A thread for those of us separated/divorced

[FrankieM20]

Oh, the life insurance is a good one!!!

[penguingrrl]

I would also suggest discussions on how to resolve if one parent wants to allow costly items that aren’t in both households’ budgets. Things like travel sports or SAT prep courses that could get incredibly pricey. I know someone whose ex tried to hit her with a bill for half of an $11K SAT prep course (which she felt was patently absurd for any kid and she couldn’t possibly afford).

[heygrey]

FrankieM20, specify equality for ticketed events with attendance limits. This could come into play with graduation or big events that have limited seating where each student gets X tickets. My elementary school gives two tickets per family to our evening Christmas concert because seating is limited. Getting those tickets shouldn't be a gamble on who happens to have custody on the day the tickets come home.

[livinitup]

I have a teenager with a part-time job. A few things that may pop up in 10+ years is who pays for a car, insurance, driver’s ed, etc. And when and under what circumstances. Which parent “owns” the car (for the sake of using it for a trade-in, selling). Expectations for what the teen does with the money earned from part-time jobs (there seems to be disagreements where one household says the teen pays for their own expenses with earned money and the other household says they have to save it).

It might be too soon to think about these things but you might want to flush out an outline of expectations. Some parents let them borrow family cars occasionally. Some buy used. Some lease. Some say “take the bus”. Some kids don’t even want to get a learners permit or license until after 18 yo.

[rupertpenny]

I have a "tie breaker" rule in regards to medical and educational decisions in or separation agreement. If the parents disagree on a medical procedure, school service, etc the expert (the doctor or educator) is the tie breaker. We haven't needed to use it yet, but I'm glad we have it in place.

[FrankieM20]

Oct 24, 2024 9:35:51 GMT -5 rupertpenny said:

I have a "tie breaker" rule in regards to medical and educational decisions in or separation agreement. If the parents disagree on a medical procedure, school service, etc the expert (the doctor or educator) is the tie breaker. We haven't needed to use it yet, but I'm glad we have it in place.

Can you share more about the rule? He’s already said he’s not giving me any tie breaker authority but maybe he would be open to a rule.

These are all so great, thank you everyone for sharing. It’s impossible to think of all these things!

[rupertpenny]

Oct 24, 2024 11:42:12 GMT -5 FrankieM20 said:

Oct 24, 2024 9:35:51 GMT -5 rupertpenny said:

I have a "tie breaker" rule in regards to medical and educational decisions in or separation agreement. If the parents disagree on a medical procedure, school service, etc the expert (the doctor or educator) is the tie breaker. We haven't needed to use it yet, but I'm glad we have it in place.

Can you share more about the rule? He’s already said he’s not giving me any tie breaker authority but maybe he would be open to a rule.

These are all so great, thank you everyone for sharing. It’s impossible to think of all these things!

For example, if one parent was against their child getting the HPV vaccine, but the other thought it was important to do, the pediatrician's opinion would win. Or, if a teacher suggested a child should be screened for possible ADHD but one parent was against it for whatever reason, the teacher's opinion trumps. Does that make sense?

ETA: Our agreement also included an agreement that we were both ok with our kids current health care providers and schools, so one parent can't just find another doctor.

[rhian]

A friend has a right of first refusal rule in place - before hiring a babysitter, she and her ex must offer the other parent the opportunity to have the kids instead.

[campermom]

Oh taxes. Who’s claiming.

[starburst604]

Oct 24, 2024 14:08:18 GMT -5 rhian said:

A friend has a right of first refusal rule in place - before hiring a babysitter, she and her ex must offer the other parent the opportunity to have the kids instead.

I was reading about this recently because I wondered if it would be in my agreement. Several experts recommended against this if you have a contentious ex because it gives them the opportunity to shame you for "not wanting to spend as much time as you can with your kids" and get nosy about where you're going. I realized immediately I do NOT want this in my agreement because STBX will absolutely do both of those things. I want to have the autonomy to get a sitter when I see fit and I am fine with STBX doing the same. However, if you don't trust your ex to set up appropriate babysitters you might want this in your agreement. 

