into your pension?

Your marriage will be classed as a 'long' one. Which means the courts will try to leave you both 50/50. Which is wrong in my opinion. These days I see so many women lose so much at the hands of feckless men. Used to be that men got a raw deal in divorces. Well not any more. So many women supporting useless men.

You need legal advice

Basically his gambling/drinking can be offset against his share of the marital assetts

Hi. Thanks. I am getting legal advice and I will be contesting any settlement. It’s not so much where the court will land that concerns me. I’ve carried this man for a very long time. I’ve tried to do the right thing. I want to see if there’s a perspective I’m missing.
Hence framing this as a moral question.
Both houses bought before marriage worth around the same. Mine has a much larger mortgage.
I started contributing to pension 20 years ago.

So he worked all those years, wasn't a stay at home father and gambled any money he earned?

Yeah, don't pay him a penny and tell him to see you in court. The judge will have a field day with him.

The family home might have to be sacrificed but anything else, I think you're safe. His irresponsible behaviour and lack of forward planning is not your fault or responsibility. Go and see a solicitor anyway.

Seriously, dont ask us! This is far more complicated and needs a very good solicitor.

I am getting legal advice. And will be contesting any claim. My only query relates to whether I’m missing some other perspective on it morally.

Yes. That’s all correct.

Sacrificing the family home will be a big sacrifice. It was the product of blood and sweat. But if that’s what happens so be it. I’ll happily pay him back the mortgage contributions for the two years he contributed. But selling it so he profits from what I’ve done is galling. All the more so when I can be certain that money will be gambled.

I don't think you are missing any other moral perspective. You should fight to keep as much as possible with experienced legal representation. You don't deserve to struggle financially in retirement because of his actions. Good luck.

Morally he is foul and completely bankrupt. Your good nature meant that you thought he had good within his nature. But he’s an addict. By nature selfish. It’s a sickening money grab from him and I’d get as much evidence of his fiscal irresponsibility throughout your marriage as is possible. Statements, payments, gambling records etc. the more evidence you have of his financial irresponsibility , contrasted to your ongoing shouldering of the fiscal responsibility in spite of his actions- the better.

I have all of this. Hence I’m fine with contesting the legal claim despite the costs. It’s not a foregone conclusion but the alternative is just too sickening to contemplate. I suppose I was just wondering if I wasn’t being fair. I sort of know I am but I just wanted to see if anyone had a different perspective.

I think you need to put the morals to one side and just look at the legal aspects- going to court is expensive to argue over money- mediation would be a better option.

the fact that you paid for most things is a bit irrelevant as houses etc are martial assets ,

How old are the children? Given he is adequately housed you may be able to delay the sale of the family home to preserve the children's circumstances for their minority. You are right to seek proper legal advice by the sound of things if he initially refused to engage and is now seeking 50% of everything, he is feeling vexatious in some way and is perhaps pursuing things out of a grievance. If so he will need his own legal advice and he will need to fund it.

In terms of ethical/moral positions perhaps this is more important for you in terms of how to take a position without backing down. If you have always done what you think is 'the right thing' that really depends on who is judging. There are many who would have refused to tolerate the years of not contributing to the family living costs. I wonder why you thought that was the right thing to do? I would say from experience, people with established addiction issues are at high risk of ongoing difficulty rather than recovery. Therefore what is the likelihood that he might be a useful provider for your children now and in the future? I would try very hard to hold on to your pension if you can including negotiating an offset on properties. You will have to get it valued unfortunately. People with addiction can be very ruthless so you may need to expect high levels of unreasonableness and very little thought for others. Good luck.

He is refusing to engage with mediation.

I thought it was the right thing to provide for my family. And I did that.
In was in an abusive situation - verbally and emotionally. Despite being a robust person I foolishly thought things would improve. They didn’t. As you correctly point out they worsened.
He will not be a responsible provider for our children going forward. They are teens.
I don’t really understand what you mean about me taking a position without backing down.
I will be trying very hard to hold on to my pension and the house I bought. While he was drinking and gambling.
Perhaps unintentionally your post has assisted me. I don’t know why the use of quotes on “right thing”. But presuming that’s intended to denigrate me it has had the opposite effect. That’s actually exactly what I’ve tried to do. And I’m still trying to do.

No intention to denigrate you at all. Your original question if I understand it correctly - was about your moral/ethical position rather than the legal position. That's what I meant by focusing on what is the right thing to do - I put it in quotes because I would argue no one can tell you what that is as we will all approach things differently depending on what our personal values and lived experiences are.

I wasn't sure if you were asking that because you are generally very fair and even handed (given you have supported him when he has not been contributing) that made me wonder if it was quite difficult to take a harder line and you were trying to get some more ideas about how you could do that.

I would be inclined to be very focused on protecting what you can of family assets as a way of protecting them for your children, I don't know if that argument will have weight in court and this is where things may seem unfair. He can rightly argue that he will also provide for his children and he should have half.

OP, you have absolutely no moral or ethical duty to give your useless husband any more than a court forces you to!

You clearly set yourself high standards, which is good — but not if you let selfish and amoral freeloaders like your husband take advantage of you. And remember that anything he takes from you he’s taking from your children too.

Thank you