Thinking on this

If you have been in a relationship/married and have had children, sadly it does not work out and you separate. Would you have any expectation of maintenances for your self ( maintenance for children been take for granted ).

I never had an expectation of any personal maintenance after all why would I am an adult and can earn my own living, but I do know women who did have an expectation of some sort of personal maintenance from the ex partner.

KamiKazeKitten

No.





Why on earth should I?

ElleEm

Great idea for a thread!

I have always had a problem with the idea of spousal maintenance. Particularly in the way it seems to be in America- the entitlement thing. Even when celebs get married and there are pre-nuptual agreements with an agreed amount for if they stay married X amount of years. I would never want pocket money off an ex!!!

I do think it's different for our generation though. When my parents got married, my mother took the traditinal role and worked in the home raising the children. She hasn't worked outside the home in over 40 years, she wouldn't have a clue what to do. In those sorts of situations where it was a mutual agreement between husband and wife that she wouldn't work, some maintenance should be paid.

If a woman is capable of being financially independant, then she should be.

Well often in a divorce settlement there is an element of spousal maintenance its a common enough occurrence, The one woman I do know who got it had not been working outside the home. I still think there should be an expectation that you get a job and supports yourself, both parents should support the children.

I am strongly pro women working outside the home for a variety of reasons.

Stheno

Spousal maintenance is part of the areas that have to be covered and agreed as part of seperation/divorce here. It is entirely seperate to child maintenance, and can be ordered to be paid in the District Court up to a maximum of €500 per week. It can be greater in the Higher Courts.

It applies equally to both genders, it is not soley there for women to claim from men.

mariaalice

mariaalice wrote: »

I am strongly pro women working outside the home for a variety of reasons.

Any woman who doesn't have her own money is uniquely vulnerable.

In my parents generation most families luckily saw the fathers income as the families income, but there were families where the sole income remained the fathers, and the women were completely under their financial power.

No adult should have that sort of power over another, its too easy to abuse.

Stheno

With women getting more and more involved in the workforce, and the pay gap closing, should the possibility of having to pay spousal maintenance in the event of a marital breakdown not something women should consider if they are the greater earner?

Stheno

Stheno wrote: »

With women getting more and more involved in the workforce, and the pay gap closing, should the possibility of having to pay spousal maintenance in the event of a marital breakdown not something women should consider if they are the greater earner?

If spousal maintenance is on the table at all, it should work both ways.

Stheno

Candie wrote: »

If spousal maintenance is on the table at all, it should work both ways.

Yes, but you'd be amazed how few women actually realise or understand that in the event of a marital breakdown, they may be liable to pay spousal maintenance if they are the higher earner and their former partner chooses to pursue it. And it has to be clearly articulated what has been agreed in terms of maintenance in any seperation/divorce agreement, including full disclosure of the financial status of both parties. In some very rare cases, even if the less well off partner chooses not to pursue it, the courts can order it paid based on the information they have.

There is (imo) very much a perception out there that spousal maintenance is something men pay to their former wives.

Wibbs

Stheno wrote: »

There is (imo) very much a perception out there that spousal maintenance is something men pay to their former wives.

+1 I've known one example of it in my own life, but Boards folks have shown me at least three other examples of it. And I've known more than a couple of examples where the woman didn't want any financial input after a divorce/separation and a few on here reinforced that. Times are changing for the better and I don't mean just for men, I mean it in the sense that women are more and more becoming financially and personally independent and that is reflected in the above examples.

Stheno

Wibbs wrote: »

+1 I've known one example of it in my own life, but Boards folks have shown me at least three other examples of it. And I've known more than a couple of examples where the woman didn't want any financial input after a divorce/separation and a few on here reinforced that. Times are changing for the better and I don't mean just for men, I mean it in the sense that women are more and more becoming financially and personally independent and that is reflected in the above examples.

Strangely I have in the past paid maintenance to a former partner, and know three other women who still do.

An interesting thing that very few people think/know about/consider in my opinion are the recent changes to legislation for civil partnership which assumes that after a certain amount of time (five years no children/three (I think) with) you have the same rights maintenance wise as married people, even down to how Revenue treat it.

As women in their twenties tend to be on parity/earning more than men, I suspect this will become a more visible issue in years to come.

Vojera

No, I wouldn't. I can earn my own money! In my current situation, I'm job seeking and my partner supports us both, but if we separated I wouldn't expect her to continue to do so. Why should she?

