All women beware, sure it's fine at first. But I will guarantee that the man will come back when you are making 40K a year more and then claim "his Half" to everything, your retierment, 401, home that YOU bought and he never put one penny into, savings, and you will be stuck with half of the bills that HE ran up and never told you about. DIVORCE at the earliiest you can..... because I can assure you the SOB will otherwise ruin your credit!

An all-too-common scenario- a woman works her butt off helping to put husband through law school or medical school, and when he's out and established and making a lot of money, he trades her in for a newer model. All of those years and she is usually left with nothing.

We all know it works both ways.

Woman also leaves man for richer man, gets custody.

Man spends 15 years living in single bed apartment sees kids every other weekendwhile she buys shoes with the money. Might even spend some time in jail if he can't make the payments.

I've seen that one quite a few times.

I personally wouldn't put anyone though school and I say if you can't afford to support the kids you shouldn't have them all the time.

women work hard to put their husbands through med school..........that is so lame.......the husband is the one working hard going to school, to think because she works at the mall and lives with him while he is working ten times as hard as she is and to say she is responsible for his success because she lives with him is stupid and sounds like a woman trying to take credit when she deserves NONE. if she pays all the bills then she should be repaid exactly what half the expenses are and they would be EVEN. same goes after your married and split too.......EVEN STEVEN...thats fair

YES!!!...to SS,AGTF women have been doing that to the men for years now..u can bitch all u want, but it sound slike that men are wise to doing it too so dont bitch..u wanted equality now u got it.!!

Please..... if one person, man or woman, puts the other through school, works, pays the bills, contributes towards school, then they should get back 100% plus interest of money spent. Let's face it, going to school is easier than working, and if you're going to school then you are not contributing 50% of the expenses.... so why should the person who provided the support only get 50% back? And ususally, the person working is also contributing to tuition, books, etc. There is nothing wrong with this but if the other partner gets out of school, makes tons of money and dumps the person who put them there they should pay for it.... so 50% of expenses is

NOT EVEN STEVEN.

...your credit... is that it, that's what you're worried about. Man are we F'd up as a people.

1. Once you're married then it's not your money any more so there are no "refunds" or "shares".

2. If you're working your butt off to put your spouse through school then maybe you should be working your butt off to put yourself through school instead. If your lifeplan involves relying on someone else for a source of income you're just asking for trouble. Be your own person and be reliant on yourself, not your spouse.

3. You can work and go to school at the same time, people do it every day. Is it fun? No, but don't let your spouse guilt you into being the only bread winner while they're off playing school.

Because it was so important to you, LF, to double post:

All women beware, sure it's fine at first. But I will guarantee that the man will come back when you are making 40K a year more and then claim "his Half" to everything, your retierment, 401, home that YOU bought and he never put one penny into, savings, and you will be stuck with half of the bills that HE ran up and never told you about. DIVORCE at the earliiest you can..... because I can assure you the SOB will otherwise ruin your credit!

Maybe we should change the laws so nobody profits from divorce.

Take what's yours and leave, not pay for 15 years to life.

I don't see how people get married with the laws the way they are.

Agreed. Most states have punitive divorce laws where the man who made all the money is punished by the judge and has to pay his ex-wife alimony for life sometimes! Why divorce if you end up paying her anyway with alimony. Change the divorce laws and skip the divorce lawyer vultures who want their cut. 50-50 split and no alimony, just child support. Move on! But this will never happen in my lifetime!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How about whomever wants the kids gets them and pays for them instead of the highly skewed normal outcome of the mother gets the kids and soaks the dad, who also wanted the kids, for half his income. For the reasons posted above, its better to go ahead and divorce amicably, without lawyers, than live seperated so the other party doesn't leave you holding a huge debt.

If you have only been married a year, that would be fine godaddy72, but if you have been married for 25 years it would be impossible to say what belonged to whom. You have built an entire life together. My husband and I have been married for only 9 years and our lives are completely intertwined. It would be nearly impossible (with the exception of clothes and small knick knacks) to separate what belonged to whom. We have taken vacations together where we purchased souvenirs and art, made joint purchases of every piece of furniture we own. Even our cars were purchased at the same time. The honest truth is that people get married with the laws the way they are because they are in love and at the time of marriage are not contemplating divorce. Personally, I think people give up on marriage far too fast. It is something that requires a lot of work from both people. But when it is over, I think that both spouses are entitled to half of the joint assets and should go their separate ways.

