My Husband Always Threatens Divorce

[Capricorn3]

Tell him to put his money where is mouth is and if he's gonna divorce you he needs to just do it. I'd kick his butt to the curb. He sounds like a major control freak.

^ THIS! That's exactly what I would do. Next time he threatens divorce, agree with him. Or, here's a thought, serve HIM with divorce papers. See a lawyer.

[reinventmyself]

My ex husband didn't threaten divorce, but he DID tell me that since I didn't work (because HE wanted me to be a stay-at-home mom to our kids), I had no "say" in the household. I responded by promptly getting a full-time job. He then complained that I wasn't spending enough time with the kids and that I was "stressed out" all the time due to my job. He WANTED to be able to give me orders, so me getting a job messed up his controlling game plan. I ignored him and kept my job, saved up money, and was eventually able to get my own apartment and furnish it so that the kids and I had somewhere to go when I left him.

 

I wasn't going to stay with someone who tried to manipulate and control me. That's not love.

I was a stay at home mom too. It took me a while to figure it out and put the words behind it, but basically, I had no say. He would entertain my opinions but in the end he always made unilateral decisions, because after all `he's the man and one who makes the money'

 

When pressed he actually said those words towards the end of our marriage, though the unspoken dynamic was always there in front of me.

I just chose not to see it.

 

Once I saw it, I tried to change it by going back to school or getting job when the kids were older and he always got in my way.

Why? Because I was nothing more than a possession.

 

I am grateful I was able to stay home with my sons for 13 years. I wouldn't change that.

I just didn't know I was signing up for a lifetime of this one-down dynamic.

 

I told him once that I wasn't aware that my life did not have as much value as his. . kinda sad, really.

[boltnrun]

I only stayed at home for 4 years. Once I realized he wanted me totally dependent on him so he could control me, I got a job.

 

He didn't want to allow me to have any say so in the marriage. Once I got a job he lost his excuse to dominate me. He then made fun of the amount of money I made, but I made enough to be able to get out.

 

His dad taught him that women are overly emotional and bad with money. That they are "spenders" and it's up to the husband to maintain total control of the household finances. Otherwise, the wife would spend all his hard earned money on trinkets and baubles and bankrupt him. And my husband bought into this mindset 110%. So, he felt it was his JOB to keep me reined in, otherwise chaos would ensue. He never saw ME, he just saw "wife" and "woman".

 

OP, you can do something about your situation. First, insist that he treat you as an intelligent human and someone worthy of respect. He married you, after all; he should treat you respectfully based on that simple fact. Then, realize that you can do something to help yourself instead of believing his propaganda that you are unintelligent and helpless without his control. You're only as helpless as you believe you are. Be confident enough to tell him "go ahead!" the next time he threatens to divorce you. He won't. I can almost guarantee that if you call his bluff he'll grumble, but he won't be calling a divorce lawyer. Then decide if this is who you want to spend the rest of your life with. If not, formulate a plan.

[itsallgrand]

I really want to understand the thought process where it becomes ok to live off a partner in this way. Or anyone, for that matter. I don't 'get it'. I want to hear it explained once and for all, so that I can understand ( even if I don't agree). How does one decide such a thing?

 

OP doesn't work. She has a child. So someone is paying for her costs of living ( and how is that ok?), and someone is paying for her child's costs of living (and how is that ok?).

 

I agree that it's not right for him to threaten divorce as a tool. I do- it's wrong. But I think the whole system she signed up for is wrong ( and I seem to be in a minority there). A system where, if you get married up and/or have a child, and you are a woman, it is ok to not provide for yourself - it's no longer your responsibility somehow. Even if she divorces him, she'll probably get alimony! It's wild! All because she married someone who was willing, maybe thrilled, to take responsibility for her.

 

But she chose that. There's cases where choice could be argued, but here she chooses it. For the benefits it provides her - not having to do it herself.

 

In this very thread, dads who don't pay child support are called deadbeat. She's not paying child support AND living off a second mans income?!

 

I don't get it.

[boltnrun]

I called my father a deadbeat.

 

He didn't pay child support. But neither did he do any of the things that children require, including supervision, preparing meals, washing clothes or house cleaning. Our mother did all of that. So I do not agree that she was living off of him.

 

I have no idea if the OP cooks, cleans, does laundry, goes to the store for food and household supplies, etc. I imagine if her husband had to pay someone to do those things for him it could get pricey.

