Reply Hey Mom! Learn more about the Gerber Life Insurance Grow-Up Plan!
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-25-2013, 04:35 PM   #281
z2akids's Avatar
z2akids
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,430
Re: Second Wives Club

If my dh were to have a breakdown and run off with some hotyoungthing I would be heartbroken. My family would really struggle. But, we would not have the added struggle of being financially broken. We would not have to rely on alimony because I did not have the ability to get out and find work. Sure, we would hurt some financially. We would need childcare at times and our income would decrease tron what it is now. But, this isn't a thread about child support. It is about alimony.

Advertisement

__________________
Jennifer
z2akids is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:37 PM   #282
vatblack's Avatar
vatblack
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,583
My Mood:
Re: Second Wives Club

Here is what I want to say on this topic that I managed to stay out of for so long:

I think alimony should be paid on a case by case basis. And I say that as a second wife who hates the amount of child support that disappears from my husband's paycheck monthly (as you are all aware of).

As for whether a SAHM is valuable to her family and whether women should stay marketable... Well, really, that is also only answerable on a case by case basis. We all know a WOHM who does it all and those who can't manage it all. Similarly we all know SAHMs whose status is a financial and social help to the family and those who does not help the family out that much.

As for staying marketable. Some people cannot stay marketable for a 1000 different reasons (even men and women are ARE in the job market run the risk of becoming absolute - e.g. desktop publishing as a career is disappearing at an alarming rate). Life happens to people in so many different variables that it is simply not that easy to say this or that should happen. Sure, it is preferable to stay current and employable and I will advocate that at any given time, but I have seen how it simply isn't always possible.

One of the biggest reasons are that when jobs become scares, the hiring criteria goes up and many people try to play catch-up with qualifications and/or experience. Then we are also living in a very unique time when jobs are disappearing and created at such an alarming rate that you can't be sure that what you train for will still be a job by the time you have graduated or worked in it for 10 years.

Therefore, I believe alimony should remain to be an option in order to help women and men out who might need it when they find themselves divorcing for whatever reason. I do believe it should be approached with caution and to give each party an amount of money that they can survive on. I don't think the paying party should be crippled by it in such a manor that he/she cannot have another marriage etc. Similarly, I do think that the receiving party should try to become independent as soon as possible (IF at all possible) so that the alimony isn't needed because it can disappear through death, cheating etc. just as easily.
__________________
Decided to close my ETSY store because of CPSA regulations that I was not aware of when I started out.
Don't want to change my avi. Love the design too much.
vatblack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:39 PM   #283
mcpforever's Avatar
mcpforever
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bama
Posts: 11,738
My Mood:
Re: Second Wives Club

It's kind of sad that a thread about alimony has turned into the SAHM vs WOHM mommy war.

Regardless of our personal choices, do we not understand that there are others who think differently about career and family than we do? Does thinking differently negate the NEED for alimony?
__________________
Melissa-Wife, mother to DS 4/02 and DD 4/07, DS 7/08 DD 7/13
ISO: my lost shaker of salt
mcpforever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:44 PM   #284
qsefthuko's Avatar
qsefthuko
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 17,853
Re: Second Wives Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belle View Post
That is just...not true. At least not in my family's case. If I died tomorrow, my DH would be up poop creek without a paddle. And he'd be the first to admit that.



But, this would be true for the working parent as well. It's not like if I die, DH just takes on all my responsibilities and gets up and goes to work in the morning. Not to mention, you seem to only be viewing this in the utilitarian sense and then extrapolating that out to a general view of SAHP'ing and mothering in general. No one is going to be more responsible for my kids than I am. No one is going to mother them better. That's a lot more than couponing and baking bread, and it seems like you don't see it that way. Which is fine, but I (and many other SAHPs) view it differently. That doesn't mean we're not aware that contingencies may arise, or that we may handle them differently than your current situation.



I'm not against keeping one's options open, but I cannot live my life in the what ifs. It would kill me. I have to make decisions for my family based on what I know to be the best for us. That includes the long run. If my husband has a mental breakdown and runs off with some hotyoungthing, I will be devastated and destroyed. But I can't live my life in anticipation of that. I don't pretend that bad things can't happen, and I do have some options afforded to me in that case, but having a career is not one of them at this point in time.



