<p>babyontheway, first nobody here asked for legal advice. Speaking for myself, I only was participating in the discussion in general terms and not sharing any specific situation in my life. </p>
<p>You also have said some contradictory statements. You said if your wife opened a new credit card without your knowledge, you’d threaten divorce or actually you said that she’d be out the next day. Now, you say if a spouse was not home enough to be there for the family, that one can’t force the spouse to do that and threatening divorce isn’t a good solution to that very valid concern. You then go onto make this general statement:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, which is it? In one circumstance, you force your spouse that if she does X, she’ll be out the door and in another circumstance, you say you can’t force a spouse to do something they don’t want to do and that’s not a good approach to solving a marital problem. </p>
<p>My Quote:
My FIL was never expected to lift a finger at home, yet he still preferred to work all kinds of hours because he didn’t like the normal “kid noise” “kid issues” that go on in a household. Being at work was an escape from normal parenting and normal kid noise/responsibilities.</p>
<p>BOW quote…
*But that was who he always was, right? *</p>
<p>Uh…no…not until the kids were old enough to be noisy, etc. Not sure what your point is.</p>
<p>Did your MIL force him to be home even though he didn’t enjoy it? Probably not…manipulating him by threatening divorce if he doesn’t spend more time at home really isn’t a good solution to the problem.</p>
<p>Of course not. She’s 85 years old. She’s from a generation that rarely made divorce ultimatums. </p>
<p>*I really think there is a reason why he wants to work the second job besides pressure from family. The wife would do well to understand that reason in order to encourage her husband to spend time at home.</p>
<p>You notice I said encourage. Not force. I don’t thinking forcing your spouse to do something they don’t want to do is good for a happy marriage. *</p>
<p>I do agree that there are reasons that the H is not verbalizing. I said that it’s odd that the second job just started last year and that he won’t reveal how much he’s earning/saving. I’m starting to believe that there’s another woman.</p>
<p>mom2collegekids, (re: your post #560)…yes, the hypothetical examples I gave and also using what TreetoPleaf mentioned, were with the assumption that the spouse with the inheritance has intentions to share the money for the good of the couple’s future and hasn’t spent one penny on him/herself of that inheritance. No greed is involved. Simply was saying that just having an inheritance in one’s own name, doesn’t solely protect it in certain situations. Your example of having to pay the mortgage is more like what I meant, due to decisions the spouse without the inheritance made that would make the spouse with the inheritance have to use the inheritance or else have the house repossessed.</p>
<p>That sounds like a legal question to me. But, I suppose I was wrong and trying to protect assets isn’t a legal question.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As far as diivorce: The divorce question isn’t a threat to prevent her from doing something, it’s a statement that says I believe in something so strongly that I am not interested in being married to a person whose actions go against that belief. A spouse that takes on debt behind my back is going against my beliefs on financial management. I’m unwilling to sacrifice good financial stability for being married to my spouse and would rather live on my own than accumulate large debts because of a spouses poor money management.</p>
<p>As far as divorce, there is a difference between using the threat of divorce to force your spouse to change and stating that if your spouse crosses certain lines that you are no longer willing to be married to them. </p>
<p>For me, a spouse who takes on debt without my agreement is one I am no longer willing to be married to. For her, me sleeping with another woman makes me a person she no longer wants to be married to. Both cases will promptly result in divorce.</p>
<p>In that case, the person with the inheritence should stand firm and let the house get repossessed. The other person won’t really let that happen but if he does, that is one fewer possesion to have to divide up in divorce court. Clearly someone who allows the roof over their head to get foreclosed over a dispute with their wife has some serious issues.</p>
<p>Of course, I’m saying all this from my perspective. In my life, I’ve only seen people save inheritence and not spend it. If one spouse is buying herself new sewing machines, building a hobby room, taking her friends to Hawaii for vacations but not letting her husband do anything fun because there is no money in the family budget, there is a whole different situation going on.</p>
<p>I like the way men are so cut and dried as to what they will and will not tolerate. I’m that way, too. For example, my husband is aware that if he doesn’t participate fully as a father, I am not interested in sharing my house with him. He can have his time with the kids when he is alone with them, and I will have my alone time with the kids when I am alone with them. In separate houses. However, there was never one moment in time when I had to ask him to spend time with the kids. It was a “given.” </p>
<p>If he didn’t want to be home so much that he wanted to work another job? I would hardly be interested in making it “bettter” there. I mean, what? He should have a better experience at home than me? He shoudln’t have to do things he doesn’t want to do? So I should do them for him? Get outta here! You’re kidding, right? Or are you older, maybe? LIke one of those really old dad guys at the soccer game who keeps getting mistaken for somebody’s grandfather?</p>
<p>redroses, I sometimes get why you say, “Leave the guy.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, are you saying that you wouldn’t want a divorce if she slept with someone else? Or is that also on YOUR list?</p>
