# Alimony for what?



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

If two grown adults divorce, their children have grown, and the property and savings have been divvied up by the lawyers, then why would one still have to pay alimony? It seems silly and sort of left over from an older way of thinking before women were liberated.


----------



## Buffy in Dallas (May 10, 2002)

Hmm, Lets see. We were married 29 years. I worked while raising 5 kids. Hubby's business finally took off in the last few years. Hubby makes about $10,000. a month. I finally had to quit working when I physically and mentally couldn't do it anymore. I'm disabled and have no income. So he decides now that I can't work to dump me and find someone else. I can't support myself and I'm at least 20 years from retirement. 

I seem to remember something about for richer and poorer, sickness and health... I think he forgot that part. :grumble:

So should he be able to just dump me off at the nearest homeless shelter and run off into the sunset with his home wrecking hussy?


----------



## roadless (Sep 9, 2006)

I was with my husband for 30 years. I worked outside the home and did my part in building and doing the paperwork for his business. My job, though not well paid , provided our health insurance the whole time we were together. ( I still provide it for him ).
My professional life was always based on decisions that we made together with the understanding we would be together forever.

Had I known that I would be kicked to the curb in my 50"s I would have made different professional choices to be better able to support myself.
I would be unable to live on my income alone.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

City Bound said:


> If two grown adults divorce, their children have grown, and the property and savings have been divvied up by the lawyers, then why would one still have to pay alimony? It seems silly and sort of left over from an older way of thinking before women were liberated.



Do you feel alimony in all cases is unwarranted or just in this case? What about the wife that put her education plans on hold so her husband got his degree and raised a family? 

Do you feel that no man should ever receive alimony? What if he stayed at home and raised the kids while his wife had a successful career?


----------



## okiemom (May 12, 2002)

I have never worked outside the home for a "paying" job. we have raised the kids, we started the farm together we have gotten a fair number of cattle, taken care of the rental property when the economy crashed and we couldn't sell our first home, we take care of his mothers house, and I kept my Mom at our house for several years until she passed 6 months ago from cancer. 

Dh and I are not even near a divorce, I am thrilled to say, but if we did I would be hosed. I might be able to get an entry level job at $10 an hour but I doubt it. Oklahoma doesn't have alimony so really we would both be hosed as we would have to split everything and we would be back to almost square one. 
Anyhoo...just another view.


----------



## roadless (Sep 9, 2006)

My ex. obviously agrees with you City Bound. He use to write WC on the memo of the check, referring to welfare ____- ( use your imagination ). I went through my lawyer to have him stop. 

Prior to all this he use to say if it wasn't for my financial savvy we wouldn't have the comforts that we did. :hair


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Some states are *NOT* community property states. And, it is often agreed that the lady will stay home and raise the kids. 

So, often the judge will award the physical property to the man who earned the paycheck that bought them, but award alimony to the lady because it would not be fair, after benefiting from his wife's unpaid work for a decade or two, for the man to get it all. So, the judge orders alimony as that makes things more fair.

Or, there is a house involved and how do you divide a house? Sometimes houses are hard to sell. So, one person might get the house and the other might get alimony, again to make things fair.

Lastly, alimony is not just for women! Plenty of men collect alimony, too!

Those are a few reasons, i am sure that other folks will chime in, here!


----------



## Shygal (May 26, 2003)

roadless said:


> My job, though not well paid , provided our health insurance the whole time we were together.* ( I still provide it for him )*.



Um....NO.

He is a big boy, he wants to have his cake and keep it too, let him get his own insurance. You are divorced, don't keep any tie to him, especially providing insurance for him. Let him get his own, since he wanted another woman, let HER provide it for him.


----------



## roadless (Sep 9, 2006)

I wish I could Shy it is part of the divorce settlement. As long as I have a job that has plans for couples it needs to be offered to him according to state law. 
I don't pay for it, he has to add the difference to the alimony but trust me he is getting an excellent deal.


----------



## newfieannie (Dec 24, 2006)

yeah, what Buffy said. that's one instance. take me for another. never worked for pay in my life. went from my fathers house to my husband's at 18. wasn't qualified to do anything else but take care of the land and my family. if mine had decided to dump me and not support me I would have been in poor shape. would have had to go back to my father. ~Georgia.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

wr said:


> Do you feel alimony in all cases is unwarranted or just in this case? What about the wife that put her education plans on hold so her husband got his degree and raised a family?
> 
> Do you feel that no man should ever receive alimony? What if he stayed at home and raised the kids while his wife had a successful career?


I do not think any man or woman deserves alimony. We take a gamble when we marry someone. If I divorced I would not expect the woman to give me alimony. I would consider it robbery if I did take it. Instead I would take my lumps, like my wounds, moan and cry into the bottom of my beer glass and except my fate good or bad. Even if it meant I ended up in the street homeless I would have to accept that because I am responsible for my own life and I was the one to take the gamble on love and to trust another person with my welfare.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

okiemom said:


> I have never worked outside the home for a "paying" job. we have raised the kids, we started the farm together we have gotten a fair number of cattle, taken care of the rental property when the economy crashed and we couldn't sell our first home, we take care of his mothers house, and I kept my Mom at our house for several years until she passed 6 months ago from cancer.
> 
> Dh and I are not even near a divorce, I am thrilled to say, but if we did I would be hosed. I might be able to get an entry level job at $10 an hour but I doubt it. Oklahoma doesn't have alimony so really we would both be hosed as we would have to split everything and we would be back to almost square one.
> Anyhoo...just another view.


Not really. If you help build a business you could fight to claim your share. It would take a good argument and good evidence but you could argue and win.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

What terri said makes sense and I can see the legal fairness in that thinking. So, I guess it is not all bad. But, what if the person remarries, or becomes super wealthy, wouldn't the need for alimony be negated or is it consider like paying back dues for the time and unpaid labor the partner put in?


----------



## frogmammy (Dec 8, 2004)

Alimony is often limited, to a number of years, or for the recipient to get an education/job training. And yes, marriage can end it.

