My husband wants to hire a nanny, instead of pay alimonty, I'm SAHM for 4 years in FL

[jasherm18]

My husband is a physician, high income around $500k this year (gaurenteed $600k in next two years) and I am a SAHM who has previously been working for 7 years post college before staying at home to raise our kids. I met him as a freshman in college, been working to support him through 100% of medical school, 5 years of residency, a fellowship and now over two years of his practice... 12 years of marriage and 15 years together. I have been at home with the first child from 2yrs old to present (now 6.5yrs old) and the youngest from birth to now, 2.5 years old.

 

My husband would rather hire a nanny, as he put it at 60hrs a week or more and about $20 an hour (his number he tossed out not mine), instead of allowing me to continue to be a primary caregiver. I am willing to continue to be flexible with his schedule, get a place within a couple miles of my current residence, and continue to make sure the kids are taken care of as they have been. Calculating out his number per hour that's $20 x 60 hrs a week x 52 weeks or $62,400. Child support is approx $1900/mo based on his income.

 

My lawyer doesn't know if the courts will allow this to happen or not. If the case in not allowing me to I have to go back to work which I'm fine to do, but then we have a nanny raising our kids and not a parent.

 

I have had trouble finding any articles or data saying kids would be best to continue with a parent. He's going to pay someone something either to me as 'alimony' or a nanny as 'salary'. I think I should have the option to at least get my youngest to school age. Child support here in FL is a straight calculation, it's really alimony that's in the air as he just thinks I haven't contributed.

 

Anyone else have this issue come up?

[Chi townD]

That's a toss up. You were a SAHM and if he were to hire a nanny, that would allow you to find employment or go back to school and pursue a career for yourself. He would be affording you the opportunity to get back up on your own two feet as a single individual. At least, that's how his lawyer will present the case to the judge, and a judge might not find that unreasonable. Because, you're probably NOT going to sell the judge on you staying home with the kids so a parent can raise them. He/she have been sitting on the bench long enough to know that there are thousands of single mom's out there in the world that are working two jobs just to make ends meet because of deadbeat Dad's.

 

 

Who filed for the divorce anyway?

[DivorcedDad123]

I think alimony in Florida has changed,and it's not a slam dunk anymore.

If you're able to work,the court might give you a "rehabilative alimony" until you're on your feet ,or for a certain amount of time.You might want to look into that.

That said,he got off easy on the child support. I pay close to that and don't make anywhere near $500K. I'd check to see if there's a 0 missing in there.

[stillafool]

That's a toss up. You were a SAHM and if he were to hire a nanny, that would allow you to find employment or go back to school and pursue a career for yourself. He would be affording you the opportunity to get back up on your own two feet as a single individual. At least, that's how his lawyer will present the case to the judge, and a judge might not find that unreasonable. Because, you're probably NOT going to sell the judge on you staying home with the kids so a parent can raise them. He/she have been sitting on the bench long enough to know that there are thousands of single mom's out there in the world that are working two jobs just to make ends meet because of deadbeat Dad's.

 

 

Who filed for the divorce anyway?

 

I'm sure alot of single moms would kill for this opportunity. I can also understand you wanting to be SAHM. It's just that you are going to be single and will need some type of career so you can take care of yourself later on. Luckily your exH makes enough money so your kids won't be deprived of anything while you get back on your feet. I know you may not see it now but this could be a blessing.

[WasOtherWoman]

I think alimony in Florida has changed,and it's not a slam dunk anymore.

If you're able to work,the court might give you a "rehabilative alimony" until you're on your feet ,or for a certain amount of time.You might want to look into that.

That said,he got off easy on the child support. I pay close to that and don't make anywhere near $500K. I'd check to see if there's a 0 missing in there.

 

Yup, that child support number is not nearly in line with a $500K salary. Although, most doctors don't make anywhere near that anymore anyway. You might want to look further into that calculation to make sure your kids are getting all that they are entitled to.

[EverySunset]

Yup, that child support number is not nearly in line with a $500K salary. Although, most doctors don't make anywhere near that anymore anyway. You might want to look further into that calculation to make sure your kids are getting all that they are entitled to.

 

You may want to reconsider your atty. WOW is right. See:

 

Chapter 61 Section 30 - 2010 Florida Statutes - The Florida Senate

 

These are specific guidelines may not apply to your case, or they may.

