Start Your Divorce Today - Premium Divorce Online


Divorce Source Community Forums >> Spousal Support/Alimony

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | >> (show all)
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Discussion - Alimony
      #230204 - 05/03/07 02:40 PM

There are a couple of posters who do not thing that alimony should EVER be awarded and I would like to know why.

I support alimony...when it is appropriate.

There are three types of "alimony": 1) Transitional Spousal Support, 2) Compensatory Spousal Support and 3) Spousal Maintenance:

1) "Transitional" (temporary) is for a party to attain education and training necessary to allow the party to prepare for reentry into the job market or for advancement therein and generally applies to SAHPs.

2) "Compensatory" is for when there has been a significant financial or other contribution by one party to the education, training, vocational skills, career or earning capacity of the other party.

3) "Maintenance" is for when there has been a contribution by one spouse to the support of the other for either a specified or an indefinite period...generally for marriages of twenty-five or more.

I don't think that "duration of marriage" is an appropriate benchmark to use in all cases...especially in Transitional Support. Why should a SAHP receive seven years of alimony for a fourteen marriage when they were only out of work for two years? I don't think that "custody" should have ANY bearing on alimony because alimony is about the MARRIAGE, NOT about PARENTING. I also don't think that the wage differences should be an automatic factor in determining alimony. Why should the higher wage earner be penalized because of their career choice?

I do think that "fault" should be a factor in determining any alimony. I don't think that someone who deliberately destroys their marriage through abuse, addition or adultery should "profit". I think that more scutiny needs to be applied to "irreconcilable differences" before granting alimony.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Debbie_L
Pooh-Bah
*

Reged: 06/06/05
Posts: 2031
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230219 - 05/03/07 03:17 PM

Well said. To just make a blanket statement that alimony should never be awarded is pretty backwards (and punitive) in my opinion. I have never received it, but I wouldn't begrudge it to someone that needed/deserved it.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Debbie_L]
      #230227 - 05/03/07 03:23 PM

I did receive it. We were married for 10 years, but I was only a SAHP for 4 and received alimony for 2. Alimony was based on the difference between what I was currently capable of earning and what I would have been earning had I stayed working and then divided by two since it was OUR decision.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Debbie_L
Pooh-Bah
*

Reged: 06/06/05
Posts: 2031
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230231 - 05/03/07 03:26 PM

Sounds pretty fair to me.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Debbie_L]
      #230233 - 05/03/07 03:29 PM

I agree that it shouldn't necessarily be based on the length of the marriage.

I've known a few couples...who had the agreement...wife works and puts husband through college. Once the children reach school age, husband will support wife while she goes to college.

EXCEPT that a divorce happens before wife ever gets to college. The marriage might only be 5 years long, but in that case, I think H should support the wife in the same capacity she suppoted him until she is out of school and in the workforce. If that takes 5 years, after a 5 year marriage, so be it.


I think the people who are anti-alimony don't view marriage as a true UNION. As a true UNIT, where the successes and failures of both parties "belong" to both parties. Just because only one spouse goes off to work each day, doesn't mean the other spouse has done nothing to contribute to the spouse's successes, salary, and earning potenital.

Afterall, how does a person work full-time, work overtime, travel for work extensively, climb the corportate ladder without any complications, with young kids at home?

I know as a working parent, it takes a support system for taht to happen and it's wrong to say that person deserves NOTHING if the marriage fails.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
matart1
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 09/01/05
Posts: 2798
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230236 - 05/03/07 03:36 PM

there are choices made going into a marriage and choices made exiting the marriage...nothing is ever written in stone.

I do not feel that incomes should be made equal - if incomes should be made equal then both people should be required to work in the same field. the reason the incomes are not equal is because of the choices that the people made on their own career paths.
not all things in life are equal....

if, and that is a big if, alimony is awarded - it should be within reason and it should come with restrictions (automatically there should be no remarriage or cohabitation and should end immediately with death, not some bs life insurance policy)

there should be "fault" to determine alimony.
meaning you want to walk away or cheat - good bye and no to the checkbook.

I think that if a person has a disability prior to marriage that is not a life sentenance to alimony.
a person who developes a disability should not reap a life sentance of alimony either - life is cruel and things happens but it would not be my husband's fault in the marriage if I developed carple tunnel on divorcesource....

alimony should be done within reason if it has to be done at all and unfortunately a lot of times I have only seen it abused more times than naught......it is funny now that after all these years that women have done the cry of poor me and alimony - more men in the last year to two have been posting about receiving alimony and women gripping about having to pay it to men and how unfair it suddenly is.....ironic don't you think...??

--------------------
Life is a long lesson in humility.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
trophywife
member
*

Reged: 01/26/07
Posts: 166
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230237 - 05/03/07 03:37 PM

I think it is hard to be married to most men, follow them from place to place and have children without future earnings being permanently reduced.
I think permanent alimony should be the rebutable presumption


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
matart1
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 09/01/05
Posts: 2798
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #230238 - 05/03/07 03:39 PM

the choice then is not to marry and have children - not so hard to do when you think about it ..... kind of what do you want to be when you grow up .....sponge??

--------------------
Life is a long lesson in humility.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: matart1]
      #230240 - 05/03/07 03:40 PM

the choice then is not to marry and have children - not so hard to do when you think about it ..... kind of what do you want to be when you grow up .....sponge??
++++++++

Oh, lord! So now women/men who take time out of their working life to dedicate it to their family and raising children are SPONGES?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
trophywife
member
*

Reged: 01/26/07
Posts: 166
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230243 - 05/03/07 03:44 PM

that is yet another reason why we need permanent alimony as a rebutable presumption--to compensate for deadbeat men that want out of their responsibilities

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230247 - 05/03/07 03:51 PM

OK since I am one of those posters you mentioned, I will go first...:)

I think my main objection to it is that I think that the money a person makes is their own. Now as far as CS goes, that is for the child. I think it should be reasonable, and not as outlandish as some of the awards have been.

The poster that started this whole debate said that his wife refused to work, spent a lot of money, he still took care of the kids, yet he is stuck paying her all this money for quite some time. Where and how should she be entitled to it?

Now for your examples:
1)Transitional - You mentioned that this applies mostly to SAHP. Here I feel they had pleanty of time to obtain training while they weren't working. Kids go to school or take naps...the opportunity to take classes on line could have been utilized. Also most schools have day care available for the students, so they could have been working on an education.

2)Compensatory - This one I am a bit more open on depending on the situation. If a spouse works and puts the other one through med/law school, then once they get the degree bail, there should be some compensation. This for maybe a few years...certainly not for life.

3)Maintenance - NO. Just because you keep house for someone shouldn't entitle you to their earnings. If you are working and don't make as much as the other spouse, then that is too bad. Not everything in life is equal.

I completely agree with you on the fault issue.

If I was a man (or even being a woman), I would not marry or stay with someone who wouldn't work. People may not agree with that, but I feel very strongly about it. If I married someone, and they suddenly decided to become an "author" or "entrepreneur" or "SAHP," I think that would be it for me. There would not be one single thing they could be doing at home that I couldn't contract out for or do myself. By working they would be contributing to our retirement and standard of living. The one exception I would have here would be if they were terminally ill. Being a little "depressed" doesn't count.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230248 - 05/03/07 03:55 PM

Just because only one spouse goes off to work each day, doesn't mean the other spouse has done nothing to contribute to the spouse's successes, salary, and earning potenital.

---> But it also doesn't mean that they have contributed either. It is VERY wrong to assume that one party...SAHP or not, is contributing to the "sucess" of the other party's career. Why not give credit where credit is due? Example...SO does NOT get a raise because I clean the bathroom...he gets a raise because HE worked hard for it. I didn't get a raise because SO hauls the garbage and recyling to the curb, I got because *I* worked hard for it.

Afterall, how does a person work full-time, work overtime, travel for work extensively, climb the corportate ladder without any complications, with young kids at home?

---> Often times, a wage earner HAS to increase their workload BECAUSE they are the only wage earner and need to make up for the loss of the second income. Should they be penalized?

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: nrvouswrk]
      #230252 - 05/03/07 04:01 PM

1)Transitional - You mentioned that this applies mostly to SAHP. Here I feel they had pleanty of time to obtain training while they weren't working. Kids go to school or take naps...the opportunity to take classes on line could have been utilized. Also most schools have day care available for the students, so they could have been working on an education.
+++++++++

What if they have a handicapped child? What if they couldn't afford the online classes? What if they couldn't afford daycare?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: matart1]
      #230254 - 05/03/07 04:07 PM

I think that if a person has a disability prior to marriage that is not a life sentenance to alimony.
a person who developes a disability should not reap a life sentance of alimony either - life is cruel and things happens but it would not be my husband's fault in the marriage if I developed carple tunnel on divorcesource....