This kind of makes more sense. If the above is really what you think being a SAHP means, then of course one would need more meaning in their lives! Or something. I'm not trying to get personal with you, but my life as a SAHM and wife goes so much beyond the utilitarian aspects and way you describe it, I guess it's hard to explain. But if it were just couponing and baking bread that I was doing around here, then yeah, I'd feel pretty unfulfilled.



It's funny, because for us, me being a SAHM is the exact same thing. He knows that if he's deployed, working long hours, or otherwise overextended that I am able to take care of everything minus the income portion of our family. To both of us, that is invaluable.



Well, all of those things except full time childcare, right? The feeding, the educating, the nurturing, etc. I mean, I can't be at a job and do all those things, but kudos if you've found something with that flexibility.



Can you see the condescension you're projecting though? I mean, for a lot of us the decision to be at home with our kids isn't about money or the most utilitarian way to run our families. It isn't about martyrdom either. It's about what values we want for our families and how they work well according to our own priorities. If I stayed at my job we could be making so much money. More than double our current income. But my kids would not have me. We'd have a bigger house, more things. But then again, if we didn't give away 25% of our income to charity we could have so much more money. We could have a bigger house, more things. I realize that not trying to earn as much money as possible is somewhat counter cultural, but I don't consider it martyrdom, and I don't think I've lost my identity. I'm still me. And I could have a lot more "luxury" if I wasn't at home. But there are things that we prioritize differently, and not just according to a more money = better standard. If I really thought that a salary would be better for my kids, then I would go to work outside the home. But just because I don't think that doesn't mean I'm nailing myself to a cross or unable to form an identity.

I think it's sad (really, genuinely not just "aww" passive agressive) that you say that your salary would have been more beneficial to your babies than your time with them.



Oh, please. The whole reason there is argument is because of diverse points of view. When someone comes on a board of moms of young children and says that SAHMs are "adjuncts" to their families, you don't think that hackles might be a tad raised? I tried to phrase my reply to that particular post in the most dispassionate way possible, but at this point it almost seems like trolling for the most offensive things you could say to a bunch of moms who prioritize staying home with their children over income.



Do we have a pot/kettle smiley? Or are you admitting that your own worldview might be leaving something out?
I think all of this covers pretty well anything further I had to say for now. Anything more will have to wait. I have to get my toddler in the house. A weeks meals for my husband cooked and frozen(I am going out of town), laundry finished, and tonights dinner cooked.
qsefthuko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:46 PM   #285
ulawolf's Avatar
ulawolf
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: michigan
Posts: 3,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by z2akids View Post
If my dh were to have a breakdown and run off with some hotyoungthing I would be heartbroken. My family would really struggle. But, we would not have the added struggle of being financially broken. We would not have to rely on alimony because I did not have the ability to get out and find work. Sure, we would hurt some financially. We would need childcare at times and our income would decrease tron what it is now. But, this isn't a thread about child support. It is about alimony.
Me too and I dont work..just sayin

Eta to add working is not the end all beat all. And I also know more women who work that get alimony than those, who dont. I get needing to support yourself and your kids. I dont get your horrible way of saying sahms are, not a vital part of, the family.

