AMEN!!!!!!

In many states ALL retirement is divided.

Plus the constant moving prevents spouses from having much of a retirement - you can't count Social Security - anyone just living on that is eating cat food for meals.

Some people cut a deal with the spouses also. I know several who aren't sharing retirements because they traded something else. In my case half the retirement was ALL I got.

Yeah there are tales out there of the cheating wife who now gets half but there are plenty that were loyal even like myself when it was abusive. I could give a workshop on why women stay. If you sat and listened to my ex you would think I was the lowest scumbag on the face of the earth. Remember folks like Ted Bundy were charmers. A court of law would award me nothing I believed for years.

quote:

Originally posted by pken:
"For better, or for worse.......in sickness and in health......'til death do us part".

And now you want to re-shuffle the deck?

Marriage is an equal partnership. And when they go bad, it's a division of everything. Fair is fair!

Too many ex-spouse's got left out of everything in the past.....that's why the laws are the way they are, about retirement pay.

I'm getting ready to duck the flack and incoming for giving you a reality check!

Love 'em and leave 'em......but not if you marry 'em!

quote:

In many states ALL retirement is divided.

Plus the constant moving prevents spouses from having much of a retirement - you can't count Social Security - anyone just living on that is eating cat food for meals.

Some people cut a deal with the spouses also. I know several who aren't sharing retirements because they traded something else. In my case half the retirement was ALL I got.

First off, the "ideal" scenario is when a wife truly is devoted, loyal and supports a man's military career while taking on the hard tasks of raising a family, basically, alone much of the time. THEN, when the man is older, he gets a case of "middle aged crazy", dumps his loyal wife for a new vette and a young set of boobs! In THAT scenario, she deserves her just compensation. THAT is what I believe the Former Spouse Protection PLan was "intended" to do.

Now...there are MANY wives of military folks, (mine was one), that HATED the military, hated everything about it...was ridden more than Seattle Slew when I was off at sea on a deployment, (unknown to me at the time), got pregnant, got an abortion while I was away, had more than one man living with her IN MY DAMNED HOUSE, etc....I have a LONNNNG laundry list that I won't go further into...I tried the marriage counseling route...she refused...she would "act" like she wanted to change things...right up until I had believed her long enough that she passed the "magic" 10 year qualification for a QDRO against my retirement...then she didn't care anymore...so I left. She got everything, house, car,kids, dogs...I got the clothes on my back and a 14 year old used car! To this day she gets almost 30% of my retirement, (she barely made the cut off..).

To THOSE women...I say they DO NOT DESERVE IT...IF I thought for one minute that my ex "deserved" it...I wouldn't be complaining...but there are a Hell of a lot of us out there that KNOW BETTER. They were NOT loyal, they cheated constantly, they manipulated the service members until they could get what they wanted and then dumped us and took the money! For THOSE cases, the Former Spouse Protection Plan SUX!!! PERIOD!

NOW, 13 years later, she is re-married...making 10 times what I do now...literally, and STILL gets MY piddly retirement as a "bonus" to buy her new car with every year...for her new hubby!

And one more thing: An 06's wife has NO CLUE what it is like to be an enlisted person with the problems we have. Tea parties and such are not our main focus. As you may gather, I don't care for O's wives...not one bit. Especially those that come onto a predominately enlisted board and preach to them about being "proper". I got a place they can STICK "proper"!

There is a bill in Congress right now to remove the 10 year "rule". That would have really bad effects for vets or upcoming vets. My understanding is the ex-spouse would only need to be married to you while you are in the service, no 10 year rule. The rule states it's not meant to favorite the vet or the ex-spouse, bunk...
I hope this case goes all the way up, we need relief from money-mongers.

The first part of your post does describe me and several women I know. I am sorry you have no respect for Officer's wives. Don't think we don't understand. I understand well living with little money - double lives are expensive.

I have mentioned before that women like your ex make all former spouses look bad. I get treated terribly when people see my ID card. People think I'm a camp follower. All I am is a Christian woman that thought she needed to hold her family together. The FSPA gave the bimbo secretary pause before she went after the married Colonel.

The new legislation may be a be careful what you wish for. Someone married less than 10 years may get a chunk now.

All I know is that the split retirement can help me from living in poverty but I should have left long before I did.

quote:

Originally posted by ATCTIRED:

quote:

In many states ALL retirement is divided.

Plus the constant moving prevents spouses from having much of a retirement - you can't count Social Security - anyone just living on that is eating cat food for meals.

