Separated, how much should I provide?

Mojisola

quidsy wrote: »

One has to assume he was fine with it to make the descision he did, not to mention he had plenty of time to get used to the idea before pulling the trigger, a luxury she & the kids didn't have.

You don't have to assume that - there could have been several years of discussions and both partners could have been well aware that the relationship wasn't working.

quidsy

No you directly called his ex wife a "madam, I found it to be condescending in the extreme, she is a grown woman & the mother of his children & you have one side of this whole sorry tale.

I used a phrase commonly used to express a surprise act. If you are unaware of that, then too bad.

No raw nerve here, I just felt that the cheerleaders were getting a bit too catty regarding his ex & figured a devils advocate would be necessary & as been proven his ex is still beign slated & given no understanding as to why she might be dragging her heels over settlement.

lucym

Mojisola wrote: »

And Jack wasn't?

I think that the difference is obvious.

quidsy

Mojisola wrote: »

You don't have to assume that - there could have been several years of discussions and both partners could have been well aware that the relationship wasn't working.

So you don't know either

Mojisola

quidsy wrote: »

So you don't know either

No - and that's why we hadn't commented on it.

Jack is asking about the practical side of splitting up and doesn't need to tell us about how they reached this stage.

lucym

quidsy wrote: »

No you directly called his ex wife a "madam, I found it to be condescending in the extreme, she is a grown woman & the mother of his children & you have one side of this whole sorry tale.

I used a phrase commonly used to express a surprise act. If you are unaware of that, then too bad.

No raw nerve here, I just felt that the cheerleaders were getting a bit too catty regarding his ex & figured a devils advocate would be necessary & as been proven his ex is still beign slated & given no understanding as to why she might be dragging her heels over settlement.

I agree. I wouldn't want my ex-partner to be spoken about that way despite the damage his behaviour caused me.

lucym

Mojisola wrote: »

No - and that's why we hadn't commented on it.

Jack is asking about the practical side of splitting up and doesn't need to tell us about how they reached this stage.

So why the need to be so unpleasant about his ex? Jack isn't...

quidsy

agreed, but it hasn't stopped an awful lot of "supposition" as to what his ex is spending her money on, thinking, feeling & how she should "just pull her big girl socks up and get a job, move on, blah blah" from happening on the thread.

Most acrimonious divorces are a battle of nerves, jackrs needs to keep his & she will finally come to an agreement but right now it seems she has decided to be a PIA. That is her right.

Mojisola

lucym wrote: »

So why the need to be so unpleasant about his ex? Jack isn't...

Is saying that she is being unrealistic in expecting to live to the same standard after the separation as she was before being unpleasant?

Or suggesting that she starts to take control of her own life and claim benefits and look for work?

HurdyGurdy

quidsy wrote: »

But is wasn't above her means a short while ago & will take her a while to deal with that & again, just becuase you are able to live a certain way, many would not wish to.

If this were true, then JackRS wouldn't have left the marriage with debts. Which he did. Debts which have only increased since that time.