ER takes a divorce detour

[Danmar]

Sorry to hear that.

This is why I can't allow myself to get into a relationship. The risk is too high.

Better to have loved and lost...... Children? Even though I went through one of the most expensive, bitter, public, long(15 years) divorces you could imagine, I got a wonderful daughter out of the deal. Also, wouldn't have met my current wonderful wife if I hadn't been married the first time.

You gotta go for. But be careful.

 

[redduck]

Also, wouldn't have met my current wonderful wife if I hadn't been married the first time.

Let me try to guess:
You married your first wife's best friend?
You married your first wife's cousin?
You married your first wife's brother?

 

[kcowan]

I think she would have been too young when he got married the first time?

 

[kcowan]

Dammar, thanks again for good counsel. I too have seen the damage when the lawyers hijack the process.

I tried to make a generous offer to avoid lawyers. DW refused. So then I just negotiated the minimums. As an example, her lawyer did not ask for half of my air miles and half of my government pension. Both of those are considered automatic. But I wanted to make sure her lawyer earned his money. He failed. And we signed the deal on the courthouse steps!

He wasted a lot of time on a corporation in which I had 50% ownership. I granted her half of my stock. But then it was handled easily (dilution through cash calls).

 

[kcowan]

They think someone "stole their husband". Ridiculous.

It is that attitude of ownership that is so disgusting. I own this guy and you will pay to get him. Nobody owns anyone! Better beware of that attitude if you want to keep your spouse. I wonder what the divorce rate would be if it included a "Get out of jail free" card!

 

[Danmar]

Let me try to guess:
You married your first wife's best friend?
You married your first wife's cousin?
You married your first wife's brother?

Hardly. I was thinking of timing availability, etc.

 

[Salaryman]

Better to have loved and lost...... Children? Even though I went through one of the most expensive, bitter, public, long(15 years) divorces you could imagine, I got a wonderful daughter out of the deal. Also, wouldn't have met my current wonderful wife if I hadn't been married the first time.

You gotta go for. But be careful.

I believe you are right about taking the chance and about kids. Despite our differences, we are very proud of the wonderful kids that came. If it hadn't been for the kids, I would not have had the fulfilling life that I had.

As for losing, I didn't get married thinking it would turn out this way. It just worked out this way and I am not blaming anyone nor looking backwards.

 

[Danmar]

I believe you are right about taking the chance and about kids. Despite our differences, we are very proud of the wonderful kids that came. If it hadn't been for the kids, I would not have had the fulfilling life that I had.

As for losing, I didn't get married thinking it would turn out this way. It just worked out this way and I am not blaming anyone nor looking backwards.

Good for you. This will all pass and you will still have your wonderful kids. Make sure that you do everything you can to keep that relationship strong. Try to ignore the rest. Again, good luck.

 

[soupcxan]

I've managed to do it so far... It actually got a lot easier around age 30.

As long as I focus enough on making and saving money, that keeps my mind off of it.

No offense but that sounds like a character out of a Dickens novel.

 

[Amethyst]

Or Silas Marner, weaving on his loom.

But Zesty may not be the relationship "type." Some aren't. Even fewer realize and understand that about themselves. Let's leave him alone.

No offense but that sounds like a character out of a Dickens novel.

 

[haha]

I think some people conflate relationship with legal marriage. As long as you keep an eye on jurisdictions and trends in family law one can have one without the other.

If you want children you as the likely non- custodial parent must be prepared for some pretty much open ended liabilities . jurisdiction is very important.

Most people need close love relationships. I certainly do. This morning I was waiting for a bus on 3rd ave and pike st. A woman in her mid fifties with a walker and some considerable spinal deformity was saying goodbye to a man who was about to board a bus. She said, Goodbye darling, I'll se you tomorrow.

She and her love were much better off for this tenderness.

Ha


Sent from my iPhone using Early Retirement Forum

 

[zesty]

No offense but that sounds like a character out of a Dickens novel.

I've actually never read a complete Charles Dickens novel. If they've got anything in common with me, maybe I should!

 

[NW-Bound]

Most people need close love relationships...

Love requires some give-and-take. People all understand that, but have different definitions and expectations.

 

[Salaryman]

Love requires some give-and-take. People all understand that, but have different definitions and expectations.

Maybe Love is the ultimate investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Sometime you ride a bull market and have dividends or you get hit with a correction and take a haircut.

 

[dunkelblau]

Maybe Love is the ultimate investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Sometime you ride a bull market and have dividends or you get hit with a correction and take a haircut.

I guess I'm the type who values marital independence as much as financial independence, to me together they mean freedom. If matrimonium est lavorum, at least you ER'd from the more difficult one!

 

[NW-Bound]

Maybe Love is the ultimate investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Sometime you ride a bull market and have dividends or you get hit with a correction and take a haircut.

Yes, there's risk in love, read marriage, not unlike risk with investment. But unlike investment, you cannot diversify in love. Not in this country and culture anyway. Or not if you are not good at hiding your diversification "hedge".

But as haha implies, people need love but perhaps they do not have to go "all in". Instead of putting it all in that single stock (no diversification here, remember), you can keep part of your stash neutral (in cash). That means getting in love but staying single.