Some people cut a deal with the spouses also. I know several who aren't sharing retirements because they traded something else. In my case half the retirement was ALL I got.

First off, the "ideal" scenario is when a wife truly is devoted, loyal and supports a man's military career while taking on the hard tasks of raising a family, basically, alone much of the time. THEN, when the man is older, he gets a case of "middle aged crazy", dumps his loyal wife for a new vette and a young set of boobs! In THAT scenario, she deserves her just compensation. THAT is what I believe the Former Spouse Protection PLan was "intended" to do.

Now...there are MANY wives of military folks, (mine was one), that HATED the military, hated everything about it...was ridden more than Seattle Slew when I was off at sea on a deployment, (unknown to me at the time), got pregnant, got an abortion while I was away, had more than one man living with her IN MY DAMNED HOUSE, etc....I have a LONNNNG laundry list that I won't go further into...I tried the marriage counseling route...she refused...she would "act" like she wanted to change things...right up until I had believed her long enough that she passed the "magic" 10 year qualification for a QDRO against my retirement...then she didn't care anymore...so I left. She got everything, house, car,kids, dogs...I got the clothes on my back and a 14 year old used car! To this day she gets almost 30% of my retirement, (she barely made the cut off..).

To THOSE women...I say they DO NOT DESERVE IT...IF I thought for one minute that my ex "deserved" it...I wouldn't be complaining...but there are a Hell of a lot of us out there that KNOW BETTER. They were NOT loyal, they cheated constantly, they manipulated the service members until they could get what they wanted and then dumped us and took the money! For THOSE cases, the Former Spouse Protection Plan SUX!!! PERIOD!

NOW, 13 years later, she is re-married...making 10 times what I do now...literally, and STILL gets MY piddly retirement as a "bonus" to buy her new car with every year...for her new hubby!

And one more thing: An 06's wife has NO CLUE what it is like to be an enlisted person with the problems we have. Tea parties and such are not our main focus. As you may gather, I don't care for O's wives...not one bit. Especially those that come onto a predominately enlisted board and preach to them about being "proper". I got a place they can STICK "proper"!

quote:

The new legislation may be a be careful what you wish for. Someone married less than 10 years may get a chunk now.

All I know is that the split retirement can help me from living in poverty but I should have left long before I did.

Ok...I was having a "moment". NOT ALL 0's wives/ex's are bad nor twit brains either. If you are not one of the afore mentioned, (only YOU know for sure), then consider yourself excluded from my remarks.

The actions currently ongoing are an effort to have the entire ASFSPA repealed, period. In it's place, basically the same thing ONLY this time with some better thought out provisions.


Like, when the ex re-marries, she/he LOSES the gravy train. Or, for 11 years of eligibility an ex won't recieve LIFETIME benefits from age 36 to DEATH!

Provisions like: Even though in a "no fault divorce" state, the government can consider grounds that would prevent the ex from claiming benefits. (With acceptable proof, no "he said, she said" crap.) Infidelity, having someone else's baby, or an abortion 5 years after the member had a vasectomy!...things like that!

As for the less than 10 year rule: I doubt that it will come to pass. After a 600,000 man/woman MUTINY...I think the powers that be would re-consider!

As for the 0's wives remark: I've had some pretty bad experiences with 0's wives. (Some good, I'll admit..)..but MOSTLY bad. It's the condesending attitude that I always fixated on I suppose. Most come off like they are "so much better" than a "mere enlisted". Again, if YOU aren't one of those women, (I refuse to call them "ladies")...then ignor my remarks.

Retirement pay should be tax free, and x--free. No matter what you girls think, you didn't earn it. You have no claim to it, and even if you do get it, we all know what you did for it.

All this talk about the ex-spouse earned the right to split retirement pay is a bit unsettling. Talk about talking care of the kids, housekeeping etc, heck civilian couples do the same thing and the ex don't get half of the retirement pay. Another angle, during the divorce proceedings, you the military member, put in a claim for half of your ex's future retirement. That will make them think. Male or female, it don't matter, it's an injustice to people who served faithly for 20 plus years, to have your ex collect part of your retirement for the rest of your or their lives, no matter they remarried and earn zillions of dollars more than you. I would like to know MSG Dan's lawyer friend about an ex who can't collect if they don't submit for the retired pay within a certain amount of time after retirement. I don't think that is the case, there is no time limit on when your ex can submit for their part of your retirement pay. And if they submit years later after your retirement, they will also get "backpay" since your retirement date. What an injustice of justice.

