CAR, I DID play with Turbo Tax last night but am now back to finishing up two more court filings before I can get Joe and Jane’s tax return completed. (I’m going to assume their oldest is in Kindergarten half-day.)
I just wanted to respond to my comments that you are taking umbrage with.
Firstly, if you read my comments about SAHP’s I stated that I was aware that there are some good FT “household mgrs” out there (you?) but in my personal experience with “friends” (most of my friends are/were “worker-bees”), neighbors and some family members, I just had not seen it. Instead I’ve seen obviously depressed “homemakers” who are addicted to alcohol, tobacco, gambling and shopping (or a combination thereof) and can’t see their way clear to mop the floor at least once every five years, take out the trash more than once a month or put their piled-up dirty laundry into their washing machine and turn it on.
Both FIH and scaredy have mentioned on this thread that they have seen same or similar and they’re likely not the only ones.
It’s one thing if this segment of the population is “retired” (with no minor children living in their residence) but quite another when they are attempting to raise minor children in the cesspool that they call “home.” Although not illegal (unless someone calls CPS on them and their kids end up being removed from the home), I feel that this behavior in adults amounts to child neglect and causes so many health issues for their kids and thus, is indicative of poor character in the parent.
Yes, not regularly removing trash from the home is a form of “hoarding,” which could be called untidy, messy or filthy. I’ve seen it all, first-hand, in households where the presumed “homemaker” has all the time in the world to “manage their household” but choose not to.
The way zk framed his posts here, especially the one where he felt he couldn’t entertain as he wanted to in a home he especially upgraded to do so (at great expense) spoke to me as someone who was frustrated with their spouse’s demands in this regard to which they (voluntarily?) acquiesced. It is not for me or anyone else to decide if zk is happy or not. I believe he stated somewhere here that he’d been married for 18 years. 18 years is a l-o-o-o-ong time to have not “traveled” or “stayed in a hotel.” (He clearly stated he hadn’t “traveled” since he’d been married.) To the reader, it sounds like he’s been (voluntarily?) incarcerated. I don’t personally know zk (to know whether he was joking here) so can only take his words at face value.
A very large portion of American adults (35 – 40%?) have been divorced at some point in their lives (esp boomers and beyond, many of whom married young). So, divorce is a reality among our peers and maybe us. A portion of those people have been divorced two or more times. I do not judge anyone for deciding to divorce and the “stigma” of being divorced has been gone for decades. But we all need to be honest with ourselves here. I believe a lot more people would choose to divorce if it weren’t for the financial ramifications of doing so. I do know that in CA, one thing is for certain. That is, the lower earner of the parties (or the non-earner) very often cannot and will not be able to support themselves (and their child[ren], if any) in the manner which they were accustomed while married … or even support themselves at all if they don’t work or otherwise have their own independent income. Even if the lower earner/non-earner party is eligible to receive awards of spousal and/or child support and the higher earner makes in excess of $200K annually, the lower earner still cannot support themselves properly unless they receive a lump sum award (or paid-off RE to live in) in lieu of SS, manage their investments properly and begin FT training/work immediately, so as not to (quickly) deplete their savings. This is because after the (much) higher earner’s income differential is factored in by the court, the SS/CS guidelines become subjective and negotiable.
Several lower-earner/non-earner types have utilized my services in the past for document preparation because they did not yet have an order in place for attorney fees and could not initially afford an attorney to file or answer their Petition and Summons. They were from all walks of life and had estranged spouses who made anywhere from $40K to $250K. I can safely say that ALL of them ended up moving in with local relatives in order to litigate their divorces and have a place to keep their children on their timeshare days. All but two are still living with same relatives up to 10 years later. All but two have minor children left in the home. One is now renting a room in a friend’s home. The other one whose children are grown is still living with their (now elderly) parents. I feel that their problems for failure to move on in life after divorce stem from mismanagement of their settlement funds (if awarded) and/or failure to obtain and keep employment.
My (limited) experience working on family law cases (I primarily prepare law and motion filings for civil lit) has taught me very well that it is utter folly for a married parent to leave the FT workforce (if they are otherwise qualified in a line of work) for a long period of time (5+ years) in order to care for child(ren) who do not have special needs. Divorce can happen to anybody at any time and often comes as a surprise to one party. Since CA is a no-fault state, the party who filed for a divorce and wants one will be granted one, regardless of what the other party wants. FWIW, the reasons for my own divorce had nothing to do with any party being a spendthrift, infidel or “messy.”
The reason the divorce rates are higher in some “flyover states” than CA, in particular, is because it is much cheaper there for both parties to live separately, plain and simple. I see that some of these same states are now mandating proof of attending premarital counseling before a marriage license is issued and offering marriage-license applicants other premarital contracts (such as obtaining counseling before divorce is contemplated) before a divorce can be filed.
I know that if I someday remarry, there will be a prenup in place months before marriage and our (separate and together) estate planning will already be completed. I won’t mingle finances, except for 1/2 of the “household fund” (utils, food, property taxes, fire ins, etc). If I end up purchasing a residence with a partner, we will each pay 1/2 cash for it and will take title as “joint tenants” (if living in CA). I won’t take out a mortgage with anyone else and won’t share legal ownership of my vehicle (my spouse can drive it) or any other assets I have and will not comingle them. My kids deserve an inheritance (if I have anything left) and so would my partner’s. If I move into a partner’s home (or they move into mine), I won’t ask to be put on title to their property and I won’t put them on title to mine.
I know I am not alone in my views here … not by a long shot.
I’ve actually seen cases where prematurely-disinherited (accidentally or on purpose) adult kids later made up credible-sounding stories accusing the surviving step-parent of sexually abusing them when they were minors (as retaliation for not getting any of their parent’s estate). Hence, we have a portion (5-10%?) of PC 290 registrants in residence in CA from all walks of life who were wrongly or erroneously technically convicted of a felony for a variety of reasons. These people are still being stigmatized by the public 40+ years after they served their time and/or paid off their fines and restitution. I feel that the lifetime registration requirement is ridiculous for one-time non-violent offenders.
There are frequently two sides to every story and a lot of shades of grey, colored by each individual’s perspective based upon their personal experiences. The only way to avoid that is to be crystal clear in your speaking and writing.