Well you can split the assets but that whole child support/alimony thing swallows lives.

Especially for people with lower incomes their lives are effectively over and they don't even see their kids.

godaddy --

It works the other way, too. A low-income couple have a child, then divorce and the woman gets custody while he turns into a dead-beat dad. She has to pay outrageous prices for day care and all the rest. Even if she wants desperately to go back to school and is willing to hold a full-time job while doing it, unless she has family who will provide child care and help with the costs, it's not going to happen.

Her life is effectively over.

The way I see it if she can't support the kid she doesn't deserve custody all the time.

It's one thing if he doesn't want to be a dad but if he wants custody he should get it.

Equality and all. You all wanted it right?

If she can't support the kid godaddy? Well then fine, go track down the dead bead dad who does not work or pay child support and give HIM custody! Let's see how easily he handles working full time, paying ALL the bills, arranging child care, PTA, ball games, scout meetings, sleep overs, birthday parties and all other things that go with being a kid while cooking, cleaning, shopping, doing laundry and everything else that he never did before the divorce.

It has nothing to do with equality, but rather the fact that women are always given 90% of the responsibility while the dad floats around contributing the very minimum he can get by with. There is NOTHING equal about any of it!

There are alot of dead beat moms out there as well. These women are so selfish that instead of giving up custody to the "dead beat" dad, they do something drastic like, I don't know, put the babies in the trunk of a car and push it in a river. There are some good guys out there. All they're looking for is time with their children, which is way more important than money. My dad didn't live with me but he sent money. And he didn't come induction to national honor society, graduation from high school or college, wedding day. Time is everything.

Well go daddy...at least you're consistent--clearly someone with a LOT of issues about women nomatter what the topic or what the board...

In no state may you divorce your minor child --If you're going to once again blame women for everything wrong in life, at least do some reading before you post.

HALF of custodial parents receive no support from the other parent, regardless of court decree. Average annual payment of those who did receive support? $3,000.00

Whether either gender benefits from marriage or divorce is one question. Child support is another.

To Hestia, your truth is messed up and misleading. A low income family qualifies for state help regarding daycare expenses and the single mom in this situation will most likely not have to pay a dime for daycare, so cut the crap! Divorce laws favor women and are discriminating against men. I know there are bad guys out there and they need to get it, but not every single man! There are plenty of women who leave husbands after they have what they wanted, a child. The man was happy and focused on his family, she leaves and takes the child and the second income they lived on together. She moves in with some other rich dude and he might as well buy a gun and shoot himself in the head because his life is indeed OVER!!! Talking from experience...

Oh yea live off the state? Is that really your answer Peter?! As a mother who divorced her ex because we were better friends than lovers, we have shared parenting which is what a lot of people are doing nowadays. He pays no child support and I take care of medical insurance. It is better that way for us. I will never live off of the state nor would I ever want to. I have an older child where her father is a total DEADBEAT DAD!!!! Took off after he found out I was pregnant and tried to pull I am not the father when everyone knew he was and finally admitted when I took him to court!There are way too many deadbeats out there! Men play these games then when they have to pay they get upset! Suck it up and be a man!!!!

How many women make 40,000 a year ? Deadbeat Dads or Moms should pay or be in jail. But women cheat just as much as men & I have'nt meet one that does'nt LIE or cheat the welfare system.

Many single mothers (and fathers) do recieve govt benefits. How many claim "head of household" filing status and/or earned income credits? These are govt welfare programs for single parents. How many single moms "live with" some man (oftentimes not the father) and neglect to mention his income when fillilng out household income forms to receive benefits (free/reduced lunch, food stamps, etc).

There are deadbeat dads and just as many unfit mothers. Either way, as a taxpayer, I am tired of paying for anyone else's kids.

WOW !!!!

Sounds like a lot of unhappily married people posting or unhappily divorced people posting or just plain pissed of couples

Night Hawk...I'm happily divorced and now, widowed divorced (he died in 2006). Can't say we didn't know each other. We were raised in the same small rural town. The problem isn't marriage. It's the people who marry foolishly thinking that the romance will always be there. How important is romance in consideration of the lifetime commitment that marriage requires?

