Divorce financial proposal

[Before you can make things better, you have to stop making them worse...]

 

... but she's missing big parts of the puzzle.

This is what you said when you wanted her to outright confess her affair to the children last year. She argued that it was an adult issue and would turn the children's lives upside down (and disgrace her). You argued that she was wrong in the eyes of God and there are consequences. You two debated on principle for 10 months. She never accepted that your priorities and view of life over her priorities and view of life. Neither of you compromised. Kids suffered.

You are on the same trajectory here. She is arguing that she is the one most in need of the family home. You are arguing that she should start over on her own.

"She wants her cake and to eat it too." has been evoked in both incidences.

My point above is that you are back to trying to sell your priorities and view of life over her priorities and view of life. That is what that model you sent over means to her. You are back to arguing whose "principles" should prevail.

It's not going to work any better this time.

If you two can't agree, as was the case last time, a judge will solve it (for $150,000 in attorney fees)... and family court is very biased toward mothers... especially the stay at home moms. You could lose the 50/50% custody. You could be ordered to give her the house or sell it. There is a lot of risk there.

Most negotiators would go at this very differently than you are approaching it and that would help. The first thing they would do is focus/listen to each parties needs, identify points of compromise, and above all, leave principles and models out of it.

Don't get me wrong, I think the financial work you are doing is excellent. It will really help you navigate the mediation.  But I also think trying to sell your model to you wife along with your view of reality, morality, and priorities is a deal breaker.

I know you hold strong to your convictions and will likely stay the course, but its still worth mentioning.

At the moment the rhetorical conversation seems to be around a mortgage we have expiring at the end of Nov... like proper expiring expiring not just off the 'deal' period. If we don't come up with a solution it goes into a default situation. The Bank's expiry team refuse to give us an extension unless one of two things are met... a court date OR the house is on the market.

You have a divorce filed for a year and no court date? That's easy enough to resolve.

[Skip]

 

... but she's missing big parts of the puzzle.

This is what you said when you wanted her to outright confess her affair to the children last year. She argued that it was an adult issue and would turn the children's lives upside down (and disgrace her). You argued that she was wrong in the eyes of God and there are consequences. You two debated on principle for 10 months. She never accepted that your priorities and view of life over her priorities and view of life. Neither of you compromised. Kids suffered.

You are on the same trajectory here. She is arguing that she is the one most in need of the family home. You are arguing that she should start over on her own.

"She wants her cake and to eat it too." has been evoked in both incidences.

My point above is that you are back to trying to sell your priorities and view of life over her priorities and view of life. That is what that model you sent over means to her. You are back to arguing whose "principles" should prevail.

It's not going to work any better this time.

If you two can't agree, as was the case last time, a judge will solve it (for $150,000 in attorney fees)... and family court is very biased toward mothers... especially the stay at home moms. You could lose the 50/50% custody. You could be ordered to give her the house or sell it. There is a lot of risk there.

Most negotiators would go at this very differently than you are approaching it and that would help. The first thing they would do is focus/listen to each parties needs, identify points of compromise, and above all, leave principles and models out of it.

Don't get me wrong, I think the financial work you are doing is excellent. It will really help you navigate the mediation.  But I also think trying to sell your model to you wife along with your view of reality, morality, and priorities is a deal breaker.

I know you hold strong to your convictions and will likely stay the course, but its still worth mentioning.

At the moment the rhetorical conversation seems to be around a mortgage we have expiring at the end of Nov... like proper expiring expiring not just off the 'deal' period. If we don't come up with a solution it goes into a default situation. The Bank's expiry team refuse to give us an extension unless one of two things are met... a court date OR the house is on the market.

You have a divorce filed for a year and no court date? That's easy enough to resolve.

[Enabler]

Skip,

With the utmost respect you are muddling things here.

1) W wants the house but knows she can't have it. She accept she can't afford it and has moved out anyway so that would be a challenge to turn the tables, especially without spending a lot of money which would remove the option from the table anyway since it hangs in the balance... but she doesn't want me to have it either even if it's possible. She'd rather pop the ball than let me play with it even though she's got a broken leg and can't play anyway.

2) You refer to my points of principle, these are not points of principle in the case of the big lord in the sky said several thousand years ago that adultery was wrong, or even whether or not it was more prudent to be honest with the kids since they'd likely have a good inclination about the affair anyway (which we now know to be fact). This is about a standard process to determine division of assets and income in a divorce. The financial proposal I have tabled is in-line with that methodology. Ultimately I don't have to sell her anything as the further she pushes towards the formal process the more likely she's going to find out that her feelings are not at all facts and that's not how the law works. It would just be nice if she aligned herself with someone who knew that such that she stopped trying to cherry pick parts of the law she wanted to use and others she did not.

3) We have had the decree Nisi for 2 years now. This doesn't need to end in court. Even if she were to align to the process and was to try and improve the deal that way there's no requirement for it to end that way, and I believe that both of us are conscious of the futility of that end zone.

New-Life

[babyducks]

Ultimately I don't have to sell her anything as the further she pushes towards the formal process the more likely she's going to find out that her feelings are not at all facts and that's not how the law works. It would just be nice if she aligned herself with someone who knew that such that she stopped trying to cherry pick parts of the law she wanted to use and others she did not.

two suggestions seem to be on the table here:

1)  Don't explain yourself to someone who is committed to misunderstanding you.

2)  Find a path to resolution.   

with a disordered person the path to resolution will be bumpy.   it won't make logical sense.  it won't involve understanding or clarity.    it doesn't work that way.

is there a path to resolution that you can identify that does not involve your Ex adopting a certain way of thinking?

[Enabler]

What tends to be the case is that my W is capable of ANY 'way of thinking' if she is told to think in such a way by the trusted someone who's guiding her thought process at the time (hence her feeling of being controlled post event). For some time she has not trusted me with the "way she thinks" and instead trusted others to show tell her the way. Those others seem to have gotten her into a bit of a dead end and frankly a bit of a pickle. I'm not suggesting she listen to me or magically start to trust my thought process, if I had that power I would do an abundance of other things rather than get her to adopt my divorce process. HOWEVER, what I can do is walk a path and show her that I am walking a path that is effective in the hope that she either a) finds someone who can give her sensible advice (i.e. she loses faith in current trusted advisors seeing that their advice isn't effective) or b) have some small sense that I am effective and is able to look at my proposal and her proposal and see how they can work together... not sure how that would work.

She believes I am demonic and have been controlling what she thinks for decades. The likelihood of her aligning herself with my view based on my sales pitch or my words is very remote. I will work with whatever she comes back with and I'll find a route through.

I wouldn't say it's bad to explain, I just think you have to be prepared for that explanation or that detailed path to be rejected... just because. It sows seeds though.

New-Life