So if the gf goes away you will stop being angry with him??

Lets pick apart your post... maybe this will make sense.

...Xs GF chased him for years...
You are blameless in this?? its all his fault and hers? If he courted her with his money then she didn't have to dig for the gold.

but he is more attached to his child. ...
Not according to you, you have said over and over he doesn't visit with her. Unless you are bringing her to dinner etc. doesn't attend school functions only obligation is financial.

...Reading the posts here has helped me realize that many, many SMs do not like skids, and some even hate them, espcially teenage daughters who look like mom. .....
I have only seen one recently say anything about a resemblence she didn't like and it was crooked teeth because it was costing a small fortune at the orthodontist. And BM did nothing but bash SM and Dad.

...DD tells me that he fights all the time with GF, and has told DD they are not gtting married. I am hopeful he has recognized her for the golddigger she is. ....Why do you think DD tells you ??? because she knows it makes you happy to hear how daddy is miserable... does she say anything nice about daddy? When DD says things about daddy you should be saying well that's daddy's business not mine. And he should not be telling "his relationship issues" to his child. Did he tell her about the circumstances of his relationship with you?? I bet not so why explain any new relationship.

You are encouraging DD to tattle on daddy she wants to make you happy.

So what if he does recognize what a gold digger she is ... will it stop with her ? If she is gone someone will take her place another gold digger perhaps what then? He apparently likes to flaunt his money. Its on him to do right by his daughter gf or not. And for you to justify DDs remarks about daddy only encourages her to badmouth him more.

Take money out of the equation what else are you going to fester on?

1. One of my SD looks like my DH and the other looks like my mother-in-law (who I love), so their appearances have nothing to do with anything.

2. No matter who was "chasing" your husband, HE made a vow to YOU, she did not. He should have had enough integrity to resist the inevitable attention any decent man is going to receive in this day and age.

3. I still do not feel any NCP or CP for that matter should be obligated by the court to support a "child" until they are 25. A 25 year old is no longer a "child". I am a teacher WITH A GRADUATE DEGREE who started teaching when I had my bachelor degree and then I worked my way through my graduate program. The school board assisted me with matching grants, and I figured the rest out. That is a good lesson in life. There is no court in the land that requires Biological Parents in an intact family to support their children until their 25 so why should it be any different for divorced parents. The "entitlement" issue is a bit nauseating to me.

4. The fact of the matter is things do change when you divorce. Unless the CP can make up the difference in incomes, your lifestyle will have to change. Maybe it's not fair, but it's life. You have to get over thinking life is fair..most of us didn't plan our lives this way, but you have to deal with the hand life gives you. Most likely kids in intact families are going to have more advantages (the most important being they have their biological parents together), but that is not your reality and the sooner you accept that and start helping your child adjust to this reality, the better off you will all be.

5. Why do you care how Ex and his gf are doing? It keeps you way too wrapped up in the past. Let it go, and tell your daughter you only want to hear about happeneings at daddy's if it something that is putting your daughter in some kind of danger. You are hurting your daughter by putting her in the middle of this drama.

I am blamed for OW chasing X? I guess that's how second wives see it. But I never would have thought that, so I do appreciate hearing that thougth.

X is more attached to DD than GF. May not be a lot, may be a lot financial, but is what it is.

DDs 15 -- she speaks her own mind. I dont think he shares "relationship" issues, but gives status updates. As to fighting in front of her -- maybe he shouldnt but I dont control that.

I think money is at the route of lot of SM/Xwife issues. I dont think it can be taken out of the equation. I think a lot of SMs feel that way too.

"Most likely kids in intact families are going to have more advantages (the most important being they have their biological parents together), but that is not your reality and the sooner you accept that and start helping your child adjust to this reality, the better off you will all be."

Well my DD doesnt live with her father, but will have everything else had we stayed married. And if GF cant accpet that too bad.

Honestly, in all of kkny's posts I have not heard much about the gf complaining about money ex pays. All I hear is kkny griping about how much money gf spends. Seriously, how do you know what she spends? And how do you know what her resources are apart from your husband. I don't work a full time job, but I have a considerable monthly income coming in from a trust my grandmother left me. The point is, if your ex is meeting all of his court ordered obligations, then he is entitled to do what he chooses with his own money after that. You are no longer entitled to it or any say in his personal affairs that do not affect your daughter.

Well the first major item was the house X lives in. First he told me that he might sell it and move to apartment (it is big but a lot of work), but GF and her sons love it. It has pool. He told me he might leave house in his will to GF and then on her death to DD. When I pointed out that GF is not to be trusted he said, OK, he would give house to DD. Now GF says sell house. HMMMMMMM. Seems like a money grubbing ploy to me. House is pretty big issues.

Sounds to me like GF is not the only gold-digger in this picture...
Or does having been married to the man somehow make one exempt?

kkny...I am assuming your ex is not going to die very soon of a terminal illness, so let's say he lives for the next 20 years and stays with the same gf. You believe she should be kicked out of a house she has lived in for 20 years so your daughter can inherit the house. That makes no sense. My BP are still married. When my dad dies, I don't expect my mom to move out. I wouldn't be entitled to anything until they had both passed. The gf has every right to stay in a home she has lived in upon your ex's death. I agree totally with sweeby. Your situation is all about money and making sure you get yours. KKNY attempts to put a pretty face on it by saying she is fighting for her daughter, but in reality, she is using her daughter to continue to enact vengenance on her ex. KKNY..you say you have a graudate degree. Take your education and earn a significant income for yourself and your daughter and give her everything you think is important. Then, you don't have to worry so much about what the ex is doing. Again, he has to pay what the court orders, but I am pretty sure the court didn't say he has to leave his house upon his death to your daughter. And quite honestly, if you have given your daughter the eduacation and advantages you claim she will have in your previous posts, she should be earning a significant income on her own and not need anyone's inheritance.

I gave a little more thought to your posts and something struck me. Your ex wanted to sell his house, but gf told him no, so he changed his mind. Then, he decided to leave house to gf, but you told him no, so he changed his mind again. It seems to me that this battle is between you and his gf and who is ultimately going to run the show with him. Sounds like to me he needs to grow some ba**s, tell you both were to stick it, and get some serious counseling for his child before you poison her against him and all men.

When I married him he wore cheap suits and drove a medium priced car. After 30 years of marriage, he was driving a BMW and living large. I think he is ambivalent about house. I do earn a nice income. But that doesnt mean DD wont get her share of her dad's estate. GF contributes nothing financially, per X, and they have decided to keep their funds seperate. Their decision not to share $$$. GF has no legal "right" to stay in house; she can save her money from selling her condo or her current earnings. She has no living ezpenese.

So ex doesn't give her any money she spends her own ... and you want to tell the GF how to spend her money too???

Separate funds.... who knows GF could be worth more than EX maybe thats why they don't marry. GF figures you will want a piece of that action too.

No I dont want her money.

But I dont want her getting anything supposed to go to my DD.

Just because she didn't vow to go after someone else's husband doesn't make it any less wrong. As I have said before, I never vowed not to steal my neighbor's car, but if I did it would still be wrong.

I have to wonder when I hear that ridiculous attempt at justification whether the poster has a history of involvement with a married man.

Children are entitled to have the standard of living they would have had had their parents remained together. THAT IS THE LAW in my state, and that is what is morally right.

By the way, medical schools and law schools expect parental information for prospective students applying for financial aid, and pretty much every student applying for medical and law schools are at least in their twenties. See the discussion of parental resources here:

http://www.med.yale.edu/education/finaid/faq/index.html

It is not just Yale - I checked a number of different schools' policies.

Just because she didn't vow to go after someone else's husband doesn't make it any less wrong. As I have said before, I never vowed not to steal my neighbor's car, but if I did it would still be wrong.
I have to wonder when I hear that ridiculous attempt at justification whether the poster has a history of involvement with a married man.

TOS: I assume this post was intended for me. If you re-read my post, the point I was making is the ex husband made a vow to be faithful, not the OW. KKNY seems to hold this OW culpable for the loss of her marriage when in reality, it is her HUSBAND'S (THE ONE WHO TOOK THE MARRIAGE VOW) FAULT. As far as my history, my first husband cheated on me, and then married her. I love myself and my child enough to move on with my life, move past the bitterness, and create a good life for us. I get along swimmingly with my ex and the former OW, and wish them the best. As I stated before, he came into a very large inheritance once we divorced, and I have every right to take him to court for a CS increase (even he says I have the right), but I don't because I like the fact things run smoothly between us and our child benefits from that. I make my own money, and am now married to a man who takes care of our family very well. There is justice in the world..if you release bitterness, envy and greed, good things come to you. If you harbor those feelings, they will poison you. When I released all of those feelings, and started focusing on good things, my wonderful husband came into my life. And FYI, I have and would never touch a married man, and trust me I have had plenty of chances. I quickly remind them they have a wife at home and they need to run right back to her.

It was cawfecup who asked the question -- was I blameless? Suggesting that the wife is at fault when husband has affair.

Do I blame X, yes, as I said, but it took years of her chasing him.

I guess I am to blame becuase even if dieted, exercised, etc, etc. I am never going to look like I am under 50. So I am at fault for getting old. Heah -- it happens.

Adultery is the fault of both the adulterous spouse and the other woman/man.

Your post sounds a bit too much like a testimonial for "The Secret." The flip side is, apparently, that if bad things happen to you it is your own fault. Tell that to the kids in this town who lost two of their classmates within a couple of weeks to illnesses.

Bad things happen to good and bad people. It is how you deal with the things that happen. Adultery is not fair and it hurts, but you can choose to forgive and move on with your life for your own good, or you can continue to wallow in your pity. You aren't hurting your ex...he has moved on, you are only hurting yourself. My "philosophy of life" has nothing to do with "the Secret". It really isn't such a secret, Christ was saying the same things 2000 years ago, and that is who I choose to follow.

As several devout Christians told me several years ago, the Bible does not instruct you to forgive someone who is unrepentant.

What exactly does "moved on" mean, anyway? That he has acquired a new family so he no longer cares about his own children? That I just imagined the tears in his eyes and the pain I heard when he let the counselor know that his wife does not allow them to visit? I suppose the fact that he is not able to look me in the eye when talking to me means he has "moved on" and is not dragging any baggage with him. I am not the one who is causing him pain. Yes, it is his own fault for staying with someone who despises most of his children. And yes, I care about him. I don't want to hurt him - I want him to rediscover the good man and devoted father that he once was.

It's no wonder that KKNY's ex found someone else.

Yes, after 27 years.

This board gives me the strenght to make certain Gf or second wife gets nothing. Thanks

And, fyi, second marriages generally have a higher divorce rate that first. so laugh at me, the old first wife, all you want. Now.

I am astounded by the anger displayed by kkny which is almost palpable. Are you going to be satisfied when/if you extract your pound of flesh? No, you're not. You're going to direct your inherent anger elsewhere. My heart aches for your daughter and what you are teaching her.

I guess I dont understand --

does letting second wife have eveything = showing no anger

I'm not a dormat. That doesnt mean I am angry. People who know me -- friends, coworkers, neighors, tennis coach all think I am easy going and easy to get along with. Teachers say same re DD. I am tired from taking DD to lessons and shopping today, so time to get ready to get showered and head out. Bye

Children are entitled to have the standard of living they would have had had their parents remained together. THAT IS THE LAW in my state, and that is what is morally right.

I can't believe I'm going to say this... I actually agree with you on this, to a point otherside.... However kkny actually is trying to get more than the normal "dues owed" Show me a divorce decree that demands A parent to leave their house to their child... That is ridiculous! It is HIS HOUSE... should he so choose he can burn it to the ground. Would kkny if still married move out of hubby's home so daughter could have it upon his death? Basically here's the thing, maybe the way they came together is wrong... But they are together and if they remain together ultimately GF will have control of his estate. What is going to happen is X is going to get sick of kkny trying to control his life and home from the sidelines and he is going to leave EVERYTHING to GF just to get even with her! That is unfortunate for his daughter. But I do not know ANY man who will tolerate his X wife telling him whom to leave his estate to. Before you go getting your knickers in a knot allow me to explain something. Regaurdless of whether your right or wrong... He ONLY has to pay what is court ordered... He is more likely to give extra if you do not try to force him to. Allowing bad blood to fester between all involved eventually will force him into a corner, and he is going to side with the woman he lives with. The more your daughter is encouraged to disrespect GF, the angrier X will become until eventually will get nothing from her fathers estate, worse yet it will cost her a relationship with the man who fathered her.

If it is in the separation agreement that the daughter inherits his house when he dies, then that is what will happen. It makes no difference that it is unusual. A separation agreement is approved by the court and legally enforceable and court ordered.

GF will not control Xs estate. Xs brother is executor. If you draft a will, you can name whomever you want executor. Even if GF becomes wife, liabilities of estate are honored. Executor is bound to honor will.

Not sure about other states, but in my state, even if someone owned a house before they married, once they marry the spouse owns half. (When I married my husband, he automatically was entitled to half of my house even though I had owned it for 6 years). And there is absolutely no will that could award the house to a child if the spouse is still living. It would be unenforceable. But that is just my state. It varies.

One -- a prenup will trump that. Two -- obligations of estate come first.

If GF is stupid enough to hire a pre-nup, then that may be. Second..you are wrong. At least in my state, NO person who is married can award the house to ANYONE other than the living spouse.

I don't know what you mean by "hire" a pre-nup. I certainly dont know what you mean by stupid. I think most people with substantial assets would have reservations about getting married second time around without a pre-nup. I know I would -- I would expect my assets to go to my DD and a husbands to go to his children (not that I am getting so soon, but men do ask me out -- at my age, widowers). I know my X has said he would not remarry without one. I beleive him.

Unless you made a gift to your husband -- which is fine if you did -- 1/2 of your house did not become his. If you divorce and did not have a pre-nup, state law governs disposition. In many short term marraiges, he woudl not get half.

As to on death, many people either have pre-nups and/or establish trusts prior to second marriage governing dispostion of property.

Ummm..trust me, my house did become 1/2 his upon our marriage. There was no need for me to gift it to him, it is automatic in my state. Further proof was when I went to sell the house 6 months later because we built a new one, the title company required him to sign all documents even though his name was not technically on the deed, because ta-da...they said the house was not 1/2 his.

Oh..and btw, we went back to court to force his X to finally re-finace their former marital home and get his name off of the home. Six years later she had not done this even though the court ordered her to do it within 90 days of the final divorce decree. My DH had to sign a quit claim deed to the house, and guess what? I had to sign it as well, because the state now saw me as having ownership interst in the house because we were married.

As far as the stupid comment regarding a pre-nup: She is stupid if you signs a pre-nup stating she will have no rights to a house she may live in for 20 or 30 years. You just don't get it. If she has a long term marriage to your ex, it is not right for her to be kicked out upon her husband's death. I don't know why this logic is lost on you. A wife is entitled to live in the marital home if the spouse dies. And seriously I don't know why your ex continues to discuss this with you. No wonder your daughter wants a small wedding...she sees the stress you cause on a day to day basis...a huge life event like this would really bring it out in you.

My ex continues to discuss anything involving DD with me. HIs GF sold her condo when she moved in with him, and contributes nothing to household costs (not part of mortgage, not utilities). So she can buy a condo and go back to living where she used to if he dies.

And a bank/title company will have anyone and their second cousin to sign off so they dont have to worry re liability. Read the papers. Many divorcees do not get assets on disolution of marriage.

In my state, you certainly do not get any interest in a house just because you marry the owner.

In my state you do unless there's a pre-nup. KKNY, in the event that your ex-husband remarries, you may want to investigate your specific state laws to confirm that the marital settlement agreement you and your ex agreed upon supercedes all else. It's unlikely but it may be beneficial to check.

Yes, attorneys have reviewed this. And at this point, dd tells me that x has decided not to get married, jsut live with GF.

In my state, the husband automatically owns 1/2 of the wife's house upon marriage and vice versa.

With second marriages, particularly if there are stepchildren, husbands and wives really should address their estate with a will or an appropriate trust. It avoids a lot of problems down the road because assets go where they are intended to go.

I'm sure there are stories about "wicked" stepmothers who withheld property and money from her stepchildren when DH dies, but it can go the other way, too.

I know of a woman (a SD) who made her elderly stepmother sell the marital home when her father died so the SD could get a face lift. I'm pretty sure her father thought his wife would stay in the home until she died and then the daughter would inherit 100% of the estate as there were no other heirs.

The father did not have a will and the deed was not written "husband and wife, joint tenants in common", and this allowed SD to force elderly SM to sell the home so SD could get her share.

June,

Since statistically women outlive men, and men dont typically marry older women, it is more likely SM is the survivor.

In the situation with the mean SD you are describing, if the dad didnt have a will, how did the SD end up with the house? Were there other assets in the estate (investments, pension) that SM And if the dad didnt have a will, and didnt have the property in joint name, what would make you think he thought SM would be living there post his death.

I truly believe most men do not expect their wives to be forced out of their homes by the children. I think most men believe their wife will be allowed to stay in their home until their death. Most men cannot fathom their children could be so heartless, but it does happen occasionally, so men need to be careful to spell out their wishes.

I also knew of a very different situation in which the adult SD was very generous to her elderly SM. The father died and never changed the beneficiary on a rather large life insurance policy. The daughter was beneficiary.

The SD was a very good person and after discussing the situation with her husband, they both decided the father had obviously overlooked changing to beneficiary to his wife. They knew the elderly SM was strapped financially and gave her all of the life insurance proceeds.

I don't want to infer that all SD's would kick their SM to the curb if given the opportunity, because that simply is not true.