I never remarried because I had to face the fact that while I loved having children, I saw no need for a husband. I always knew I could raise my sons, take care of my home and own a business like any good '60's super Mom. I wouldn't recommend that to any other woman.

Every marriage has its ups and downs. If the relationship was solid, mature and had breathing room, it continued to grow and go forward. Of course, there are marriages where abuse, alcoholism or drug addiction make it impossible to commit oneself to a lifetime of that kind of obsessive behavior and all of the damage it can do mentally and physically not just to the wife but also to the children.

Peter, I have worked in social services for +20 years, and I assure you - state paid child care is not as easy to get as you think. It is based on a sliding fee, and to qualify, you have to be so far under the poverty level it's obscene. This is really a topic re: a broken system. BOY HOWDY - it is broken! Contrary to what most individuals believe, social services programs do not do much of anything to give people adequate resources. They really don't - EXAMPLE - in most states, in order to qualify for medicare - a single person has to earn less than $300/month. Well..if you work hard at minimum wage with no benefits, you work like a dog for an employer and disqualify yourself from receiving health benefits - Unless you have a child under two and/or are pregnant - this immediately disqualifies all the hard working men who do very dangerous jobs and get NO health benefits. The gross lack of assistance really hurts both men and women in this country. It's VERY complicated, and twisted. Men who make very little have a TERRIBLE time with child support. They can't survive if they pay what they should so they avoid paying. And of course, the women and children suffer because of it. ....what a ka-fuffle...

It is very sad when things like this happen. It is sadder that we as a nation have not found a way to help, but instead resort to blaming one person or another. Resources are hard to come by in this world, and I praise anyone who can maintain faith and a sense of humor in a dark hour. Carry on and look toward the light. It's still there.

Right. Germany. Enough said.

I wouldn't bash the Germans so much, they care more about education then the USA does. Friend of my dad who lives in Germany (Munich I think?) says they only have to pay $700 a semester for university. it's probably as common as it is here, just maybe more concentrated in certain areas (big cities?)

chris...What makes me think that this would never fly in the Middle East? Sorry, the door was opened there, I just had to walk through...roflmao.

This arrangement is not for people who can't stand their spouse, or have physical abuse or substance abuse issues. This arrangement will also not work if either spouse is fiscally irresponsible. The people who do this are usually those who respect their spouse but have ceased to get emotional support from them. In the past, when divorce was taboo, I"m sure many people resorted to "permanent separation" but called it sleeping in separate bedrooms and didn't formally separate. I don't think that, unless you are a conservative Christian, that there is any more Scarlet Letter syndrome about divorce. The divorce rate is 50%, and everyone knows someone who has gone through a divorce, if they haven't done so themselves.

Christina...There is one problem this article doesn't address...the significant "others". Few men will wait for a woman who is married to another man. And, though a lot of "other women" wait, in the end? They realize years of their live are passing with a man who is too childish to make adult decisions and validate her in his life.

I think men, especially, love having the absent wife. The girlfriend eventually goes away.

I think whether someone sticks around depends on whether they want to get married or not. I personally know two couples who have been living together for at least 20 years and, because they each went through bad marriages/divorces, they vowed never to marry again.

If the new relationship depends on marriage, then a permanent separation won't work. However, if the new partner never wants to get married, then the permanent separation is not an issue. It probably also depends on how close the permanently separated couple live and are involved in each other's lives. If it is the same house/town, raising children together, then the new partner might take off after a while. If, however, the permanently separated spouses haven't seen each other in years, live in different states, their children are grown, etc., then the marriage is probably not an issue at all.

I think that the situation probably depends on how much the permanent separation parties have moved on with their own personal lives. If the boyfriend/girlfriend senses that the marriage might revive, they are probably gone. Who knows, maybe the girlfriend/boyfriend is also dodging the whole marriage issue as well. You can't propose to your girlfriend if she is married to someone else, and she isn't looking at the bridal magazines either.

Hey, life isn't fair. Marriage is meant to only be abused by heterosexuals (sarcasm). Marriage is sacred and its main goal is procreation, except for when it isn't.