---> Tough issue. I think that a person who marries someone with a disability has more accountability than when a disability later arises. I also think...when the disability later arises, that it is dependent upon the nature and cause of said.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230255 - 05/03/07 04:09 PM

[quote]
What if they have a handicapped child? What if they couldn't afford the online classes? What if they couldn't afford daycare? [/quote]

Sounds like lots of what if's that should have been considered before marriage and before having kid<s>.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #230259 - 05/03/07 04:17 PM

I think it is hard to be married to most men, follow them from place to place and have children without future earnings being permanently reduced.

---> I think we need to drop all gender references because there are women who are higher wage earners, men who support their wives while they continue their education, men who are SAHPs, men who follow their wife's career and just stick to the laws themselves.

I think permanent alimony should be the rebutable presumption.

---> Huh? Do you realize the consequences of such a presumption...an almost 100% divorce rate! Hell, all I would have to do is marry some poor shmuck that makes more that I do for a year and I get an extra paycheck.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230261 - 05/03/07 04:26 PM

I think the people who are anti-alimony don't view marriage as a true UNION. As a true UNIT, where the successes and failures of both parties "belong" to both parties. Just because only one spouse goes off to work each day, doesn't mean the other spouse has done nothing to contribute to the spouse's successes, salary, and earning potenital
++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now Susan, you and I were getting along so well last night :).

I don't feel that my raises and promotions are due to anything other than my hard work. Just because someone washed my clothes, or made me dinner, doesn't mean that they contributed to my success. I could have done that myself.

As for those of us who don't believe in SS not believing that their marriage is a union...not at all. Being in a union means everyone pulls their weight.

This is an issue that not everyone will agree on. So the best thing is to marry or be with someone who shares your views. My current husband does. Both of us have too much pride to expect support from the other if something happened to the marriage.

Now where have all the men been the last few days? I would have though at least yengra/maud dib would have been chiming in. How about GR8Dad? Spinndergras? (I think that is his name...)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: nrvouswrk]
      #230263 - 05/03/07 04:30 PM

As for those of us who don't believe in SS not believing that their marriage is a union...not at all. Being in a union means everyone pulls their weight.
+++++++++

Again, you seem to be saying that you don't feel SAHP's "pull their weight". Is that what you are saying?

I think it's a great sacrifice to be a SAHP. What about the spouse who stays at home because they have 3 kids and can't work and pay daycare on three kids without losing money. So one HAS to stay home. Just because one agreed "ok, I'll stay home for a few years" doesn't mean they are contributing less, being a "sponge" or not "pulling their weight."


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #230264 - 05/03/07 04:30 PM

[quote]I think permanent alimony should be the rebutable presumption [/quote]

What? Permanent alimony for a 6 month marriage? Permanent alimony for a 5 year marraige? Perm. alimony for childless marraiges where both parties work? What are you talking about?

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230267 - 05/03/07 04:34 PM

[quote]I think it's a great sacrifice to be a SAHP. What about the spouse who stays at home because they have 3 kids and can't work and pay daycare on three kids without losing money.
[/quote]

Then they don't have enough household income to afford 3 kids....or....they don't have the job skills going into the marriage to afford 3 kids and daycare for them,

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: changes]
      #230269 - 05/03/07 04:36 PM

Then they don't have enough household income to afford 3 kids....or....they don't have the job skills going into the marriage to afford 3 kids and daycare for them,
++++++++

Yes, that's true, but it doesn't negate the fact that they DO have 3 young children. It took TWO people to make those children, so why should only ONE of those people suffer the financial reprocussions of having to leave the workforce to take care of them?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230272 - 05/03/07 04:41 PM

Instead of advocating that women are victims in a paternalistic society and deserve money you should advocate that women should become self reliant BEFORE marrying and having kids. I hope your daugthers grow to be independent educated women, before falling in love and being dependent on a man.

Maybe it should be the law that you cannot marry until you are a 25 year old with some sort of education or job skill.

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
matart1
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 09/01/05
Posts: 2798
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230274 - 05/03/07 04:42 PM

I think it's a great sacrifice to be a SAHP. What about the spouse who stays at home because they have 3 kids and can't work and pay daycare on three kids without losing money. So one HAS to stay home. Just because one agreed "ok, I'll stay home for a few years" doesn't mean they are contributing less, being a "sponge" or not "pulling their weight."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

hmmmm - more on your plate than you can handle so to speak - solution, stop making poor choices. childrens are not ornaments, all cute and cuddly. they really do have to be taken care of preferrably by adults making adult decisions.

>>>>>>>>>>>

Abstinence
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the practice of abstinence in general. For sexual abstinence, see Sexual abstinence.
Abstinence is a voluntary restraint from indulging a desire or appetite for certain bodily activities that are widely experienced as giving pleasure. Most frequently, the term refers to abstention from sexual intercourse, alcohol or food. The practice can arise from religious prohibitions or practical considerations.

Abstinence has diverse forms. In its oldest sense it is sexual,[citation needed] as in the practice of continence, chastity, and celibacy. Commonly it refers to a temporary or partial abstinence from food, as in fasting. Because the regimen is intended to be a conscious act, freely chosen to enhance life, abstinence is sometimes distinguished from the psychological mechanism of repression. The latter is an unconscious state, having unhealthy consequences. Freud termed the channelling of sexual energies into other more culturally or socially acceptable activities "sublimation".

--------------------
Life is a long lesson in humility.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
trophywife
member
*

Reged: 01/26/07
Posts: 166
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #230276 - 05/03/07 04:44 PM

Susan is not saying that

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
spinnerdegrassi
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/20/06
Posts: 8153
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: nrvouswrk]
      #230277 - 05/03/07 04:44 PM

I'm here..

I some ways I agree with you...and using Susan's theory, I would be the one who should be compensated with alimony should my wife and I divorce.

For the bulk of our marriage my wife has travelled for her job (She's a Database Admin for a major medical software provider and thus has to travel to hospital's all across the world to tune, update or fix the company's software that sits on top of an Oracle Database)

Now she was doing this job (not at this company, but another) before we married. She progressed in her career accordingly, even with a young daughter to raise. Would she still have progressed to the point she has if she hadn't married me? I have no doubt, since she had to deal with the exact same issues prior to our marriage, that she did during our marriage, ie. structuring how to ensure there was someone around to watch SD when my wife was on the road. The main difference was that when we married, I was the one watching SD on those days when my wife was on the road vs my MIL or my wife's sisters. Do they deserve compensation any more/less than I do for doing the same thing I did? Would my wife have been impeded progressing in her career should she have kept using her mother or sisters instead of me? I doubt it.

How does one adequately assess how much me staying in town to work vs her travelling contributed to her success, or hindered mine? I'm a RN. Progression in my career goes one of 4 ways. You either become a Nurse Practitioner, an Educator, Administrator or a Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist. Or you stay as an RN. I knew when I stared in nursing that I'd be progresing towards administration, thus have been taking masters level coursework pt over the past few semesters. I'm not sure how my wife travelling precludes me from doing that because I wouldn't take more than 6cr hrs per semester regardless based on my work schedule. I'd be doing the same thing if I was single or married, kids to watch or none. My guess is that my wife would also be doing the same job in all 4 of those circumstances also.

Sure you have extremes where one partner does sacrifice significantly for the sucess of the other partner's career. I tend to believe those are anomalies in marriages, and the predominant amount fall much more in the middle.

Edited to add that for almost 2 years during our marriage I transitioned from an on the road job, to working from home to then Nursing. In effect, I was a SAHD, who also happened to bring in an income during that time frame. It didn't hinder my career progression, nor did it progress my wife's since she was at the same company for 5 years, in the same job during the time I was working out of the house. How did my being home and available to take on the all the household related tasks exactly progress her career during that point?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #230278 - 05/03/07 04:47 PM

[quote]Susan is not saying that [/quote]

I guess that is up for debate. Her attitude on this board for the past fews years continually portrays women to be victims. Usually the story is protrayed something like this: Big mean CEO leaves his wife of 25 years for a eastern European supermodel or "trophywife". Poor wittle wifey never worked a day in her life, all of the sudden has some kind of mental illness, and now deserves money because she is a victim of a broken contract...or something similar. Details may change.

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: spinnerdegrassi]
      #230279 - 05/03/07 04:48 PM

Oh no no Spinders...ONLY women need alimony. Silly men should just go get a job...

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
trophywife
member
*

Reged: 01/26/07
Posts: 166
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #230280 - 05/03/07 04:50 PM

Men do earn most of the money, and last I looked don't do much around the house or have many babies

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #230281 - 05/03/07 04:52 PM

Instead of advocating that women are victims in a paternalistic society and deserve money you should advocate that women should become self reliant BEFORE marrying and having kids. I hope your daugthers grow to be independent educated women, before falling in love and being dependent on a man.

Maybe it should be the law that you cannot marry until you are a 25 year old with some sort of education or job skill.
++++++++

I agree with you 100% Miranda. And it's sad that I'll be encouraging my daughters to NOT leave the workforce to care for their children. I wish a parent could stay home with their kids...keeping them out of daycare for as long as possible, without jeopardizing their future to do so.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
spinnerdegrassi
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/20/06
Posts: 8153
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #230285 - 05/03/07 04:54 PM

[quote]Men do earn most of the money, and last I looked don't do much around the house or have many babies [/quote]

Exactly how many of the 3+ billion men in the world have you lived with? Because you have no idea what men do around the household other than those you have lived with or know personally. Since that represents such a small minority in this total of married couples your statement that they don't do much around the house is irrelevant since you have nothing to back that up other than idle speculation.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230288 - 05/03/07 04:55 PM

I would suggest they job share if possible. The money is not the bes but at least they are not out of the work force totally. I have done well teaching online college courses. The money is about a third of my potential income but I can work from home, make money, and my kids do not have to be in daycare and are still able to do their extras.

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: spinnerdegrassi]
      #230289 - 05/03/07 04:56 PM

Spinnders, I hear what you are saying, but your case is not "typical."

You and your wife do not have children together. You were not raising kids while getting your nursing degree...nor while you were building your life.

Your wife had the blessing of having sisters and others to help her with her child. Not all parents have such resources available to them.

I'm talking about a typical, young couple, married, raising kids, building careers, all at the same time.

As far as I know, you don't have any kids of your own, right? And both you and your wife had your education and careers in "full swing" when you married??


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230291 - 05/03/07 04:59 PM

I'm talking about a typical, young couple, married, raising kids, building careers, all at the same time.

+++++++++++++++++++

That comes down to personal decision making and being accountable for your decisions. My brother gripes 24/7 about his dead end job. He shoulda/coulda finsished college instead of drinking away four years of his life and pissing away my parent's money. His choices his consequence.

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #230292 - 05/03/07 04:59 PM

I would suggest they job share if possible. The money is not the bes but at least they are not out of the work force totally. I have done well teaching online college courses. The money is about a third of my potential income but I can work from home, make money, and my kids do not have to be in daycare and are still able to do their extras.
+++++++

Miranda, I've been reading many, many articles on this...and that stats are overwhelming.

Sure, you are doing OK working partime, but that's probably because you have a spouse working fulltime, no? If you weren't married, could you afford to work parttime and be there for the kids?

The "cost" of working parttime is great. You aren't building a retirement acouunt as you would be working fulltime. You aren't building social security credits as you would be working fulltime. You are missing out on years of raises based on a full-time salary.

Your husband is losing out on none of that. YOu are the only one bearing those costs. He's not making the same sacrifices for the kids as you are.

There's a real COST to not working or working only partime. Sounds like your entire family is BENEFITING from what you are doing, but only you will suffer the financial impact should a divorce occur.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #230296 - 05/03/07 05:02 PM

Instead of advocating that women are victims in a paternalistic society and deserve money you should advocate that women should become self reliant BEFORE marrying and having kids. I hope your daugthers grow to be independent educated women, before falling in love and being dependent on a man.
++++++++++
Perfect response!

If I had had a daughter, instead of raising her to think there was someone out there to support her, I would raise her to be self supporting.

Susan, I don't think someone staying at home contributes to my success. Again, there would be NOTHING they could be doing for me that I couldn't do for myself. THEY would be the ones who would be benefiting from MY labor. They would have room and board, food, insurance, clothes,a car, all provided for them. For what? They scrubbed a floor, cooked a meal, and watched the kids? NO!

I could hire Molly Maids to clean the house. I am a good cook, so I could do the dinner. Pizza Hut delivers to my area, so there would be that option. To watch the kids, there is preschool. There have been big pushes in the last few years in regards to kids being better prepared for school if they had gone to preschool, so even the kids would be benefiting.

So how in God's name would I be benefiting by someone staying at home? Not one thing you mentioned I couldn't contract out for less money than it would cost me to support someone who stayed at home.

The bonus here would also be that I could fire them if they didn't do the job correctly. Do you think I could fire my husband as easily?

As for the issue about having 3 children. I have one. I would have liked to have had 3. I could only afford one.

Don't have more kids than you can afford to support. Very few people these days are ignorant about the birds and the bees.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
spinnerdegrassi
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/20/06
Posts: 8153
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230297 - 05/03/07 05:06 PM

Actually I got my BSN during the marriage. I had my 1st bachelors in comp sci prior to marriage. I did my degree PT while working FT with my wife on the road, and again...myself watching SD during that 2.5 year stretch of school. It was when clinicals set in that I left my IT job, and split my time between school, and working from home.

My wife did have the help of family, but she was also astute enough to recognize the ability to structure her career around their help.

You have to understand, I came into SD's life when she was 3 going on 4 years old. For close to 9 of the past 12 years (8 years of marriage and the one year we lived together prior to marriage) I have predominantly raised SD in the time she is in the household if one were to "count days" based on me looking after SD alone vs the two of us here together to raise her.

However, I don't honestly feel that I have been hindred as a result of it, nor do I feel it stopped me from making career changing decision, or hurt my financial ability to earn.

But again, this is all subjective depending on the individual scenario and each case would have to be looked at on a case by case basis.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230299 - 05/03/07 05:06 PM

I don't understand what you are talking about.

Sure we are all benefitting from each other. If my H did not make the money he makes I would not be sitting at home working part time I would be working full time.

I have my social security credits fufilled so I am not sure what you are talking about. I don't plan on receiving social security so I have my own retirement IRA, CD's, investments.

Sure I have forgone income, but if I wanted to I could jump into a full time position as I have never really been out of the workforce. Having an education under your belt gives you options.

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: nrvouswrk]
      #230300 - 05/03/07 05:08 PM

I think my main objection to it is that I think that the money a person makes is their own.

---> Then why bother getting married...why not stay single?

The poster that started this whole debate said that his wife refused to work, spent a lot of money, he still took care of the kids, yet he is stuck paying her all this money for quite some time. Where and how should she be entitled to it?

---> First of all...this discussion has NOTHING to do with that particular post.

---> Second...in that particular instance...you're forgetting that they BOTH made choices. He could have choose...at any time...to NOT stay married if it was REALLY that big of an issue. Sure you might argue that he stayed married for the "sake of the kids", but that's just an excuse.

1)Transitional - You mentioned that this applies mostly to SAHP. Here I feel they had pleanty of time to obtain training while they weren't working. Kids go to school or take naps...the opportunity to take classes on line could have been utilized. Also most schools have day care available for the students, so they could have been working on an education.

---> First of all...do you have any idea how expensive "online" classes are...especially if you are working towards a degree? Minimum of $300 PER class + fees...I checked. The majority of parents who become SAHPs do so because they can't afford the cost of daycare, so what makes you think they can afford the cost of college...especially with only one wage earner. And IF the college has daycare...none of our CCs do, and the local university doesn't do it for free...it's usually at a reduced fee.

---> Second...why?

3)Maintenance - NO. Just because you keep house for someone shouldn't entitle you to their earnings. If you are working and don't make as much as the other spouse, then that is too bad. Not everything in life is equal.

---> This isn't about "keeping house" or "wages"...it's about the loss of expectations and adequate compensation for that loss in excess of inadequate marital distribution.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #230302 - 05/03/07 05:09 PM

Don't we all have forgone income? If my husband was not a Air Force pilot he could have been a commercial pilot making more money. He is likely equalized now in pay (with his bonus), but in his early days he made a pittance compared to what he could have.

If I never married I could be the CEO of Build a Bear or something. I guess we all have choices in life don't we? It just seem some of us live with our choices and some of us expect others to pay for our choices...

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: changes]
      #230303 - 05/03/07 05:10 PM

Sounds like lots of what if's that should have been considered before marriage and before having kids.

---> Huh? I don't think anyone PLANS to have a handicap child or not being able to afford something.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
trophywife
member
*

Reged: 01/26/07
Posts: 166
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230306 - 05/03/07 05:11 PM

I have a prenup that took out the "ifs"

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230308 - 05/03/07 05:12 PM

I think it's a great sacrifice to be a SAHP.