[j.man]

I have no idea if the OP cooks, cleans, does laundry, goes to the store for food and household supplies, etc. I imagine if her husband had to pay someone to do those things for him it could get pricey.

I did all of these growing up so my single mom could work more hours and I still do them today. Between studying for boards, regular work hours, and on-call hours, my partner has about two hours of free time a week to her name, so I handle virtually everything. Still work full time and still contribute 50/50. It was much harder when I was 16 and looking after siblings. Today, I'm a grown man who knows his way around the house with a bucket of soap and it's a ****ing layup.

 

Look, if you're juggling kids, I understand so much as taking a p1ss is a daunting task you may not get to until three hours after you needed to. Not a single argument there and I dread the day. I've read through your former situation and the others posted on here and respect the hell out of them. But I think relating them to the OP's situation involves a bit of conflation, especially considering there's been no mention of her not being "allowed" to work.

 

I'm always tickled when folks not responsible for child progeny throw out a list of 20 or 30 things they have to do in a week around the house like 80% of the things don't take longer than a half hour. I'd love to just take care of the house and that be that. Wake up at 8, done by 11:30 after taking a nap in between, pull out a bottle of Makers and day drink my way through another PS4 game.

 

All half-joking aside, OP, you two married 40+ years old without kids in the house. We're not talking a couple married in their 20s, who built and fostered a household together, and now find themselves in their traditional (for them) roles after the dust has settled and the kids are in college. He's got no reason in the world to respect you coming in and "homemaking" while surprising him with nearly a doubled car repair bill. Frankly, you should be worried about any man who would be OK with that as it's men like that who play the ***hole in the cautionary stories written by the women above.

 

Again, I wouldn't once excuse the guy for the mock executions, but I see the legitimate gripe behind it. Personally, I say in all sincerity that if you want to, go ahead and call the bluff. Divorce the guy and try your luck with another dude under the same circumstances. But if you two really are happy otherwise and assuming he's not actually prohibiting you from work like the ladies above, I'd get some part time work going. If not for the sake of being able to pay to fix your own car, then to have something saved should he actually mean it next time he says it. I think you'd be a lot more comfortable working under these circumstances than worry about rent and utilities on top of it.

[faraday]

I really want to understand the thought process where it becomes ok to live off a partner in this way. Or anyone, for that matter. I don't 'get it'. I want to hear it explained once and for all, so that I can understand ( even if I don't agree). How does one decide such a thing?

 

OP doesn't work. She has a child. So someone is paying for her costs of living ( and how is that ok?), and someone is paying for her child's costs of living (and how is that ok?).

 

I agree that it's not right for him to threaten divorce as a tool. I do- it's wrong. But I think the whole system she signed up for is wrong ( and I seem to be in a minority there). A system where, if you get married up and/or have a child, and you are a woman, it is ok to not provide for yourself - it's no longer your responsibility somehow. Even if she divorces him, she'll probably get alimony! It's wild! All because she married someone who was willing, maybe thrilled, to take responsibility for her.

 

But she chose that. There's cases where choice could be argued, but here she chooses it. For the benefits it provides her - not having to do it herself.

 

In this very thread, dads who don't pay child support are called deadbeat. She's not paying child support AND living off a second mans income?!

 

I don't get it.

 

I was in almost the exact same situation as the OP when I moved in with my husband. Single parent...I had run a Dayhome up until that point, and closed it down to go back to school...so when we moved in together, I was launching my business...which took 2 years to start maintenance by money...so I was reliant on him from the beginning.

 

It's tough. I didn't have applicable skills (still don't) to go get a 9-5 job...I could work retail...I might even be able to get into management, but every retail position has evenings and weekends...and what do you do with your kid? I mean, paying for normal daycare was crazy expensive, but then to pay for night time as well? Well, it was more than my wage would have been. If my husband hadn't been doing field work, he would have watched her while I was working...but his schedule was unpredictable and he was gone more than he was home...so we agreed that I would stay home to watch the girl, and I would take care of things around the house and continue working on my business.

 

My husband never really understood why I couldn't get in a full work week on my business...he didn't get how much extra housework comes with a family...until he was laid off and we switched roles. He can't wait to go back to work...because it's hard running a household. Kids activities, homemade dinners (and I'm not talking pasta from a box with jarred sauce- I make everything from scratch- so delicious), the extra mess kids make (before kids I used to clean weekly...now it's daily), making sure lunches are cleaned out and repacked, getting a bajillion loads of laundry done and put away every week (because 1 kid somehow makes like 20 loads of laundry every week, it's insane), managing bath times, homework...meal planning and grocery shopping (for a family it's a lot different than when single or living with a partner)...my husband didn't get it until he did it...and now, when he ends up going back to work, I get a housekeeper Because he sees that there's a lot more to it than before with no kids. It's a huge job.

 

If her husband married her knowing she was a stay at home parent...then he must have felt that she brought enough to the table to compensate for her lack of income. People can bring things that aren't money to a relationship. We are more than dollars and cents...otherwise everyone would just go for whoever they can land that has the highest salary.

[faraday]

And btw, child support is a pittance of what it costs to raise a child. The child support payment I receive is used to contribute towards raising my daughter...but the amount she receives isn't even enough to cover half our heat bill in the winter.

 

Also, alimony was used to equal things out back in the day. My grandmother was a stay at home mother to five children. My grandfather had an affair and left her...she wasn't able to work with that many children to care for...so alimony saved her. In modern times, it can go to the man or the woman- whoever sacrificed their career to support the other. So if a husband works to support his wife going to med school, and she divorces him right before graduating, shouldn't he be compensated for supporting her? It works the same if a wife stays home to raise children while a husband works- childcare costs can often equal a paycheque....so sometimes it makes more sense to have one partner (the one that earns less...which is often the woman) stay home...she's sacrificing her career for the betterment of her children and family (because husbands benefit from having a stay at home partner as well)...should she be punished for staying home with her kids if they divorce? Didn't the husband benefit from not needing to take sick days when kids are sick? Or from having someone take care of housework and cleaning?

 

Idk...like I get it. I see alimony get abused...and that's upsetting...but do we say no one deserves it because some people abuse it? I can't imagine the life of hardship my grandmother would have faced.

[boltnrun]

So I reread the original post. OP, do I understand correctly, you have a child but you only see him every other weekend? And this is why you say you can't get a job?

 

I agree that getting a job should be your number one priority. You can work part time to start. When my kids were toddlers I worked evenings while my husband worked days. Then when they were in school full time I got a full time job.

 

And I have no college degree either. But I have built a decent career for myself.

 

And I can tell you, being self-sufficient is terrific. I don't have to depend on anyone for anything. So I can afford to be choosy about who I spend time with and who I date. Or marry.

[faraday]

So I reread the original post. OP, do I understand correctly, you have a child but you only see him every other weekend? And this is why you say you can't get a job?

 

I agree that getting a job should be your number one priority. You can work part time to start. When my kids were toddlers I worked evenings while my husband worked days. Then when they were in school full time I got a full time job.

 

And I have no college degree either. But I have built a decent career for myself.

 

And I can tell you, being self-sufficient is terrific. I don't have to depend on anyone for anything. So I can afford to be choosy about who I spend time with and who I date. Or marry.

 

I misread that initially too thinking she had her kid full time and the kid goes to dads every second weekend...that does make it harder to justify staying home...but at the same time, it would be rare to find a job that requires working weekends that would let you have every second weekend off...and maybe her partner won't help with childcare...or maybe because she sees her child so little already that she doesn't want to miss out on more time. Who knows.

 

And at 49, it's hard to suggest going back to school.

 

Maybe part time work where shifts can be traded? Although it'll be tough to trade getting weekends off unless it's in a restaurant.

[boltnrun]

I had part time jobs that didn't require working weekends. I answered phones for a business, for example. I also did clerical work for a doctor's office. Definitely was not open weekends lol! Then as I gained experience I was able to qualify for full time office jobs.

 

That would be my suggestion. Not necessarily to try to "save" the marriage (I'd still have trouble with the divorce threats and the put downs), but to gain independence and confidence.

[faraday]

I had part time jobs that didn't require working weekends. I answered phones for a business, for example. I also did clerical work for a doctor's office. Definitely was not open weekends lol! Then as I gained experience I was able to qualify for full time office jobs.

 

That would be my suggestion. Not necessarily to try to "save" the marriage (I'd still have trouble with the divorce threats and the put downs), but to gain independence and confidence.

 

How long ago did you do that? In my city, even answering phones part time requires a degree now. Any kind of office work requires a degree. Maybe it depends on where you live? Because even a lot of retail positions require either relevant experience or a degree...it's kind of crazy.

