BettyBoo Posted January 25, 2007 Posted January 25, 2007 Some opinions welcome please. I am engaged to my b/f of four years. He is now going through a divorce as in Ireland you have to be seperated five years to apply for divorce. The breakdown of his marriage was due to her infidelity over the years and she has children by another man whilst still married -whom my b/f financed . They are all financaly independent now. My gripe is this - he is still paying her maintenance even thought there is no court order to do so. He thinks it will look better for him in the divorce. I think it will set a precedent. I feel right now that I will put the relationship on hold until he has his end sorted. I do not agree with him paying for her to sit on her butt whilst other women go out and work hard for thier living. Like I said she has no dependents. Am I being unreasonable. I dont want her as a noose around our necks for the rest of our lives. Has anyone out there being in this position.
Curmudgeon Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 I know nothing about UK law but i agree that he should stop paying maintenance. It sounds as if she's been the beneficiary longer than is necessary to get a job and become self-sufficient.
mum2three Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 Could that be why he is continuing to pay her?
MoonGirl Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 Sounds strange to me. I don't see why he's paying her if they don't have kids together.
littlekitty Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 WTF?! Five years?! I never knew Ireland differed so much! Provided they have no children together I see absolutely no reason what so ever for him to be paying her maintenance. To my knowledge maintenance is less popular in the UK than it is the US, and doesn't happen quite so often. But after 5 years? It won't do him any favours I can see in a court of law. He wants to divorce her.. surely it looks worse if he's actually still supporting her?!
Touche Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 I'm a little confused here. Is he the recognized parent of these kids? Were the kids born while they were together (married and living under the same roof)? If so, he might be the legal father under the law (not sure of the laws there either) and responsible for their support even if they're not biologically his.
Author BettyBoo Posted January 26, 2007 Author Posted January 26, 2007 The children were born and reared within the marriage. However they are all financially dependent now -over 22 and one is married. So I do think it is a bit crazy and even insulting to being supporting her at this stage. I have met with him today and told him my position on this and that I cannot continue with the realtionship until he cuts all ties. He said his legal counsel told him too pay but then his barrister told him the opposite! Which ever way it goes I cannot be part of it. It is our intention to get married perhaps next year so I was just seeking out advice in case anyone else had been in the same position.
tinktronik Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 Some opinions welcome please. I am engaged to my b/f of four years. He is now going through a divorce as in Ireland you have to be seperated five years to apply for divorce. The breakdown of his marriage was due to her infidelity over the years and she has children by another man whilst still married -whom my b/f financed . They are all financaly independent now. My gripe is this - he is still paying her maintenance even thought there is no court order to do so. He thinks it will look better for him in the divorce. I think it will set a precedent. I feel right now that I will put the relationship on hold until he has his end sorted. I do not agree with him paying for her to sit on her butt whilst other women go out and work hard for thier living. Like I said she has no dependents. Am I being unreasonable. I dont want her as a noose around our necks for the rest of our lives. Has anyone out there being in this position.How long were they married . If they were married and she raised his family while he worked , then why should'nt he pay her ? But first how long were they married?
blind_otter Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 How long were they married . If they were married and she raised his family while he worked , then why should'nt he pay her ? But first how long were they married? Actually didn't the original post say that the children were by another man, not the H? If so, whose children was she raising? Hers and this OM's, not the H's kids.
tinktronik Posted January 26, 2007 Posted January 26, 2007 Actually didn't the original post say that the children were by another man, not the H? If so, whose children was she raising? Hers and this OM's, not the H's kids. I got that the wife and husband had 2 kids that were grown that wife had already raised , but now she has a new baby with someone else that shes with even though the D is'nt finall and H is living with the OP .... Is that right ,????
Author BettyBoo Posted January 27, 2007 Author Posted January 27, 2007 I got that the wife and husband had 2 kids that were grown that wife had already raised , but now she has a new baby with someone else that shes with even though the D is'nt finall and H is living with the OP .... Is that right ,???? NO- there is no baby. They reared three children together ( One of those my b/f is not the father of and there is a strong possibility he is not the father of any of them). Irrespecitve of that all of that these 'children' are between 22-33 years old and all left home. Hope that clarifires matter. They remained married for 20 years- 10 of which they lived seperate lives under the same room for the sake of the children. Thye seperated 7 years ago.
Recommended Posts