---> It's not a "sacrifice"...it's a parental choice.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230310 - 05/03/07 05:15 PM

It took TWO people to make those children, so why should only ONE of those people suffer the financial reprocussions of having to leave the workforce to take care of them?

---> So why should only ONE of those people suffer the financial resprocussions of having been the one to STAY in the workforce to take care of ALL of them?

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230311 - 05/03/07 05:18 PM

Just because one agreed "ok, I'll stay home for a few years" doesn't mean they are contributing less, being a "sponge" or not "pulling their weight."

---> Nobody is saying that, but at the same time, being a SAHP does NOT put one on a pedestal.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #230313 - 05/03/07 05:21 PM

Men do earn most of the money, and last I looked don't do much around the house or have many babies

---> Biology has NOTHING to do with alimony.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230314 - 05/03/07 05:21 PM

When my husband and I got married, we both did so with the idea of being equal partners. We both work, and we both take care of the home.

Whoever posted that men don't do housework is wrong. I don't know a man who doesn't help out. Even my drunken ex did so without being asked. Sure there might be a few out there, but my guess is that most guys are pretty decent about helping out.

I am not looking to take anything from anyone that I didn't personally earn. Conversely, I don't want anything taken from me by someone who didn't earn it.

Women/men should not be looking at marrying someone as a retirement plan. They should be looking to fund one on their own.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230315 - 05/03/07 05:23 PM

I'm talking about a typical, young couple, married, raising kids, building careers, all at the same time.

---> Excuse me...but the ex and I were one of those "typical, young couples, married, raising, kids, building careers, all at the same time" and I totally disagree with your biased assessment of same.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230323 - 05/03/07 05:58 PM

[quote]
Yes, that's true, but it doesn't negate the fact that they DO have 3 young children. It took TWO people to make those children, so why should only ONE of those people suffer the financial reprocussions of having to leave the workforce to take care of them? [/quote]

Who said they had to leave in the 1st place...sounds like a choice was made. As for it taking 2...yeah physically it does....I have to wonder how much discussion/thought goes into it....compared to expectations/guilt. The when the divorce comes no one seems to understand how people can act as they do.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: nrvouswrk]
      #230327 - 05/03/07 06:12 PM

So how in God's name would I be benefiting by someone staying at home? Not one thing you mentioned I couldn't contract out for less money than it would cost me to support someone who stayed at home
++++++++++

That pretty much says it all. You don't see the value in kids having a parent at home with them. YOu'd dump them in daycare at 6 weeks old and move on.

I see the value in having a parent home with the kids.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230328 - 05/03/07 06:13 PM

[quote]Sounds like lots of what if's that should have been considered before marriage and before having kids.

---> Huh? I don't think anyone PLANS to have a handicap child or not being able to afford something. [/quote]

And few if any PLAN to lose money in Las Vegas but the odds say it can happen. PLAN accordingly.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
It's not possible to consider [Re: changes]
      #230330 - 05/03/07 06:16 PM

every possible outcome prior to marriage. For example, there WAS no internet when I got married...thus I wouldn't have been able to consider taking on-line classes during the marriage.

I'm one of those who received transitional support while I completed my education. I DID go to college during the marriage, but since I worked full time for the first 9 years of the marriage, I could only go to college part time at night. My ex was NOT a supportive person to my college courses. If I took more than one course per term I had to deal with constant grief from him over watching the children while I attended classes. He would NEVER take on the responsibility of caring for the children so that I could have time to study, do homework, write papers, or work on projects. Somehow I was supposed to do all of these WHILE cooking dinner, changing diapers, giving baths, doing laundry etc...while he sat and watched whatever ball game was on TV.

I was able to complete my AA degree when I became a SAHM. Ex REFUSED at that point to do any evening child care, so I had to take day courses. There was no child care provided by the community college, so I was fortunate to find an elderly women in a retirement community near the college who would watch my son for a few hours a couple of times a week. At least I could work on homework, reading, or projects, etc during the daytime while my ex was working, but the crap I would get if dinner wasn't ready on time or things weren't neat enough...just because I had schoolwork to do.

I needed a break after obtaining the 2 year degree because of how much crap I had to take while trying to go to school. There were very few online courses available at that time...it was a brand new trend in education at that point. Also, most of the online opportunities were for general education...rather than upper division work and were not specific to my major...or I had already taken the particular courses that were offered. I didn't return to college until AFTER the decision to divorce. At that point I was working full time, but I still received transitional support BECAUSE my income was significantly lower than my ex's.

My point really is that it's not always possible to go to school WHILE being a SAHM. It's probably more easily accomplished now, but again...it depends entirely upon the situation and the type of course work involved...AND the money that the couple has to commit to it. Private online or long distance studies are certainly available, but at a much higher cost than attending through the local community colleges or state colleges.

Also...it's not possible to predict having a handicapped child....OR to predict how well your partner will shoulder the burden with you.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #230332 - 05/03/07 06:18 PM

"That pretty much says it all. You don't see the value in kids having a parent at home with them. YOu'd dump them in daycare at 6 weeks old and move on."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Putting a kid in daycare is not quite "moving on."

Even if a case could be made for infants, what about high school kids? Should one parent really be sitting at home while they are at school?

My son is at school from 7 to 5. How would he be benefiting from me being at home?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: changes]
      #230334 - 05/03/07 06:19 PM

And few if any PLAN to lose money in Las Vegas but the odds say it can happen. PLAN accordingly.

---> If you're go make comparisons, at least stay in the same food group.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: Melody]
      #230339 - 05/03/07 06:26 PM

It's not possible to consider every possible outcome prior to marriage.

---> And even if you do...shyt happens.

---> I have no doubts that the reason why over half of marriages fail is because people EXPECT them to fail.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: Melody]
      #230344 - 05/03/07 06:40 PM

[quote]every possible outcome prior to marriage. [/quote]

Many of them can be lumped together and provided for by a big bunch of cash. Cash allows for many options when things happen down the road. Making major potentially dangeous financial decisions when people aren't in a positon to do so....spells potential disaster.

[quote]
For example, there WAS no internet when I got married...thus I wouldn't have been able to consider taking on-line classes during the marriage.
[/quote]

Community college? Night classes? Not getting married till you finished college? Not having kids till you finish college?

[quote]
My ex was NOT a supportive person to my college courses.
[/quote]

But you chose to marry and stay with him anyway. Continuing choices....

[quote]
If I took more than one course per term I had to deal with constant grief from him over watching the children while I attended classes.
[/quote]

So you had kids before you got your education. Another choice.

[quote]
My point really is that it's not always possible to go to school WHILE being a SAHM.
[/quote]

And my point is that it's a choice to become a SAHM before you got your education. Make choices and live with the outcome.

[quote]
Also...it's not possible to predict having a handicapped child....OR to predict how well your partner will shoulder the burden with you. [/quote]

Hmmmm.....to have ANY kid you better have a boatload of cash. USDA said having a kid in the year 2002 would cost approx 250 grand to raise on avg to age 18<no college expenses>. So my feeling is that unless you can confidently walk into a bank and get a 18 year loan for a quarter million bucks without putting up any collateral<unless you plan to let'em repo the kid>.....then you're not in a financial position to have a kid. A little thought beyond that says a kid with a handicap will cost more...likely much more....so....you really need more savings to allow for that possibility.

As for a slacker partner....pre-marital counseling? Living together for a while? Being married a while before having kids? Things like this should tell you how someone is likely to act in the future. See warning flags? Don't move forward until you fix the existing issues.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #230345 - 05/03/07 06:46 PM

[quote]And few if any PLAN to lose money in Las Vegas but the odds say it can happen. PLAN accordingly.

---> If you're go make comparisons, at least stay in the same food group. [/quote]


odds are odds......

But pick whatever you like....things can be planned for...in general with lots of cash. Lots of cash makes things easier if you have a kid<handicappd or not> in you have many more options<daycare, maids, whatever>. And cash also helps in las vegas too. Maybe cash is the food group that needs to be thought of before lots of costly choices are made early in a marriage.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: Gecko]
      #230347 - 05/03/07 06:48 PM

[quote]---> I have no doubts that the reason why over half of marriages fail is because people EXPECT them to fail. [/quote]

According to stats....it's money. Back to that old food group again.....

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
Easy to have such clear hindsight [Re: changes]
      #230376 - 05/03/07 09:10 PM

Did you even consider that he did not make me aware that he would behave in such a pigheaded manner about my taking college courses UNTIL it came about?

As far as going to college before marriage....I went to work straight out of high school....college wasn't an option for me. I was an adult, fully self-supporting when I chose to get married. The college was because the EX was pushing me to go....THEN he decided he didn't want to be supportive of the endeavor.

Did you not read? I WENT to night classes! At the community college! WHILE I was working full time!

Um....I was perfectly content with working full time and NOT going to college. The EX encouraged the college...AND wanted the SAHM crap. I went along with it because it was what HE wanted. However, since I went along with it, I fully intended to do it well. But ex wasn't truly behind what he had suggested.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Susanf31
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 10630
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: Melody]
      #230380 - 05/03/07 09:17 PM

Wow! What great points!

I think these anti-alimony "you could take classes online" gals must be, ...ahem.....SEVERLY younger than me!

Girls, let me tell you about the 80's. THERE WAS NO INTERNET! I first joined AOL when I was about 28 years old...that was 13 years ago. At the time, YOU WERE CHARGED BY THE MINUTE to be online. There was no "unlimited" online. It was also DIAL UP, at about 9000 kps. I remember when 14,000 kps was outstanding. You couldn't have possibly taken courses online at that time.

Even if you could, online classes and degrees were more "scams" back then and not worth the paper they were written on. Things have changed. But you have no idea how ignorant you sound to a person over 40. Your so-called "solutions" weren't available to us back when our children were small.

Nightschool in college wasn't possible for many people. Not everone lived within commuting distance of college...and simple could not go.

Lastly, I've known MANY, MANY teenagers who have really benefitted from having a SAHP instead of being a latch-key kid from the age of 8.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: Easy to have such clear hindsight [Re: Melody]
      #230386 - 05/03/07 09:23 PM

[quote] The EX encouraged the college...AND wanted the SAHM crap. [/quote]

How many little craps...er...kids did he want you to have and stay home with? If you saw it as "crap"....maybe 1 was too many.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: Susanf31]
      #230387 - 05/03/07 09:24 PM

I think these anti-alimony "you could take classes online" gals must be, ...ahem.....SEVERLY younger than me!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I will be 50 this month. :)

I have known MANY, MANY teenagers who have really been harmed by having a SAHP instead of one who worked. I add myself, my sister, and my best friend to that mix.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Relayer
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 9506
Loc: Moorglade Mover
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Debbie_L]
      #230403 - 05/03/07 09:57 PM

[quote]Well said. To just make a blanket statement that alimony should never be awarded is pretty backwards (and punitive) in my opinion. I have never received it, but I wouldn't begrudge it to someone that needed/deserved it. [/quote]

Actually, to receive alimony is pretty backwards.

--------------------
GO CUBBIES!!!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30985
One question, and a statement... [Re: Gecko]
      #230429 - 05/04/07 02:44 AM

"through abuse, addition or adultery should "profit". "

Is multiplication okay? LOL!

Okay, I completely agree with you. I also think that if the earning spouse can prove that they TRIED to get the other spouse educated, but the other spouse made choices that stopped that, those attempts should be considered.

Example, I TRIED to get my ex to get her GED. Signed her up and paid for classes. She dropped out consistantly, screwed guys in the class, etc.

--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
onerose
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/30/05
Posts: 3154
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: nrvouswrk]
      #230467 - 05/04/07 07:55 AM


I am one of those that think SS should never be awarded. I have thought about all of the different scenarios and I still can not see it. Yes, even the handicapped child scenario. I could see that both parents have to support the child for life. But how do you deceide which parent? What if they both wanted to stay with the child? What if one parent dies? There are so many what if’s in this situation. Now if one parent wants to pay SS so the other parent could stay with the child. That is great. But the handicapped child is the least likely situation to happen out of all the ones

I will never understand the concept of SS. Ever. I know a lot of you disagree but it is just my opinion. I was raised to take care of myself and my responsibilities. I would feel iky if I took SS money from someone I was divorced from.

I was one of those terrible parents who put the child in day care at 6 weeks old. But they are turning out to be great adults. I would have much rather put them in day care and shown them how to work hard to achieve their goals, than to teach them to take hand outs from anyone. And for me, it would feel like a hand out to take money that I did not work for, from someone that I was married to at one time.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
nrvouswrk
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/13/06
Posts: 2362
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: onerose]
      #230551 - 05/04/07 10:41 AM

I couldn't agree more.

I asked my husband last night if something were to happen to our marriage, would he try and get SS from me. He said NO. He would never take anything that wasn't his. I promised him the same. I would NEVER want someone to be able to take credit for supporting me. Everything I have is because of working hard and paying for it myself. I would prefer to live on less, than have someone else support me.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: changes]
      #230561 - 05/04/07 11:10 AM

But pick whatever you like....things can be planned for...in general with lots of cash.

---> That's a nice little fantasy you have going on, but you're missing a couple of things...1) where are you going to get "lots of cash" and 2) even if you do manage to have a nice little "lot" that you've saved for a "rainy day", how long to you think it's going to last?

---> When ex and I got married, we had "plans" and started saving accordingly. Unfortunately...we didn't "plan" for the federal government's gross negligence and flat out stupidity in the name of "trade relations" to plunge our area into one of the worst "depressions" since the 30s! We had a good 6 months of "income" tucked away...it was gone in 3 because we weren't declared a "federal disaster area" until too late. When I was pregnant with our first child, I was going to take a year off and we had been saving for it...then the company husband was working closed, two days later I went into premature labor (6 1/2 months) and found out the company hadn't paid the premiums in three months. I had to quit my job to save the baby, took ex two weeks to find a new job...three months after our daughter was born, our "savings" were gone and we were forced to file bankruptcy.

Maybe cash is the food group that needs to be thought of before lots of costly choices are made early in a marriage.

---> There you go again with the word "choices". Do you think people make the CHOICE to lose their job, make the CHOICE to have a "special needs child", make the CHOICE to have a drunk driver plow into their car or have the transmission go out, make the CHOICE for the kid to need glasses or braces?

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: One question, and a statement... [Re: gr8Dad]
      #230564 - 05/04/07 11:16 AM

Is multiplication okay? LOL!

---> That falls under "adultery".

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BeckaLeigh
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/08/05
Posts: 6875
Loc: Texas
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #230577 - 05/04/07 11:43 AM

trophywife, I have seen some ignorant things come out of your keyboard, but this one beats all. It actually made me laugh. I needed a good laugh. Thank you.

No, men dont have many babies. All I can say to that is DUH. But, they are just as capable of it as we are. Some men do alot better than some of the women I have seen taking care of kids.

As for cleaning, my husband cleans when he sees something that needs to be done. My X kept the house immaculate. I know alot of men who clean better than their wives do. Heck, my dad does a better job at it than my mom and she doesnt work. So, before you go stereotyping, know what you are talking about.

--------------------
I tried being normal once. Worst five minutes of my life.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Marie_ss
member


Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 100
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: nrvouswrk]
      #230655 - 05/04/07 01:36 PM

[quote]I couldn't agree more.

I asked my husband last night if something were to happen to our marriage, would he try and get SS from me. He said NO. He would never take anything that wasn't his. I promised him the same. I would NEVER want someone to be able to take credit for supporting me. Everything I have is because of working hard and paying for it myself. I would prefer to live on less, than have someone else support me. [/quote]

I'm anti-alimony as ALL adults should first be self-sufficient whether single, married or divorce.

Like you, I'm in my 50's, got an engineering degree, worked since college, married at 22 but we chose not to have our son until I was 30. My ex and I divorced amicably after 20 years when our son was 12 (he's now almost 22, a college senior, and a very caring adult) - no spousal support exchanged because we were both working adults. Our son didn't suffer because he went to daycare as a toddler - in fact, it helped prepare him for kindergarten because he needed the time with other kids and not just adults. I didn't hit glass ceilings because I was a CP mom - work hard and you will be recognized in your field.

It's unrealistic to say that alimony should equalize income because not everyone has the same earning potential. Standard of living for both parties in a divorce is lower because two separate households are supported on the same total income. In this day and age, there is no reason why anyone should NOT pursue educational and work opportunities before, during, and after a marriage.

I've been remarried now for almost 10 years and both my current hubby and I agreed that a prenup was unnecessary, and that alimony is an evil word :-)

Edited by Marie_ss (05/04/07 01:39 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: Marie_ss]
      #230689 - 05/04/07 02:25 PM

Like you, I'm in my 50's, got an engineering degree, worked since college, married at 22 but we chose not to have our son until I was 30. My ex and I divorced amicably after 20 years when our son was 12 (he's now almost 22, a college senior, and a very caring adult) - no spousal support exchanged because we were both working adults. Our son didn't suffer because he went to daycare as a toddler - in fact, it helped prepare him for kindergarten because he needed the time with other kids and not just adults. I didn't hit glass ceilings because I was a CP mom - work hard and you will be recognized in your field.