I went "all in" at an early age, and am still "invested" 35 years later. Guess I am lucky.

 

[Danmar]

Yes, there's risk in love, read marriage, not unlike risk with investment. But unlike investment, you cannot diversify in love. Not in this country and culture anyway. Or not if you are not good at hiding your diversification "hedge".

But as haha implies, people need love but perhaps they do not have to go "all in". Instead of putting it all in that single stock (no diversification here, remember), you can keep part of your stash neutral (in cash). That means getting in love but staying single.

I went "all in" at an early age, and am still "invested" 35 years later. Guess I am lucky.

Interesting analogy. I guess getting married early is like early stage investing. There is a chance to "make it back" if things go wrong. Having it "go wrong" just before or after ER might be a real disaster.

 

[athena53]

As wonderful as my marriage is with DH, if he were to leave this earth before me (likely since he's 15 years older and has health issues) I won't be in a hurry to marry again. I will DEFINITELY be interested in another loving relationship. I am less interested in the obligations the state imposes when it becomes "legal". When they can tap funds I brought into the marriage for someone else's LTC expenses (assuming they've run out of funds and would otherwise need Medicaid to pay), that's scary. People in my family live into their 90s. I need to plan for that.

 

[kcowan]

There is also the confusion of being in lust versus being in love. The first usually remains for the first year or too, giving a chance for the latter to develop.

One thing I have observed is that some couples "let themselves go" after many years in a comfortable relationship. While others keep their appearance and behaviour at a high level as long as they can.

DW considers this to be a measure of respect for her partner. The result is that we are often judged to be at least 10 years younger than actual.

 

[Sunset]

Rich, much appreciate the wise words. Kids absolutely comes first, and I am betting that I can overcome the negativity of the situation.

Have some big goals next year after I pay off the lawyers. This includes a dream trip my kids and my parents to see some European cities and watch some football games there. My Ex did not allow my kids to be with my family nor travel abroad. Trying to be civil about all this, but she really was not a nice person.

Will take your advice to heart.

Be sure to get it in writing (in divorce agreement/court order) you can take the children, as if she has custody, she can/will stop you from taking the kids on vacation out of the country or even the State.
She just has to say 'no', and you are a criminal if you go ahead and travel.
Besides you will need written permission from the custodial parent to cross the border.

 

[Rick_Head]

I watched this with DB and SIL. Don't let your heart undo your head. They both thought they were so right that they should fight over the assets. I told both of them "the law suggests this, work it out and get it over with". Both, of course wanted 100% of assets. When the smoke cleared, each got about 30% and the lawyers got the rest. Each felt they'd won.

What can one say?

 

[athena53]

I watched this with DB and SIL. Don't let your heart undo your head. They both thought they were so right that they should fight over the assets. I told both of them "the law suggests this, work it out and get it over with". Both, of course wanted 100% of assets. When the smoke cleared, each got about 30% and the lawyers got the rest. Each felt they'd won.

What can one say?

The best advice I got was to decide which 3 things were important to you and not go ballistic over the rest. I got uninterfered-with custody of DS, all the investments in my name and a reasonable share of the equity in the marital home. My Ex got no child support obligations (he never worked again, anyway) and a ton of stuff, which he lost after not paying the storage fees. Stuff can be replaced.

 

[Olbidness]

I brought significant assets into my marriage, my now EX was dead broke (Actually she had a negative net worth.) We saw a huge increase in net worth though the dot com era and then the eventual bust. When I filed for divorce we had a zero gain in net worth.


I loved the look on my EX's face when she found out how little she would get.
It made getting killed in the meltdown totally worth it. Ah good times.

 

[aja8888]

During my divorce settlement in 1990 (the money part as she wanted and got all the "stuff"):

Her: "I saw our financial balance sheet and we have $1,000,000 in the asset account..."

Me: "That is correct"

Her: "Well, I expect one half of that...."

Me: "No problem there, but, the other side is liabilities..."

Her: "What are those?"

Me: "That is $650,000 in mortgages on both homes, ours and the rental"

Her: "Oh, so what happens to those?"

Me: "You get 1/2 of the debt too"

Her: "Hey, that's not fair....I didn't know that before I filed for divorce"

Me: "That's too bad....it is community property also."

 

[Danmar]

During my divorce settlement in 1990 (the money part as she wanted and got all the "stuff"):

Her: "I saw our financial balance sheet and we have $1,000,000 in the asset account..."

Me: "That is correct"

Her: "Well, I expect one half of that...."

Me: "No problem there, but, the other side is liabilities..."

Her: "What are those?"

Me: "That is $650,000 in mortgages on both homes, ours and the rental"

Her: "Oh, so what happens to those?"

Me: "You get 1/2 of the debt too"

Her: "Hey, that's not fair....I didn't know that before I filed for divorce"

Me: "That's too bad....it is community property also."

That sounds like my deal too. I paid all liabilities(including mortgages,eventually) while she got all the assets, except my career. Wait, come to think of it, she got a piece of that too, through a kind of notional equity in me. Ie every time I got a raise she got more alimony. She owned a piece of me. Maybe 15-20% I figure. The only way I can "buy that piece back" is to purchase her an annuity to replace the alimony. Will be worth it.