Divorce

My ex-wife has decided to withdraw my access to the children citing my lack of responsibility as a parent. The youngest bumped his head falling backwards after taking a photo. The fact that we are in court in two weeks time re/ financial settlement I can't help but feel this is purely using the children as a weapon to try and leverage more from me.

She wants to keep the house, but as a £20k part time worker she's going to struggle to pay the mortgage on a £300k house...expects me to pay the whole thing for the next 15 years and then accept that her 'maintenance' of the house means I only get 15% of the value back...

It's despicable that she's using the children in this manner.
 
Gornall said:
It's despicable that she's using the children in this manner.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's a painful, too-common thing. Speaking from experience. Even now, 10 years on, I find the conclusion that I once mixed it with a moral dwarf irrefutable.
 
I'm well into 5 figures with solicitors fees in my three year divorce although it looks like we've now got a settlement. No kids involved but I've agreed to 55% including her getting the house mortgage free, chunk of cash and chunk of pension, none of which she contributed to at all significantly. Only because the cost of taking it to court is eye watering.
 
I think this is a lesson to married couples across the country. You have both got to work and both split 50/50. I only ever hear of issues where the wife has been doing **** all for years and then wants a share of the pot.

Dont let it happen guys. Even kids arent an excuse for a wife bailing on employment.

PAz said:
Been through this. Quite honestly the money is less important than the children.
Focus on them (I am sure you are), as maintaining access and being there for them is what's really critical.
Click to expand...
Anyone in this situation needs to go to the courts to make sure they get access to children in a manner that suits both parties.
Yes its more money, but dont even entertain the notion of talking to someone that will do this. It's what the courts are there for.
 
Last edited:
darkgen said:
^ did she not work? What was the rationale as you were child-free?
Click to expand...
Not as such for about 20 years, I financed her home based business. Rationale was effectively agree now or go to court for an agreement with no guarantee of the outcome and a **** load more costs. This arguably works out cheaper
 
I think the law reflects the unfairness of the fact that in the past women were expected to give up work, at least full time work, to undertake the unpaid tasks of child care and housework while her husband earned the money they needed. This obviously left her financially beholden to him and at a significant disadvantage in the case of divorce with little/no savings and reduced or no income and earning potential despite the contribution she had made to marriage. I'm sure in such circumstances it makes perfect sense for her be entitled to half the assets collectively acquired dusing the marriage. It also makes sense that if she is going to be the sole or primary guardian of any children that her ex husband shoulders his fair share of the financial burden of child rearing. After all having children was likely to have been a joint decision.

I do think, however that the law in this area has been slow to catch up with societal changes; the financial and domestic responsibilites of a marriage are less clearly defined and likely to be more evenly distributed than would have been the case in the past and divorce settlements should reflect the actual contribution, both financial and domestic made by both parties. In some cases, where the marriage has been more 'traditional' this may mean the wife is entitled to half the assets acquired collectively during the marriage. In others it should mean that there is little or no division of assets since neither party has been disadvantaged financially by the division of labour within the marriage. The law is slowly beginning to catch up but it is taking time.

The only advice I have for the OP is to speak to a lawyer and keep it as amicable as possible. Testy and difficult divorces seldom bring either side what they want.
 
iamtheoneneo said:
I think this is a lesson to married couples across the country. You have both got to work and both split 50/50. I only ever hear of issues where the wife has been doing **** all for years and then wants a share of the pot.

Dont let it happen guys. Even kids arent an excuse for a wife bailing on employment.


Anyone in this situation needs to go to the courts to make sure they get access to children in a manner that suits both parties.
Yes its more money, but dont even entertain the notion of talking to someone that will do this. It's what the courts are there for.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
Whatever life you lead make sure you are happy with getting 50pc. If one partner doesn't work make sure they are effectively contributing.

This stuff is horrendous.
Obviously we only hear one side of story on forum but it's brutal if totally true.

Add kids into the mix and h nothing matters
 
Electroshadow said:
I feel for everyone in here, trust me it's no different even if your not married!
Still costs the best part of an executive car to pay off a gf that hasn't contributed or named on the property it smarts a lot especially when they initiate the breakup.
Click to expand...

In the breakup of a typical male breadwinner / female childcarer type relationship the woman would have far less rights when unmarried - for example there is no starting point of a total asset split 50/50 - your gf must have been able to evidence how she had specifically contributed to the property; financially or otherwise, in order to get any sort of settlement?
Have a look at some threads on mumsnet (if you dare) for the opposing view in these circumstances - It actually makes for pretty grim reading. Women in solid relationships sacrificing their careers to raise the children, separating after 10 years, realising they are not on the deeds to the house & being left with no home, no career prospects, & children to house/care for, while the man starts afresh with his new squeeze, a house & a stable job.
 
ci_newman said:
Or not wanting to lose access to their kids (as several guys have reported happening to them in this thread)
Click to expand...

I wake up almost daily and think that way - if I could turn back the clock I wouldn't do it if I knew what I know now. Not seeing my boy every day is very painful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom