Trying to get past my knee jerk response to BPDh counter-proposal

[VIDEO: "What is parental alienation?"]

All,
I usually post over on Conflicted, but I suspect that some of you may have a bit more insight to help me process my options.  My apologies for a long post, but I will eventually get to my question. 

I'm going through a legal separation process with a mediator.  The reason behind the legal separation vs. divorce is that I'm not sure I want a divorce (mostly inability to reconcile divorce under current circumstances with my faith).  The goal of the legal separation vs staying together or informal separation is that I consider BPDh's willingness/ability to be self supporting a must if we are going to work towards reconciliation.

BPDh is 42, able bodied, skilled in a number of areas, and has a college degree.  He has been under-employed/unemployed for the majority of our marriage (22 years this month).  Since we separated he has started up his own business and earns approximately the median income for a household in our area.

We have 2 children - S18 is working towards a degree in engineering with scholarships covering tuition but not room and board.  S14 is starting highschool at the K-12 private school he's been in since 7th grade.
 
We also have 3 beagles that we love to the tune of about $300/month (two are elderly and one is on more meds than my grandmother).

My separation proposal - 50% custody and joint decision making.  I pay all child and dog related expenses other than the food the kids eat when in his custody and any entertainment expenses he chooses to incur for them.  Marital assets are split 65/35 in his favor, with sufficient liquid assets after taxes for him to buy a house comparable to what he is currently renting and still have 4 months of his gross income in savings.

In our mediator's words, my proposal is non-traditional but generous, especially where assets are concerned.  She is of the opinion that -if we went the "traditional" route - a judge would probably award child support to BPDh, which he would then need to spend on the kids.  I would rather bypass the drama of making sure he contributed his portion and just pay everything myself.  She thinks we are "on the bubble" as far as maintenance cases go, since our earning ratio is about 65/35, but that marital assets would be split 50/50 rather than the favorable split I am offering.

My goal - as alluded to before - is to have BPDh self supporting so that I am able to step out of the "caretaking" role and work on reconciliation from a more equal responsibility footing.  This is something that our T has been stressing in each of our individual appointments with her.  She is asking me to back down on the "over functioning" and BPDh to step up.

Mediator pushed BPDh to give a counter-proposal today.  He did a lot of "my lawyer says I should be asking for more" with no specific numbers until the very end of our 2 hours.  He prefaced by saying that he feels like he should be taking more financial responsibility for the children because "money is votes" and he doesn't like the idea of me being able to have more votes than him.  Then he proceeded to say he would rather I give him more assets and pay him monthly child support, but he agrees that the back and forth of who pays what bills for the kids would be cumbersome, so he'll take 1/2 the estimated child support he would likely be awarded and none of the fixed costs associated with the kids.  So in non-BPD speak, I will give him money so he can spend it on the kids if he wants, making him feel like he has taken more responsibility for them.

Here's where the questions come in -
Monthly support makes me feel like there is no opportunity for my #1 term for reconciliation (BPDh becomes self supporting) to happen.  My knee-jerk reaction is to be up front with him that if monthly support is something he would require, we are no longer talking legal separation, we're talking divorce (FYI, in my state a legal separation can be changed to divorce by either party 90 days after the separation decree is issued with no further settlement negotiation).  I can see how he would perceive this as me putting him in a no-win situation (get monthly support but divorce or waive monthly support with no guarantee of reconciliation) when my intention is actually to make sure he has the opportunity to ask for a higher monthly support number because this is probably now a path to divorce, not reconciliation.  Do any of you have thoughts/insights on whether this is something I should do, and how it might be worded in the least inflammatory way?

Has anyone navigated a legal separation that is either still in effect with no divorce, or eventually led to divorce? 

Any things I should be considering as I cool down/re-evaluate after this latest interaction?  I said I would respond after a day, but I'm not sure I can process this in that amount of time.

Any questions that might clarify the situation better?

BeagleGirl

[BeagleGirl]

All,
I usually post over on Conflicted, but I suspect that some of you may have a bit more insight to help me process my options.  My apologies for a long post, but I will eventually get to my question. 

I'm going through a legal separation process with a mediator.  The reason behind the legal separation vs. divorce is that I'm not sure I want a divorce (mostly inability to reconcile divorce under current circumstances with my faith).  The goal of the legal separation vs staying together or informal separation is that I consider BPDh's willingness/ability to be self supporting a must if we are going to work towards reconciliation.

