Possible getting Divorced!!!!

[copperhead]

 

Definitely on the to do list, with the biggest worry being more overall estate planning. Which is probably more important for us than a married couple, due to the legal differences we've already touched on here. What happens to my assets if something happens to me? I want to make sure they go to her.

 

research living trusts

[KennyFKINPowerz]

Get a lawyer. It all boils down to how much you make -vs- how much she makes. In this case it sounds like your screwed. My ex wife made 10.00 an hour and they tried to rake me over the coals. The only thing that saved me is they found out she was on welfare and instead of her losing her welfare benefits, she decided for sign off on everything and I didnt have to pay. We agreed on shared parenting and we have the kids an equal amount of time and they still tried to wax me for $777.00 a month for 2 kids. It took me over 2 years to finalize my divorce and I hated every second of it.

[TTQ B4U]

Those aren't his feelings or words, they are mine. He isn't complaining about caring for his kids and neither am I. I am trying to make the point that in no way does this woman deserve the amount that she receives based on what she did.

 

Okay so we're clear that you have emotion injected into the portion of an unforutnately situation that calls for no emotion.....a divorce is a legal proceeding and if you or heaven forbid an attorney gets emotional about those proceedings, you're as aobut out of place as I would be running in the Olympics.

 

I absolutely see your opinion that you feel she doesn't derserve the amount provided to her by the courts but if you want to argue points, then you have talk the legal and contractual details of the case not emotions and opinions. Those do absolutely nothing but cost people more money.

 

All of your contract talk is funny. You make it seem like marriage isn't about love and respect, but business. That's my point.

 

I think I've absolutely discussed the non contractual, emotional and religious portions of a marraige where appropriate in this thread. However, as noted above, this thread isn't about that. The OP noted he's likely entering into a legal proceeding and others have discussed simliar/related situations that don't call for in-depth talk about love and respect. Feel free to do so here but by the time a marraige is in divorce court there's not much love left and respect turns to disrespect or at best courtious treament....if you're lucky.

 

There should be a clause stating that if one of the two parties involved decides to ruin the relationship by cheating multiple times and then breaking the "contract", that they don't get to reap the benefits of your said "contract".

 

No clause needed. If the above is what you want then don't enter into marriage. Stay in a friends with benefits situation and have agreements drawn up by an attorney on how you would like things to be laid out both in a perfect world and should shit hit the fan. That's exactly the advice I have been giving Jesse.

 

Again, your friend and I will say based on what you're sharing, you too don't likely understand what a marraige entails from a legal or business perspective. You may not like my view on that and call it funny, but it is what it is and failing to realize that or address the details doesn't change ones misunderstanding. What that will do is lead to a lot of emotional distress and frustration.

 

Ask your friend why he got married. It would be interesting to hear what he says. I bet most people couldn't answer it well beyond saying they were in love and wanted to spend the rest of their lives together, blah, blah, blah. They attest some type of "committment" but never understand the details behind what it means legally and then bauk when the accountability train runs them over in court.

 

Thanks for the continued discussion. Just trying to be straight with you, not be a dick to you.

[TTQ B4U]

Get a lawyer. It all boils down to how much you make -vs- how much she makes. In this case it sounds like your screwed. My ex wife made 10.00 an hour and they tried to rake me over the coals. The only thing that saved me is they found out she was on welfare and instead of her losing her welfare benefits, she decided for sign off on everything and I didnt have to pay. We agreed on shared parenting and we have the kids an equal amount of time and they still tried to wax me for $777.00 a month for 2 kids. It took me over 2 years to finalize my divorce and I hated every second of it.

 

It will boil down to more than just income but I see the point you're trying to make.

 

Keep in mind what $10hr and welfare assistance really is though in terms of income, especially as a single mom sharing custody. You may think you were raked over the coals, but I'll take a good raking over the hot unfortunate mess she's put herself in.

 

$777mo. for two kids isn't bad dude. Private daycare for my kids was $1,100mo each. No way I'd put them in some shitty center for less so just looking at what costs are to raise a kid to my standards and beliefs, if we were to have gotten divorced when they were younger, I'd eat beans and rice to insure the kids didn't get screwed in the process. It wouldn't be cheap but then I knew that going in.

 

The sad thing about many divorces is parents fail to insure the impact and disruption to the kids lives is minimized. They attempt it but then immediate go to how it impacts them and the focus on the kid is then reduced. Ironically if they would have been thinking that way all along about their spouse and then kids they wouldn't likely be getting divorced.

 

To be married and have kids is one of the most selfless jobs in the world when done right and as funny as it sounds can be a lot of fun. Come to think about it, it's just like my job

[KennyFKINPowerz]

It will boil down to more than just income but I see the point you're trying to make.

 

Keep in mind what $10hr and welfare assistance really is though in terms of income, especially as a single mom sharing custody. You may think you were raked over the coals, but I'll take a good raking over the hot unfortunate mess she's put herself in.

 

$777mo. for two kids isn't bad dude. Private daycare for my kids was $1,100mo each. No way I'd put them in some shitty center for less so just looking at what costs are to raise a kid to my standards and beliefs, if we were to have gotten divorced when they were younger, I'd eat beans and rice to insure the kids didn't get screwed in the process. It wouldn't be cheap but then I knew that going in.

 

The sad thing about many divorces is parents fail to insure the impact and disruption to the kids lives is minimized. They attempt it but then immediate go to how it impacts them and the focus on the kid is then reduced. Ironically if they would have been thinking that way all along about their spouse and then kids they wouldn't likely be getting divorced.

 

To be married and have kids is one of the most selfless jobs in the world when done right and as funny as it sounds can be a lot of fun. Come to think about it, it's just like my job

 

777 a month is bad when I am already paying for everything on my end. When you look at it 777 is not all that would have been getting paid out. Its just what I would have been giving her to party on. Shared parenting to me is that everything is split down the middle, not I pay my half and then I pay half of your half. Thats 3/4 and isnt very balanced. Its not my fault that she decided to be a lazy piece of shit and not do anything with her life. I worked my ass of to get where I am. I made a lot of sacrifices to get where I am. I didnt do all that to give her money to party on. If she cant afford the kids then she shouldnt have them if you ask me. I would have no problem keeping them full time. She made her bed and now she has to lie in it. I have no problem taking care of my kids and I think its absolute BS that a court thinks I should have to help their mom.

[smokin5s]

It's not that simple. There are about 12 different factors that play into consideration when determining child support and alimony. It's not just as simple as who makes what and who gets what percentage of time with the kids. I would hope your attorney took the time to cover all that so you fully understand the details. If not, you need to ask.

 

 

 

Sure, they both are used to the $140k lifestyle, but again, there are many factors in play here not just who makes what added together and divided by two. Both parties didn't come into the marraige with equal stuff, tons of factors changed their lives while married and thus to expect each is going to exit with equal stuff is not a proper expectation. An attorney will confront you with that upfront or at least they should.

 

Her earning potential on her own isn't what his is and the contract of marraige isn't going to just toss her out to fend for herself with just her income and call it a day. That's not how it works. Believe me, roles are reversed more often than you think too.

 

Niether party will see their results as fair and both will toss blame. The reality is both are responsible in some way. Wives don't just haul off an cheat, they do it for a reason that was likely not seen, ignored or caused. It's rarely just entirely one sided.

my wife has 2 college degrees... so her earning potential should be higher than mine... just saying that she's female is stupid IMO... or just because I work harder than her and have excelled in my carrier while she has not, doesn't mean that I now owe her anything.... at some point women should have to fend for themselves... I can tell you in my marriage at least, all of our nice stuff has been purchased by me because I work hard, put in long hours at work and provide it... that shouldn't continue if we are no longer married. At that point, if she wants nice things, she can go get it herself. I get the splitting assets that you aquire while married down the middle, but that's it. Our legal system is so one sided it isn't funny.