---> I see no reason why you should receive alimony either, but your situation is just that...yours. Now had some of the circumstances been a little different...say you had been a SAHP for four years AT the time of the divorce, it would NOT be unreasonable for you to receive some Transitional Support for a couple of years while you got up to speed in your field.

---> As I said...there are times when alimony/spousal support is warranted and other times it is not.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
onerose
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/30/05
Posts: 3154
Re: It's not possible to consider [Re: Gecko]
      #230942 - 05/04/07 08:09 PM

---> As I said...there are times when alimony/spousal support is warranted and other times it is not.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It seams like you are really against SS unless it applies to your situation and the fact that you took SS.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
trophywife
member
*

Reged: 01/26/07
Posts: 166
One Rose's comment about Gecko [Re: onerose]
      #230948 - 05/04/07 08:16 PM

"what you think depends on where you sit"

however, I don't know many women that don't earn a lot less than their husbands--most would deserve alimony

Edited by trophywife (05/04/07 08:17 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
spinnerdegrassi
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/20/06
Posts: 8153
Re: One Rose's comment about Gecko [Re: trophywife]
      #230955 - 05/04/07 08:19 PM

Then you must hang with a lot of stupid women who aren't making much of an effort to earn a living

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
onerose
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 12/30/05
Posts: 3154
Re: One Rose's comment about Gecko [Re: trophywife]
      #230957 - 05/04/07 08:20 PM


I sit where I think I can support myself and my kids. I am actually that strong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
spinnerdegrassi
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 08/20/06
Posts: 8153
Re: One Rose's comment about Gecko [Re: onerose]
      #230968 - 05/04/07 08:30 PM

When my wife and her ex split, there was no alimony, no child support going in either direction, because each had the ability to earn a living. My wife always earned more than her ex, still does to this day. I guess that means my wife is just that much superior to the slags trophywife hangs with. :)

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231003 - 05/04/07 09:03 PM

[quote]But pick whatever you like....things can be planned for...in general with lots of cash.

---> That's a nice little fantasy you have going on, but you're missing a couple of things...1) where are you going to get "lots of cash" and {/quote]

Work..savings...investment...not blowing it....any and all and more.

[quote]
2) even if you do manage to have a nice little "lot" that you've saved for a "rainy day", how long to you think it's going to last?
[/quote]

Alot longer than starting out wih no savings.....

[quote]
---> When ex and I got married, we had "plans" and started saving accordingly. Unfortunately...we didn't "plan" for the federal government's gross negligence and flat out stupidity in the name of "trade relations" to plunge our area into one of the worst "depressions" since the 30s!
[/quote]

The there wasn't enough saving done before choices/decisions were made. When things change and you're not prepared...the future plans get put on hold.

[quote]
We had a good 6 months of "income" tucked away...
[/quote]

Some would call that a rainy day fund. Not enough to make major life changing decisions in my view.

[quote]
Maybe cash is the food group that needs to be thought of before lots of costly choices are made early in a marriage.

---> There you go again with the word "choices". Do you think people make the CHOICE to lose their job, make the CHOICE to have a "special needs child", make the CHOICE to have a drunk driver plow into their car or have the transmission go out, make the CHOICE for the kid to need glasses or braces? [/quote]

You assume things like that don't happen to everyone in some form or another.....yet not all end up without jobs<maybe they went with self employement or a govt job, etc>, maybe thy make the CHOICE not to have kids at all...again....a CHOICE. As for a drunk driver hitting your car....the type car and safety features it has is a choice...the insurance you carry on whoever might be killed in the crash is a CHOICE...the car and it's reliability and maintaince levels are CHOICES we all make. As for needing glasses and braces....seems like something you'd plan for and then if it's not needed....you're ahead of the game.

Yes it does mean thinking about lots of things...and planning and planning some more. Backup plans and maybe plan for everything going wrong. It's not much fun....it's not impulsive....it's not romantic....it;s not carefree and wind in your hair lifestyle....it's kinda boring and dull. But it is possible.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: One Rose's comment about Gecko [Re: trophywife]
      #231050 - 05/04/07 09:48 PM

however, I don't know many women that don't earn a lot less than their husbands--most would deserve alimony

---> So the high wage earner has to pay because they made different career choices?

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
PhoenixRising
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 01/05/07
Posts: 3681
Loc: New York
So you don't think I should get SS [Re: Gecko]
      #231233 - 05/05/07 12:07 PM

Let's start with the consensus that I was ignorant and naďve.

So how much should my ignorance and naivety cost me ???

My ex and I had a child. Stupidity#1: child wasn’t planned. Because we never planned to have children, we didn’t have those conversations you all say parents should have before having children…

We didn’t know much about daycare options. Most of the town has a SAHP or WOHP..
Neither one of us really wanted to be the one that stays home w/ it.

I ended up being the one. Mainly, because ex barfed every time he had to changed a diaper and I only threw-up every other time.. He literally couldn’t function w/o sleep and I could slightly manage going through the day comatose.

When ODS was three, I had another child. Nope, this one wasn’t planned either (PS: ex was in charge of birth control (he claimed to know exactly what my cycle was)..

My ex filed for divorce before YDS reached 1st grade. I had been out of work for 10yrs…

We already agreed I was stupid..

My ex was earning ungodly amounts of money. It was a bull market, our investments were doing well. House was paid off, cars, college funds and all his toys were paid for. Going back to work wasn’t on the top of my list.

I never saw the divorce coming.

In all my attempts to settle, I never asked for alimony. He wouldn’t settle. He wanted the children and I to disappear. He wanted no financial obligations because he wanted to retire and to finally get a chance to enjoy “what little time” he had left on this earth.

At the preliminary conference, I was given a status quo agreement. It said he would continue to pay everything that he paid before. Therefore, I didn’t feel the need to rush out and get a job. Because we were still going to be supported, I thought it better to use the time to get my graduate degree. Starting a career at 50 is hard enough; at least a piece of paper would show that I was employable…

It didn’t work. He never paid. But in for a penny, in for a pound. I had already incurred student loans on top of all the mounting legal debt. I thought to finish in two years or less; I thought it would be better to persevere. Remember, we have agreed that I am stupid…

When he filed 22 child abuse charges against me; I knew I was innocent. I signed up for my courses and explained to my professors that I would have to rear-load my time in the field because I couldn’t go into elementary schools. I didn’t know anything about CPS. I figured it would take a couple of weeks to come back “unfounded”.

It took 6 months and I was indicated for one count of child abuse. I made YDS run around outside when he started to have a meltdown until he calmed down; that is abusive.

It took almost a year and $50k to get an appeal heard and won. Meanwhile my ex-in-laws brought various child abuse and criminal charges against me. Those took a ton of money and time. I was found not guilty.

The bottom line, it was a 3yr custody battle. There were multiple custody evals; home studies, CPS investigations. I have now been out of work for 13yrs, had a slew of incomplete courses and still don’t have my degree…

Could I have made better choices? Oh yeah, starting w/ not marrying my ex.

At trial, I was awarded substantial SS for the next five years while the judge didn’t say it, I think that it was punitive.

SS will go to my long-suffering attorney who hasn’t been paid in years.

So, it is not that we will be vacationing on the south of France on all this alimony that he should be paying (the decision was in March, he has made one weekly payment out of the last 10).

I’m a hard worker, intelligent when I am not being stupid, and pretty well liked.. 50yrs old isn’t old any more. If I work for 20yrs, I can still have a nice retirement, put my kids through college… I just need a chance…

You really don’t think that the children and I deserve the SS? I don’t deserve life-time SS for making a stupid choice but 5-years for the sake of the children doesn’t seem like a lot to ask. CS is only 25% of his salary; we used to live on 100% of his salary. We just need a little bridge to become self-sustaining…


PS: Is it true CSE can only collect CS? So there is no way to actually collect SS unless he voluntarily decides to pay it?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
BeckaLeigh
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/08/05
Posts: 6875
Loc: Texas
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #231242 - 05/05/07 01:04 PM

Good idea, Miranda. Getting married at a young age has worked out for alot of people but then for some of us, even those of us who CAN support themselves, it was a major mistake we wouldnt have done over.

--------------------
I tried being normal once. Worst five minutes of my life.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
You go way too far [Re: changes]
      #231257 - 05/05/07 01:39 PM

How dare you insult me or any other parent on this board. I used the word "crap" because I found that I didn't care for the full time SAHM lifestyle. It was nice, but not challenging or interesting enough. How dare you call my children "craps".