Mon


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

City Bound said:


> What terri said makes sense and I can see the legal fairness in that thinking. So, I guess it is not all bad. But, what if the person remarries, or becomes super wealthy, wouldn't the need for alimony be negated or is it consider like paying back dues for the time and unpaid labor the partner put in?


Laws change, and different states have different laws, and I do not know.

I do know that when you step in front of the judge for anything, the judge usually has the last word!


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

And City Bound, the biggest thing about alimony.

No matter what, even when court ordered, amount decided on by the court - to be paid via the court. You often don't get any of it.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

City Bound said:


> What terri said makes sense and I can see the legal fairness in that thinking. So, I guess it is not all bad. But, what if the person remarries, or becomes super wealthy, wouldn't the need for alimony be negated or is it consider like paying back dues for the time and unpaid labor the partner put in?



It is my understanding that alimony ends if one remarries.


----------



## bowdonkey (Oct 6, 2007)

```

```



Terri said:


> Laws change, and different states have different laws, and I do not know.
> 
> I do know that when you step in front of the judge for anything, the judge usually has the last word!


You got that right!


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

This thread was started because of another thread entitled "Tacky" in ST.
A member asked a question about an alimony check issue, and comments / ideas were shared.

I find it intentional, and very hurtful, to purposefully start a thread with the intention of airing out ones own very negative and hurtfully opinionated views on a topic. 
I find this to be very passive aggressive and devious.

With that said, I agree with the notion in post 7.

I will also add, until you have walked a 1000 miles in one's shoes, tread lightly on topics you know nothing about......lest your ignorance of the topic shine like the sun.


----------



## roadless (Sep 9, 2006)

I tried not to take the comments personally.
I know the type of person I am and the type of wife I was. 
I can look anyone in the eye on both accounts.
Certainly human with all that encompasses, yet I do live my life with integrity.
I am not a thief for the alimony I legally receive.


----------



## tinknal (May 21, 2004)

Laura, it is perfectly acceptable for one to start a new thread on a related topic to avoid causing thread drift or conflict in the original thread.

That said Divorce laws differ wildly by state. I don't like divorce, but if it has to occur I'm satisfied with my state laws. Minnesota is a community property state. Any wealth that is accumulated during the marriage is to be shared equally. This includes retirement accounts, real estate, business growth, and so on. I believe that any spousal support is short term.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

Laura Zone 5 said:


> This thread was started because of another thread entitled "Tacky" in ST.
> A member asked a question about an alimony check issue, and comments / ideas were shared.
> 
> I find it intentional, and very hurtful, to purposefully start a thread with the intention of airing out ones own very negative and hurtfully opinionated views on a topic.
> ...


preach it !!!!!!!!


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

tinknal said:


> Laura, it is perfectly acceptable for one to *start a new thread on a related topic to avoid causing thread drift or conflict in the original thread.*


Tink, I totally agree with your statement.
This thread was started so the OP could spew.



> That said Divorce laws differ wildly by state. I don't like divorce, but if it has to occur I'm satisfied with my state laws. Minnesota is a community property state. Any wealth that is accumulated during the marriage is to be shared equally. This includes retirement accounts, real estate, business growth, and so on. I believe that any spousal support is short term.


Indiana is the same way.
Once the kids are 17, no child support.
Every thing is 50 / 50.

Now that sounds "fair" until you factor in men/women who stayed home, raised children, managed the home, etc for 20-35 years......then find themselves, north of the age of 50.....without any marketable skills, no health insurance, and 50% of the debt and no way to pay it because their spouse just decided to 'change their mind'.
The only 'spousal' support in IN. happens IF the college age kids, go to college, AND live at home with one of the parents....the other parent could be made to pay up to 25.00 a week. IKR, 25.00 a week.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

roadless said:


> I tried not to take the comments personally.
> I know the type of person I am and the type of wife I was.
> I can look anyone in the eye on both accounts.
> Certainly human with all that encompasses, yet I do live my life with integrity.
> I am not a thief for the alimony I legally receive.


you just keep doing what ya need to do.....and let nay sayers comments roll of ya like water on a ducks back.

you know how we are to be judged and have council by our peers....well....only folks married 30 years or a great length can even come close to understanding the dynamics of your situation.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Feelings run high on the subject of alimony, and I salute those people who have kept their cool and have remained within the owner's and the host site's guidelines!

I would like everybody to CONTINUE to keep in mind the guiding mantras of Homesteadingtoday, which are summed up by "be nice", and "neighborly advice".

Opinions on the subject of alimony are going to be diverse. We all have our opinions and nobody *HAS* to agree with anybody else, BUT! We are bound by the rules of the site to be neighborly and kind. 

As I have said, feelings run high when the subject is alimony, which is why this thread is being closely watched. 

Because I do not actually enjoy chopping bits off of peoples posts or removing them entirely, please remember that the site does allow polite disagreement, but nothing rude and no "hiss 'n spit". 

So far this thread has done OK. Viewpoints have been raised and viewpoints have been disagreed with, and almost all of it has been done within host tolerances. Most excellent! And, please remember to continue to observe host tolerances!

Thank you,

Terri


----------



## viggie (Jul 17, 2009)

elkhound said:


> you just keep doing what ya need to do.....and let nay sayers comments roll of ya like water on a ducks back.
> 
> you know how we are to be judged and have council by our peers....well....only folks married 30 years or a great length can even come close to understanding the dynamics of your situation.


I think trying to understand, not judge, was the purpose of the thread. As someone who's never been supported by another, I honestly did not understand either. I'm still not sure how I feel about it, but there are some good reasons here.


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

Well, gentlemen, if you feel that divorce is unfairly expensive, get back in there and invest some time and effort into your marriage so that it doesn't end in a divorce.

Maybe everyone should be required to take a semester of divorce law before they can obtain a marriage license. I assume that people know what they are signing up for in that marriage contract, but maybe some of them don't.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

wr said:


> Do you feel alimony in all cases is unwarranted or just in this case? What about the wife that put her education plans on hold so her husband got his degree and raised a family?
> 
> Do you feel that no man should ever receive alimony? What if he stayed at home and raised the kids while his wife had a successful career?


In that case, it can be done (and has, too).

