spousal support

[ohiostate]

Wichita Falls:

Sorry for going off on a tangent. My situation was different than yours - no marital infidelity by either of us. I having no problem in providing spousal support for a year or two for a stay-at-home mom to get back in the workforce especially since you supported him while he went back to school. Even though my ex-wife has a college degree, I have no problem with a year or two of alimony to year, but 5 years is ridilicous (sp?).

Another note, I don't know how a dad does not want to see his kids. It is NEVER the kids fault and the parents should try to do everything to help the kids. I cannot see my girls enough.

Sorry again - I was not referring to your situation.

 

[Bali Hai]

Wichita Falls:

Sorry for going off on a tangent. My situation was different than yours - no marital infidelity by either of us. I having no problem in providing spousal support for a year or two for a stay-at-home mom to get back in the workforce especially since you supported him while he went back to school. Even though my ex-wife has a college degree, I have no problem with a year or two of alimony to year, but 5 years is ridilicous (sp?).

Another note, I don't know how a dad does not want to see his kids. It is NEVER the kids fault and the parents should try to do everything to help the kids. I cannot see my girls enough.

Sorry again - I was not referring to your situation.

Jesus H. Christ!! This is exactly why Jerry Springer makes money!! You jerks didn't even read a word OG said to you. Oh well, it's YOUR money!!

 

[kanza1]

Some would rather raise their own kids rather than having a daycare do it. My ex was a stay at home mom for the last 8 yrs of the marriage, and I paid the price big time. She was awarded 10 yrs of alimony (at least it's not permanent). Stupid me for wanting my wife to raise our kid.

 

[AHA]

Stupid me for wanting my wife to raise our kid.

No one forced you to get married and have kids. YOU could have stayed at home and taken on that 24/7 UNPAID job, but you decided not to. Men screw themselves, and the women work for zero wages.

 

[Gum_Drop]

Some would rather raise their own kids rather than having a daycare do it. My ex was a stay at home mom for the last 8 yrs of the marriage, and I paid the price big time. She was awarded 10 yrs of alimony (at least it's not permanent). Stupid me for wanting my wife to raise our kid.

And for some it just isn't economical to go to work. Me personally, I cant wait until my youngest is in school. I am itching to get back to the workforce, and to have a conversation during the day that doesn't include Noggin... lol

After doing the calculations, we would only benefit around $40 a week.

 

[Bali Hai]

And for some it just isn't economical to go to work. Me personally, I cant wait until my youngest is in school. I am itching to get back to the workforce, and to have a conversation during the day that doesn't include Noggin... lol

After doing the calculations, we would only benefit around $40 a week.

The issue here is that women WORK to keep current employment skills. If working is a losing proposition, that's too damn bad!!

You should not have kids until you can afford to work and support them!!

 

[penelope10]

OK, just wanted to clarify, so no one jump me. Cause I'm not taking the stance that it's right or wrong. But spousal support in TX is awarded on a temporary basis. I think the longest time length (without it being voluntary) is three years. It's only been within the past 10 years (if memory serves me right) that this even existed in TX.

The term "ALIMONY " is not used as a legal descriptive in TX. In TX, if one asked for Alimony in court, he or she would be quickly corrected. There is no "Lifetime" support awarded here. Spousal support (I believe the true legal term here is spousal maintenance) is intended as a rehabilitive tool for the spouse unable to support themselves after the divorce. (And there are other conditions that must exist for a spouse to be awarded spousal maintenance--it's not "automatic").

Spousal maintenance ends when:

1. The 3 years elapses as stated in the order

2. Death of either the person paying the support or recipient

3. Marriage of the recipient

4. Further orders of the Court affecting the spousal maintenance obligation, including a finding of cohabitation by the recipient


The only way a spouse can be awarded spousal support beyond the three year period is if that spouse is disabled or is responsible for a disabled child.

If anyone is aware of otherwise, please feel free to correct me.