[FrankieM20]

rupertpenny, this is great and exactly what I’m looking for. You don’t need to agree with me but can we agree to side with the professional?? And the examples you have are exactly like what I will be dealing with.

And yes, taxes!! We have two so we can each claim one, but I want the younger one 😜

[rhian]

Oct 24, 2024 14:25:15 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

Oct 24, 2024 14:08:18 GMT -5 rhian said:

A friend has a right of first refusal rule in place - before hiring a babysitter, she and her ex must offer the other parent the opportunity to have the kids instead.

I was reading about this recently because I wondered if it would be in my agreement. Several experts recommended against this if you have a contentious ex because it gives them the opportunity to shame you for "not wanting to spend as much time as you can with your kids" and get nosy about where you're going. I realized immediately I do NOT want this in my agreement because STBX will absolutely do both of those things. I want to have the autonomy to get a sitter when I see fit and I am fine with STBX doing the same. However, if you don't trust your ex to set up appropriate babysitters you might want this in your agreement. 

Totally understand this! My friend and her ex have a decent relationship, so it works for them. She likes it because she found the hardest thing about splitting was missing her kids, so she likes he opportunity to see her kids more occasionally.

ETA: This friend is very much an extrovert, so for her, the idea that her kids were with a babysitter while she was home alone made her really sad. I didn't want to suggest that anyone who opts not to do an arrangement like this doesn't miss their kids!

[campermom]

Oct 24, 2024 14:25:15 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

Oct 24, 2024 14:08:18 GMT -5 rhian said:

A friend has a right of first refusal rule in place - before hiring a babysitter, she and her ex must offer the other parent the opportunity to have the kids instead.

I was reading about this recently because I wondered if it would be in my agreement. Several experts recommended against this if you have a contentious ex because it gives them the opportunity to shame you for "not wanting to spend as much time as you can with your kids" and get nosy about where you're going. I realized immediately I do NOT want this in my agreement because STBX will absolutely do both of those things. I want to have the autonomy to get a sitter when I see fit and I am fine with STBX doing the same. However, if you don't trust your ex to set up appropriate babysitters you might want this in your agreement. 

Same. I have my kids all but 4 days a month but if my ExH had the opportunity take any breaks/free time I had away to get “called into work” he would. I do not have ROFR in my agreement.

[supertrooper1]

Oct 24, 2024 14:08:18 GMT -5 rhian said:

A friend has a right of first refusal rule in place - before hiring a babysitter, she and her ex must offer the other parent the opportunity to have the kids instead.

Please do not do a right of first refusal.  My attorney had so many reasons why it was bad.  

Something to consider for your parenting plan is travel.  We have to notify the other parent if we're away from the home for more than 7 nights and if there will be foreign travel other than Canada.  My ex tried to put in there that we had to notify the other parent if we stayed one or more nights outside of our county.  I nixed that fast.  

Having a set time of exchange has been helpful.  Instead of "Friday" or "Friday after school" we have "Friday at 5pm".  

We do week on/week off custody, and have a 2 week clause during the summer.  I hate it because he doesn't have to tell me when he's taking his two weeks until April 30th, so it makes it hard to plan.  Plus, if we don't take them consecutively, then we have to figure out if we switch weeks or split weeks so we don't end up with 3 weeks together.  

I also wish I hadn't agreed to so many holiday changes.  We even have Halloween broken down instead of just staying with the parent that has him that day.  

I follow @theuglytruthofdivorce Samantha Boss on TikTok.  She is not an attorney but helps people with parenting plans and has some great advice.  

[FrankieM20]

Holidays are going to be interesting. My first instinct was to just stay with the parent who has that day. But what about birthdays? I think that will be the hardest. I was thinking if it’s the non parenting day, that parent can have dinner while the other parent has breakfast?

It just feels so unnatural to divvy up their time like this.

[Roc A Bee]

Holiday time has been the most important to document. We have “even” year and “odd years” for Thanksgiving and Christmas. Also whoever doesn’t have the kids on their birthdays, get them for 3 hours. We don’t have parent bdays in the order, but you may care about that.