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
You calling teachers stupid? [Re: spinnerdegrassi]
      #231260 - 05/05/07 01:43 PM

I find your reference to anyone who doesn't earn as much as her husband insulting. It's not like I'm flipping burgers, ya know. I have a professional degree with graduate work....yet I am significantly underpaid for the level of responsibility and influence my job entails.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: You go way too far [Re: Melody]
      #231275 - 05/05/07 02:51 PM

[quote]How dare you insult me or any other parent on this board. I used the word "crap" because I found that I didn't care for the full time SAHM lifestyle. It was nice, but not challenging or interesting enough. How dare you call my children "craps". [/quote]


You used the word in terms of being a Stay At Home MOTHER....see the MOTHER in there? If it's a crappy job/sitation then don't do it. If you don't like your own terms pointed out...don't use them.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
semantics! [Re: changes]
      #231277 - 05/05/07 03:01 PM

Hardly worth the effort to discuss it with you.

The ACRONYM is widely understood as just that....an ACRONYM that applies to a parent (in my case female) who stayed at home. No reference was made to not enjoying motherhood...you ASSUMED that. Better now?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
changes
Pooh-Bah
**

Reged: 04/07/07
Posts: 1820
Re: semantics! [Re: Melody]
      #231280 - 05/05/07 03:07 PM

Back peddle as much as you like....you're the one all worked up.

--------------------
If I agreed with you then we'd both be wrong.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TGSM
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 02/06/05
Posts: 5844
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231499 - 05/06/07 12:12 AM

Okay, let me see if I can put together a coherent thought. LOL It's been a long day.

Though some might be surprised, I am not completely against alimony. I do believe there are circumstances where it is justified. However, I don't think lifetime support should ever be awarded. At most, 1/2 the length of the marriage should give a person enough time to make a new lives for themselves. The supported person should have to accept their share of responsibility for the decision to stay home. They do so by not believing they are entittled to their exspouses money for life.

It may even further surprise some people to know that when DH and I first got together, I had no problem with the spousal and child support he paid. I didn't know all the amounts till much later in our realtionship, but still...I thought it was commendable of my husband to provide for his XW and kids in such a manner. He is a good man.

When things took the turn and resentment started to creep in was after my son was born. SD had graduated in June of 97 and there was a significant drop in CS. We decided to save some money so that we could have our child. Drew was born in Dec. 98.

Money was tight, but we were doing good. BM flipped out after he was born and started causing all sorts of visitation issues. This is when we started hearing a lot of the PAS bullshit from her. SHe said to Dave, "You have another son you can spend time with now, stay away from MY son." She withheld visits, hid the kids, etc.

She said, "Well I guess you won't be paying for the kids college education now." WTF???...He had agreed to give her what was called family support (It's combined and she paid no taxes on it.) So we were supposed to take the tax deductions placing us in a position to paid more child support....because of this, she was supposed to continue putting money into their college funds accounts. Not only didn't she NOT put the money into the accounts, she actually cleaned them out to pay her attorney she also lied and filed married and single...took all 3 kids as deductions and stuck Dave with a $18,000 tax bill he couldn't pay

I digress...let me try to get back on track, I have a migraine.

So my problem with paying alimony didn't come until after my husband was laid off his tech job in the bay area at 45 years old.

At this point in time, Dave has no job, we had no assets and I was recovering from childbirth.

She gave us such incredible hell over us asking to lower the CS and Alimony. She refused to lower her non-modifable alimony ($300 a month) and as a result, her child support ended up very low ($245 a mont.) So even with us being forced to give her 45% of DH's net pay, we still mamanged to get by and thrive.

So it was during that battle the resentment had started to rise. When DH got another job working for the county, there was literally a $1.00 per hour difference between their jobs...that's why I ALWAYS tell people...DO NOT ACCEPT NONMODIFABLE ALIMONY...it's evil.

So slowly, the resentment creeped in as it became apparent her intent was to try and put our family on the street, including my new baby boy whom she hated. It was at that point in time that I knew I hated her. The words she has said about my child alone make me want to smack her six ways from sunday.

Again...I digress. The situation further detiorated when she strung her ex fiance along for five years and wouldn't marry the guy because she didn't want to lose her alimony. I mean she was working it. He would "stay" at her house, but still owned his own home. He put thousands of dollars into her home thinking it would one day be his too....nope she used him like a piece of toliet paper and then grabbed her next victim (the therapist) our of the box of lies.

Now she is planning on marrying this guy in Aug or Sept. (Remember alimony ends June 30, 2007.)

But we will have the last laugh. She will pay full child support for 12 months...I will recoop money from her that I have spent out of my own money to care for her son.

Then on June 10, 2008 I will close the door on an financial dealing we will have with that woman forever...if I never have to see her again....the better my life will be for it.

--------------------
Faith-a f*rm belief in something for which there is no proof...complete trust.~Merriam Webster


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
Not worked up at all.... [Re: changes]
      #231513 - 05/06/07 02:59 AM

you're not worth it.

And it's pedal...I'm not selling anything.

Edited by Melody (05/06/07 03:00 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: TGSM]
      #231588 - 05/06/07 11:51 AM

So in essence...alimony was ok until it effect your life and then it wasn't ok.

You're against "lifetime" alimony, but what if you're 60, 65, 70 when the divorce happens...do you think that that person has sufficient time to make a "new life" for themselves? People who are currently of that age going through a divorce are of a different generation that you are I and thus their marriages and expectations are different than yours or mine. Why should those people be punished because of that?

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231592 - 05/06/07 12:00 PM

Let's be realistic, lifetime alimony at age 70 could be 5 years or 10 years- a relatively short term in comparison to someone who is 45-50 years old. Alimony really should not extend past the length of marriage. A woman who was married for 20 years and divorced at age 45 should not be given 35 years of alimony because she never work full time or out of the home, etc. And really once social security kicks in and both parties are retired there is no reason why one should still pay the other. THat is def. not "equitable" by any means. People on fixed incomes being forced to pay someone they were married to 20 years prior? Yuck!

And really if alimony did not negatively effect someone's life it would not be such a contentious issue.

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Miranda]
      #231605 - 05/06/07 12:42 PM

Let's be realistic.....

---> And therein lies the problem, people aren't being. The majority of ya'll who have partcipated in this discussion still do not understand that alimony is not a black and white issue. Sheesh...I even gave ya'll the three distinct types of alimony, but ya'll are still trying to lump it together and make it fit every situation and you can't. Nor can you treat alimony like you do child support.

You can't say that it's ok to pay alimony to someone who is 70 and then turn around and say that alimony should NOT be paid because of social security.

Nor can you just arbitrairly decide that because someone remained a SAHP after the kids were in school or only worked part-time, that they are LESS deserving of alimony.

While I agree...in principal...that alimony shouldn't exceed the length of marriage, I also understand that there could be circumstances that warrant it. Let's say that during our ten years of marriage, I fully supported and paid for my spouse's education...eight years of it. I don't think that that is a debt that could easily be paid in ten years, so why not give the other party 15 years to pay it off?

As for your final statement...a lot of things can "negatively" effect someone's life, but that is NOT what makes it "contentious"...what makes alimony so contintious is that it has been abused/misused.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Miranda
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 20822
Loc: North of Mexico
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231610 - 05/06/07 12:55 PM

"You can't say that it's ok to pay alimony to someone who is 70 and then turn around and say that alimony should NOT be paid because of social security."

***************

I never said it was okay to pay a 70 year old alimony. I was replying to your post about a 70 year old getting lifetime alimony in comparison to a 45 year old getting lifetime alimony.

--------------------
13.1...because I am only half crazy!

Edited by Miranda (05/06/07 12:56 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Redlegg
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 10/05/06
Posts: 27199
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231615 - 05/06/07 01:02 PM

My personal take is that there is nothing wrong with alimony. It should enable the less financially able spouse to get back on their feet, to a lifestyle that they are capable of living decently. It should not be awarded for a lifetime to any spouse. There are sacrifices made by both spouses in every marriage, and that is a partnership whether you like it or not. When the marriage is dissolved, then both should be able to live their own lives, that takes time financially, but when it happens the alimony should end.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TGSM
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 02/06/05
Posts: 5844
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231619 - 05/06/07 01:18 PM

Alimony was okay until it began to be misused and utilzed as punishment, not as betterment to her life. Agree or not, that's how *I* feel about it. She did not use it to better her life, get a degree or a better job. She used it as a tool to hurt my husband and ultimately her own son when he came to live with us. She avoided marriage to keep it coming in and now she is going to marry some guy she has known 4 months because it is ending...she's a user. JMHO

One of my best friends got alimony after an 18 year marriage (She was a SAHM.) She went back to school and got a degree and is now a HS teacher making decent money. Her XH paid his alimony faithfully...he was ordered to pay for 9 years, she ended it ON HER OWN 3 years early after she got her degree and a good job. Now that's a situation that ended up fair.