It's my understanding that child support payments are not influenced by either party's behavior during and after the marriage. Alimony can be, and often is.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

roadless said:


> I was with my husband for 30 years. I worked outside the home and did my part in building and doing the paperwork for his business. My job, though not well paid , provided our health insurance the whole time we were together. ( I still provide it for him ).
> My professional life was always based on decisions that we made together with the understanding we would be together forever.
> 
> Had I known that I would be kicked to the curb in my 50"s I would have made different professional choices to be better able to support myself.
> I would be unable to live on my income alone.


Why do you provide insurance for him? Now, I've seen that done as an aspect of alimony, but it was usually for a short time, usually 6 to 12 months or whenever the party obtained insurance elsewhere, whichever came first. I could also see it being done if he is a custodial parent, as part of child support. But otherwise, why do you do this?


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

viggie said:


> I think trying to understand, not judge, was the purpose of the thread. As someone who's never been supported by another, I honestly did not understand either. I'm still not sure how I feel about it, but there are some good reasons here.



if a woman is a stay at home mom say for 20 years....she is working for family needs too.......the man could have $200,000 in 401k and other work related benefits.....she deserves half of home and 401k....plus any other IRA's.....now if it was assets earned before marriage then no i do not agree with splitting that.as far as alimony its up tp judge..maybe she needs it for say 4 years while she goes to school to educate herself to get in workforce.

couples file jointly have their SS benefits based as a couple too.....meaning she gets some credit for his outside wages.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

wr said:


> It is my understanding that alimony ends if one remarries.


Not always.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

In an earlier post Roadless stated that she is ordered by the court to carry insurance for him: she did not say if there is a time limit on it or not.

Courts order what they decide to order!


----------



## roadless (Sep 9, 2006)

It is part of the state law. My job provided the health insurance for our family all of our married life. He pays the difference between the single and couple policy. If I was to leave this job and get another that provided couple insurance it would need to be offered to him too.
This would end if he was to remarry.


----------



## viggie (Jul 17, 2009)

elkhound said:


> if a woman is a stay at home mom say for 20 years....she is working for family needs too.......the man could have $200,000 in 401k and other work related benefits.....she deserves half of home and 401k....plus any other IRA's.....now if it was assets earned before marriage then no i do not agree with splitting that.as far as alimony its up tp judge..maybe she needs it for say 4 years while she goes to school to educate herself to get in workforce.
> 
> couples file jointly have their SS benefits based as a couple too.....meaning she gets some credit for his outside wages.


Thanks for the example. My worldview and experience are just very different. I did not even date until I finished college as I felt it necessary to be able to support myself regardless of my circumstances. (Which was against my upbringing as a good woman should have just married off...good thing though since no one will have me)


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

thesedays said:


> In that case, it can be done (and has, too).
> 
> 
> 
> It's my understanding that child support payments are not influenced by either party's behavior during and after the marriage. Alimony can be, and often is.



It is my understanding that how alimony is decided varies quite a bit. In my province, it's a set amount based on a formula. 

I do feel there are those that should be awarded alimony but I think it should be considered on a case by case basis.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

viggie said:


> Thanks for the example. My worldview and experience are just very different. I did not even date until I finished college as I felt it necessary to be able to support myself regardless of my circumstances. (Which was against my upbringing as a good woman should have just married off...good thing though since no one will have me)


heres the opposite end of that scale....a guy i know had a home paid for...met a woman..fell for her they married..she became pregnant..had child..moved out after 3 years in relationship.......his dad built that home for him years ago...it was big and nice.....she walked away with 78% of everything....as she walked by him in court on final hearing...she said one more like you and i can retire...!!!

dohhhhhh

at our age viggie.....protect yaself with a prenup..


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

wr said:


> It is my understanding that how alimony is decided varies quite a bit. In my province, it's a set amount based on a formula.
> 
> I do feel there are those that should be awarded alimony but I think it should be considered on a case by case basis.


That's true for child support too. Every family is going to have different needs; there is no "one size fits all".

Many years ago, I was at a party and there was a man there who had recently gotten divorced, with several children, and his wife had totally taken him to the cleaners. Among other things, he had to sell a business that had been in HIS family for 3 generations - she didn't own ANY of it - and give her all the money from it. Blah, blah, blah. I finally said, "I am extremely unsympathetic regarding divorced men, and I would have to hear your ex-wife's side of the story before I could make any kind of judgment." (Try saying that to a woman, and living to tell about it! :happy2: ) Not only did it shut him up, he totally crumpled.

Weird thing is, I found out some months later that within a few weeks of this party, all of his children had moved in with him, and had nothing to do with their mother. :runforhills:

When I was growing up, I just saw way too many families where the husband came out of it with a sports car and a stable of teenage girlfriends, and the wife and kids were living with her parents because of all the debts he ran up on purpose, often with the knowledge and support of his extended family, knowing that he would leave his children destitute. It was also almost unheard-of for a father, and his family too, to be involved on any level with the kids within a year or two after the split. Back then, it wasn't a cliche.


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

heres another thought...the guy or lady works 30 years and mate stays home for kids and then continues at home keeping home nice and homestead working..garden,etc etc......the working person receives a retirement from company....dont you think the mate is entitled to half each month when its starts being paid out since it was earned as a result of both persons action for those 30 years that they both had agreed upon and worked for.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

elkhound said:


> heres the opposite end of that scale....a guy i know had a home paid for...met a woman..fell for her they married..she became pregnant..had child..moved out after 3 years in relationship.......his dad built that home for him years ago...it was big and nice.....she walked away with 78% of everything....as she walked by him in court on final hearing...she said one more like you and i can retire...!!!
> 
> dohhhhhh
> 
> at our age viggie.....protect yaself with a prenup..



I've been watching an old fool chase a young gold digger and while I don't think he's going to cans up marrying her, he's sure happy to shovel a lot of cash her way, just so he can prove to the world that he's got what it takes to catch the eye of a cute thing half his age. 

I guess my point is that if you pick shallow people for a spouse, you can expect situations like this.


