Readers Respond
The previous question was from a reader who wondered about the terms of his separation. He wrote:
My wife and I have been together for close to 20 years, married for almost a decade and still live together, though we’re seeing other people. We started dating outside the marriage a few years ago, but eventually I realized I’d be happier splitting up. I led the charge toward separation. She has complex emotions about it, but things are generally good. Financially, we’re comfortable but not rich. We supported each other through graduate school, and our salaries have since been roughly equal, though student-loan payments eat up a substantial chunk. Each of us has retirement accounts, and a payment I received through an injury settlement enabled us to buy our house. I’m exacting, organized and focused. My wife is not. I’ve heavily researched divorce law in our state; she hasn’t. … I have roughly twice as much in savings as she does. Should I be “nice” by laying everything out and trying to split our assets as evenly as possible? Or is it OK to use my greater knowledge of the relevant laws to keep as much money as I reasonably can? We’re trying to avoid hiring lawyers because of the expense, which gives me an advantage. — Name Withheld
In his response, the Ethicist noted:
So you’re asking whether you can take advantage of your spouse’s ignorance — and you’re calling this an amicable divorce? Oh, dear. The knowledge you’ve acquired about your state’s divorce law should be used to arrive at an outcome that’s fair to you both; instead, you’re treating that knowledge as if it’s a personal asset to be shielded from your spouse. Reasonable people can disagree about what counts as a fair division of marital property, and you’re entitled to pursue your own interests. But your wife needs to understand her rights for the process to be just. You’d do well, then, to reconsider the decision to go ahead without legal assistance. Getting legal advice needn’t mean incurring the expense of a contested divorce. You could consult a mediator, and each of you could have a lawyer review the proposed agreement. The work you’ve put into understanding divorce law doesn’t entitle you to exploit your wife’s evident, if perhaps unwarranted, trust that you’ll treat her fairly.
(Reread the full question and answer here.)
⬥
The letter writer and his spouse both need their own lawyers. This is well worth the lawyers’ fees. Neither of them has the knowledge to come up with a settlement that is ethical, fair and in accordance with their state laws. A good lawyer knows about stuff you wouldn’t know to ask about, and helps you keep your emotions out of this process. At the end, the settlement will be far more ethical than if you did the save-the-lawyer-fees route. — John
⬥
The Ethicist writes that “you’re treating that knowledge as if it’s a personal asset to be shielded from your spouse.” Yes, and the writer should. The reality is that in a marriage where one partner is “exacting, organized and focused” and the other isn’t there are years of back pay owed for invisible labor. If the wife chooses not to look out for her own interests, that’s her mistake — no one is owed anything in a divorce, beyond basic civility and what they’re willing to advocate for themselves. — Laura
⬥
Financial fraud and financial infidelity have no place in honorable dealings. Taking advantage of someone who trusts you is particularly sad. — Cathy
About The Author