This is the same teabagger logic that demands smaller government (except for when I need assistance) and more privacy from government interference (unless I have a gay neighbor, in which case, his/her sex life is an open investigation). Good luck with this logic.

The problem is all the financial incentives.

If you allow gay marriage you'll have guys getting hitched with their pals.

Only way you could support it is to reduce marriage to an entirely religious symbolic thing which I think it should be.

Anybody can get married but nobody benefits financially.

I don't think God TOLD anyone that he is OK with that...

Like heterosexuals don't get married for green cards, health insurance, or other kinds of financial benefits?

I don't see the tax code changing to disregard marriage benefits. Think of all of the howling from the conservative right.

God never said he was against it either Jordie. He didn't write the bible, a human did (thought God gave him the ideas, the human still interpreted them before writing them down, so still not God's word). God created every human in his image. Personally crafted them. Are you saying someone that is attracted to the same sex was a mistake? Do that when you get to the pearly gates, I dare you. Look at God and say "wow, you didn't follow the book a human wrote! You made gay and lesbians! you're going to hell :\"

To follow up, the only thing I folllowed when I was Christian were the Ten Commandments. The only religious laws that God himself wrote.

"

When God finished speaking to Moses on Mount Sinai, he gave him two tablets of stone inscribed by the very finger of God. They contained the Ten Commandments."

Christina - that's my point. At least with heteros it's limited. If you had everyone do it the entire system would colllapse under a mountain of fraud.

God doesn't really approve of gay people if you believe the bible so some kind of civil ceremony that has no legal significance would be more appropriate.

Separation of church and state and all that...

I don't think God TOLD anyone that he is OK with that...

God talks to you, huh?

By all means, allow gays to marry so that they can be as miserable as straights.

A legal marriage is more appropriate, considering that marriage has been in every culture and was not invented by any of the three major religions of today. The churches don't have to marry anyone if they don't want to, but the government does.

To each his own. But personally, I could not stay married to someone and sleep with someone else. I guess it comes down to your morals. It's not how I see marriage. I see your point Dave. And how can you ever be free to go on with your life? Life and let live though.

You're right Dave. No fairness at all--but at least people are beginning to see that.

Dave104...Actually, gay people are the best example of true, natural marriages as they originated in humanity. Think about it. There never was a marriage rite in the caves of prehistoric men and women. They only understood a natural commitment to each other. No religious connotations, no ceremonies...just a natural bond.

What most human beings want to ignore is that they haven't really advanced as a civilization so much as contorted nature.

In PA there is a mediation group called "Divorce Done Right" and the idea is that you both meet with a lawyer who basically covers all the aspects of divorce ( child custody, division of property, etc) and both spouses figure out what works best for their situation. then the lawyer writes up an agreement that goes back to each individual lawyer for the divorce papers to be filed and finalized. We used it and it worked really well EXCEPT that my ex's lawyer kept trying to change the agreement to "protect" his interests....I think she wanted to make more money...however overall it was less stressful and way less expensive than both of us paying lawyers to fight over stuff that did not need to be fought about.

My ex and I did our own divorce. Just found the right papers, filled them out, got them certified and voila. We didn't want to take anything from one another and absolutely wanted to see each other succeed in life. We lived together while separated for 7 months while we got everything sorted and put our house on the market. We both moved to different states to build our careers and continued to help each other out financially when needed (as best we could, we didn't have much back then) for a year or so.

Linda Warren Seely...I hadn't heard of it. But then, I divorced 30 years ago. Times were different then. It was the onset of no-fault divorce. I'm a stickler for placing blame squarely on the shoulders of the guilty. So, I opted out of that type of divorce. However, I had to make concessions in order to have the divorce proceedings pass quickly through the courts....no alimony. Since I already was supporting myself, I didn't need it anyway. But, he was warned that if he skipped the state and didn't pay child support for his half of his children, I'd see to it he sat in jail if necessary. I believe child support as a federal law has been a blessing for many women. It wasn't federal law in 1980.

Interesting that keeping a house and someone else's paycheck equates to quality of life for some people.

I'm with you boy wonder--Hate to sound like a finger-wagger, but what the hell message does this send to your son?? There's no dignity in this. Pay the damn lawyer.