 

Per this chart, the base minimum for support of two children with a single parents income like your STBXH is 2200+ in Florida. And THEN you multiply 7.5% of his monthly net over 10,000. So if he makes say, 45k a month, the first 10k = $2,200 or so then 7.5% of 35k (so about $2,625?) added to the $2,200 for a total of about $4,825ish?

 

I wouldn't be half so worried about alimony as getting the correct child support. PLEASE find an atty comfortable with litigating a high figure spouse, I agree that the figure you stated seems way too low.

Edited October 22, 2014 by EverySunset

[jasherm18]

Well when it comes to the child support I used this:

 

Calculator |

 

I am figuring we might be at a me 4-5 days, him 2-3 days, so that puts the custody primarily in my household. I came up with me at 208 and him at 157 days a year it was $1700-1900/mo depending on my income. I'm not familiar with the other calculation. His net take home is $13k a paycheck or $28k a month.

[DivorcedDad123]

Your income will be imputed to minimum wage, more than likely.

Using your calculator,and not adjusting for any medical deductions,etc.,,

I came up with around $5k per month for two kids,imputing your income to minimum wage.

[oldshirt]

This forum is really not the place for legal advice, that is for your attorney(s)

 

However here is another thing to consider, many courts are really coming down on physicians and lawyers and nuclear physicists etc that are supported by their spouses for 12+ years while they are in school and them dump them once they are out of school and bringing home large incomes.

 

Many courts almost view it as the medical license and it's associated income potential as marital property.

 

I agree with the earlier poster who suggested you find a lawyer that has expertise in litigating divorces of high-income professionals.

 

A garden variety divorce attorney that handles regular working and middle class divorces may be waaaay out of his or her league here.

 

Your STBX has surely hired some big guns to represent him - you need to do the same.

[EverySunset]

Well when it comes to the child support I used this:

 

Calculator |

 

I am figuring we might be at a me 4-5 days, him 2-3 days, so that puts the custody primarily in my household. I came up with me at 208 and him at 157 days a year it was $1700-1900/mo depending on my income. I'm not familiar with the other calculation. His net take home is $13k a paycheck or $28k a month.

 

Net and take home are different. Very different, and it goes by net. Why are you doing these calcs not your atty?

 

We can't say this enough, get somebody who knows high income divorce cases or your ex will clean up here. His atty will be fluent in this kind of case. Shouldn't yours be? Yet yours sounds overwhelmed or intimidated already...

Edited October 23, 2014 by EverySunset

[PegNosePete]

I'm a bit confused here. Maybe things are different across the pond, but I thought:

 

- Child support is money he pays to support his children

- Alimony / spousal maintenance is money he pays to support his ex-wife

 

Aren't they completely different things?

 

Child support is usually calculated using a formula. X% of salary depending on number of children, children to other mothers, how many overnights he has per month, etc. Whereas alimony is much more case-dependent, being based on individual circumstances: your needs, his ability to pay, other outgoings, assets, etc.

[Mr. Lucky]

 

I am figuring we might be at a me 4-5 days, him 2-3 days, so that puts the custody primarily in my household. I came up with me at 208 and him at 157 days a year it was $1700-1900/mo depending on my income. I'm not familiar with the other calculation. His net take home is $13k a paycheck or $28k a month.

 

Alimony, child support and custody are three very different things.

 

Given proper representation, you will probably get what you want (and then some!) in regards to alimony and support.

 

It's less likely the court will order him to use you for child care when he has custody. Doesn't mean you can't effectively parent and be there for your kids...

 

Mr. Lucky

[Keenly]

Depending on the state, if the courts decide you are fit to work, you may be legally obligated to look for a job.

[CarrieT]

My husband would rather hire a nanny, as he put it at 60hrs a week or more and about $20 an hour (his number he tossed out not mine), instead of allowing me to continue to be a primary caregiver. I am willing to continue to be flexible with his schedule, get a place within a couple miles of my current residence, and continue to make sure the kids are taken care of as they have been. Calculating out his number per hour that's $20 x 60 hrs a week x 52 weeks or $62,400. Child support is approx $1900/mo based on his income.

I am newly married to a surgeon who also went through a custody battle similar to this. His ExW wanted mostly sole custody with this rationale. In his case, my new husband emptied his retirement account to pay for lawyers to fight this for a variety of reasons. Like Enigma32 said, my husband would rather bring in a stranger to help raise his children than pay his ExW to "continue to screw him."