----------



## willow_girl (Dec 7, 2002)

> heres the opposite end of that scale....a guy i know had a home paid for...met a woman..fell for her they married..she became pregnant..had child..moved out after 3 years in relationship.......his dad built that home for him years ago...it was big and nice.....she walked away with 78% of everything....as she walked by him in court on final hearing...she said one more like you and i can retire...!!!


I let my second husband keep my half of the house we built together ... but I told him if he hooked up with some hussy, and lost it in a subsequent divorce, I would track him down and :hammer: him!


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

willow_girl said:


> I let my second husband keep my half of the house we built together ... but I told him if he hooked up with some hussy, and lost it in a subsequent divorce, I would track him down and :hammer: him!



you rock !!


----------



## elkhound (May 30, 2006)

wr said:


> I've been watching an old fool chase a young gold digger and while I don't think he's going to cans up marrying her, he's sure happy to shovel a lot of cash her way, just so he can prove to the world that he's got what it takes to catch the eye of a cute thing half his age.
> 
> I guess my point is that if you pick shallow people for a spouse, you can expect situations like this.



these people were same age i was referring too.

theres a lot of evil men and women in this world that have no qualms about taking from others .


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

viggie said:


> I think trying to understand, not judge, was the purpose of the thread. As someone who's never been supported by another, I honestly did not understand either. I'm still not sure how I feel about it, but there are some good reasons here.


 
Exactly. Thank you. The OP was not intended to slander, insult, or spew (as claimed by Laura) it was simple to understand why alimony even exists in a modern world that has become more egalitarian.

I agree there are some good point raised in this thread to support the legitimacy of alimony and I thank the mature and cool headed people who offered those points of few for adding insight into this conversation. Gaining insight was the intention of this thread. 

I only offered my opinions on alimony later in the conversation when they were directly or indirectly requested. I never intended and still do not intend to beat people over the head with my point of view. I just wanted to know why it still existed when to my understanding it seemed an outdated relic left over from the 1800's.


----------



## Laura (May 10, 2002)

If it weren't for the protections of Family Court, people would tell their spouses, "I divorce you" walk away and leave them destitute. Each state has their own financial calculation formulas that consider many factors including needs. 

Unless we personally read divorce files with financial statements, we don't know if the settlement was "fair." Many men who are ordered to pay spousal maintenance don't think their judge was fair at all. What is fair in their minds is they get to skip off with everything leaving the aggrieved party destitute.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

City Bound said:


> it seemed an outdated relic left over from the 1800's.


Well, the laws were written back then, some of them. And, the judges must apply the laws.

Many women during a divorce still learn that everything is in their husband's name and therefor they own nothing, nada, zip.

So now we have alimony. In many states the judge will just say "this is not fair" and assign alimony to even things up. And, apparently in other states there is a formula to follow. Some states have no alimony but I think those states are community property states? I am guessing as every state has its own laws. 

Lastly, some men also collect alimony, if that is what is decided during the divorce. 

I am aware that divorce decrees are not always fair for either men or women. Justice is not always just. Whether court is fair or not often depends on how the laws are applied.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

City Bound - you want to learn. This is for your education.

1. Two people join a partnership, they have a joint goal and both work in their own way to achieve that goal. A house, a business or a 401K, retirement funds, health insurance, etc. In many cases one person goes out to focus on conquering those goals, but as in all plans there has to be a back up person to get the food, keep the place going and take care of subsequent staff or persons in the same partnership, but as subordinate members.

Go down the road and the funds come in to build all that, the experience the other businesses sees is the visible partner, but not so much the operational person.

Now you get to 10 or 20 years, and the visible partner in this partnership decides that they want to dissolve the partnership and go into business in a totally different area and type of business. Or maybe just wants to be a real sole business with no need for operational person or subordinates.

This dissolving the partnership would have to have a reallocation of the assets and future residue income. So, in this case, the two main partners would need to dissolve all the business assets and incomes at about 50/50. In this case, there would not be any future allocation of funds.

But, lets consider that the visible partner wants to keep the physical assets but does not have the funds to pay 50% of the total to the operational partner at this time, what to do? They have a huge discussion and in some cases they decide that the 50% of the assets is $500 a month for 6 years, and being kept on the healthcare of the visible partner as that is part of what is an asset to the partnership. 

Then again, we may see that the operational partner needs new more up to date training, as they have never acquired the new market skills to allow them to become a visible partner, on their own. This is when assets are set aside to cover their living and school expenses for a time to bring the operational person more equal to the visible partner.

Also, whomever has the subordinates needs income to cover the partnerships obligations to the subordinates.


It's all business, and like all businesses there is a good faith expectation when entering into a partnership; and if the good faith is broken often the partnership is broken and dissolved. That's when one or more of the above happens.

In these day, many times there is an agreement for dissolving a partnership drafted before the partnership is entered so there is no problem finding the equitable division of assets should the partnership dissolve.


The alimony is the distribution of assets determined by the people involved often with the help of lawyers and approved of by a judge.

That's why there is alimony.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Very nice angie.

My agreement would be this:

Whatever we owned before we married is still ours when we split.
Whatever we acquire while together is divided 50/50 when we split.
Whatever inheritance one acquires during a marriage belongs solely to that person after the split unless it is a business or home that the other partner worked to build or improve.
Family heirlooms remain with the person who's family they have been passed down from.
Anything a person earns or acquires after the split is solely there's.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

City Bound - very practical.

But, during the partnership, be sure to have both partners to audit the assets.

Let's just say over $100,000 in assets was transferred to a "church" in the year or two before I divorced. Of course, the "church" takes care of the minister that became an arch bishop. And people will lie under oath to make sure that assets are not divided equally.

So be sure to have audits by both parties.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Angie, an audit sounds so cold. I do not know if I could do that. If I can not trust the person I am sleeping next to at night how can I even be married to them. The idea disturbs me. I see the practical cover-your-butt of it, but that is a wet blanket in the romance department.

How about just marrying a fair minded and ethical person? Then you can just sort this stuff out objectively and compassionately. pipe-dream? Maybe.