BPDh is 42, able bodied, skilled in a number of areas, and has a college degree.  He has been under-employed/unemployed for the majority of our marriage (22 years this month).  Since we separated he has started up his own business and earns approximately the median income for a household in our area.

We have 2 children - S18 is working towards a degree in engineering with scholarships covering tuition but not room and board.  S14 is starting highschool at the K-12 private school he's been in since 7th grade.
 
We also have 3 beagles that we love to the tune of about $300/month (two are elderly and one is on more meds than my grandmother).

My separation proposal - 50% custody and joint decision making.  I pay all child and dog related expenses other than the food the kids eat when in his custody and any entertainment expenses he chooses to incur for them.  Marital assets are split 65/35 in his favor, with sufficient liquid assets after taxes for him to buy a house comparable to what he is currently renting and still have 4 months of his gross income in savings.

In our mediator's words, my proposal is non-traditional but generous, especially where assets are concerned.  She is of the opinion that -if we went the "traditional" route - a judge would probably award child support to BPDh, which he would then need to spend on the kids.  I would rather bypass the drama of making sure he contributed his portion and just pay everything myself.  She thinks we are "on the bubble" as far as maintenance cases go, since our earning ratio is about 65/35, but that marital assets would be split 50/50 rather than the favorable split I am offering.

My goal - as alluded to before - is to have BPDh self supporting so that I am able to step out of the "caretaking" role and work on reconciliation from a more equal responsibility footing.  This is something that our T has been stressing in each of our individual appointments with her.  She is asking me to back down on the "over functioning" and BPDh to step up.

Mediator pushed BPDh to give a counter-proposal today.  He did a lot of "my lawyer says I should be asking for more" with no specific numbers until the very end of our 2 hours.  He prefaced by saying that he feels like he should be taking more financial responsibility for the children because "money is votes" and he doesn't like the idea of me being able to have more votes than him.  Then he proceeded to say he would rather I give him more assets and pay him monthly child support, but he agrees that the back and forth of who pays what bills for the kids would be cumbersome, so he'll take 1/2 the estimated child support he would likely be awarded and none of the fixed costs associated with the kids.  So in non-BPD speak, I will give him money so he can spend it on the kids if he wants, making him feel like he has taken more responsibility for them.

Here's where the questions come in -
Monthly support makes me feel like there is no opportunity for my #1 term for reconciliation (BPDh becomes self supporting) to happen.  My knee-jerk reaction is to be up front with him that if monthly support is something he would require, we are no longer talking legal separation, we're talking divorce (FYI, in my state a legal separation can be changed to divorce by either party 90 days after the separation decree is issued with no further settlement negotiation).  I can see how he would perceive this as me putting him in a no-win situation (get monthly support but divorce or waive monthly support with no guarantee of reconciliation) when my intention is actually to make sure he has the opportunity to ask for a higher monthly support number because this is probably now a path to divorce, not reconciliation.  Do any of you have thoughts/insights on whether this is something I should do, and how it might be worded in the least inflammatory way?

Has anyone navigated a legal separation that is either still in effect with no divorce, or eventually led to divorce? 

Any things I should be considering as I cool down/re-evaluate after this latest interaction?  I said I would respond after a day, but I'm not sure I can process this in that amount of time.

Any questions that might clarify the situation better?

BeagleGirl

[formflier]

My first reaction is that you go back to him and ask him to give you what you want on this particular matter (however you want to set up money... .so he steps up) and you ask him where else he would like you to "come towards him" or something like that.

This is the time to be frank about what you want.  I want you to be self supporting so we can spend time as equals and see what the future holds for us.

Listen... .I know it's been a while and I don't remember which way a "written TS document" went... .if you guys did it or not.  I am thinking not.

Is this the place where both of you decide what you really want.

You have been consistent in saying he needs to stand on his own two feet.  I don't think I would budge on that.  Especially with T saying that is big deal.

Can you be firm there and "in exchange" offer a structured TS to give him some hope?  Perhaps he thinks you will convert this at 90 days and be done.  If you gave him a 1 year TS written plan... .perhaps he would back of his plans.

Trying to be pragmatic here.

Big picture:  This assumes you want to reconcile.

FF

[ForeverDad]

Pardon me for a bit of bluntness here.  Court doesn't care whether you're nice or not, kind or not, fair or not, whatever or not.  Mediator basically said as much - "generous".  Your terms ought to (largely) ignore what is fair, nice, whatever and focus on what you truly believe will work or have the highest expectation of success... .for the children and you, not him.

For example, do you really think joint custody would work?  Perhaps in your case, you know your situation best.  Rather than put the parenting on such an equal basis, where he could easily sabotage you by refusing to agree to something, why not seek a variation to joint status, modified either with Decision Making or Tie Breaker?

Remember, he's an adult.  I noticed that he's been working since you set boundaries and strong expectations for him.  It appears he can step up to the plate, to some extent, if he has to.  Be aware that if you weaken those boundaries, or allow him to weaken them, then he'll most likely revert to his past patterns of underemployment.

Distance and time in Separation can cloud whether he is really changing for the better.  BPD is most evident the closer the relationship.  The distance and associated boundaries in a Separation can make you think he really might be better and then when/if you get back together he will likely revert back to past patterns.  My point is that unless he is also in focused therapy, applying it diligently in his life and thinking and doing so over years then any seeming improvement is unlikely to continue once you're restarting the relationship or loosening the boundaries.

I too had huge reservations about divorce.  My religious boundaries were focused on Jesus' statement that only death or infidelity allowed a remarriage.  However, there are two additional reasons I pondered that a spiritually oriented person may decide to legally divorce even if I didn't feel I had a right to remarry... .(1) endangerment to self or children or (2) spiritual damage to the family.  My then-spouse had driven away our friends and family (especially my family) and I could sense my ex was then looking at me sideways to work herself up to making false allegations, our child was a preschooler then.  I tried to get us to joint marital counseling but she refused.  Sure enough, on a day she was raging and threatened my life, I called the police and she claimed I was the bad person.  (A perception I noted, she felt she had to make me look worse than her.)  I didn't file for divorce right away, I was hoping she would agree to reconcile but she refused, she just kept making new allegations.  Finally, once I accepted I could not make any progress with her, I filed for divorce.  Her response was to file more allegations.

As it turned out, I did learn of infidelity years later, so I can marry again someday with a clean conscience.  (My son still tells me she hates me so reconciliation is still not an option.)

Regarding Divorce or Legal Separation, my lawyer said he never recommended LS, did it only twice and it was only done so the other spouse could keep health insurance.  LS is almost unheard of here on the Family Law board.  Evidently when a BPD (or acting out behaviors) are involved, a clean break is the practical option.  That you understand a divorce may be inevitable anyway is a wise perspective.

One final thought, my lawyer told me that if I went for LS, then later decided to divorce anyway, then all LS agreement terms would be tossed out or at least open to being contested again.  Maybe that's not a big issue with your children closer to being adults, but ponder those ramifications.

[formflier]

BG,

Said another way... .it appears to me legal separation is being designed to encourage him to get to a place where YOU would feel comfortable reconciling. 

So... it's not really about the legal separation... .it is a tool to reconcile... .or prove reconciliation won't work.

If that is the case... .which only you can decide... .then you need to stand firm for what you want in he agreement.

Note... if your thinking is changing.  Slow down making agreement and make sure whatever legal things you do, support what you want.

Hope this makes sense.  Thoughts?

FF

[Grey Kitty]

Q1: I'm not clear on his counter-proposal.

Is he asking for child support instead of the 64/35 asset split?
Would his counter-proposal be more expensive to you than your original generous proposal?

Q2: I'm really questioning your judgement regarding your reason for not giving him direct support:

Monthly support makes me feel like there is no opportunity for my #1 term for reconciliation (BPDh becomes self supporting) to happen.

Bluntly, I think it is foolish to make a separation agreement with the goal of helping him 'qualify' to reconcile with you. (Whether it has a chance of working or not!)

The point of a separation agreement is to cut the joint financial ties between the two of you so you can live independently. Try to negotiate something that does that as fairly as you can manage... .being extra generous if you can afford to do so.

[BeagleGirl]

So... it's not really about the legal separation... .it is a tool to reconcile... .or prove reconciliation won't work.

I would say the above is a pretty accurate summary of what my goal in moving forward with LS was.  So far all the evidence is on the "reconciliation won't work" side.  I've been asking this all along, but the questions are louder in my head since the last mediation appointment - How long do I wait?  How many times do we "go 'round the mulberry bush" before I am released from the marriage?  How much proof is enough?  Who gets to be the judge?

FF,
You've asked a few times about setting up a TS agreement and I think I've neglected to answer.  I'm going to run this by our pastor tomorrow, but my thinking (supported by T) is that the act of me taking the lead on setting up the TS agreement would be a continuation of the pattern where I take on his responsibility.  I and our T have repeatedly indicated to him that the responsibility for developing a plan for reconciliation lies with him.  He has been given guidance by myself and T on things that he should consider addressing in such a plan.  He has yet to propose anything resembling a plan or proposed agreement.  

So basically, unless my discussion with our pastor changes my thinking, I will not be providing a plan for reconciliation.  I and our T will continue giving indications of behavior that stands in the way of reconciliation (continuation of financial dependence on me, abusive behaviors, lack of repentance for past wrongs).  Since he has chosen to not eliminate those behaviors, giving him a list of actions he could take (going to MC, going on dates, mowing the lawn, etc) would only continue the window dressing he has done that makes him feel justified in seeing himself as the victim when I don't re-enter the role of wife (as he's defined it).  

So where does that leave me?  I am having a harder and harder time seeing any outcome other than divorce.  Part of me is still thinking in the same FOG patterns.  I feel like I am coming closer to reconciling myself to the idea of divorce vs long term LS (with a bit of scriptural "gymnastics" that I am still hesitant about) but I still feel obliged to "buy" my freedom.  Part of my knee jerk response was "If all it costs me to be free of my marriage to him is $x/month, that's money well spent."  

T is very strongly encouraging me to stand firm on no continuing financial support paid to him regardless of whether I'm now "planning" on divorce.  She sees it as an act of "tough love" that gives him the opportunity to stand on his own two feet and build relationships with his kids (and maybe me) from that position.  She also fully expects him to continue to come to me for increasing/continuing support no matter what I agree to now.  So basically what ForeverDad said.    

A quick update to the situation - the appraisal on our family home, which I will be awarded in the separation agreement, came back at $20K over what we bought it for 5 years ago.  That is extremely shocking, since our community has since been featured in global news for race riots.  Not something that tends to increase home values.  So I did a quick review of the comps that were used and within the first 4 lines on the first comp found errors that would inflate the value of our house vs. the comp.  BPDh has not said anything about re-evaluating his counter-offer based on this new information.  Even with the appraised valuation the division of assets is still weighted in his favor, just not as much.  I have been working on squelching the thinking around "now he feels more justified" and the FOG/pride that would make me want to compensate for the higher valuation or fight it.  Ultimately, those things only matter if I am wanting/willing to engage in a "who's the victim" battle with BPDh, and that's a fight I will never win.  I'll let him decide if he wants to ask for more.  I can always offer up 1/2 of any profit made on the sale of the house when sold (not planning on selling it).

My main focus right now is to not be in a hurry.  I'm meeting with our pastor tomorrow.  I have another appointment with T on Monday, and meet with a lawyer on Tuesday.  THEN I will think about responding.  We scheduled a "last" mediation appointment at the beginning of Sept that we can cancel if I agree to his counter-proposal or we come to some other agreement before then.  While I REALLY just want this to be over, I know that my personal growth right now is around learning to endure and work through the discomfort/pain resulting from healthy behaviors and decisions.  Reacting to FOG and/or "amputating" the relationship will not get me where I want to go.

BG

[formflier]

Big breath here.

Think about where you are "taking the lead" and "letting him take the lead".

You are taking the lead in splitting the r/s... .(relatively) and he is taking the lead in... .?

So... .I honestly don't see the harm in you taking further lead in creating a TS agreement... .that he can and most likely will "counter"... .just like he did in the LS.

I'm all for talking to T and pastor... .but I would ask them to reflect on the difference in taking the lead... .and open and honest ... .and direct communication between two people in a relationship.

Big picture stuff:  A TS would have at least 1, 2, 3 and 4 in it.  If he says no to 3 and 4... .then... .well... .you have a clear answer, even though it's not the one you like/want.

Said another way:  Passivity in communications is a BPD trait... .I would not let such a chronic problem stand in the way of clear answers... .or "proving" that he is refusing a clear answer.  

Perhaps consider this.

Tell him you will accept his financial proposal after he provided you with an acceptable TS agreement

That puts the ball in his court with both things.

BG,

Big picture FF moment.  It's obvious you would like to reconcile (under certain conditions).  You have very limited and "sucky" tools at your disposal to "influence" that to happen.  The tools are somewhat better at "proving" that he failed and hopefully getting you closer to being able to let this relationship go.