Wow such judgement! And interesting that you comment on her keeping the house and getting his paycheck but no comment on the cheating husband and the effect that has on the son! I think it says that these people cannot live together happily, but the father cares about his son and the mother of his child enough to make sure they are living comfortably....if he is ok with it, then why pay divorce lawyers to disrupt the arrangement!

I have to agree with the first two posts. That is sending an ugly message of dependency to your child. You, as a wife and a woman, should be outraged at your husband's infidelity and should desire nothing more than your freedom and diginity. You're not getting either of those things in this situation. By furthering your education or building on your current career, you can ease into owning your current lifestyle and remove your husband from the picture entirely. Don't wallow in this mess your husband created--find a way to leave it behind you.

Jeeya...I am in total agreement with you. Women who have so little self-respect that they would depend on their not-so-husband for a home or support prove they don't have enough belief in themselves to raise themselves out of the pit of dependency.

There is NO WAY I would have remained in a house I didn't own. When I divorced, I allowed him to keep his 15 years of equity but I paid the remaining 15 years of the mortgage and all of the rest of the associated bills on a single paycheck. No woman dares tell me that she can't do it.

"The" problem is the kids. Hopefully anybody doing this doesn't have any. What does it say about us as a society that poeple who can't stand each other don't get divorced because they'd lose health insurance, or because they simply can't afford to set up another household? That's not a real choice--esp. if, as in a lot of divorces, it's not an 'amicable' agreement.

I agree that would work a lot better for you, but the 50 other people who would pay more so you could pay less...not so much. Single payer just leads to poor coverage for everyone at a higher expense. Sucks that you have a chronic condition, but that doesn't make it everyone's issue to deal with.

Quit your complaining Liutgard

Based on your comment about financial "eligibility", you're obviously already enjoying a version of that single payer system - Medicare or Medicaid probably in your case.

Your meds might be $1300, but some little voice inside tells me the good ole taxpayer is picking up your tab.

And why doesn't price charming have a policy that you could be covered under?

He probably barely works either.

DeeP-2007029 your name should be SheeP-2007029- do some research. Canada has higher patient satisfaction, shorter wait times in emergency rooms, surgeries and office visits and over-all a higher quality of life. They have a single payer health care system, which allows them to purchase prescription drugs in bulk, passing the savings on to their citizens. That is the main reason our citizens pay $1300 rx bills, because the average American is still fighting for the right to be fleeced while the rest of the civilized world has group negotiating power and leaves us behind in a mess of our own making. I bet that you are one of many oxymorons who is against public health plans but still supports our socialized educational system. Private school vouchers are un-American right comrade? Blah-bah-bah - You are a sheep

teachfaith...or else he/she doesn't live in NJ where you pay school taxes before you have kids if you own a home and till you die if you remain in said home long after your children have children.

That old BS that someone paid for my kids to go to school is just that BS. I paid school taxes for 4 years before either of my children were born just because I owned a home. Anyone who earns 6-figures and says the can't afford their kids educations are morons who prefer someone on a lower income to help them have a bigger, more expensive home and all of the glitz and glam.

And, anyone who works in the private sector already pays for two health insurances and pensions...theirs and those of public sector employees. This, in addition, to paying for someone else's kid to go to school on half of what the educatorati earn?

Boy wonder, you are not only heartless, but ignorant. Yes, I'm on disability. Which is covered by money that goes into the system when we're working. I certainly paid Social Security taxes when I was working.

My 'price charming', as you put it, is in grad school and working. However, he is not at a job that offers medical benefits- like many of other Americans. Even if he was, have you never heard of pre-existing condition clauses? And what insurance covers meds to that amount?

teachfaith, we all pay for public schools because we all benefit from them. Next time you get upset about taxes going to schools, remember this- those kids in school now will be working in your nursing home someday. Wouldn't you prefer that they be educated? Or would you be content to have the person who measures out your meds and monitors your medical conditions be illiterate?