 

One issue is - of course - taking care of the children, but for my husband, the Nanny that he ultimately hired also helped take care of his household with cleaning, laundry, etc. Many nannies do these additional chores, especially for the children.

 

My lawyer doesn't know if the courts will allow this to happen or not.

It may depend on how contentious your divorce is or not. If it is, then the courts may see you as trying to do this sort of thing to manipulate the children negatively against their father. That is why a 50/50 split - regardless of who your husband brings in to assist with the children's care - is recommended by the court system.

 

I have had trouble finding any articles or data saying kids would be best to continue with a parent.

You probably won't because it is different with each family. Who is to say that being with a parent IS best? There are cases where the divorce has come about because a parent is abusive or negligent. It would be difficult to establish any data or norms with such variables.

 

He's going to pay someone something either to me as 'alimony' or a nanny as 'salary'.

Again, those are two entirely different things that YOU are trying to make the same.

 

I think I should have the option to at least get my youngest to school age.

That is your opinion, but a judge may believe that the father should have just as much time with the child.

[Keenly]

You've reminded me Carrie. In a 50 50 situation you probably wont get child support.

[CarrieT]

You've reminded me Carrie. In a 50 50 situation you probably wont get child support.

 

You never know; my husband pays a nominal amount of support to his Ex - like $300 a month or something...

 

I'm not exactly sure why, but I know he does.

[jakrbbt]

In my state there's a calculation, based not only on how much time is spent with each parent, but also on difference in incomes (or potential to earn, if one doesn't work) and how much someone pays for daycare (up to a certain limit allowed for daycare). So, for example, with 50/50 custody I'll still owe my husband child support, even if I pay around $800/month in day care-- unless he goes out and gets a relatively high-paying job. It's not a ton of child support and the reasons if you think about it make sense-- evening out the child's lifestyle to provide some stability between the two households, giving both parents the ability to live their lives and make child-care decisions without it being like they are still married.

[PegNosePete]

That is why a 50/50 split - regardless of who your husband brings in to assist with the children's care - is recommended by the court system.

I've never heard such a thing, do you have a link to support that claim?

 

True, unless there are reasons to the contrary such as abuse or drug use, courts believe it is in the interest of the children to have contact with both parents. But nowhere have I ever seen anything saying that 50/50 is the best or most often recommended solution. Quite the opposite in fact, most courts recommend that children have one stable home and (possibly overnight or weekend) contact with the other parent. If the parents are in agreement then a 50/50 split can provide stability - but if there is animosity then a 50/50 split is often one of the worst possible outcomes for the children. And when talking about custody, that's all the counts care about - the children. They generally (and quite rightly IMO) don't give a rats ass about the parents wishes or what the parents think is "fair".

 

Of course it's all handled on a case by case basis so there will be individual cases where a court does order a 50/50 split. But it's not common, and it's not any kind of recommended or ideal situation.

Edited October 24, 2014 by PegNosePete

[jakrbbt]

I've never heard such a thing, do you have a link to support that claim?

 

True, unless there are reasons to the contrary such as abuse or drug use, courts believe it is in the interest of the children to have contact with both parents. But nowhere have I ever seen anything saying that 50/50 is the best or most often recommended solution. Quite the opposite in fact, most courts recommend that children have one stable home and (possibly overnight or weekend) contact with the other parent. If the parents are in agreement then a 50/50 split can provide stability - but if there is animosity then a 50/50 split is often one of the worst possible outcomes for the children. And when talking about custody, that's all the counts care about - the children. They generally (and quite rightly IMO) don't give a rats ass about the parents wishes or what the parents think is "fair".

 

Of course it's all handled on a case by case basis so there will be individual cases where a court does order a 50/50 split. But it's not common, and it's not any kind of recommended or ideal situation.

 

I guess this highlights a jurisdictional variation. In my jurisdiction, 50/50 is the soup du jour. Everyone gets 50/50, it is considered presumptively best, and parties have to make some showing to not-get that. Very few judges of late have been ordering other-than 50/50 unless the parties stipulate to something different-- at least, in my jurisdiction. Sounds like others are different. It should be relatively easy (for a lawyer at least) to look up the statistics and see what the local judges have been ordering.