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

City Bound said:


> Angie, an audit sounds so cold. I do not know if I could do that. If I can not trust the person I am sleeping next to at night how can I even be married to them. The idea disturbs me. I see the practical cover-your-butt of it, but that is a wet blanket in the romance department.
> 
> How about just marrying a fair minded and ethical person? Then you can just sort this stuff out objectively and compassionately. pipe-dream? Maybe.



In the heat of a divorce? Definitely a pipe dream and that is why there are divorce laws pertaining to the division of marital property, etc. I don't think an audit sounds any colder than a list of "agreements". My suggestion is if you think that you may need to cover your tail in the long run, start with a prenup and go from there.

Personally, I agree about marrying a fair minded and ethical person. Unfortunately, the one you marry may not be the one your divorcing later. People and circumstances change.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

One other thing, that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned yet. One reason (usually) women don't ask for alimony is because it's taxable income (and conversely, is deductible by the payor). 

Several years ago, I was part of a conversation with several elderly women, and they were talking about how it used to be such a disgrace to be a divorced woman, and nowadays, the pendulum's almost swung too far in the other direction: that whenever a woman announces she's getting a divorce, people far too often :buds: :clap: :bouncy: even if they know absolutely nothing about how it happened or why. I replied, "How did society view divorced men? I've never heard or read anything about that." They all just kind of stood there for a few seconds, and one of them finally said, "I don't recall that anyone had an opinion about them, or that we were supposed to."

:shocked:

BTW, there have been some high-profile cases where "palimony" was paid out between a never-married couple who split up.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

City Bound said:


> Angie, an audit sounds so cold. I do not know if I could do that. If I can not trust the person I am sleeping next to at night how can I even be married to them. The idea disturbs me. I see the practical cover-your-butt of it, but that is a wet blanket in the romance department.
> 
> How about just marrying a fair minded and ethical person? Then you can just sort this stuff out objectively and compassionately. pipe-dream? Maybe.


City Bound, some are very good liars.

See, you have to Believe and trust or not enter into a marriage or business with a person. And you can live with someone 10 years or more and find out the truth at some time. 

But you have to understand, That is one bad apple in the vast barrell of possibilities. 

And if I tried just a little bit, I could scare you and have you running away from a relationship called marriage if you knew my life. It was very interesting and the end information was very revealing.

But you see, if you stop believing in people and stop WORKING at being a person that someone would WANT TO STAY WITH, then it's gone. 

I have a book that you may want to read, and some will poo poo me telling you this. But Chuck Holton wrote a book "Making Men" and there is a portion about picking a mate. And how to grow into someone a person would want to be a life long mate with. 
http://www.amazon.com/Making-Men-Five-Steps-Growing/dp/0615544398

Take a look at it's review and a bit about it. You have another thread about Courtship, and I have a few things about that once I read your outlook, as my youngest did full Christian Courtship and I learned a LOT about that.

If you would read the "Making Men" I'll buy it for you and either send a kindle version or if you give me your mailing address, I'll get a copy mailed to you if you want it.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

Of course one could always do as I did and never rely on a spouse for support either during or after the marriage. I always thought of marriage as a business arrangement first, then a love affair and subsequently, when I had to get divorced, I did not need alimony (he acquired a bimbo) and did not depend on him for my basic needs.

I always have felt that one should protect oneself first. Sorry about all the romance, roses, and rose colored glasses, but I grew up watching women stay married to beaters and were too afraid to leave due to no money, no skills, no jobs, etc. My mom drilled it into me, and I drilled it into my girls..never rely on a man to support you, never depend on another for your daily bread and never depend on anyone but yourself to feed your children.

Has worked fine so far. My girls are still married to the men they chose, but they both are self supporting. I am self supporting and though my last husband was deceased, neither myself nor my son ever missed a meal. I have always worked, both on the farm and off the farm and provided for myself and my kids. Anything the husband provided was "gravy" and either put in the bank for the future or used to purchase something that was desired by both parties.

Never, ever..depend on anyone to pay your way. Doesn't matter if you are man or woman, you will never have to "put up with" anything you do not want to if you are able to operate independently.

I am married now, but I work and have my own money. Dh has his own accounts. We have one joint account for payment of the monthly bills. Works for us. If he decides to go his way, I won't starve nor will I be unable to afford a place to live. Neither will he. I have seen way too much here on HT with women who were or are totally dependent on their husbands, it's frightening to me to be that dependent on someone else. 

Just my observations based on real life, those here on HT and the many, many people I met while a paralegal.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

rkintn said:


> In the heat of a divorce? Definitely a pipe dream and that is why there are divorce laws pertaining to the division of marital property, etc. I don't think an audit sounds any colder than a list of "agreements". My suggestion is if you think that you may need to cover your tail in the long run, start with a prenup and go from there.
> 
> Personally, I agree about marrying a fair minded and ethical person. Unfortunately, the one you marry may not be the one your divorcing later. People and circumstances change.


 
No, not in the heat of divorce. I thought angie was saying that a couple should do routine audits to keep records just incase they get divorced.

True, some people show a different face, an ugly face, in a divorce.


----------



## frogmammy (Dec 8, 2004)

Tell me how you split the assets when one partner put THEIR plans on hold and worked to put the other through 10 years of college, working as a waitress and a sales clerk (2 jobs). Now the "educated" partner wants a divorce. How to you split a brain and give someone back ten years of their life?

Saw this a LOT back when I was working at a teaching hospital....Doctors FINALLY finish their education and internship and trade the "old" wife for a new one.

Mon


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

City Bound said:


> No, not in the heat of divorce. I thought angie was saying that a couple should do routine audits to keep records just incase they get divorced.
> 
> True, some people show a different face, an ugly face, in a divorce.


Actually, I do advise that both partners know all the assets and liabilities at about once a year. Or all the time. 

sidepasser, your way works well, unless both are building a few businesses together.

ETA: there is a practical reason in long marriages to have assets and liabilities know by both - what if one dies, and the non-knowledgeable one is left to figure things out?


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

City Bound said:


> No, not in the heat of divorce. I thought angie was saying that a couple should do routine audits to keep records just incase they get divorced.
> 
> True, some people show a different face, an ugly face, in a divorce.


That face shows up before the divorce, you just get the best look at it when the proceedings start up. 

