SAHM divorce help/pointers

heuchera

Tea&Biscuits wrote: »

hmm perhaps it's just the use of the word "support".

I've found whilst being a SAHM most women go back to work in some way shape or form, and those who don't are spoken about as having husbands who "support" them.

I suppose, it is the semantics of this that is all wrong (to me). A husband does not "support" (financally) his wife while she is a SAHM. A husband and wife make a joint decision to have one parent at home to care for THEIR children until they reach an age where it is no longer deemed necessary.

I shall hush now!

Fair enough. You both make a decision to run the household on one wage.

Obviously if there isn't one wage any more, the household will still have to be run somehow.. so restless6 wasn't entirely wrong.

wendz86

If you have property and assets it's more complicated. You may be entitled to some benefits depending on what you do have.

Your ex will need to pay money towards the children which you can either come to a private agreement about or go through the child support people if you have issues.

duchy

Tea&Biscuits wrote: »

hmm perhaps it's just the use of the word "support".

I've found whilst being a SAHM most women go back to work in some way shape or form, and those who don't are spoken about as having husbands who "support" them.

I suppose, it is the semantics of this that is all wrong (to me). A husband does not "support" (financally) his wife while she is a SAHM. A husband and wife make a joint decision to have one parent at home to care for THEIR children until they reach an age where it is no longer deemed necessary.

I shall hush now!

So if they divorce - who pays the rent/mortgage, puts food on the table , buys the children's clothes if the SAHP chooses not to work ?

Seems pretty clear cut - the SAHP goes onto benefits or gets a job. So saying getting a job is in your future isn't unreasonable .
Semantics don't pay the bills.....and neither does child support in most cases . (and I say this as a single parent )

FBaby

To be fair, your OP is ambiguous as not clear whether you want to know how a settlement would be worked out on the basis that you've been a SAHM or whether you are asking what are the implications once you are divorced.

The reality is that the time by which the partner (usually male) who brought in the money in the family had to continue to do so after the divorce so that his ex and children didn't see a change in lifestyle has long changed.

Nowadays, unless in exceptional circumstances, being a SAHM is considered a luxury and from a support perspective, only those with children under the age of 5 are considered entitled to be so, anyone over that age are expected to work/look for work.

Ultimately, whether SAHM or not, the only people of importance are the children. This means that ultimately, a judge will always ensure that children are the least affected by the divorce and that means staying in the property if possible. If the house is owned, it might very well be that you are entitled to a higher percentage of equity, or to remain in the house until you are in a long term relationship, the youngest child is 18 or so.

Also, as I'm sure you know, every asset is considered joint, so your husband's occupational pension, if he has one, will most likely be considered joint. It them all comes down to negotiation between solicitors.