Divorcing PPR and child maintenance

I responded to your posts because you were advising the OP to "destroy" his ex-wife and "go to war" on her.

You wanted him to tell his young children in detail about their mother's wrongdoing, no matter how harmful this might be to them. You wanted him to give up his job and default on the mortgage so the house would be repossessed - which ironically would destroy his credit rating, not hers. .

Basically, your posts are a lesson in what NOT to do in a divorce proceeding. None of that is good or helpful advice, no matter how outraged you are on his behalf.

Now, I'm done responding to you.

It's because it's a bit mental

Not saying this is what happened here at all but I believe in general people should be very very careful about who they choose to spend their lives with.

This may be obvious to a lot of people but it definitely isnt to all.

Ive seen plenty of horror shows in my town where lads have gotten women pregnant when drunk or have hit the age of 30, panicked and ended up with a complete wrongun. Always ends in tears as they havent spent enough time getting to know the person to catch the red flags.

Number 1 common denominators are serious alcohol dependency and Daddy issues. If you notice either of these before having kids, getting married or buying property then turn, run as fast as your legs can carry you and never look back.

Of course the inverse is true for women seeking potential partners but based on the excellent information in this thread its much more in the mans interest to be sure about a future partner unless they want to end up desolate without a bean to their name!

Nobody does well out of a divorce.

But if we're going to get gender specific, there is a cautionary tale for women here, too.

No woman should ever, EVER, give up her independence, sacrifice her own career, or put all her financial security in the hands of a man.

I have met so many women in their late thirties or forties who trustingly, foolishly, gave up their own careers, sacrificed their own career progression and future earning potential to stay home and raise the children and support their husband's career progression, only to be traded in for a younger model, when she was no longer exciting enough or dynamic enough for her husband.

And then she is faced with the same crap as has been flung around this thread - "she never contributed". "She should go back to work full time and pay 50:50" (after years out of the workforce, and basically starting again having to retrain, and with reduced earning capacity).

The OP may be paying more of the costs for his family at the moment, but at least his ex-wife is in employment.

It would actually be a lot worse for him, if she wasn't.

All fair points.

I find the "if she didn't work it would be worse for him" idea a bit redundant though. Same goes the other way. You can always point to a worse situation and tell someone to be grateful for their current raw deal.

It seems to be an all or nothing e.g. "stop saying home parenting is worth nothing". Im not saying that at least.

Im asking is the law fair in this country? Is there a fair split going on here? This man is nearly bust with whats happening here. I find it very heavily weighted in one persons favour.

I don't think the law is as unfair or as biased towards women, as some make it out to be.

And it would be worse for the OP if his ex-wife wasn't working. He would be liable for spousal maintenance too, if she wasn't.

And in fairness, after expenses the OP still has more than half of his income left most months.

It will all come down to what the court decides about the property division.

So are we conceding its a bit biased towards women?

If he didnt work she'd be paying the mortgage unless she wants to sell up. I.e. she'd be worse off. Like I said redundant.

See his post above. He cant even cover rent. Shes clearing nearly 3k a month. Wheres the "In fairness" in that?

I agree on the property division but that's a while away yet. Not much use to him at the moment couch surfing at his parents.

No I didn't.

You're asking me what's fair - let me ask you this.

How to you propose to make a combined income that used to support one household, magically stretch to support two?

And no, we actually don't have the relevant figures. We know how much she has coming in (and it is quite a bit less than the OP does). We don't know what the weekly outgoings are.

There will still be food, utilities and all the other bills associated with running a home to pay.

Yes. Friend's sister - 3 kids. Divorced. She stayed in the house with the kids until youngest 23 as was in Uni. That child was 2 when they split - so 21 years he's had to wait to get his 50% of house and it doesn't happen automatically overnight, you have to go to court over it again etc. Now it's hassle as 2 of the kids still live at home and haven't the type of income for rent/buy. So he'd be making his kids homeless:ish (I assume they'd figure something out eventually).

The problem in Ireland is that 1 semi-d doesn't equal 2 flats....