You need to read through the thread more. Retirement military or civilian is a property settlement not spousal support. I know many who are collecting their former spouse's civilian retirements. My former spouse waived collecting part of my civilian if I would not come after a portion of his.

quote:

Originally posted by MSG_Starr:
All this talk about the ex-spouse earned the right to split retirement pay is a bit unsettling. Talk about talking care of the kids, housekeeping etc, heck civilian couples do the same thing and the ex don't get half of the retirement pay. Another angle, during the divorce proceedings, you the military member, put in a claim for half of your ex's future retirement. That will make them think. Male or female, it don't matter, it's an injustice to people who served faithly for 20 plus years, to have your ex collect part of your retirement for the rest of your or their lives, no matter they remarried and earn zillions of dollars more than you. I would like to know MSG Dan's lawyer friend about an ex who can't collect if they don't submit for the retired pay within a certain amount of time after retirement. I don't think that is the case, there is no time limit on when your ex can submit for their part of your retirement pay. And if they submit years later after your retirement, they will also get "backpay" since your retirement date. What an injustice of justice.

The money an ex gets IS a "property" settlement. When the law was passed, it proclaimed military retirement as a "joint marital property", without qualification, and allowed ex-spouses to collect.
They can file LATER down the road, but as I understand, IT IS NOT "retroactive" but rather it starts from the day the courts recognize the QDRO. It took my ex almost a YEAR for her attorney to have the QDRO drawn up in such a way that it was "acceptable" by DFAS..THEN she had it filed and it took effect the day it was declared in effect in court.
Civilians DO have their retirements attached and in such a way that it doesn't matter if the ex-spouse re-marries or not. My wife now is awaiting her settlement from her ex: she got half of their savings account and half of his retirement...HOWEVER: she cannot claim it UNTIL HE RETIRES or at age 56 1/2...whichever comes first. He is still working the same career for Kraft Foods. The "saving account" she cannot touch until she is 59 1/2...why??? I haven't a clue...but her half is just over 125K. It is an "investment" savings and if the stock market takes a dive -- it COULD be next to nothing by the time she is old enough to gain access to the cash. Fingers crossed that doesn't happen.

I have always maintained that if a service member has been married to someone, (trying to be gender neutral here..ok), and that sppouse "faithfully supported" the member and his/her career for 20+ years...AND THEN the member gets "middleaged crazy", dumps the old wife and kids for a red sports car a big boobed blonde...Then, in that case, the ex-spouse DESERVES the 1/2 retirement. And I tell you now honestly...IF that had been MY circumstance-- I wouldn't be *****ing about it! But is WAS NOT and it STILL sticks in my craw...will til the day I die!

My ex was ridden "more than Seattle Slew", (a line from Liar, Liar), got pregs, got an abortion while I was at sea, continued screwing around behind my back until the day I finally packed up and left her ***! She had been "coached" by her best friend whom knew about the ASFSPA to "stick with me" a couple of more years UNTIL she reached "eligibility"...which she did....afterwards she made life at home so miserable and refused counseling etc...that finally I just left. (That's the reader's digest version.)
She called me one evening a few months after I moved out and told me, "That's alright you SOB, I stayed with you long enough to get half your retirement didn't I?!" To which I replied:
"Yes...you did. But you remember ONE THING! You get that for as long as I live...or as long as YOU LIVE...and don't you forget it!"
She NEVER mentioned it again...to this day...15 years later! And YES...she remarried, makes 10 times what I do. I'm 100% disabled, (non-service connected), one paycheck away from living in a cardboard box...she & her new hubby get a new truck every year now...courtesy of the ASFSPA...THANK YOU CONGRESS AND DFAS!

Oh...BTW:

YES! I'M BITTER! BITTER AS HELL!

But not so much at the ex anymore...but at CONGRESS for ALLOWING THIS CRAP to pass WITHOUT ANY QUALIFICATIONS! Even in a no fault divorce state, the ASFSPA COULD have been written to accomodate extenuating circumstances/factors. BUT because they didn't want to be a "courts system" over it...THEY TOOK THE EASY WAY OUT...Which OF COUSE...SCREWED THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF MILITARY MEMBERS!

Had we divorced in Virginia or some OTHER "at fault" state, then her DOCUMENTED past could have been evidenced and she wouldn't have gotten SQUAT!