How does it work, anyway? How do they decide how much you have to pay? And how long does it last? Until they remarry? Or until you remarry? Or until pension age? Pardon my ignorance, I only know people who pay child maintenance, not spousal maintenance.

Stheno

Vojera wrote: »

No, I wouldn't. I can earn my own money! In my current situation, I'm job seeking and my partner supports us both, but if we separated I wouldn't expect her to continue to do so. Why should she?

How does it work, anyway? How do they decide how much you have to pay? And how long does it last? Until they remarry? Or until you remarry? Or until pension age? Pardon my ignorance, I only know people who pay child maintenance, not spousal maintenance.

THey've no real guidelines, it's annoyingly vague, it states something like the party seeking maintenance shouldn't suffer a substantial deterioration in standard of living due to the marriage/relationship ending.

They have guidelines of a sort that are unseen.

You can be told to pay up to 500e a week in the lowest court, and it's unlimited after that.

It last until the person receiving the maintenance remarries/dies.

Give you an example of one case, woman earning 95k, husband unemployed for three years. She shelled out €750 per month for him to stay in the family home and moved out to a smaller house.

Another: Woman earning 50k, husband 20k, she shelled out €300 per month in maintenance.
No children involved in either case.

I know of another few including my own.

Now the flip side is the impact on men emotionally, it's a relatively new phenomenon to have women pay maintenance, and divorce/seperation has a terribly negative impact on men in terms of mental illness/suicide.

How much worse must it be for men with that mindset to end up dependant on successful ex-wives? What stops them getting jobs, and this is meant for men and women, is it being used to being looked after? Is it a sense of entitlement?

meeeeh

If the couple agree one of the parents would stay at home and take care of the kids and not progress in their profession and the other one has some high flying job then yes you are entitled to something. If it would be in another country where both parents are always expected to work then I'd say no. But in Ireland where quite a few people sacrifice their job to take care of the children then yes. It also depends how much the other partner earns. If he or she is on low or avarage income there is no point.

Vojera

Stheno wrote: »

...

That's pretty crappy! It's hard to argue that you're paying too much or whatever if they don't have a specific guideline to follow. It seems pretty arbitrary. Presumably it's subject to review if the higher-earning partner has a change of circumstances?

What if the relationship ends due to the fault of the lower-earning partner (e.g. infidelity). Are they still entitled to claim maintenance? That would send me into a blind rage >_<

I think you're right, I think there are a lot of fellas who would find it demeaning to be paid maintenance from their ex-partner. I'm sure there are women who would feel that way too, but I think that collectively we still have the mindset that the man should be the breadwinner and look after the woman.

Lia_lia

Ha! I didn't even know such a thing existed.

When my parents split up my Dad never gave my Mother money for us even. The odd birthday and Christmas present...but that's it

Stheno

Stheno wrote: »

civil partnership which assumes that after a certain amount of time (five years no children/three (I think) with) you have the same rights maintenance wise as married people, even down to how Revenue treat it.

Legal civil partnership between same sex people?....or is this partnership as a consequence of co-habitation?

Stheno

Moonbaby wrote: »

Legal civil partnership between same sex people?....or is this partnership as a consequence of co-habitation?

Co-habitation, not civil partnership, that's classed as the same as marriage in terms of rights.

There is a redress scheme for co-habiting couples in the event they break up.

I mix up cohabitation rights and civil partnership as the act that covers both is the same

Stheno

Stheno wrote: »

Co-habitation, not civil partnership, that's classed as the same as marriage in terms of rights.

There is a redress scheme for co-habiting couples in the event they break up.

I mix up cohabitation rights and civil partnership as the act that covers both is the same

That is really scary.
At least if you were married, you made a considered choice to bind yourself together financially.

Stheno

Moonbaby wrote: »

That is really scary.
At least if you were married, you made a considered choice to bind yourself together financially.

It's seriously stupid when you consider that after a co-habiting couple split one may be liable to pay maintenance, but when together they are treated as individuals by Revenue, and couples for the purpose of social welfare assessment.

vitani

Stheno wrote: »

With women getting more and more involved in the workforce, and the pay gap closing, should the possibility of having to pay spousal maintenance in the event of a marital breakdown not something women should consider if they are the greater earner?

That's the main reason I wish prenups were valid in Ireland. I'm single, and on a low salary at the moment, but as my career progresses, it should increase. The thought of having to pay maintenance to an ex bothers me. Equally, I wouldn't want to receive it.

My daughter's father pays maintenance for her, and that money goes into a separate bank account, and I make sure every penny goes on her, that I don't benefit from it at all.