Is spousal support an option?

[murrak02]

What is the name of your state? Arizona
My husband and I are divorcing, but trying to agree on as much as possible to keep it out of court. We have been married for 5 years and we have 2 children. We both work full-time, he making 2.5 times more in income than I do. If this went to court, would a judge ever grant spousal support in this situation? I know that the marriage was rather short (though it felt like a lifetime!), but I am also concerned that I am barely going to be able to pay my bills when I am out on my own, much less have much to offer my children. What do you all think? Is it reasonable to ask for spousal support?

[nextwife]

You and he will BOTH have to support your children.

SS is very unlikely for such a short marriage. How did you pay your own bills BEFORE the marriage?

[IrishLady47]

Have you calculated what CS will be? AZ is uses both incomes to determine total CS required and then each parent pay their proportional share. Go to [url]http://www.supreme.state.az.us/childsup/[/url].

Even if you could get SS for a short-term marriage, it would probaby be limited (1/2 the length of marriage or less). Plus, AZ determines SS first if warranted. So, your income & share of CS will increase (along with your TAXABLE income) and your STBX's will decrease. It may not even make monetary sense.

And, do you really want to count on support from a man you don't even want to live with? You will have to make adjustments, so will your STBX--it's the same pie and it is being cut up in more pieces. You might as well adjust now to living w/in your means. Why delay facing reality?

[nextwife]

Originally Posted by IrishLady47

Have you calculated what CS will be? AZ is uses both incomes to determine total CS required and then each parent pay their proportional share. Go to [url]http://www.supreme.state.az.us/childsup/[/url].

Even if you could get SS for a short-term marriage, it would probaby be limited (1/2 the length of marriage or less). Plus, AZ determines SS first if warranted. So, your income & share of CS will increase (along with your TAXABLE income) and your STBX's will decrease. It may not even make monetary sense.

And, do you really want to count on support from a man you don't even want to live with? You will have to make adjustments, so will your STBX--it's the same pie and it is being cut up in more pieces. You might as well adjust now to living w/in your means. Why delay facing reality?

They've BOTH been working full time. Mom has no superior right to custody. Dad has the same potential right, as neither has been primary caregiver. And mom will only get CS IF she gets custody.

[IrishLady47]

I never mentioned who would get custody, that is really not only criteria according to AZ guidelines. AZ takes BOTH gross incomes and determines what the amount of TOTAL child support will be. Each parent is then expected to support the child(ren) proportional to their incomes. Custodial time also plays a factor on the portion percentage. OP states that her husband make 2.5x MORE than her. Unless she will seldom have custodial time with the children, I bet the AZ CS calculator will have him paying some CS to her.

Geesh, read what people actually have written, not what you ASSUME they meant.

Personally, I don't think anyone who can work full-time, regardless of gender, should receive SS. To me, it is only applicable in long-term (and I mean 20 yr +) marriages AND when one of the couple CANNOT work or work full-time for a legitimate reason (poor health, etc.). But, that is not the laws in most states and this is a LEGAL forum.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by IrishLady47

I never mentioned who would get custody, that is really not only criteria according to AZ guidelines. AZ takes BOTH gross incomes and determines what the amount of TOTAL child support will be. Each parent is then expected to support the child(ren) proportional to their incomes. Custodial time also plays a factor on the portion percentage. OP states that her husband make 2.5x MORE than her. Unless she will seldom have custodial time with the children, I bet the AZ CS calculator will have him paying some CS to her.

Geesh, read what people actually have written, not what you ASSUME they meant.

Personally, I don't think anyone who can work full-time, regardless of gender, should receive SS. To me, it is only applicable in long-term (and I mean 20 yr +) marriages

Okay, does this apply to husbands as well?? Meaning, does the wife only benefit from a 20 yr+ marriage?? I already know your answer and that is why and the only reason why I even bother with you people.

AND when one of the couple CANNOT work or work full-time for a legitimate reason

Unfortunately that is a catch all. These feminists take advantage of such vague language.

(poor health, etc.). But, that is not the laws in most states and this is a LEGAL forum.

LEGAL is whatever the judge chooses to make legal in "most" states. OPEN your eyes.

[IrishLady47]

Yes, SS should be determined regardless of gender. And, in most states the laws have been changed to reflect this during the 80s and 90s. So, if a couple divorce and the woman has been the primary wage-earner and the husband cannot support himself, then SS would be paid to the husband.

Is it applied often? Probably not. For several reasons 1) Old-fashioned, pateralistic judges (usually men, BTW). 2) Women still tend to leave the work-force to care for children, etc. more than men do. 3) Men still earn more than women, even when accounting for education, etc.

However, it certainly does happen. I personally know several female soldiers who are paying SS to their ex-husbands.

And, please stop using the word "feminist", Bali. You have no idea what it means. A true feminist would certainly not want support from an ex when she can support herself.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by IrishLady47

Yes, SS should be determined regardless of gender.

But, it is not.

And, in most states the laws have been changed to reflect this during the 80s and 90s.

I can play dead too.

So, if a couple divorce and the woman has been the primary wage-earner and the husband cannot support himself, then SS would be paid to the husband.

Give examples, not talk.

Is it applied often? Probably not. For several reasons 1) Old-fashioned, pateralistic judges (usually men, BTW). 2)

You voted the A-holes into office!

Women still tend to leave the work-force to care for children, etc. more than men do.

I see that changing, but try to get a judge to award aman alimony from a woman!


3) Men still earn more than women, even when accounting for education, etc.

Irrelevant.

However, it certainly does happen. I personally know several female soldiers who are paying SS to their ex-husbands.

Good, the scales seem to be getting balanced.

And, please stop using the word "feminist", Bali. You have no idea what it means. A true feminist would certainly not want support from an ex when she can support herself.

You mean when the feminist "chooses" to support herself.

[IrishLady47]

OP -sorry for the detour on your thread caused by Bali Hai & I apologize for participating in his madness. I'm posting below the factors under the AZ statute on spousal maintenance. However, I still advise to consider all the implications of requesting this even if it could be granted by the court. You stated you want to keep this out of the courts and as an agreement between the both of you. Requesting SS can definitely create a barrier & there may be no going back.

25-319. Maintenance; computation factors

A. In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage or legal separation, or a proceeding for maintenance following dissolution of the marriage by a court that lacked personal jurisdiction over the absent spouse, the court may grant a maintenance order for either spouse for any of the following reasons if it finds that the spouse seeking maintenance:

1. Lacks sufficient property, including property apportioned to the spouse, to provide for that spouse's reasonable needs.

2. Is unable to be self-sufficient through appropriate employment or is the custodian of a child whose age or condition is such that the custodian should not be required to seek employment outside the home or lacks earning ability in the labor market adequate to be self-sufficient.

3. Contributed to the educational opportunities of the other spouse.

4. Had a marriage of long duration and is of an age that may preclude the possibility of gaining employment adequate to be self-sufficient.

B. The maintenance order shall be in an amount and for a period of time as the court deems just, without regard to marital misconduct, and after considering all relevant factors, including:

1. The standard of living established during the marriage.

2. The duration of the marriage.

3. The age, employment history, earning ability and physical and emotional condition of the spouse seeking maintenance.

4. The ability of the spouse from whom maintenance is sought to meet that spouse's needs while meeting those of the spouse seeking maintenance.

5. The comparative financial resources of the spouses, including their comparative earning abilities in the labor market.

6. The contribution of the spouse seeking maintenance to the earning ability of the other spouse.

7. The extent to which the spouse seeking maintenance has reduced that spouse's income or career opportunities for the benefit of the other spouse.

8. The ability of both parties after the dissolution to contribute to the future educational costs of their mutual children.

9. The financial resources of the party seeking maintenance, including marital property apportioned to that spouse, and that spouse's ability to meet that spouse's own needs independently.

10. The time necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the party seeking maintenance to find appropriate employment and whether such education or training is readily available.

11. Excessive or abnormal expenditures, destruction, concealment or fraudulent disposition of community, joint tenancy and other property held in common.

12. The cost for the spouse who is seeking maintenance to obtain health insurance and the reduction in the cost of health insurance for the spouse from whom maintenance is sought if the spouse from whom maintenance is sought is able to convert family health insurance to employee health insurance after the marriage is dissolved.

13. All actual damages and judgments from conduct that results in criminal conviction of either spouse in which the other spouse or child was the victim.

C. If both parties agree, the maintenance order and a decree of dissolution of marriage or of legal separation may state that its maintenance terms shall not be modified.

D. Except as provided in subsection C of this section or section 25-317, subsection G, the court shall maintain continuing jurisdiction over the issue of maintenance for the period of time maintenance is awarded.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by IrishLady47

OP -sorry for the detour on your thread caused by Bali Hai & I apologize for participating in his madness. I'm posting below the factors under the AZ statute on spousal maintenance. However, I still advise to consider all the implications of requesting this even if it could be granted by the court. You stated you want to keep this out of the courts and as an agreement between the both of you. Requesting SS can definitely create a barrier & there may be no going back.

25-319. Maintenance; computation factors

A. In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage or legal separation, or a proceeding for maintenance following dissolution of the marriage by a court that lacked personal jurisdiction over the absent spouse, the court may grant a maintenance order for either spouse for any of the following reasons if it finds that the spouse seeking maintenance:

1. Lacks sufficient property, including property apportioned to the spouse, to provide for that spouse's reasonable needs.

2. Is unable to be self-sufficient through appropriate employment or is the custodian of a child whose age or condition is such that the custodian should not be required to seek employment outside the home or lacks earning ability in the labor market adequate to be self-sufficient.

3. Contributed to the educational opportunities of the other spouse.

4. Had a marriage of long duration and is of an age that may preclude the possibility of gaining employment adequate to be self-sufficient.

B. The maintenance order shall be in an amount and for a period of time as the court deems just, without regard to marital misconduct, and after considering all relevant factors, including:

1. The standard of living established during the marriage.

2. The duration of the marriage.

3. The age, employment history, earning ability and physical and emotional condition of the spouse seeking maintenance.

4. The ability of the spouse from whom maintenance is sought to meet that spouse's needs while meeting those of the spouse seeking maintenance.

5. The comparative financial resources of the spouses, including their comparative earning abilities in the labor market.

6. The contribution of the spouse seeking maintenance to the earning ability of the other spouse.

7. The extent to which the spouse seeking maintenance has reduced that spouse's income or career opportunities for the benefit of the other spouse.

8. The ability of both parties after the dissolution to contribute to the future educational costs of their mutual children.

9. The financial resources of the party seeking maintenance, including marital property apportioned to that spouse, and that spouse's ability to meet that spouse's own needs independently.

10. The time necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the party seeking maintenance to find appropriate employment and whether such education or training is readily available.

11. Excessive or abnormal expenditures, destruction, concealment or fraudulent disposition of community, joint tenancy and other property held in common.

12. The cost for the spouse who is seeking maintenance to obtain health insurance and the reduction in the cost of health insurance for the spouse from whom maintenance is sought if the spouse from whom maintenance is sought is able to convert family health insurance to employee health insurance after the marriage is dissolved.

13. All actual damages and judgments from conduct that results in criminal conviction of either spouse in which the other spouse or child was the victim.

C. If both parties agree, the maintenance order and a decree of dissolution of marriage or of legal separation may state that its maintenance terms shall not be modified.

D. Except as provided in subsection C of this section or section 25-317, subsection G, the court shall maintain continuing jurisdiction over the issue of maintenance for the period of time maintenance is awarded.

That was very nice of you. Hopefully OP sees that the statutes unfairly favor her.

She should feel better now living a life of free loading.

[IrishLady47]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

That was very nice of you. Hopefully OP sees that the statutes unfairly favor her.

She should feel better now living a life of free loading.

????? She has to meet one of the factors listed under paragraph A for SS to even be considered. Based on what she posted, she doesn't meet 2 or 4, there is not enough information to comment on 1 or 3.

Also, please show me the "her" in any portion of the statute.

[IrishLady47]

Originally Posted by nextwife

Mom has no superior right to custody. Dad has the same potential right, as neither has been primary caregiver.

Totally agree. And, again, I never said Mom would have custody. My assumption was shared custody which is generally the case these days.

Originally Posted by nextwife

And mom will only get CS IF she gets custody.

Simply not true. Read the Arizona statute on child support. In AZ, a CP could have to pay CS to a NCP depending on respective gross incomes and parenting time.

[IrishLady47]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

Is it applied often? Probably not. For several reasons 1) Old-fashioned,
paternalistic judges (usually men, BTW). 2)

*You voted the A-holes into office!*

Oh, only women vote judges in office where you live?

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

.....but try to get a judge to award aman alimony from a
woman!*

An established fact--men have been awarded spousal support. Try "google"

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

3) Men still earn more than women, even when accounting for education, etc.

*Irrelevant.*

Income is irrelevant? Okay, please cite the case where a man has been ordered to pay SS to a woman who earned MORE than he did. How did you put it - give examples, not talk.

I'm sorry, I forgot--you don't post to provide information to anyone, it's your free anger therapy to deal w/your divorce.

[Bali Hai]

Originally Posted by IrishLady47

Income is irrelevant? Okay, please cite the case where a man has been ordered to pay SS to a woman who earned MORE than he did. How did you put it - give examples, not talk.

I'm sorry, I forgot--you don't post to provide information to anyone, it's your free anger therapy to deal w/your divorce.

That is not the point. The point is that woman in general earn less than men in the work force. That is NOT a reason to expect someone else to pay that woman alimony.

The fact is that woamn earn less than men in the work force becase they are worth less. That is not so hard to figure out.

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Bali Hai

That is not the point. The point is that woman in general earn less than men in the work force. That is NOT a reason to expect someone else to pay that woman alimony.

The fact is that woamn earn less than men in the work force becase they are worth less. That is not so hard to figure out.

Well...that statement certainly does it for me...I cannot believe even you would have the nerve to say something like that.