SUGGESTION: NEVER divorce in a no fault state...it takes a heck of a lot longer in a "fault/cause" state but that's better than someone that doesn't deserve your retirement getting it for LIFE when you KNOW they don't deserve it!

I think it is about time to hear someone say exactly how I feel about it. And why is it that they get this until they die, if they only shared a few years as thier spouse. The worst part is the women that divorce their husbands still get it. Their should be a law againts that as well. If you chose to leave the marraige, committ adultry, and move on then you certainly should not be able to share in his/her retirement that they spent so many years to earn. My husband is now going through this. I am disgusted by this law. It creates scandles for people to have reason to marry into the military. It makes it too easy for them. I'm just a woman searching into this and came across this board, so I just wanted to comment on it. Trust me when I say, I will be part of trying to be heard and helping to change this law if i can!!

"the women who divorce their husbands" describes me. I filed when I found out about the adultery. He was never going to file because he knew after a 27 year marriage he would have to split up quite a bit.

Be careful what you wish for.

In my case, in a 90 day no fault state my ex stalled and stalled hoping I would give up (not come back to him but give up on the divorce). He was telling his girlfriend that I wouldn't divorce him for religious reasons then had to backpedal when I filed. His stalling cost me $8000 in lawyer fees. While he stalled he ran up quite a bit of credit card debt which totally trashed my credit rating. This was a FINANCE officer by the way. So all I got after an abusive 27 year marriage was half the retirement. DFAS also gave me a hard time and "lost" the paperwork multiple times. It took me 6 months to get the direct deposit started.

Don't tell me I didn't earn it.

quote:

Originally posted by flyy58:
I think it is about time to hear someone say exactly how I feel about it. And why is it that they get this until they die, if they only shared a few years as thier spouse. The worst part is the women that divorce their husbands still get it. Their should be a law againts that as well. If you chose to leave the marraige, committ adultry, and move on then you certainly should not be able to share in his/her retirement that they spent so many years to earn. My husband is now going through this. I am disgusted by this law. It creates scandles for people to have reason to marry into the military. It makes it too easy for them. I'm just a woman searching into this and came across this board, so I just wanted to comment on it. Trust me when I say, I will be part of trying to be heard and helping to change this law if i can!!

I'd like to introduce another aspect of this sharlng of retired pay. What bothers me is that I have to pay taxes on the entire amount of retirement pay instead of only the amount I receive. My ex has to pay taxes on the amount she receives which amounts to double taxation (in my estimation.) My lawyer told me back in 1983 to just report what she received as "alimony" on my tax return and that worked fine until this year when I was audited. I believe that DFAS should indicate the amount she gets as non-taxable on the 1099-R (there is a block for that) which would fix the problem. I've written to Sen Snowe asking her help on this and I hope it works out. Meanwhile, I am wondering how readers on this list view that. Let me state right up front that she deserves her portion, and admitedly it took me a few years to come to that conclusion.

rp

You said your lawyer told you to report it as alimony??? Did the audit show differently??

I also pay taxes on my half of my ex's retirement that has already been taxed. I think it stinks.

The only way I have survived my losing 49.9% since getting divorced in Feb 1990 is simple. I simply look at it as I win in the end. If she dies I am finished with this unjust bullshit, and if I die , well she grubs no more money out of me. Being dead is the only way we will not have to pay these blood suckers. I support any and all causes for reform. If such reform did happen, it would be too late for those of us that have suffered full penetration, "with no lube mind you!!!"

Yes, he told me that after everything was finalized; just to get rid of me I suppose. He also told me that payments would end if she remarried, but from what I read on this list I suppose that was a lie. (as I now review my divorce decree I see no reference to that.)

Here is what IRS said: "Alimony Deduction - Disallowed." "In order to claim an income credit for alimony, you must meet 5 tests - The payment i in cash, the parties do not designate that the payment is not alimony, if the paties are separated under a divorce decree/separate maintenance, they are not members of the same household when payments are made, there is no liability to make payments after the death of the recepient spouse and the payments are not treated as child support."


"you are only allowed an alimony/spousal support (retirement pay) deduction if you receive your gross retirement pay. Your former spouse receives her portion of your military retirement pay driectly from DFAS. You in turn receive only your portion directly from DFAS which you reported on your Form 1040, line 16b. You may not deduct from income an amount for which you did not report as income."

Unless Sen Snowe can get DFAS to report her portion as non-taxable on the 1099-R then I am stuck. I'm sure she is going to send my information directly to IRS as I just today had to fill out a private information release form and send it back to her office and she will get the same gobble-de-gook as the IRS sent me (above) and that will end my quest. Insofar as Congress giving any relief/changes to the AFSPSA; forget it, Pat Schroeder's (grrrr) liberal party just returned. I have resigned myself to this as there will be no change in my lifetime (I'm 76); I do feel, however, that the double taxation is grossly unfair. Otherwise - life is good.

Thanks for your interest.

quote:

Originally posted by 10788759:
You said your lawyer told you to report it as alimony??? Did the audit show differently??

I also pay taxes on my half of my ex's retirement that has already been taxed. I think it stinks.

Good info posted on the requirements for a deduction. I am sure at 76 you will not live to see any justice in this issue. At 55 I to doubt that a change will come in my life time.

The fine leaders that pilfer and waste the public's money and molest freely those that work UNDER them care less. NO concern is shown by these leaders for those that paid a heavy price in this thing called freedom. Freedom is a double edged sword at times, and I honestly see the veterans getting the dull side of the blade. At least if the sharp side was used the cut would be clean and precise. NO! The vetern must experience the dull side that produces a jagged, uneven, and more painful experience.

Thanks to the Play Boy mentality in Washington I advise you to take your own tube of lubricant to divorce court. You may be so broke just the generic brand is affordable, but sure beats that dry assault you surely will experience other wise!!!

Dear Destroyed, Your story is truly sad and I feel your pain. Not because I can relate, but because I'm human and a female so I can understand your pain. How ironic that I am actually on the other side of this coin. I just recently married a retired Army Veteran and am questioning his ex-wife getting any part of his retirement pay. My first thought was there was only a black or white side to this debate. But after reading your story I can see that there should be a gray area too. What I mean by this is just like there are no two people just alike ,there is no two situations in this ex-spouse thing either. My husbands ex cheated on him, didn't even support him mentally or emotionally. He was fighting in Vietnam for her freedom and for our great country and she does nothing to help him in any way. They where married for 12 and did have a beautiful daughter who now calls me Mom and says I'm more of a mother than she's ever had with her real mom. They have been divorced for twenty years and he has to pay her money? There is something not right with that. I guess maybe like with the criminal laws that have sentencing guidelines for various crimes, we need gide lines in regards to this spousal-retirement pay. I believe it is possible to give some help to the spouses whom were there for their mate. Who was divorced by them and left not due to any form of adultrey or wrongfulness on their part. But their spouse wanted the divorce and then they shoul dgive some money for the number of years that was given to them in the marriage. But for the unfaithful,good for nothing spouses, they don't deserve squat. I don't know, but regardless I am truly sorry for your situation and will keep your children and yourself in my prayers. God Bless you.
SeptemberArmybride

Hope its true, 25% would be acceptable. I feel they should get some tribute. But when they are the cause of the problems, and stay for the free ride. No they are not collateral damage, they become expendable, except as active duty members we have deployments and other things to due than to get rapped up in a civilian divorce court with an angry spouse, whos cheating on the side and you can't prove it, because you are overseas or shipboard. Spouses who want everything except your soul. Let us go and let the soldier fight without the burden of worry, guilt or what ever. It goes both ways. Happens to both genders. So keep it neutral.

E-mail received by me:
http://macombdaily.com/stories/011607/loc_20070116002.shtml



· Michigan 16th Circuit Court Judge DONALD G. MILLER - (United States Air Force): In 2001, (North v. North) - Judge Donald G. Miller awarded 50% of Mr. James North's VA disability compensation to his ex-wife as a property settlement - for life. Judge Miller's ruling in the North divorce case was a blatant violation of U.S.C., Title 38, §5301 and U.S.C., Title 42, §659. On November 30, 2004, Judge Miller's ruling was determined to be a violation of North's veteran's benefits and reversed by Macomb County Circuit Court Judge Mark S. Switalski.
Judge Donald G. Miller is a USAF veteran and flew combat mission in Vietnam. Miller retired as a Colonel from the Air National Guard after having served as Base Commander at Selfridge Air National Guard Base. Miller is a member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Vietnam Veterans Association, the Selfridge Air National Guard Base Community Council, and the Experimental Aircraft Association.
Judge Donald G. Miller's wife is Michigan Congresswoman, Candice Miller - (R).
North v. North - PDF file link