As far as a 60, 70 or 80 year old person getting alimony. I did say, 1/2 the length of the marriage was fair in many cases. If you are dealing with a person who is 60, 70 or 80 and was in a long term marriage, most likely 1/2 the length of the marriage is going to be lifetime for him or her. :0)

--------------------
Faith-a f*rm belief in something for which there is no proof...complete trust.~Merriam Webster


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: TGSM]
      #231628 - 05/06/07 02:06 PM

She did not use it to better her life, get a degree or a better job. She avoided marriage to keep it coming in and now she is going to marry some guy she has known 4 months because it is ending...she's a user.

---> Hmmmmm...because she didn't "better" herself...she is a "user"; because she is remarrying AFTER alimony ends...she is a "user"; because she's only know her future husband for four months...she is a "user". Would she still be a "user" if she had "bettered" herself, but is still remarrying AFTER her alimony ends? Would she still be a "user" if she didn't "better" herself, but remarried BEFORE alimony ended? Would she still be a "user" is she wasn't getting remarried? Would she still be a "user" if she had know this guy for several years?

---> I don't think ending alimony early or going the distance makes you a "better" or "worse" a person. While I think not using transitional support to better oneself is foolish...it not for me to "dis" someone for doing or rather...not doing something I would/wouldn't do differently.

---> As for your friend...would you feel differently about her if she hadn't given up her alimony?

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TGSM
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 02/06/05
Posts: 5844
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231636 - 05/06/07 03:25 PM

Is there a point to this playing 20 questions Gecko? Obviously my feelings about BM are based upon our exact situation. We could speculate all day long with the what if's...if your point is that situations vary, then I'll gladly give you that. I was speaking to my situation.

If someone is using their alimony to better their situation and make a life for themselves outside their ended marriage, then bullyroo for them.

Oh and to the last question, yes I would have felt differently about my friend if she had bled her ex dry just because she legally could have. I think she did the honorable thing...she bettered herself, made a life for herself outside and apart from her ex-husband, then cut him loose.

--------------------
Faith-a f*rm belief in something for which there is no proof...complete trust.~Merriam Webster


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
txks1151
enthusiast


Reged: 03/26/07
Posts: 210
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: TGSM]
      #231655 - 05/06/07 04:34 PM

Example in my current alimony situation..

My Ex gets $1900/mo from me. I pay the Mortgage and her car payment, she gets about $510 a month in cash. She also gets $650 a month in SSI.

She has no bills besides Power, Car insurance ($100) and Phone. ($65).

No other bills, I got stuck with them all.

So she has abotu $700+ a month to live on. She could/can live on that while she finds a job and gets up to speed. Her alimony only ends if she remarries prior to April 2011.

But, instead of setting herself up for long term success, she is "fire-saleing" off the house and car, to get more cash a month. That way she can live well without working.

(this is what she told my father last week)

So instead of using my money to better herself, I believe her plan is to live well, string boyfriend along until near the end of the alimony (4 more years) and then marry the next sucker who will support her lazy behind.

But, I'm biased and jaded that she has more money than me every month (taking her SSI into account) and does not lift a freaking finger for it.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Relayer
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 9506
Loc: Moorglade Mover
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: txks1151]
      #231690 - 05/06/07 06:32 PM

[quote]Example in my current alimony situation..

My Ex gets $1900/mo from me. I pay the Mortgage and her car payment, she gets about $510 a month in cash. She also gets $650 a month in SSI.

She has no bills besides Power, Car insurance ($100) and Phone. ($65).

No other bills, I got stuck with them all.

So she has abotu $700+ a month to live on. She could/can live on that while she finds a job and gets up to speed. Her alimony only ends if she remarries prior to April 2011.

But, instead of setting herself up for long term success, she is "fire-saleing" off the house and car, to get more cash a month. That way she can live well without working.

(this is what she told my father last week)

So instead of using my money to better herself, I believe her plan is to live well, string boyfriend along until near the end of the alimony (4 more years) and then marry the next sucker who will support her lazy behind.

But, I'm biased and jaded that she has more money than me every month (taking her SSI into account
) and does not lift a freaking finger for it. [/quote]


SSI is a needs based program and at $500+ a month with no living expenses, she does not qualify and it defrauding the government.

--------------------
GO CUBBIES!!!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gecko
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/01/04
Posts: 20211
Loc: Third rock from the sun
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: TGSM]
      #231691 - 05/06/07 06:33 PM

Is there a point to this playing 20 questions Gecko?

---> Yes.

--------------------
If you air your dirty linen in public, expect people to comment on the skid marks!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rebecca5
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 11697
Loc: Down home.
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: txks1151]
      #231697 - 05/06/07 07:08 PM

All the money you pay toward her bills counts as income. I can't believe she still qualifies for SSDI.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Relayer
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 03/13/07
Posts: 9506
Loc: Moorglade Mover
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Rebecca5]
      #231708 - 05/06/07 07:32 PM

[quote]All the money you pay toward her bills counts as income. I can't believe she still qualifies for SSDI. [/quote]

SSI and SSDI are differnt. ON SSDI, you can be worth a lot, stay under around $1000 a month and still qualifiy. If someone pays for your house, it wouldnt matter. It's what you actually earn.

SSI is needs based (you also need a rent/mortgage payment), where any money coming in is offset. She would qualify for SSDI but not SSI. The SSA obviously does not know about her $$ coming in nor her living arrangements.

--------------------
GO CUBBIES!!!!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TGSM
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 02/06/05
Posts: 5844
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Gecko]
      #231711 - 05/06/07 07:40 PM

Oh good! I would have hated to think it was meaningless blather...

--------------------
Faith-a f*rm belief in something for which there is no proof...complete trust.~Merriam Webster


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rebecca5
Carpal \'Tunnel
**

Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 11697
Loc: Down home.
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Relayer]
      #231716 - 05/06/07 07:47 PM

"If someone pays for your house, it wouldnt matter. It's what you actually earn."

Your expenses and your income impact your benefit amount. If someone else pays your bills, it effects your expenses.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
matart1
Carpal \'Tunnel
*

Reged: 09/01/05
Posts: 2798
methinks her defrauding is reason to call hotline [Re: txks1151]
      #231832 - 05/07/07 06:46 AM

SSI is a needs based program and at $500+ a month with no living expenses, she does not qualify and it defrauding the government.
>>>>>>>>>

if indeed this money from you coming to her would legally offset the SSI or whatever and she would fraudulantly gain it - then call the hotline to report it.
Barbi can go find a job.

--------------------
Life is a long lesson in humility.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
yregna
veteran
*

Reged: 07/25/06
Posts: 1265
Loc: Oregon
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: Susanf31]
      #236651 - 05/17/07 06:24 PM

Being the SAHP is a LOT easier...A LOT ! You shouldn't be able to cash in after being the SAHP.

--------------------
"Anything free is worth what you pay for it..."
"Climate is what we expect, weather is what we get"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rosie716
recently joined
**

Reged: 05/01/07
Posts: 10
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: yregna]
      #238938 - 05/22/07 06:36 PM

what would you know.. have you ever actually been a SAHP?? doesn't seem like it..the job requires alot more than you let on having..

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cabodad
newbie


Reged: 05/23/07
Posts: 37
Loc: Arizona
Re: Discussion - Alimony [Re: trophywife]
      #240063 - 05/24/07 11:24 AM

Any way you look at it - It's expensive. My ex decided to leave after 28 years. Arizona law, no fault. She has worked for the same airline for 30 years, full time. She gets 30% of my 401k (larger than hers) and $1800 a month for the next 12 years. I will be 67 when I stop paying her. She will be 65. Goodby retirement. I hope she finds a pilot that will marry her, that is my only way out. She also got half of the equity in the house and half of everything in it. I got all the bills, kids college loans, etc.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | >> (show all)



Extra information
0 registered and 4 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  dsAdmin 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is disabled

Rating:
Topic views: 12910

Rate this topic

Jump to

Contact Us Divorce Source Home

*
UBB.threads™ 6.5.1.1


Resources & Tools
Start Your Divorce Online Start Your Divorce
Several Options to Get Started Today.
Divorce Tools Online Divorce Tools
Keeping it Simple to Get the Job Done.
Divorce Downloads Download Center
Instantly Download Books, Guides & Forms.
Divorce and Custody Books Discount Books
Over 100 of the Best Divorce & Custody Books.
Negotiate Online Negotiate Online
Settle your Divorce and Save.
Custody and Support Tracking Custody Scheduling
Make Sure You Document Everything.

Easily Connect With a Lawyer or Mediator
Have Divorce Professionals from Your Area Contact You!
Enter Your Zip Code: