Query of spousal maintenance

CuppaTea

Well there is little point me continuing, a decision has been made.

I for one didn't consider it "nonsense" or "crazy".

Disrespectful or disagree aside.

CuppaTea

BitterAndTwisted wrote: »

It's not reasonable for a person you are no longer in a relationship with to be expected to support you now or at any time in the future, otherwise what would be the point of having a separation agreement at all?

Agreed but solicitors still use spousal maintenance in agreements which is why I asked.

Reams

The whole point is to leave you with approx. what ex has. If his future earning capacity is likely to be greater than yours, the 5 Pence enables the door to be kept open for that purpose.


If the Court Order is worded correctly, he cannot as Margaret Clare claims make similar demands on you.
Besides any of the above, unless the ex has made a substantial payment to be invested for the children,( usually only applicable in high end settlements), there cannot be a clean break where dependant children exist.


You Cuppa have to look out for yourself. All very well posters here getting on their feminist high horse, but none of us know the financial circumstances of either of you.
I think you should keep that 5p clause in, and more importantly, so does your solicitor.

Mojisola

Reams wrote: »

I think you should keep that 5p clause in, and more importantly, so does your solicitor.

But her husband's solicitor will, quite rightly, fight it.

Why should a man be financially responsible for what happens to his ex in the future? After the divorce, they should be leading separate lives and being responsible for themselves.

They will both have responsibility for the children but that's a different matter.

mumps

CuppaTea wrote: »

Well there is little point me continuing, a decision has been made.

I for one didn't consider it "nonsense" or "crazy".

Disrespectful or disagree aside.

I agree with you that comments like "nonsense" and "crazy" are uncalled for. I personally find the "kept woman" comment offensive as well. I think if you have health problems your solicitor is right to think about this and could even be accused of negligence if he didn't, after all there is the bit about "in sickness and in health" and if you are unwell why should he walk away from that, particularly with young children involved. Some people just like to be unpleasant, take no notice of them and I hope you and the children are OK.

GobbledyGook

Think about it carefully before you make a decision and make the decision that is right for you and your circumstances.

I got slated by some people for getting spousal maintenance in my divorce. Lots of people thought it was disgusting I didn't get up off my 'lazy bum' (and that was the polite ones) and fend for myself. However, I gave up uni to move for my husband's job and I then became a SAHM to our children because his career progression would have been severely hampered if he had to take days off when the children had chicken pox etc. Even when I went back to work part time it was still me who was responsible for sick days and school holidays. Spousal maintenance was put in our divorce for a set time to give me the chance to build up my employment history and/or go to uni or college. By the time our youngest starts high school I'm expected to be completely fending for myself (obviously his responsibility to the children would still stand).

In our case spousal maintenance was right and fair (and he also thought so). If it's right and fair in your case then don't put it aside because other people don't agree with it in any case.

GobbledyGook

I should add - not people on here. After the reaction about child maintenance when I first split up I kept quiet about it here!

whodathunkit

mumps wrote: »

I agree with you that comments like "nonsense" and "crazy" are uncalled for. I personally find the "kept woman" comment offensive as well. I think if you have health problems your solicitor is right to think about this and could even be accused of negligence if he didn't, after all there is the bit about "in sickness and in health" and if you are unwell why should he walk away from that, particularly with young children involved. Some people just like to be unpleasant, take no notice of them and I hope you and the children are OK.

"In sickness and in health" refers to during the marriage, not after it ends in divorce.

daisiegg

whodathunkit wrote: »

"In sickness and in health" refers to during the marriage, not after it ends in divorce.

Don't wedding vows still say 'until death parts us' (death, not divorce!) Mine did anyway but it was a church wedding so I don't know if it is different in another setting.

tinkerbell28

If your solicitor has suggested it. I'd trust them over some forumites who couldn't wait to tell you to get on their feminist high horse. As one poster so elegantly put it.