I tend to agree that women and men should not be so dependent on the other that they cannot take care of themselves. This goes beyond a divorce situation.


How much "weight" a lender will put on spousal maintenance in determining if one qualifies for a refi I would would think would be up to that lender. Along with other factors. (In response to whether SM could be used as income for purposes of a loan). Yes it can, however, the lender will probably take into account that it is only temporary---three years max unless a situation exists as described above. And it should be reflected as spousal maintenance on the loan app. As well as monies received as CS, monies received from employment, and monies received from investments, etc. (Anything you put on paper that is counted as income to qualify for a loan)

Sorry for the hi jack.

 

[LdiJ]

OK, just wanted to clarify, so no one jump me. Cause I'm not taking the stance that it's right or wrong. But spousal support in TX is awarded on a temporary basis. I think the longest time length (without it being voluntary) is three years. It's only been within the past 10 years (if memory serves me right) that this even existed in TX.

The term "alimony " is not used as legal descriptive in TX. If you asked for Alimony in court you'd be quickly corrected. There is no "Lifetime" support awarded here. Spousal support (I believe the true legal term here is spousal maintenance) is intended as a rehabilitive tool for the spouse unable to support themselves after the divorce.

The only way a spouse can be awarded spousal support beyond the three year period is if that spouse is disabled or is responsible for a disabled child.

If anyone is aware of otherwise, please feel free to correct me.

I tend to agree that women and men should not be so dependent on the other that they cannot take care of themselves. This goes beyond a divorce situation.


How much "weight" a lender will put on spousal support in determining if one qualifies for a refi I would would think would be up to that lender. Along with other factors. (In response to OP's question if SS could be used as income for purposes of a loan). Yes it can, however, the lender will probably take into account that it is only temporary---three years max unless a situation exists as described above.

Sorry for the hi jack.

I agree 100% that in this day and age women and men should not be dependent upon each other.

However, there are circumstances where one spouse WANTS the other dependent, at least until a divorce comes around, or circumstances where they make decisions, jointly, as parents, for one of them not to work and stay home with the kids...sometimes for valid economic reasons, sometimes as a parenting decision. There are also circumstances where one is dependent due to a real disabilty, and other circumstances where one put their education on hold to support the other, with the expectation that they would have their "turn" to get a degree. There are still some rare instances of "corporate wife syndrome" where the wife is expected to enhance her husband's career climb, although that is much less prevalent now.

The bottom line is that marriage is supposed to be a partnership, and an evolving one based on the needs of the family unit, as a whole.

The problem is that divorce, or an unwed family status leads to the breaking of "contracts" between spouses/partners. The family economic dynamics don't evolve naturally based on the family's needs.....sudden disability for one of the spouses can produce the same result.

I watched a marriage unfold that really estounded me in this day and age. The couple married at 30ish and for strictly green card purposes. He wanted a green card, she was his friend and agreed to the marriage. They lived in the same household to make it more credible for immigration. They got drunk one night and had sex, and produced a child...LOL, and stayed together so that he could get his citizenship.

Shortly after he got his citizenship she was diagnosed with Huntington's disease....and rapidly progessing. He could have divorced her AND easily received custody of their child but he did not. He stayed. He took care of her. He bathed her, fed her, changed her diapers and did everything for her until the day she died. He took his marriage "contract" that seriously. She had no significant assets so he didn't do it for monetary gain...he just did it out of duty, affection and respect.

I greatly admired that...it was almost a 10 year committment on his part, from the time she was diagnosed until she passed away. Not many people in this day and age would do that. I think that he also taught their child an invaluable lesson.

Of course...they were committing fraud from the get go, so lets not hammer that issue...OK....that is recognized. However this was a truly REAL marriage, contractually.

 

[fairisfair]

WE made a decision together on what was best for our kids. Ohiogal, the tone of your statements sounds like a made the decision alone. There is no way my ex-wife is $60,000 behind in her career. She also decided to just work as a secretary during the other years of our marriage - she had a bad experience with teaching before we were married. But that did not matter. There are other details - like I brought $50,000 in savings (she brought no savings) and I basically leave with half of it. So before you make the statement that I made the decision to ..., there is more to the story.

This is NOT YOUR THREAD. Be quiet.

 

[fairisfair]

I agree 100% that in this day and age women and men should not be dependent upon each other.

However, there are circumstances where one spouse WANTS the other dependent, at least until a divorce comes around, or circumstances where they make decisions, jointly, as parents, for one of them not to work and stay home with the kids...sometimes for valid economic reasons, sometimes as a parenting decision. There are also circumstances where one is dependent due to a real disabilty, and other circumstances where one put their education on hold to support the other, with the expectation that they would have their "turn" to get a degree. There are still some rare instances of "corporate wife syndrome" where the wife is expected to enhance her husband's career climb, although that is much less prevalent now.

The bottom line is that marriage is supposed to be a partnership, and an evolving one based on the needs of the family unit, as a whole.

The problem is that divorce, or an unwed family status leads to the breaking of "contracts" between spouses/partners. The family economic dynamics don't evolve naturally based on the family's needs.....sudden disability for one of the spouses can produce the same result.

I watched a marriage unfold that really estounded me in this day and age. The couple married at 30ish and for strictly green card purposes. He wanted a green card, she was his friend and agreed to the marriage. They lived in the same household to make it more credible for immigration. They got drunk one night and had sex, and produced a child...LOL, and stayed together so that he could get his citizenship.

Shortly after he got his citizenship she was diagnosed with Huntington's disease....and rapidly progessing. He could have divorced her AND easily received custody of their child but he did not. He stayed. He took care of her. He bathed her, fed her, changed her diapers and did everything for her until the day she died. He took his marriage "contract" that seriously. She had no significant assets so he didn't do it for monetary gain...he just did it out of duty, affection and respect.

I greatly admired that...it was almost a 10 year committment on his part, from the time she was diagnosed until she passed away. Not many people in this day and age would do that. I think that he also taught their child an invaluable lesson.

Of course...they were committing fraud from the get go, so lets not hammer that issue...OK....that is recognized. However this was a truly REAL marriage, contractually.

that was a lovely story.

Except for the fraud part, and the fact that it had nothing to do with spousal support.

 

[penelope10]

I agree 100% that in this day and age women and men should not be dependent upon each other.

However, there are circumstances where one spouse WANTS the other dependent, at least until a divorce comes around, or circumstances where they make decisions, jointly, as parents, for one of them not to work and stay home with the kids...sometimes for valid economic reasons, sometimes as a parenting decision. There are also circumstances where one is dependent due to a real disabilty, and other circumstances where one put their education on hold to support the other, with the expectation that they would have their "turn" to get a degree. There are still some rare instances of "corporate wife syndrome" where the wife is expected to enhance her husband's career climb, although that is much less prevalent now.

The bottom line is that marriage is supposed to be a partnership, and an evolving one based on the needs of the family unit, as a whole.

The problem is that divorce, or an unwed family status leads to the breaking of "contracts" between spouses/partners. The family economic dynamics don't evolve naturally based on the family's needs.....sudden disability for one of the spouses can produce the same result.

I watched a marriage unfold that really estounded me in this day and age. The couple married at 30ish and for strictly green card purposes. He wanted a green card, she was his friend and agreed to the marriage. They lived in the same household to make it more credible for immigration. They got drunk one night and had sex, and produced a child...LOL, and stayed together so that he could get his citizenship.

Shortly after he got his citizenship she was diagnosed with Huntington's disease....and rapidly progessing. He could have divorced her AND easily received custody of their child but he did not. He stayed. He took care of her. He bathed her, fed her, changed her diapers and did everything for her until the day she died. He took his marriage "contract" that seriously. She had no significant assets so he didn't do it for monetary gain...he just did it out of duty, affection and respect.

I greatly admired that...it was almost a 10 year committment on his part, from the time she was diagnosed until she passed away. Not many people in this day and age would do that. I think that he also taught their child an invaluable lesson.

Of course...they were committing fraud from the get go, so lets not hammer that issue...OK....that is recognized. However this was a truly REAL marriage, contractually.

In TX, as far as spousal support, it's pretty cut and dry as to whether a person qualifies. One of the key conditions, I believe, is more than ten years for length of marriage. I don't believe the term Long Term Marriage is used. There is an exception to this rule however. (And I welcome anyone to look it up to find out).

I'm really not trying to get into a debate as to whether spousal maintenance should exist or not. Or what the responsibilities of either spouse should be in a marriage. Spousal maintenance does exist in TX. One piece of the puzzle I THINK is that we don't have State Income Taxes here. It is an attempt to ease the burden on individual counties that offer assistance. (Thus attempting to do away with the necessity of having a State Tax in the future). If an ex spouse is given a period of time to obtain training, and become more self sufficient, the probability of asking for assistance goes down. These monies come from the pocket of ex spouse rather than a governmental agency. Right or wrong? Don't know. Has the the determination been made that Spousal Maintenance exists in TX? Yep.

Sorry LD, not trying to argue with you on your points or to be ugly.

 

[LdiJ]

In TX as far as spousal support it's pretty cut and dry as to whether a person qualifies. One of the key conditions, I believe, is more than ten years for length of marriage. I don't believe the term Long Term Marriage is used. There is an exception to this rule however. (And I welcome anyone to look it up to find out).

I'm really not trying to get into a debate as to whether spousal maintenance should exist or not. Or what the responsibilities of either spouse should be in a marriage. Spousal maintenance does exist in TX. One piece of the puzzle I THINK is that we don't have State Taxes here. It is an attempt to ease the burden on individual counties that offer assistance. (Thus attempting to do away with the necessity of having a State Tax in the future). If an ex spouse is given a period of time to obtain training, and become more self sufficient, the probability of asking for assistance goes down. These monies come from the pocket of ex spouse rather than a governmental agency. Right or wrong? Don't know. Has the the determination been made that Spousal Maintenance exists in TX? Yep.

Sorry LD, not trying to argue with you on your points or to be ugly.

I didn't think that you were....and I got off topic a bit myself....or rather off the focus of this thread.

 

[Bali Hai]

In TX, as far as spousal support, it's pretty cut and dry as to whether a person qualifies. One of the key conditions, I believe, is more than ten years for length of marriage. I don't believe the term Long Term Marriage is used. There is an exception to this rule however. (And I welcome anyone to look it up to find out).

I'm really not trying to get into a debate as to whether spousal maintenance should exist or not. Or what the responsibilities of either spouse should be in a marriage. Spousal maintenance does exist in TX. One piece of the puzzle I THINK is that we don't have State Income Taxes here. It is an attempt to ease the burden on individual counties that offer assistance. (Thus attempting to do away with the necessity of having a State Tax in the future). If an ex spouse is given a period of time to obtain training, and become more self sufficient, the probability of asking for assistance goes down. These monies come from the pocket of ex spouse rather than a governmental agency. Right or wrong? Don't know. Has the the determination been made that Spousal Maintenance exists in TX? Yep.

Sorry LD, not trying to argue with you on your points or to be ugly.

Spousal support, spousal maintenance AND alimony are all LEGALLY the same thing.

What has happened is the thinking that the renaming of ALIMONY in just about every state will somehow make it more PALATABLE to the person ordered to pay it!!

The IRS calls the deductible payments ALIMONY because you are providing INCOME to that person!!

Government agencies have made divorce VERY EASY for people these days under pressure from the woman's movement. LdiJ's post about sticking it out until the end no matter what is VERY RARE these days because divorces are EASY!!!

Alimony should only be ordered under the most rare of circumstances and a jury of six peers should decide it and not someone from a government agency with a political agenda!!