You say audits sound so "cold". Well, if you are worried about your "assets" there is going to be an amount of coldness to the arrangement, in some fashion. At the same time, for some, it could actually add to the relationship knowing they don't have to worry about being taken advantage of should the relationship fail.


----------



## L.A. (Nov 15, 2007)

I lost pretty much everything, and it hurt in every sense of the word,,,,

I soon realized,,,,Money don't mean much to me,,,,,Never did....

Courts are there & I believe they try to be fair,and want to be fair, but they can't ever be "Fully Informed" as they state they are in their decree....

They are trying to do the impossible,,"fair & just",,,,I would not want their job !!

I wasn't going to post on this thread,,,,,Why did I,,,dang it :hand:


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Angie, thank you for the generous and kind offer to buy me the book. Let me think on it and get back to you, if I may.

I really enjoyed the ideas of a woman who wrote a book called Emotional Purity and it is possible you might enjoy her thoughts. http://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Pur...&keywords=emotional+purity+by+heather+paulsen
I had a cassette recording of some of her lectures. Although her work is aimed at young women the advice and her ideas apply to both sexes in my opinion.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

I'll check it out. And Chuck's book is good for men and women to read. 

Just let me know if you want the book and I'll get it to you.


----------



## tambo (Mar 28, 2003)

AngieM2 said:


> Actually, I do advise that both partners know all the assets and liabilities at about once a year. Or all the time.
> 
> sidepasser, your way works well, unless both are building a few businesses together.
> 
> *ETA: there is a practical reason in long marriages to have assets and liabilities know by both - what if one dies, and the non-knowledgeable one is left to figure things out?*




This is so true. My Mom died suddenly and my Dad didn't have a clue about the finances.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

Our state negates alimony if both parties are adequately employed, which was very much to my benefit at the time of my divorce as my ex and I were both employed for all but 3 months of our time together and her salary was a bit higher than mine at the time we split.

Since we both had 401k plans from the same company she had no claim on my account nor did I have any claim to hers.

When she found out that the mortgage balance liability would be split equally between us, she gave me all the liability and a quit claim which didn't bother me as she had always used her salary to provide child care for her son from a previous marriage in place of the delinquent child support from her ex and I made the mortgage payment from my salary anyway.

Us keeping "his and hers" checking , saving and investments and having a basic prenup to protect our accounts we had prior to our marriage sure made the divorce easy to execute.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

I tell my husband where we are financially every few months weather he wants to hear it or not, and he rarely wants to hear it. He would rather I did the money stuff.

I tell him because it is what keeps the household going and he needs to know this stuff!!!!!!! He knows I feel strongly about it and so he hears me out and then he ignores the finances for another few months.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

City Bound said:


> Angie, an audit sounds so cold. I do not know if I could do that. If I can not trust the person I am sleeping next to at night how can I even be married to them. The idea disturbs me. I see the practical cover-your-butt of it, but that is a wet blanket in the romance department.
> 
> How about just marrying a fair minded and ethical person? Then you can just sort this stuff out objectively and compassionately. pipe-dream? Maybe.



My ex had assets hidden all over the country. One I advised him that I didn't want the cattle and didn't want them sold, his herd literally tripled overnight. Incidentally, a great deal of my income purchased those cattle.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

L.A. said:


> I lost pretty much everything, and it hurt in every sense of the word,,,,
> 
> I soon realized,,,,Money don't mean much to me,,,,,Never did....
> 
> ...


I am very glad you did post. Very good insight.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

tambo said:


> [/B]
> 
> This is so true. My Mom died suddenly and my Dad didn't have a clue about the finances.


I like the idea the amish have were everyone can do everyone else's job that way if one dies, is away on business, or is sick, the farm does not stop running. 

I think the same idea applies perfectly to family finance. Even include the kids they need to know what to do.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

frogmammy said:


> Tell me how you split the assets when one partner put THEIR plans on hold and worked to put the other through 10 years of college, working as a waitress and a sales clerk (2 jobs). Now the "educated" partner wants a divorce. How to you split a brain and give someone back ten years of their life?
> 
> Saw this a LOT back when I was working at a teaching hospital....Doctors FINALLY finish their education and internship and trade the "old" wife for a new one.
> 
> Mon


Years ago, I worked with a woman who as a young adult lived in a city that had a college of chiropractic, and worked with a lot of women who had that happen to them. She said that ALL of them were the same personality type: very naive and timid, and probably abused too, and definitely not on an intellectual par with their husbands. Not a small percentage of them had one or more children in the meantime too.

Nowadays, there are not a small number of newly minted doctors, lawyers, etc. who are trading in their HUSBANDS. Assuming she just used him to get through school, that's wrong too.

However, although I'm not a nurse, I sometimes post on a nursing board, and the divorce rate for women with children who go to nursing school (and specifically RN programs) is so high, more than once, when such a woman has sought advice regarding how she should plan out the next few years, she's been told, "File for divorce. You're going to do it anyway, so just get it out of the way right now."

:shocked:


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

I would not put anyone through medical or law school. No way. How can that even work. Once a person improves their station in life they are ether going to want to revamp their life ALONE or use their new station to lift their family up. Too risky.

I know someone that did this to a woman who put him through law school. The woman was not naive, timid, or abused, she was lovely, beautiful, smart, and good natured. he just took advantage of her and gave up a great woman so that he could party and do drugs after becoming a lawyer.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

City Bound said:


> he could party and do drugs after becoming a lawyer.


Bet he didn't remain a lawyer for very long.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

He is still a lawyer. Maybe it is just a local thing but drug habits are very common among Lawyers and Doctors here.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

City Bound said:


> I would not put anyone through medical or law school. No way. How can that even work. Once a person improves their station in life they are ether going to want to revamp their life ALONE or use their new station to lift their family up. Too risky.
> 
> I know someone that did this to a woman who put him through law school. The woman was not naive, timid, or abused, she was lovely, beautiful, smart, and good natured. he just took advantage of her and gave up a great woman so that he could party and do drugs after becoming a lawyer.



A lot have done it and remain married so I don't think you can judge many by the actions of a few.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

wr said:


> A lot have done it and remain married so I don't think you can judge many by the actions of a few.