Last edited by ulawolf; 05-25-2013 at 04:50 PM.
ulawolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:48 PM   #286
drunkenmonkeysmommy1's Avatar
drunkenmonkeysmommy1
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: right outside of Memphis ,TN
Posts: 5,675
My Mood:
Quote:
Originally Posted by z2akids
If my dh were to have a breakdown and run off with some hotyoungthing I would be heartbroken. My family would really struggle. But, we would not have the added struggle of being financially broken. We would not have to rely on alimony because I did not have the ability to get out and find work. Sure, we would hurt some financially. We would need childcare at times and our income would decrease tron what it is now. But, this isn't a thread about child support. It is about alimony.
Child support only goes so far. And you would need more than just child care AT TIMES. Write down every time you leave your house with out kids. I am betting you rely on your husband's presence more than you think.
Alimony does not usually get awarded to women that are financially secure with out their husband. It is sometimes not even awarded to those that would not be great off. So using those cases as examples are really pointless.
Alimony is for women that put their lives on hold( financially ), so they could support their husbands career. Many work their tails off to put them through law school/ medical school/ business degrees, etc with the understanding they would be able to be supported by the career that they helped them achieve.
__________________
http://www.diaperswappers.com/forum/...0#post15969570
wet bags,snack bags,super hero capes, dino tails, tutus ,crayon rolls, tote bags,cloth diaper key chains,kid's aprons, car roll ups, and much more!
drunkenmonkeysmommy1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:48 PM   #287
EmmaGM's Avatar
EmmaGM
Registered Users
seller
seller
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 7,907
My Mood:
Can we talk about how wohms are awarded alimony too? Its not like only us life sucking stay at home bonbon eaters are collecting alimony.

If you contribute say $30k to your household and your husband contributes $100k, then you are awarded alimony to balance that out a little bit.. Then what? You're not working hard enough, not smart enough, didn't get enough education?
__________________
Emma H&T Mama to Faolan 6/7/12 & Malachy 1/29/14
Mary born into heaven at 14 weeks
Cautiously expecting #4 10/6/16
EmmaGM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:48 PM   #288
Icryinbaseball's Avatar
Icryinbaseball
Registered Users
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Rockford Ill.
Posts: 2,769
Re: Second Wives Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcpforever View Post
It's kind of sad that a thread about alimony has turned into the SAHM vs WOHM mommy war.

Regardless of our personal choices, do we not understand that there are others who think differently about career and family than we do? Does thinking differently negate the NEED for alimony?
It is sad that people feel that those who feel that alimony is needed are just fat lazy lumps who dont do anything. It is sad that some people simply cannot further their education or find a better paying job for whatever their reason is.

But on that note my husband had the chance to buy into a partnership in a company that his income 10 years ago would a little over 5x's what it is now. The company has grown A LOT so I am sure his income would be even more. We chose together for him to join the Army instead and do what he loves over being rich. Are there times that I wish we would have taken the inital hit and went with the 250K a year, of course. But money doesnt hold value to us as much as it does to others.

And if my husband chooses to leave me after all he has put me through then yes I would expect some sort of income to live on. Because he would be leaving me knowing that I am unable to work and support myself and the kids. He is not going to leave me high and dry.
Icryinbaseball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:48 PM   #289
z2akids's Avatar
z2akids
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 6,430
Re: Second Wives Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mama*Kim View Post
On this point, in many cases, this is not the simple option it used to be. I substitute teach in a culinary school at a public college. Wait lists for almost every program in the school are around a year long. For the culinary program, its more like a year and a half. Years ago, my husband qualified for a worker retraining program through unemployment. He still waited more than six months before there was enough funding for him to go, and the waits are even longer now. I'm not saying people shouldn't try, but to make it sound like the money and training will just be handed out if you ask is untrue. Not to mention that almost all aid programs require a minimum of a 50% course load to qualify for any kind of aid, and many technical programs are 32-40 hour per week programs. Who's paying for childcare while these moms are in school?

DH and I have chosen a nontraditional schedule. If I worked full time M-F, my income would barely cover child care. Instead, I work nights and weekends. Sure, sometimes its tough, but I'm able to work less hours since I'm not having to pay a day care or babysitter. I find we value our family time together more because its limited. I do agree with you to some extent that there are other options, but its not as easy as you seem to think.
You plan and continue to work toward it. While your baby is young, you take your core courses through distance learning. You applly early on to your program so that you are ready to start when a space opens up.

DH and I made the decision. When my youngesst was 6 months old that I would not go back to law. I began taking online classes through my community college. I applied to the nursing program as soon as I had met the requirements. I continued to take nonlinear classes until my waitlist spot opened up. I planned my schedule like some people.talk about plannning their budget. I did have to oat for childcare from time to time for clinicals, but my DH worked his schedule around my clinicals and a couple of times my MIL came and helped. It was tough. There were plenty of days where I drove to school with the kids and DH met me there so I could attend a night class while he took them home.