I honestly believe in the good of most people, and I believe most good hearted human beings would realize it is not a kind or moral thing to throw their SM out on the street especially at a time when they are dealing with a loss of a spouse. However, money also does strange things to people, so I think it is in everyone's best interest for the financial expectations and dealings to be spelled out.

June -- how did SD end up with house if no will -- was this in a different state than you. Becuase I think if no will, SM would have gotten part of house.

June and Lafevem -- what would you think if SM sold her own condo, took all $$ for her, moved in with Dad, contributed nada for rent, mortgage, utilities etc. Would you still think she is entilted to house for life?? Just aksing.

If the daughter gave the SM more than $12,000 a year from the life insurance, she would have to pay federal gift taxes. I hope she talked to a financial planner first.

kkny,

SD ended up with 1/2 of the house - not the entire house. If she waited until her SM died, she would have had 100% of the estate. But chose to force her SM into the sale of the house to get 1/2.

With the situation with the live-in gf, she and your ex do not have a legally binding relationship, unless they live in a common law state and meet the definition of a common law spouse. Given what you've stated, with no financial contribution toward the home, she should expect to only live there as long as he wants her to or until he dies, whichever comes first.

I know live-in situations work for some folks for various reasons, but when I was single, I owned my own home. I dated a couple of guys who wanted me to sell it and move in with them. No way would I do that for a guy who was a boyfriend. When I finally sold my home, it was three weeks before DH and I got married.

I just saw too many gals do what your ex's girlfriend did - sell their place, move in and wait for a proposal that never came.

June, I still dont understand, if there was no will, why would SD have been entitled to 100% of house on SMs death. I would have thought that that SM could give her half to whomever she wanted (her own children, charity, whatever).

Wow, what a diversion from the original post!

However, between all the venom and legal mumbo jumbo, I was reminded of my dear neighbor, "Betty", who recently died.

DH and I had yet to move back into our house as it was under construction when Betty passed away. She had been living w/ her "third", "Al", and they weren't married. I found this a little odd for an elderly couple, lol, but never dreamed to question it.

Anyway, shortly after Betty died, Al was told "by the kids" (they had no children together) to leave the house for the day. While gone, moving trucks came by and moved out a bunch of stuff. We were horrified, thinking it was Betty's adult children. But, it was Betty's deceased second husband's kids. In his will, the house was left to Betty for as long as she lived. Upon her death, it went to her stepkids who wasted no time giving Al the boot. Al and Betty lived there in harmony for YEARS and we were all very sad to see Al be forced to move across the state to his daughter's place. But, I guess Betty's skids had no real obligation to Al and legally, Betty's hands were tied. Not sure if that's the reason they never married (like the house would have gone to her skids in that event) or not, but it was an odd arrangement.

Dana

Dana,

Maybe I dont understand -- but it seems to me that here was Bettys second husband doing what many (including June) here think was right -- on death of dh (which would be husband nubmer two) letting SM stay in th hosue for the rest of her life, and you seem to imply that the skids should be nice and let SMs next husband have rights to house. Wow, this could go on forever. I dont know what you mean by "shortly" and I dont think you know if skids had notified Al he had to vacate. I think this is one reason that skids or first wife have some issues with sm getting hosue for life on death of husband (that at some point in time, it is going to be difficult to get the hosue back, between sms own children, etc)

I am curious why you say this was an odd arrangement -- presuambaly you mean living togehor and not being married. There are many reason, financial and otherwise as we all know. It could be social security (that Betty was getting widows benefits which would stop if she remarried). I am certain you would agree if couples want to live togethor (particulary if they are not planning on having children) it is their own busienss.

Well thanks for all your advice! We did decide to let them go. Their mom's parents arranged for them all to stay at their house, guess the bm (in late 30's!) and her boyfriend have moved back home with mommy and daddy! We had some problems with dates...we gave them dates and they chose different dates. So my dh finally grew a pair of ***** and told them our dates or nothing, so they changed the airline tickets to our dates :) The bm's boyfriend is flying out here to get the kids...which I find funny b/c bm does not work, so wouldn't you think that she might want to fly here? But I did cave on the clothes and we are sending them there with a few outfits each (not their best clothes-but presentable) and I even took them to the store and bought them stuff to do on the plane. Hopefully everything goes well...I am nervous though. BM has been saying things to the oldest about "if you lived with me....." So I hope that this trip does not turn into some brainwashing, she would never get custody of the kids but I don't want them to have empty promises and ideas put in their heads. So wish us luck with this!