I definitely wouldn’t leave it up to whoever has them for the day as you could be screwed out of major holidays for years based on that.

I wish we would have split up our time 50/50 with exchange on Wednesdays that way weeks like Thanksgiving break and Spring break when the kids have all week off, spend half of it with each parent.

I don’t know that you can factor in everything regarding expenses. There are just so many.

[pinkdutchtulips]

Oct 24, 2024 14:08:18 GMT -5 rhian said:

A friend has a right of first refusal rule in place - before hiring a babysitter, she and her ex must offer the other parent the opportunity to have the kids instead.

J has this in his as well. It works for them. 

It is NOT something that would have worked for me if I had shared custody. Thankfully, I did not. 

[rosiebear]

We switched Christmas and Thanksgiving every other year. For Christmas, regardless of whose time the holiday landed on, the “Christmas” parent had them all day December 24 to the morning of the 26th.

It worked great. No breaking the day up, taking them away from their new toys, etc. If I didn’t get them for the actual Christmas day, then we celebrated December 31 as our Christmas Eve and January 1 as our Christmas Day.

[starburst604]

Welp. STBX was fired today after almost 15 years at his job. It was shocking to hear but I'm not shocked it happened. I've been telling him for years to watch his temper and how he speaks to people at work, but he always thought he was untouchable. A lot like how he thought he could do whatever he wanted and I'd never leave him! Considering how he's been acting to me, I'm sure he's been very difficult at work too. I'd like to say he'll learn from this but he won't - he was going on about how it was a witch hunt because he's always the victim of course. Fortunately he has a big network and should probably find another job quickly, but there's no question he's deteriorating so unless he gets some help and fast, who knows what will come of his career.

[campermom]

starburst604 do you think he would purposely dumb down his salary for CS reasons? Voluntary impoverishment?

[starburst604]

Oct 25, 2024 16:35:30 GMT -5 campermom said:

starburst604 do you think he would purposely dumb down his salary for CS reasons? Voluntary impoverishment?

No I don’t think so. We both have a big payout coming from the home sale proceeds once the divorce is final in a couple of weeks, so he can’t really cry poor mouth.

[gottadobe]

Oct 25, 2024 14:58:58 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

Welp. 

It couldn't have happened to a nicer person.
You'd think this would be rock bottom for him, although it doesn't sound like it - "witch hunt."

[starburst604]

Oct 25, 2024 16:54:36 GMT -5 gottadobe said:

Oct 25, 2024 14:58:58 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

Welp. 

It couldn't have happened to a nicer person.
You'd think this would be rock bottom for him, although it doesn't sound like it - "witch hunt."

I know. One big concern I have though is that he has employee stock options and while he is fully vested, I am reading that getting fired with cause can result in them being revoked entirely. I was supposed to get half of that which was a 6-figure sum, so I will be pretty pissed if that ends up happening.

[marie]

Oct 25, 2024 17:03:59 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

Oct 25, 2024 16:54:36 GMT -5 gottadobe said:

It couldn't have happened to a nicer person.
You'd think this would be rock bottom for him, although it doesn't sound like it - "witch hunt."

I know. One big concern I have though is that he has employee stock options and while he is fully vested, I am reading that getting fired with cause can result in them being revoked entirely. I was supposed to get half of that which was a 6-figure sum, so I will be pretty pissed if that ends up happening.

Fully vested? I work in HR and this doesn’t sound right at all, I think you are okay. Vested means that you earned them and honored the vesting schedule . Was he fired or laid off? That could impact his vesting schedule too for any awards that he didn’t see to their initial vesting date

[starburst604]

Oct 25, 2024 18:33:05 GMT -5 marie said:

Oct 25, 2024 17:03:59 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

I know. One big concern I have though is that he has employee stock options and while he is fully vested, I am reading that getting fired with cause can result in them being revoked entirely. I was supposed to get half of that which was a 6-figure sum, so I will be pretty pissed if that ends up happening.