Right, but I would tell her that if we divorce that she has to pay me back for the tuition. A verbal contract. I know not very smart legally, but most of my life has been lived by verbal contracts and I have a good sense from over a lifetime who is decent and honest enough to stick to the honor code and who is a rat.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

City Bound said:


> He is still a lawyer. Maybe it is just a local thing but drug habits are very common among Lawyers and Doctors here.


They're common in all occupations. And trust me, it WILL catch up with him. It always does.

Sounds like she's better off without him anyway. Hope they didn't have any kids.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

City Bound said:


> Right, but I would tell her that if we divorce that she has to pay me back for the tuition. A verbal contract. I know not very smart legally, but most of my life has been lived by verbal contracts and I have a good sense from over a lifetime who is decent and honest enough to stick to the honor code and who is a rat.


Would she owe you the cost of tuition, living expenses as well or some combination and would that agreement be altered if she became a doctor and supported you and the family for 5 or 10 years before a divorce? What about interest on your investment? Investing that much money someplace else would have likely generated a much better return. 

I would also wonder what you would intend on doing if she chose not to honor the verbal agreement? If you sued for compensation, a judge will consider you request, the validity of a verbal agreement and make a decision based on matrimonial law precedents - alimony.


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

City Bound said:


> Right, but I would tell her that if we divorce that she has to pay me back for the tuition. A verbal contract. I know not very smart legally, but most of my life has been lived by verbal contracts and I have a good sense from over a lifetime who is decent and honest enough to stick to the honor code and who is a rat.


In a court of law, most of the time verbal agreements are worth the amount of paper they are written on. I get the impression that you really don't have a clue as to how family and divorce law works. Maybe you should brush up on it, if you ever decide to get married so at least you will have an idea of how your ideals will stack up against the actual law. I've known several people who had a similar mindset as yourself as far as relationships and money etc and they all got a really rude awakening standing in front of the divorce judge. Very rarely are all parties happy with a judge's ruling, but those who think they are the only right one in the relationship (usually the more controlling partner) seem to take the ruling the hardest and are the most bitter after it's all over with.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

if she supported the family after she got our of school for five to ten years I would call it even. 

Well, it is still is a romance a family, it is not business so me personally I would take in account everything, all the facets that went into the union and see how it balances. I find with most give an takes in my relationships everything usually balances out in the over all wash.

If she did not honor our verbal agreement I would just take it on the chin and write her off as a piece of garbage, then count myself lucky to be done with her.

it all depends on the people involved some people are stingy and greedy and others are fare minded and decent. 

if the person was a monster and I lost everything I would count myself the wealthy if I never had to see or hear from her again. Freedom and disentanglement is better then money sometimes.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

rkintn said:


> In a court of law, most of the time verbal agreements are worth the amount of paper they are written on. I get the impression that you really don't have a clue as to how family and divorce law works. Maybe you should brush up on it, if you ever decide to get married so at least you will have an idea of how your ideals will stack up against the actual law. I've known several people who had a similar mindset as yourself as far as relationships and money etc and they all got a really rude awakening standing in front of the divorce judge. Very rarely are all parties happy with a judge's ruling, but those who think they are the only right one in the relationship (usually the more controlling partner) seem to take the ruling the hardest and are the most bitter after it's all over with.


I know it does not hold up in court. But it hold up between decent people. If I lose I lose. it is just money in the end. If we can not trust each other why even bother getting married in the first place. That is why I believe in long engagements it helps you feel each other out. if I ever get divorced the greatest reward would be getting rid of the person and not having them in my life. Money cant buy that peace of mind.


----------



## rkintn (Dec 12, 2002)

City Bound said:


> I know it does not hold up in court. But it hold up between decent people. If I lose I lose. it is just money in the end. If we can not trust each other why even bother getting married in the first place. That is why I believe in long engagements it helps you feel each other out. if I ever get divorced the greatest reward would be getting rid of the person and not having them in my life. Money cant buy that peace of mind.


In all honesty, you seem very scared of commitment. It's one thing to take things slow and get to know your partner, but it's as though you want guarantees that your partner is NEVER going to change and that they MUST live up to whatever messed up standard you set forth. It's a recipe for disaster, broken hearts and, of course, no commitment. You have to LIVE life, not sit around and nit pick it to death and assign rules to every move to be made. It is my hope for you that you realize that sooner rather than later so you will actually be able to experience joy in a relationship. Sitting around watching for signs of the other shoe dropping is no way to live.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

rkintn said:


> In all honesty, you seem very scared of commitment. It's one thing to take things slow and get to know your partner, but it's as though you want guarantees that your partner is NEVER going to change and that they MUST live up to whatever messed up standard you set forth. It's a recipe for disaster, broken hearts and, of course, no commitment. You have to LIVE life, not sit around and nit pick it to death and assign rules to every move to be made. It is my hope for you that you realize that sooner rather than later so you will actually be able to experience joy in a relationship. Sitting around watching for signs of the other shoe dropping is no way to live.


I have been in a happy relationship since October. She is great, very sweet and nice.

Maybe three years is long. At the least two. It usually takes me a year for my relationships to mutually putter out so if we are still strong after a year there is hope.

I live. I do stuff. I dated a lot in the spring with a few different women, went out a lot in the summer with friends and family, went traveling in the fall.


----------



## GrammaBarb (Dec 27, 2012)

Hi Folks,

Can we all agree that if we have fifty people posting, we will have *at least* 100 points of view? I've been divorced twice, both very civil, and I still have my home----after two refi's, which seems fair since I wanted to be here and my Ex's didn't. 

Both had the potential to be horrendous, and were made easier and more civil---I would even say friendly---by the simple fact that in both cases, we *liked* one another even after falling out of love. 

We've read a lot of "worst case" scenarios on this thread, and I have women friends who have horror stories, but there are also instances where people act like adults, think of the kids and grandkids involved, remember the emotional and financial investment of *both* parties, and do it right. I count myself among those fortunate few, and am eternally grateful!