[journeynow]

He wants you to discuss expenditures ahead of time, since he's the one that will be covering them? You've agreed to that, and yet you've gone against your word and spent money without warning him? And he gets upset to the point he threatens divorce? Are the arguments always about money?

[lisa4321]

@j.man he said it wouldn't be my own spending money and no spending

[lisa4321]

Don't judge what you don't know. My child doesn't live with us!!

[lisa4321]

True every type of work requires a degree now

[lisa4321]

Not always about money

[boltnrun]

True every type of work requires a degree now

 

I don’t have a degree but I work. Most of the people I work with don't either.

[lisa4321]

Yes every errand pay bills household chores

[itsallgrand]

What is it we don't know?

 

How would you support yourself and your child without your husband and ex?

 

I'm not saying it's easy, nor that the work you can get right now will be conveinent or what you would prefer. Add any children to the mix, it gets harder. But do you think you are responsible to take care of you and your child? Do you think you are entitled to being cared for ? Having help is nice, trade offs are nice. But it's help, not mandatory because you do chores you would have to do anyways if you solely supported yourself. We all have laundry and chores to do, bills to pay.

[shiner501]

It does not matter who is earning the money. You are PARTNERS. That means you're both in this TOGETHER. For better for worse. For richer for poorer. Remember those words does he?

 

This man sounds like a very immature, emotionally abusive and probably weak male individual who feels strong by threatening you with this nonsense.

 

You know the situation better than any of us but I suggest it's time to consider calling his bluff. Move out of the marital bed. Start to plan your departure. Mark my words, I am 99% sure he will cave as soon as he sees you doing these things and will become a puppy when he sees you on the way out.

[Lester]

A side note:

 

"I told him my car brakes were $500. It needed transmission fluid and brake fluid and fuel injectors cleaned. Came to $800. I told dealer go ahead without asking him first."

 

$300 dollars?

Quart transmission fluid $10.00

Pint of brake fluid $5.00

Pint of injector cleaner $8.00 (Poured into gas tank.)

 

Parts total $23.00

Labor, maybe 10 minutes. (I doubt he even did it.)

 

I think this dealer is a crook.

I highly doubt he did anything more than throw some brake pads on the front rotors. $50.

 

I'm not trying to justify your husband's overreactions, but instead, beware of crooked auto dealers/mechanics who love to rip off people.

 

 

Learning how to talk to each other, a budget and not getting ripped off should save your marriage.

You will have to take the first steps by standing up to him.

 

Start by telling him not to ever threaten you again.

Next, ask him to check the fluids and brakes. If he doesn't know how..., bingo! This is the main reason he's shooting his mouth off at you.

 

Get under the hood of your car!

Use the internet to help you.

 

PS, it's not about how much money you make, it's about how much you get to keep.

[Lester]

While on a roll...

 

Theory:

Oil/liquids can't be compressed.

 

Definition:

Auto brakes are little more than a pipe filled with oil.

On one end is your foot which pushes an obstruction (piston) into/down the pipe.

On the other end is a squeezer/caliper. This is basically a small can/reservoir with a second piston to which the brake pads are attached.

Because the oil won't compress, it pushes the second piston and pads outward against the spinning rotor, which is attached to the wheel, thus slowing the car.

 

When the brake system is new or properly redone, the main brake fluid reservoir (small semi-clear container, under hood, driver side) will be filled to the "max" line.

As the brake pads wear, the squeezer/caliper will need more and more oil in it's reservoir to make the stroke/squeeze. Thus, the main reservoir will drop in level as the caliper(s) reservoirs fill with more and more oil.

 

Once the pads are worn, the squeezers/calipers on each wheel being serviced must be pressed back to their original, unextended position. (Big pair of Channel lock pliers works well)

 

As the Caliper(s) are squeezed back, the non-compressible oil pushs back up the pipe refilling the main reservoir.

 

If this dealer did all the brakes, the reservoir would must likely not have needed any oil.

Actually, they usually have to suck some out. This being due to nervous car owners adding oil when it's not needed.

 

Again, I don't have a warm and fuzzy feeling about this dealer.

[Wiseman2]

Depends on the make/model.

[faraday]

My dad is able to replace my calipers and brake pads for under $200...but before I asked him to help me, I got quotes...all three quotes were around $1200. Depends on make/model...where you live etc.

 

This isn't really about brake pads though...it's about the way fights take place. In a marriage, the "d" word shouldn't be thrown around lightly...it erodes trust and respect, and without those, you've got nothing.