Fully vested? I work in HR and this doesn’t sound right at all, I think you are okay. Vested means that you earned them and honored the vesting schedule . Was he fired or laid off? That could impact his vesting schedule too for any awards that he didn’t see to their initial vesting date

He was definitely fired. He was put on a PIP a year or two ago and I think they were slowly making their way toward firing him. But I hope you’re right about the shares!

[thebreakfastclub]

Oct 25, 2024 18:35:17 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

Oct 25, 2024 18:33:05 GMT -5 marie said:

Fully vested? I work in HR and this doesn’t sound right at all, I think you are okay. Vested means that you earned them and honored the vesting schedule . Was he fired or laid off? That could impact his vesting schedule too for any awards that he didn’t see to their initial vesting date

He was definitely fired. He was put on a PIP a year or two ago and I think they were slowly making their way toward firing him. But I hope you’re right about the shares!

Luckily a firing for performance isn't "cause" - that's things like theft, fraud, willful misconduct. Doing a poor job isn't considered termination for cause.

[starburst604]

Oct 25, 2024 18:40:02 GMT -5 thebreakfastclub said:

Oct 25, 2024 18:35:17 GMT -5 starburst604 said:

He was definitely fired. He was put on a PIP a year or two ago and I think they were slowly making their way toward firing him. But I hope you’re right about the shares!

Luckily a firing for performance isn't "cause" - that's things like theft, fraud, willful misconduct. Doing a poor job isn't considered termination for cause.

That makes sense. I’m sure he hugely played down why he was fired , so for all I know it could be something more serious. Let’s hope not.

[heyyounotyouyou]

Thought some of you might find interest in this article/study.

Women take to single life more readily than men, new research finds.
www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/living-single/202410/why-women-like-being-single-more-than-men-do

[starburst604]

Nov 3, 2024 20:48:17 GMT -5 heyyounotyouyou said:

Thought some of you might find interest in this article/study.

Women take to single life more readily than men, new research finds.
www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/living-single/202410/why-women-like-being-single-more-than-men-do

This lines up with my anecdotal experiences, both my own and other divorced/separated women that I know. The part below is right on point.

“Studies have shown that on average it is women, more than men, who seem to take to single life. They like it better. They like their solitude more. They spend more time pursuing their interests. They are more likely to have fulfilling friendships—they are good at connecting and staying connected with the people who matter to them. Domestic chores are not a challenge; they’ve often been raised to know how to cook and clean. Single women who were previously married to a man often express relief at no longer doing more than their share of those tasks and of caretaking too.”

I never minded living alone before I was married. I actually loved it. I did yearn to have a family but I did have a well-rounded life with friends and hobbies, so returning to that (well half the time, when DD isn’t with me) hasn’t been a big challenge for me.

[Beeps (WOT?*)]

Oct 24, 2024 14:08:18 GMT -5 rhian said:

A friend has a right of first refusal rule in place - before hiring a babysitter, she and her ex must offer the other parent the opportunity to have the kids instead.

My son had this agreement with his ex for anything over four hours. Problem was that while he followed it, she didn't. He had to have all his daycare providers approved by her, she didn't have to follow the same rule. That was, until a judge declared otherwise, FINALLY, after a couple years of this gamesmanship.

The BIG one he fought for was vacation time and education. She wanted a different school than the one right down the street from where they *both* lived. She also refused to allow him to take their daughter on extended vacations, out of state (even to my house sometimes; they are ten miles into ID and I live in WA. Even with the "right of first refusal" when she first left him, she even refused to allow ME to pick her up or watch her because "she's a stranger." It was all about being a PITA and having control. You cannot IMAGINE the evil cackling when he won everything he wanted at mediation earlier this year. HE gave up some things, but they were things he didn't care about, things he put on his list as "want but they're really here for me to have things I am willing to concede on." :rubs hands gleefully.

So, important note...if and when you need to mediate, have your list but include some things you couldn't care less about that you're willing to give up in order to get what you absolutely must have. For him, it was school choice and vacation, and he gave up every-other-year tax and something else I don't recall because she thought it was more i