If sex ain't that important, STAY FRIENDS and don't marry!!! Your supposed to marry the person whom you can HAVE SEX with AND be FRIENDS WITH. Not one or the other. Sex is a form of communication, bonding and healing. People with your mindset rob those for whom SEX is important the opportunity to be with someone who is more in tune with their emotional AND sexual needs. The fact you seem to arbitarily dictate what is and is not valuable in the relationship doesn't bode well for your partner. You're supposed to give your partner what they need (hence the idea of taking a vow to do so). If you ain't gonna meet the needs of your mate like you promised, you're already divorced. That principle applies to needs for affection, communication and the like. People have needs. Don't be tellin folks what is or is not important in a relationship. If they don't agree with them, you'll deliberately not meet their needs and wonder why they left you. It's because you lied. It's because you thought you were better than them because they needed sex. My God, the arrogance...........

"I'm staying for the bennies".... sounds like legalized prostitution.. And if you don't put out... It's a trick roll.

Wow. Having trouble gettin some, Abercrombie?

How do you know Austin's spouse doesn't agree with him regarding the importance of sex in marriage? Maybe they are perfectly compatible in that area.

Go smoke a pickle Austin Bob, it suits you better.

"and neither of us got involved in another relationshio during the separation."

Ha! As far as you know.

Jesus said: "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery and the man who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery."

We do NOT understand this today...
Step 1: Divorce Your Spouse
Step 2: Remarry Another Person
Step 3: Commit Adultery

http://www.cadz.net/mdr.html

sheesh

Religious fanatics. When will it ever end? How do adults believe that silly superstitious crap?

Indeed

I'm just curious. What word of the Christian God are you quoting? Should I assume that you're trying to quote passages of the bible of Christianity, which was formed by the Roman empire around 330 AD as a tool of strengthening their empire? A book which was formed through religious and political members who decided which stories of Christ should be considered truth or heresy? (And since this official church was being founded on political grounds by the order of the Emperor, I'm sure that there weren't any editing or political agendas present...)

While I personally don't agree with the concept of indefinite seperation, that is my personal opinion. Any person is welcome to their own opinion. But to quote passages of the Bible as if they were law, especially considering that some passages have even been proven to be mis-translated over the years to the point of altering their meaning, is just kind of foolish.

You mean like God created man 10,000 years ago and in seven days? Not to change the subject but, it really pisses me off when my neighbor (little old lady 84 yrs old) sends her money each month to these religious shows on TV (so they can pray for her) and then can't afford to make her rent or buy food for the month.

bodo1152..Why does she piss you off and not the religious extortionist on TV? Seems to me YOU can do something about it if it offends you so much.

As for those religious hawkers on TV, these are people who learned early in life there's an easier way to shill people out of their money. Take a good look at them. Scrubbed cleaner than a baby's butt and mouths going as if they are possessed. It's to laugh.

I would like to know who here actually had a conversation with God about gay marriage?

Because it makes a mockery of marriage, that's why. Yeah divorce is complicated. So is life. Doesn't matter if you never marry again..you don't need his prmission for a divorce.

So what do you tell him when you come home late with your clothes and hair in disarray and "the look" on your face after a night of socializing; "honey, I was out doing my thing"!!!

AP, Commons - zdcdoc's marriage is only a mockery based on your definition. If it works for them, it is none of your business. Do you regularly police your neighbors' homes to make sure that their marriages live up to your idea of what marriages should be? Everyone gets to make their own choice about how their own marriage should work. You don't get to make the rules for everyone.

Apparently you're too dense to realize that she was attempting to show you how stupid your post was.

I've been reading through some more posts. If love is still there but not "the love", you can still be there for them even if you're divorced.

M-109...In today's world, women's salaries are much higher than 30 years ago when I divorced. Any woman who divorced 30 years ago knew she was never going to have it easy. Child support today is huge by comparison to the paltry amounts back then. And, few women in 1980 who could work got alimony. I absolutely do not believe in alimony unless there has been severe physical or mental abuse. Then, the perp should pay for the damage.

The problem with a woman as a single parent is that she knows she'll never earn what her husband does and there isn't time to keep house, take care of kids, work 2 or 3 jobs and have enough free time for herself to go back to college when she has children of school age. That's why custody needs to be shared far more than it is. It should be a federal law that the non-custodial parent spend half the amount of hours with his progeny as his former spouse. Otherwise, she gets bashed because she can't be super woman.

you're the only rational woman on this board. I agree with you

ewent - you make a good case for women NOT getting married until they are educated.

See? You should have divorced.