<p>Few are going to let their house be lost, let’s get real. </p>
<p>The real issue is why would you stay with anyone you can’t trust in any way? For the family? Sorry, don’t buy it. Anyone who stays with someone they can not trust in any way deserves what the get. It’s just watching a train wreck in slow motion.</p>
<p>babyontheway, it really isn’t as simplistic as you make it sound. For example, you say that the person without the inheritance will never let the house go to foreclosure but if the spouse without the inheritance has done some things to either lose the family income or takes on debts, etc. etc. and has no money to his/her name and is relying on the inheritance of the other spouse to bail out the situation, how can you say the spouse with no inheritance won’t let the house be foreclosed upon? And in any case, why would the spouse with the inheritance want to see the house foreclosed upon or the bills not paid? It is not such a simple answer as you suggest.</p>
<p>Also, before you said you can’t force the spouse to spend more time at home but you can force the spouse to not open a credit card without your knowledge. To some, the issue of the spouse not being home much is just as important as the opening of the credit card is to you. Phone mentions her husband is never home and basically ignores the family.</p>
<p>Poetgrl, at the end of a 20 year marriage I decided life was just too short to live unhappy most days. My decision was certainly the right one for me, life quickly became magnitudes happier. My ex is a good guy, we just had very different wants and needs and I couldn’t trust him to be there for the family.</p>
<p>I’m hoping to live a long life, and 50 more years of settling for mediocrity didn’t feel right. Had it been as negative as many here paint, I’d have left much sooner.</p>
<p>And this make complete sense to me…but is written much different than other people who were suggesting divorce for phone30. In your case, you would have said no from day 1 on the second job rather than complaining after he had been working night and day for 18 months and been giving money away for 14 years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think that you are probably a very fair spouse. One that has clear expectations of your husband and asks your husband to do his share but only his share. And as you said above, your husband very much enjoys spending time at home with family as you expect. So I don’t think you’d ever need to think about making home life any better for him.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ma’am, I’m not talking about chores here…I’m talking about each spouse treating each other kindly and nicely. If you don’t have a kind spouse at home, you probably will rather spend time in the office than go home and get yelled at by your spouse. This applies to either gender.</p>
<p>Thank you for the clarification. I agree that kindness and respect and real interest in each other is the bare minimum. Actually, my grandmother always said, “If you wouldn’t talk that way to a neighbor on the street, you shouldn’t do it to someone in your own home.” She said people forget that a lot.</p>
<p>I’m lucky. I actually really like my H, in addition to loving him. But, at least half of the credit goes to him. Cuz he is equally likable. :)</p>
<p>Only phone30 knows if being home with family is something that she believes in so strongly that she would choose not to be married to a man who wasn’t home with family on weekends.</p>
<p>But, I don’t think she wants a divorce…at all.</p>
<p>I think what she wants is her own life and her own voice. Given her husband’s responsiveness to all the women in his life, I"m thinking, at heart, he would be unhappy if he realized how miserable she is.</p>
<p>I really sometimes think, as women, it is important to learn to ask for what we want, and to ask very directly. As in, “I would like to go out to dinner on Saturday night with you. I would like to eat steak. I would like you to wear a collared shirt.”</p>
<p>I’ve found guys are really responsive to direct requests. fwiw.</p>
<p>I think they just have a certain type of marriage where he thinks the money is “his.” I’m sure that after being pushed around by his mother and sister all these years, he just decided to marry a woman who wouldn’t bug him about things.</p>
<p>But, yeah, there could be another woman involved. It does seem kind of odd.</p>
<p>*If he didn’t want to be home so much that he wanted to work another job? I would hardly be interested in making it “bettter” there. I mean, what? He should have a better experience at home than me? He shoudln’t have to do things he doesn’t want to do?</p>
<p>Ma’am, I’m not talking about chores here…I’m talking about each spouse treating each other kindly and nicely. If you don’t have a kind spouse at home, you probably will rather spend time in the office than go home and get yelled at by your spouse. This applies to either gender. *</p>
<p>I wouldn’t be that surprised if one reason he took the second job is to avoid chores and such. I know men who prefer working overtime and/or second jobs rather than to have to do household chores and child care.</p>
<p>First of all, is it only men that prefer working overtime or second jobs over cleaning house and doing laundry? Let’s be fair to both genders here.</p>
<p>But there probably isn’t anything wrong with that.</p>
<p>The income from a second job can be used to pay for laundry service, a maid, and occasional professional child care.</p>
<p>I think they just have a certain type of marriage where he thinks the money is “his.”</p>
<p>I guess a good question the wife should ask is…If my sibling or parents called tomorrow and needed the same level of support, would you be fine with me sending the same amount of money each month to a member of MY family.</p>
<p>* I’m sure that after being pushed around by his mother and sister all these years, he just decided to marry a woman who wouldn’t bug him about things.*</p>
<p>There is a bit of truth here. A man who wants to do what HE wants (including cow-towing to his mom/sis) is going to pick a wife who is not assertive/challenging.</p>
</p>