[DKilbourne]

Okay so we're clear that you have emotion injected into the portion of an unforutnately situation that calls for no emotion.....a divorce is a legal proceeding and if you or heaven forbid an attorney gets emotional about those proceedings, you're as aobut out of place as I would be running in the Olympics.

 

I absolutely see your opinion that you feel she doesn't derserve the amount provided to her by the courts but if you want to argue points, then you have talk the legal and contractual details of the case not emotions and opinions. Those do absolutely nothing but cost people more money.

 

 

 

I think I've absolutely discussed the non contractual, emotional and religious portions of a marraige where appropriate in this thread. However, as noted above, this thread isn't about that. The OP noted he's likely entering into a legal proceeding and others have discussed simliar/related situations that don't call for in-depth talk about love and respect. Feel free to do so here but by the time a marraige is in divorce court there's not much love left and respect turns to disrespect or at best courtious treament....if you're lucky.

 

 

 

No clause needed. If the above is what you want then don't enter into marriage. Stay in a friends with benefits situation and have agreements drawn up by an attorney on how you would like things to be laid out both in a perfect world and should shit hit the fan. That's exactly the advice I have been giving Jesse.

 

Again, your friend and I will say based on what you're sharing, you too don't likely understand what a marraige entails from a legal or business perspective. You may not like my view on that and call it funny, but it is what it is and failing to realize that or address the details doesn't change ones misunderstanding. What that will do is lead to a lot of emotional distress and frustration.

 

Ask your friend why he got married. It would be interesting to hear what he says. I bet most people couldn't answer it well beyond saying they were in love and wanted to spend the rest of their lives together, blah, blah, blah. They attest some type of "committment" but never understand the details behind what it means legally and then bauk when the accountability train runs them over in court.

 

Thanks for the continued discussion. Just trying to be straight with you, not be a dick to you.

 

I fully understand the implications, I just don't have to agree with all of them. I'm sure he got married under the impression that he wouldn't have to deal with a cheating wife and subsequent legal issues. He and I are both more than intelligent enough to understand all of the legal implications, but damn some of them just seem to be over the top. Nobody said that we had to agree on them, which is what is clear in this thread. No one likes that side of the marriage and most don't agree with how it turns out in the end if it goes south.

It is nice to have the details put out there for those looking into it though.

I don't plan on getting divorced now or ever, but I have a feeling that most people don't get married to get divorced.

One last thought, why is it that women can get a portion of future raises that the man acquires after the divorce? She isn't around for those and telling me that "she was supportive of him while he was working towards that" isn't going to satisfy me.

[BoostedAce]

I've learned so much from this thread... Thanks a bunch

[TTQ B4U]

777 a month is bad when I am already paying for everything on my end. When you look at it 777 is not all that would have been getting paid out. Its just what I would have been giving her to party on. Shared parenting to me is that everything is split down the middle, not I pay my half and then I pay half of your half. Thats 3/4 and isnt very balanced.

 

In your case, there are kids involved and in those situations, it's not about you and how you are impacted. The courts are looking at $XX dollars coming in and what is in the best interest of the kids first and who is able to secure that best interest. They are then going to look at her and insure she's not in the street the day you are separated. You're fine, you have a job and are obviously the more skilled of the two, so just like when you married her and prior to the divorce, the courts are going to insure there's a fair and representative standard of living similar to what they experienced since the day you committed to upon saying "I Do" until the day of the divorce.

 

How she spends the money isn't your concern nor that of the courts unless it's proven she's an unfit mother using the money for drugs or something. Otherwise, life goes on and she's just as entitled to raise the kids during her time with them as she see's fit. No different than if you were just friends.

 

Someone asked earlier why is the legal system involved. That's why. So you don't get married, take a less than life equipped woman under your roof, pop out a couple kids out then for whatever reason the marraige ends and you attempt to let her and possibly the kids swim for their lives with little support from you. That's not the intention of the contract of marriage. Who is at fault plays little to no part.

 

Would you be cool with the courts saying you only owe $200mo? How do you think that would impact the kids? The everything else likely includes health insurance? Things she obviously can't provide? If you're not the one to provide that who will? You said yourself she's not capable.

 

Its not my fault that she decided to be a lazy piece of shit and not do anything with her life. I worked my ass of to get where I am. I made a lot of sacrifices to get where I am. I didnt do all that to give her money to party on.

 

Again with the self focus view....it's not about you man. You married that lazy piece of shit and played a part in her life and that of the kids you brought into this world. Like it or not, it's you have a role and responsibility there man. Sure you worked your ass off, but if you did it strictly for yourself then you likely should never have gotten married and had kids. You're not giving her anything. That money you're providing is to insure the those who you were responsible for during the marriage aren't left in the cold when it's over.

 

If she cant afford the kids then she shouldn't have them if you ask me. I would have no problem keeping them full time. She made her bed and now she has to lie in it. I have no problem taking care of my kids and I think its absolute BS that a court thinks I should have to help their mom.

 

That's not how it works man. It's a common comment from mostly men who are the bread winners but that's not how it works. The did ask you and you passed on alternatives and instead entered into a marriage contract. Her bed was your bed too and you had an obligation and for a number of years fufilled it. You can't wash your hands of that just because you get divorced. Especially when kids are involved. Their her kids too and again, the legal side of marriage is to protect the kids who are entitled to a mother, regardless of what you think of her or type of person she is. You don't get to strip her of that based on financial situations.

 

It's not BS that the courts are forcing you to support her. You did it for years on your own didn't you? Look at all the people that walk into work one day and find out their out of job, benefits and companies just say fuck you, that's your problem, we're outsourcing everything? That's not much different.

[TTQ B4U]

my wife has 2 college degrees... so her earning potential should be higher than mine... just saying that she's female is stupid IMO... or just because I work harder than her and have excelled in my carrier while she has not, doesn't mean that I now owe her anything.... at some point women should have to fend for themselves... I can tell you in my marriage at least, all of our nice stuff has been purchased by me because I work hard, put in long hours at work and provide it... that shouldn't continue if we are no longer married. At that point, if she wants nice things, she can go get it herself. I get the splitting assets that you aquire while married down the middle, but that's it. Our legal system is so one sided it isn't funny.

 

Regardless of her degrees, courts will look at her earnings thus far and factor in her potential. Fact is though, depending on her career path and given the fact that women still are traditionally paid less all roll into things.

 

Again, with the "what I have done" me, me, me attitude....you don't owe her anything different than what you've been providing her up until you were divorced. I can't believe so many people don't understand that. You married meaning you became a team, not separate players living in the same house. You're joined man....again, more people need to understand what marriage is and why to do it.

 

You didn't buy all those nice things with your money. Once you got married, all that money was equally both of yours, not just yours. Just because my wife carried our kids for 9 months and gave birth doesn't take away any rights I have as a dad. She sure worked harder in that dept. but it doesn't negate my role. Just the same, because your half of the team you were on worked harder doesn't negate the fact that you were a team.

 

Again, the lifestyle you both enjoyed gets divided and doesn't go more one way than the other. You will both take a hit but she's not guilty and deserving of any less than you for any reason. What you enjoyed together doesn't end the day you divorce. It also doesn't go on forever. How long is your alimony term, 5 yrs? Prolly not that long. Again, if you don't agree with that then don't get married.

 

Marriage support doesn't end cold turkey in all cases. Sounds to me like several of you had incomes with a significant difference than your spouses. Equal it out a bit more and things would be different.

[TTQ B4U]

I fully understand the implications, I just don't have to agree with all of them. I'm sure he got married under the impression that he wouldn't have to deal with a cheating wife and subsequent legal issues. He and I are both more than intelligent enough to understand all of the legal implications, but damn some of them just seem to be over the top. Nobody said that we had to agree on them, which is what is clear in this thread.

 

If you and he fully understood the implications and didn't agree with them, then right there's it's clear you shouldn't have gotten married and made a mistake doing so or were at some point willing to accept the consequences. Either way, the contract was made and accountability will be had.

 

No one expects to deal with cheating spouses, or legal issues, but again, those are some of the same things you need to prepare and protect against whether you're married or just living together. I use Jesse as a prime example as he's in a committed relationship and if they buy the house together, it will actually be uglier and more complicated should they break up if they don't both prepare ahead of time. Note I said BOTH.

 

 

I have a feeling that most people don't get married to get divorced.

 

You're likely right. And I would imagine 99.9% who do get married can't tell you why they did above and beyond the blah, blah love talk, bs....and they most certainly can't tell you what they did to prepare for the end should it come.

 

One last thought, why is it that women can get a portion of future raises that the man acquires after the divorce? She isn't around for those and telling me that "she was supportive of him while he was working towards that" isn't going to satisfy me.

 

She doesn't need to be "around" for that. That type of benefit doesn't go on forever of course but during the time where support is paid it will. The reason is again, back to lifestyle and income during the marriage. Had the couple stayed together she would have benefited from his earnings increase and thus support payments will factor it in, especially if there's history of it.

 

Example: I get 10% of my W2 dumped into my 401k by my employer as a bonus each year. If I get divorced, you can bet they are going to factor that repeatable bonus into the numbers should I be called on to pay support.

[TTQ B4U]

I've learned so much from this thread... Thanks a bunch

 

What did you learn, don't get married, you're fucked if you do, or that my dog can lick his own balls and I'm extremely jealous of that. I learned that Jesse likely tried the peanut butter trick :gabe:

 

 

Needs posted again:

 

http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/145241729/original.jpg

[DKilbourne]

 

She doesn't need to be "around" for that. That type of benefit doesn't go on forever of course but during the time where support is paid it will. The reason is again, back to lifestyle and income during the marriage. Had the couple stayed together she would have benefited from his earnings increase and thus support payments will factor it in, especially if there's history of it.

 

Example: I get 10% of my W2 dumped into my 401k by my employer as a bonus each year. If I get divorced, you can bet they are going to factor that repeatable bonus into the numbers should I be called on to pay support.

 

I understand that, but that is an existing part of your compensation while married. A promotion or raise that isn't a given, isn't. Why is that part of the payment?

[TTQ B4U]

I understand that, but that is an existing part of your compensation while married. A promotion or raise that isn't a given, isn't. Why is that part of the payment?

 

It's future earning potential. I've enjoyed progressive promotions over the years with that increases in my income and thus that future earning potential will come into play.

 

That's why I said earlier in the thread you can't just go out and take a low paying job and expect to pay far less. If I went out and took a $50k / yr job they would rape me for the difference between that $50k, what I am making now, have made in the past and am capable of making in the future.

 

The reverse is true to however. In the case of a spouse like mine that is an attorney who decided to quit working. If we get divorced in 3yrs a court is going to look at my wife with an expectation of a certain level of earning potential when she re-enters the workforce. They will base that on her past earnings and earning potential she has moving forward.

[smokin5s]

Regardless of her degrees, courts will look at her earnings thus far and factor in her potential. Fact is though, depending on her career path and given the fact that women still are traditionally paid less all roll into things.

 

Again, with the "what I have done" me, me, me attitude....you don't owe her anything different than what you've been providing her up until you were divorced. I can't believe so many people don't understand that. You married meaning you became a team, not separate players living in the same house. You're joined man....again, more people need to understand what marriage is and why to do it.

 

You didn't buy all those nice things with your money. Once you got married, all that money was equally both of yours, not just yours. Just because my wife carried our kids for 9 months and gave birth doesn't take away any rights I have as a dad. She sure worked harder in that dept. but it doesn't negate my role. Just the same, because your half of the team you were on worked harder doesn't negate the fact that you were a team.

 

Again, the lifestyle you both enjoyed gets divided and doesn't go more one way than the other. You will both take a hit but she's not guilty and deserving of any less than you for any reason. What you enjoyed together doesn't end the day you divorce. It also doesn't go on forever. How long is your alimony term, 5 yrs? Prolly not that long. Again, if you don't agree with that then don't get married.

 

Marriage support doesn't end cold turkey in all cases. Sounds to me like several of you had incomes with a significant difference than your spouses. Equal it out a bit more and things would be different.

once we aren't married I no longer owe her ANYTHING.... the only thing I owe is my children. That team nonsense is just that, nonsense.... once a divorice happens, you are no longer a team. as far as her working harder carrying the child, that can be argued.... I had to pick up all her slack so she could lay around. Child birth is no picnic but I wouldn't go as far as saying she worked harder....

 

(man, I hope my wife doesn't read this thread... would be bad news for me! )

[TTQ B4U]

once we aren't married I no longer owe her ANYTHING.... the only thing I owe is my children.

 

That's emotionally what you feel but not what the contract nor law sees. You entered into a relationship where your individual actions and joint decisions together had an impact on the current and future of all parties not just the children.

 

Alimony isn't paid in every situation, but in the OP'ers case, it will very likely be a portion of the next 3-5yrs should they split. Remember, according to what we've heard, they've been married 14yrs, she's a stay at home mom and there's a 14yr old involved.

 

Those are long time decisions made by both parties and just because you split you don't get to forgo the aftermath of decisions you were a part of making regardless of who they impact. You're still responsible in some fashion and for some length of time. Reverse the roles and you'd agree.

 

That team nonsense is just that, nonsense.... once a divorce happens, you are no longer a team.

I used the word team in reference to married couples and in that context it's absolutely not nonsense. Once divorced, while no longer a team, you are both jointly responsible for the welfare of any children, unless a court orders otherwise.

 

as far as her working harder carrying the child, that can be argued.... I had to pick up all her slack so she could lay around. Child birth is no picnic but I wouldn't go as far as saying she worked harder....

you didn't pick up her slack, you did what was needed and in the best interest of the household while your partner/team-mate was carrying your child.

[caseyctsv]

Man, read this whole thread at lunch. It is truly sad to read such terrible opinions of marriage. I have been married 18 years (married at age 21) and cannot imagine life without her. She would tell you the same. Marriage works with true commitment from both parties and a common reason for living. I really hope some of you come to reAlize that marriage is not something to be feared or ridiculed but to be cherished and nurtured. Love is a verb not a feeling, marriage takes work!

 

All that being said, there are some rediculous decisions coming out of the courts in divorces.

[2pointslow]

I wonder if their is a direct correlation between murders and divorce?

[twistedfocus1647545489]

Statistically speaking, 100% of divorces begin with marriage.

 

 

Can't argue with hard statistics.

:gabe:

[HotCarl]

Jesus christ, what is the premise behind alimony? Why should someone deserve a cut of your paycheck for nothing? (Aside from child support)

 

Im not an atty but the premise is that he (the husband/father) supplied a certain level of quality of living for her (wife/mother) while they were married and she wasnt working. Now that they wont be married he has to keep providing a certain level of quality of living after they are divorced. Its bullshit.

 

My mom wanted to divorce my step-dad but the lawyer suggested she put him in an extended stay and give him a monthly stypen for 2 years prior to the divorce to avoid paying any allimony after the divorce. My step-dad is a moron so he went for it thinking they were just seperated. Mind you the only reason my mom would owe my step-dad anything is b/c she made ALOT more money than he did and he basically did nothing.

[TTQ B4U]

Im not an atty but the premise is that he (the husband/father) supplied a certain level of quality of living for her (wife/mother) while they were married and she wasnt working. Now that they wont be married he has to keep providing a certain level of quality of living after they are divorced. Its bullshit.

 

It's not bullshit.

 

The purpose of alimony is to avoid an unfair situation that would likely occur even after property is divided and child support is granted. The courts have broad discretion to decide what is fair in each case, there's no black and white calculator. Here's an example:

 

Take a husband and wife who were married 10 years before splitting. At the time of the divorce, the husband earns $63,000 a year, after seven years at a large company where the top pay for his specialty is $80,000. When the couple married, he was in graduate school and the wife was earning $22,000. The wife worked for three more years, supporting the husband while he completed his coursework and graduated.

 

When their first child was born, they agreed that the wife would care for the child at home. At the time of divorce, the wife had been working full-time for one year since the couple's children, ages seven and six, had entered school. She was earning $23,000 a year and was granted custody of the children.

 

A judge in this case would certainly award child support and would probably divide marital property equally between the couple. But it might not seem fair to the judge to allow the husband to leave the marriage with the sole possession of the couple's most valuable asset—his earning potential. When the wife contributed to his education by supporting him. Unlike the family's home or station wagon, the husband's earning power has not yet reached its full value, but it promises to grow. It seems especially unfair for the wife not to receive a share of it since after helping the husband attain his education she agreed to forfeit her earning power to invest time in the family. The several years she spent out of the workforce continue to handicap her earnings. Alimony is the only means available to the court to avoid a such an unjust division of assets.

 

Reverse the shoes and you would see my point.

 

So back OT to the OP'er. They have 14yrs of marriage and the wife is a stay at home mom, and all of the choices during that time affect both people. He's not going to be able to split up and dump her to fend for herself after that many years out of the work force while his work force world continued on.

[TTQ B4U]

Factors the legal systems looks at when determining alimony. Like I said about child support, there are a number of them.

 

 

1. The actual need and ability of the parties to pay;
   
2. The duration of the marriage or civil union;
   
3. The age, physical and emotional health of the parties;
   
4. The standard of living established in the marriage or civil union and the likelihood that each party can maintain a reasonably comparable standard of living;
   
5. The earning capacities, educational levels, vocational skills, and employability of the parties;
   
6. The length of absence from the job market of the party seeking maintenance;
   
7. The parental responsibilities for the children;
   
8. The time and expense necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the party seeking maintenance to find appropriate employment, the availability of the training and employment, and the opportunity for future acquisitions of capital assets and income;
   
9. The history of the financial or non-financial contributions to the marriage or civil union by each party including contributions to the care and education of the children and interruption of personal careers or educational opportunities;
   
10. The equitable distribution of property ordered and any payouts on equitable distribution, directly or indirectly, out of current income, to the extent this consideration is reasonable, just and fair;
    
11. The income available to either party through investment of any assets held by that party;
    
12. The tax treatment and consequences to both parties of any alimony award, including the designation of all or a portion of the payment as a non-taxable payment; and
    
13. Any other factors which the court may deem relevant.
    

[morabu]

here's a fun hypothetical.

a couple has been together 10 years, has 2 children together.

wife hasn't worked in 4 years, but has a greater earning potential from her college education. husband gets custody of the children.

is the wife getting alimony, or is the husband getting child support? lol

[TTQ B4U]

here's a fun hypothetical.

a couple has been together 10 years, has 2 children together.

wife hasn't worked in 4 years, but has a greater earning potential from her college education. husband gets custody of the children.

is the wife getting alimony, or is the husband getting child support? lol

 

No 100% answer as a lot lies in the details and the court. A good attorney goes a long way.

 

Not enough information really. Again all the factors I listed will play into alimony and there's a similar list for child support. Joint income has a lot to do with both.

 

In the above, there's a reason mom lost custody, so that will play in. Earning potential is there but she's been out of work for 4 years, so there's going to be a ramp up time. Courts aren't going to expect her to go get a job and be 100% right away.

 

In terms of child support, yet there will be some for dad. That issue will be revisited once mom is established in the work force.

[TTQ B4U]

Just as a follow up because I have received several PM's, if you have a spouse and child on welfare, the state will deduct the costs of covering their medicaid from her payments. If you don't make those payments the state will come after you and your bank accounts. Edited August 17, 2012 by TTQ B4U