(Do I get the "Pollyanna Award" for this admittedly (and unabashedly) positive post? No? Well, OK, how about a couple of cookies?) :happy:

Barb


----------



## Guest (Jan 2, 2014)

If you live in your mom's basement,and your only income is a crazy check, you don't need to worry about alimony.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

zong said:


> If you live in your mom's basement,and your only income is a crazy check, you don't need to worry about alimony.


:rotfl:


----------



## tambo (Mar 28, 2003)

What? I just had a divorce attorney ad pop up on my computer when I clicked this thread.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

zong said:


> If you live in your mom's basement,and your only income is a crazy check, you don't need to worry about alimony.


Take a hike zong.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

sidepasser said:


> Of course one could always do as I did and never rely on a spouse for support either during or after the marriage. I always thought of marriage as a business arrangement first, then a love affair and subsequently, when I had to get divorced, I did not need alimony (he acquired a bimbo) and did not depend on him for my basic needs.
> 
> I always have felt that one should protect oneself first. Sorry about all the romance, roses, and rose colored glasses, but I grew up watching women stay married to beaters and were too afraid to leave due to no money, no skills, no jobs, etc. My mom drilled it into me, and I drilled it into my girls..never rely on a man to support you, never depend on another for your daily bread and never depend on anyone but yourself to feed your children.
> 
> ...


Yes, marriage is a business agreement. That is why after the I do's are said the parties, witnesses and officiating mediator all sign the marriage contract to be filed with the local probate court along with any prenuptial agreement attachments. 

It is always good to see folks who understand and accept the personal business aspects of a marriage contract.


----------



## doodlemom (Apr 4, 2006)

zong said:


> If you live in your mom's basement,and your only income is a crazy check, you don't need to worry about alimony.


Don't be giving my kids ideas.


----------



## Jokarva (Jan 17, 2010)

sidepasser said:


> Of course one could always do as I did and never rely on a spouse for support either during or after the marriage. I always thought of marriage as a business arrangement first, then a love affair and subsequently, when I had to get divorced, I did not need alimony (he acquired a bimbo) and did not depend on him for my basic needs.
> 
> I always have felt that one should protect oneself first. Sorry about all the romance, roses, and rose colored glasses, but I grew up watching women stay married to beaters and were too afraid to leave due to no money, no skills, no jobs, etc. My mom drilled it into me, and I drilled it into my girls..never rely on a man to support you, never depend on another for your daily bread and never depend on anyone but yourself to feed your children.
> 
> ...




Best post I've seen in ages....wish I could *like* it a thousand times.


----------



## viggie (Jul 17, 2009)

tambo said:


> What? I just had a divorce attorney ad pop up on my computer when I clicked this thread.


My just popped up another tab with a war game. 

Seriously though if ads are doing that now it's bad.


----------



## tambo (Mar 28, 2003)

viggie said:


> My just popped up another tab with a war game.
> 
> Seriously though if ads are doing that now it's bad.


Yep and I have ad block downloaded on my computer. I never get ads here. This one popped up in a different window not on HT.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

zong said:


> If you live in your mom's basement,and your only income is a crazy check, you don't need to worry about alimony.


You've met my son's last 3 girlfriends?


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

City Bound said:


> Freedom and disentanglement is better then money sometimes.



Learn this well. I paid a great deal of assets to get that freedom, and so did many Ladies and Gents here.

Sometimes freedom costs a lot of $$$.


----------



## DUlrich (Dec 31, 2008)

zong said:


> If you live in your mom's basement,and your only income is a crazy check, you don't need to worry about alimony.


Hey! I live in a normal bedroom upstairs AND am gainfully employed :kung:


----------



## Buffy in Dallas (May 10, 2002)

People change. Never in my wildest nightmares did I ever think my husband would do any of the many despicable stunts that he has in the last year. :bdh:

I will never completely trust anyone again.


----------



## shanzone2001 (Dec 3, 2009)

What's his is mine, and what's mine is mine. Duh!!!


----------



## roadless (Sep 9, 2006)

Buffy in Dallas said:


> People change. Never in my wildest nightmares did I ever think my husband would do any of the many despicable stunts that he has in the last year. :bdh:
> 
> I will never completely trust anyone again.



I know what you mean Buffy, it is like something from Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

For me it is the trusting myself that is the challenge. I use to rely on my gut sense about people but I was so completely wrong about him (and her). 

I now have a secondary conversation going on in my head. when I interact with others. I question myself as to is what I am perceiving real and true.
It is draining.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Sociopaths are talented, I will give them that.
Knowing what I know now....
He didn't change, not one bit.
The only change is NOW I KNOW what and who he is.....and the truth changes how I perceive him.
Now I know who he really is....what he is really capable of. 
Before? I was busy maintaining Camelot.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice? Shame on me.

Much research and study of Sociopaths- Narcissist's- Pathological Liars, has done wonders for me..

Trust again?
Yeah......yeah I will.
Cut my ties IMMEDIATELY and COMPLETELY when it's broken?
Oh hades yeah I will.

Live and learn!

If I keep my guard up, I might miss that feeling of electricity that runs up from my heels to the top of my head, when a man gently runs his hand up the back of my neck, into my hair line, and winds his fingers in my hair..
I miss that feeling NOW.....and I don't want to go the rest of my life, never feeling it again, and I am afraid if I constantly assess the situation under a microscope of 'is this one like the old one'.......I will miss it.
I don't want to miss it.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

I think CB has hit on something with a long engagement of two - three years. Perhaps if one is putting on an act, they will not be able to keep that up for that long. It gives a couple time to decide if marriage is really what they want or was it just companionship, someone to do things with, etc.

However, I feel that anything beyond 3-4 years is showing a definite lack of commitment. If you don't know if you want to marry someone in that length of time, I seriously doubt the wedding will ever take place. I had a girlfriend who was engaged to man for 7 years. He kept putting the wedding off, so she broke up with him. He would call and she would hang up or not answer the phone. That went on for over six months. Funny, when she did finally agree to see him, he set a date within two weeks, and they got married. Been married to each other ever since.

Doesn't always work out that way though. Some people like the idea of being together without the commitment. That is fine as long as one doesn't lead another person down the primrose path by promising something they have no intention of delivering.


----------