My prayer and hope is that you DO reconcile.  Just as important I would hope you get to a place where you "know" he isn't going to change... .or even better... .he has told you a clear no.

Note:  I really like the idea of accepting his offer "contingent" on HIM putting forth an acceptable TS agreement.  Perhaps rename it a pathway to reconciliation agreement.

Normally... .I would not advise "mixing streams".  In this case the legal separation is really not about the legal separation... .therefore... .it's ok to bring in other elements that... .perhaps... .may move you towards your bigger goal.

Thoughts?

FF

[BeagleGirl]

Q1: I'm not clear on his counter-proposal.

Is he asking for child support instead of the 64/35 asset split?
Would his counter-proposal be more expensive to you than your original generous proposal?

The point of a separation agreement is to cut the joint financial ties between the two of you so you can live independently. Try to negotiate something that does that as fairly as you can manage... .being extra generous if you can afford to do so.

GK,
He's asking for child support in addition to the 65/35 asset split (now 57/43 with the appraisal value of the house).  He'd be willing to just use the standard calculation, but if I don't want to have the ongoing discussions about who is paying for what aspect of the kid's expenses and who needs to be reimbursed for what by whom (not something I would want even with a non-BPD) then he'd be okay with me just giving him 1/2 of the calculated value to spend as he deems best while I cover all expenses for the kids and dogs other than food and activities when with him.  So that's basically his counter-proposal.  Unequal asset split, no obligation to pay for anything outside food for them 50% of the time, and a monthly support check from me.  

After talking with T (who agrees with you on the goal of the financial aspect of the LS), I'm leaning toward countering with my original proposal (even with the higher valuation of the house).  

The unequal split in assets would represent 2.5 years of the monthly support he is asking for IF you take into account the equity I'm being awarded with the house at the current appraisal value.  My fall back position would be split of the profit on the house when sold (effectively cancelling out the value of that asset in my column) which would put us at a 69/31 split representing 7 years of the monthly support he's asking for.  

That's definitely a better deal for him than he could likely get if he took this to court, considering that the number he's looking at for child support calculation includes S18 who can be considered emancipated anywhere between now and 4 years from now, dropping the support owed by about half.  I would still be paying expenses for S18 until he is done with college (my choice, because I can) but since BPDh would not be obligated to do so, he also would not be "entitled" to a percentage of the expenses incurred by S18.

You have {inadvertently} put me in my comfort zone of numbers.  Thanks.    When I run the numbers, he has enough to live on and fulfill reasonable obligation of support for our boys.  I have enough to live on, cover any shortfall in his obligation, and provide the "American Dream" extras that I want for my boys (loan free college education and ability to phase them into "real world" financial obligation between ages 18 and 22).  We are, in fact, very fortunate.  It is only when he compares his current situation (needing to work full time and manage his finances) with what he had grown accustomed to (not working and spending whatever he wanted to with me cleaning up any financial "mess" that he's a penniless victim and I'm a cruel money hoarder.

To sum things up, I value the freedom from monthly support payments very highly, both because of logistics and also because of how I view it in terms of a non-negotiable prerequisite for any discussion of reconciliation.  Allowing the courts to dictate terms could leave me with a greater share of the marital assets, but on the hook for some level of monthly child support.  If any of you have any creative ideas on how to achieve my main goal (no monthly support payments), please chime in.

BG

[formflier]

I value the freedom from monthly support payments very highly

Then honor this a decline on his offer. 

Since you want him to lead... .let him know what is non-negotiable and let him figure it out... .vice you.

I would have the same feeling about not wanting to be "always" going back and forth over who pays what...

FF

[BeagleGirl]

FF,
I'll address your questions/thoughts on TS over on the Conflicted board.
BG

[formflier]

FF,
I'll address your questions/thoughts on TS over on the Conflicted board.
BG

 

I'll look for it over there.  The only reason I'm pushing hard for that... .is your obvious desire to reconcile. 

FF

[GaGrl]

To the avoidance of a monthly payment, I would suggest a counter offer with the 35/65 split on assets... .good deal for him... .and no monthly support. Done. If he protests that he needs the child support, then it is for the minor child only (you have no obligation for a child 18 or older) and it ends upon the younger child's graduation from high school (not that far off, really). In other words, get the dollars up front now, or the monthly support shrinks.