Now I work full time nights. I was practical when I chose my new caterer. I made a decision in my career choice in part because I knee I would have some flexibility. I miss very little. I sleep while the kids are in school. They don't go to childcare. I rarely miss a sporting event and when I have to DH is there as well. There are other nursing jobs where I could make more, but money isn't the be all and end all. Financial stability is very important to us and sometimes there are sacrifices to ensure it.

I am no longer my kids primary caregivers. DH and I have the jouly of sharing in that responsibility. He puts them to bed and gets then up when I am working. Honestly, it has been good for all of us.
__________________
Jennifer
z2akids is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2013, 04:59 PM   #290
soonerfan
Registered Users
seller
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,754
My Mood:
Re: Second Wives Club

Quote:
Originally Posted by Belle View Post

Can you see the condescension you're projecting though? I mean, for a lot of us the decision to be at home with our kids isn't about money or the most utilitarian way to run our families. It isn't about martyrdom either. It's about what values we want for our families and how they work well according to our own priorities. If I stayed at my job we could be making so much money. More than double our current income. But my kids would not have me. We'd have a bigger house, more things. But then again, if we didn't give away 25% of our income to charity we could have so much more money. We could have a bigger house, more things. I realize that not trying to earn as much money as possible is somewhat counter cultural, but I don't consider it martyrdom, and I don't think I've lost my identity. I'm still me. And I could have a lot more "luxury" if I wasn't at home. But there are things that we prioritize differently, and not just according to a more money = better standard. If I really thought that a salary would be better for my kids, then I would go to work outside the home. But just because I don't think that doesn't mean I'm nailing myself to a cross or unable to form an identity.

Absolutely, part of my post is condescending. The sarcasm is directed right at those who act as though moms who work are somehow neglecting their babies, the ones who post things like, "Sure, it takes a lot of sacrifice on my part to do EVERYTHING for my entire family to keep it running--but I will because NOTHING is more important than being here with my babies!! I feel sorry for those who think money is more important than family!" If that doesn't apply to you, then neither does my sarcastic comment.

I think it's sad (really, genuinely not just "aww" passive agressive) that you say that your salary would have been more beneficial to your babies than your time with them.
I never said my salary would have been more beneficial to my babies. I said that *financially* my salary would have benefitted my family more than my best days of couponing, cooking, avoiding daycare, etc. FINANCIALLY.If you ignore that part, it changes the meaning entirely.



Oh, please. The whole reason there is argument is because of diverse points of view. When someone comes on a board of moms of young children and says that SAHMs are "adjuncts" to their families, you don't think that hackles might be a tad raised? I tried to phrase my reply to that particular post in the most dispassionate way possible, but at this point it almost seems like trolling for the most offensive things you could say to a bunch of moms who prioritize staying home with their children over income.



Do we have a pot/kettle smiley? Or are you admitting that your own worldview might be leaving something out?
You'd have to be blind to not realize that the poster who used the word "adjunct" was using it only to refer to finances. She even addressed that explicitly. While it might not be the least offensive term that could be used, I see her intended meaning. And how is the bolded not the exact type of condescending martyrdom I referenced earlier? Finally, I'd never be so arrogant and pious as to assume my worldview was comprehensive. However, the difference is that I freely acknowledge that. I'm a reflective enough person to say, again having been a SAHM for many years who only recently returned to the workforce outside of nap or bedtime, that while my time with my babies was amazing, wonderful, and important, it would have been extremely imprudent for me to entirely neglect my resume. That's all I said. That is all z2akids said.
I don't think it matters how long someone has been a member of DS (but post count alone is not an isolated factor). The point I was making was something entirely different, and I still maintain that I think it would be interesting to see the correlation.


ETA: I think staying home with kids is amazing for those who have the opportunity. I also think it is important to be able to support yourself and your offspring without any help. I don't think SAHM vs. WOHM is an argument worth having, but I advocate self-reliance for everyone.
__________________
Many things to many people.

Last edited by soonerfan; 05-25-2013 at 05:02 PM.
soonerfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Copyright 2005 - 2014 Escalate Media. All Rights Reserved.