By Brad Young<\/a>, Money feature writer<\/b><\/p>\n Abandoning her career to look after their two daughters was what Isobel’s* ex-husband wanted.<\/p>\n Six years after their divorce, she earns a quarter of his salary while caring for the children six out of seven days.<\/p>\n Despite having two university degrees, she is “trapped” on universal credit and frustrated with a “ludicrous” divorce system that didn’t account for years of unpaid work to support her ex and raise their family.<\/p>\n “I feel hugely let down and I feel cheated by a system that feels so orchestrated towards women being on the back foot,” said Isobel, 44, from Berkshire.<\/p>\n Data suggests she is not alone.<\/p>\n The numbers<\/b><\/p>\n Divorce slashes women’s household incomes far more than men’s, new research by Legal and General has revealed.<\/p>\n Wives can expect their income to be halved on average in the year after ending the relationship, compared with a 30% drop for husbands.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n A closer look at Isobel’s divorce settlement – and why half didn’t seem anywhere near fair<\/b><\/p>\n Isobel was earning \u00a319,500 working for a pharmaceutical company in 2007 when she married her ex-husband.<\/p>\n She took voluntary redundancy while on maternity leave in 2008 and over the next nine years only briefly worked part-time.<\/p>\n “It [the jobs] didn’t last very long because he didn’t manage very well with me being at work,” she said.<\/p>\n When they divorced in 2019, she had been back in work for two years. But her care assistant salary was just \u00a317,000 – much less than her likely salary if she hadn’t given up her career to be a mum. As for her husband – he was now taking home approximately \u00a352,000.<\/p>\n In a roughly even settlement, she was awarded the car, one buy-to-let flat with \u00a350,000 equity, and \u00a355,000 of \u00a3200,000 equity from the family home, plus child maintenance. He was awarded the remainder of the equity and a separate buy-to-let flat.<\/p>\n She spent \u00a320,000 on solicitors’ fees and, given her low wages, much of the rest of her capital was used to pay off debt accumulated after separating and renting from 2018 onwards, she said.<\/p>\n “Why on earth would it [the settlement] be a 50-50 split when my earning capability is a quarter of what he earns?” said Isobel, who is now a nurse on \u00a325,000 a year while her ex-husband earns six figures.<\/p>\n “I’ve had six years out of work, I’m the primary carer for the children, I’m never going to be able to get a job that gives me \u00a3100,000, am I? That’s ludicrous. And why is that not taken into account?”<\/p>\n Some more data<\/b><\/p>\n Double the number of divorced women (14%) have cut their hours to manage caring responsibilities compared with men (7%), Legal and General (L&G) found.<\/p>\n “Women still pick up the majority share of caring responsibilities, both for children as part of the family unit, but also elderly relatives,” said Lorna Shah, managing director of retail retirement at the pension provider.<\/p>\n Shah sees a lot of cases where married women prioritise the family unit over their own financial well-being and long-term earning potential.<\/p>\n Emma Hitchings, professor of family law at the University of Bristol, agrees: “Wives, and particularly mothers, are in a precarious financial position at the point of divorce.”<\/p>\n Her wide-ranging 2023 study, Fair Shares on Divorce, found married women were more likely to be employed part-time, with 28% taking home under \u00a31,000 a month compared with 10% of men.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n One key asset that’s often overlooked – pensions<\/b><\/p>\n Pensions are one of the three main assets divvied up in any divorce settlement, alongside capital and housing.<\/p>\n Yet Hitchings said her study found there is a “lack of awareness, understanding and interest in pensions” on divorce.<\/p>\n “Women are far more likely to surrender any rights over pensions,” said Shah, adding they often prioritised the family home.<\/p>\n Legal and General found 28% of women waived their rights to access their partner’s pot, compared with 17% of men.<\/p>\n This is despite women having smaller pensions for the same reasons their wages are lower post-divorce: the gender pay gap (which stands at 7%), longer parental leave and more career breaks for childcare.<\/p>\n “There’s a\u00a0reticence for some women to call on their partners’ pensions,” said Shah.<\/p>\n “I think it feels like it’s not theirs, but obviously if they’ve had joint finances as part of a marriage, then actually they’ve contributed to that in other ways and therefore it should all be considered.”<\/p>\n Grace’s divorce and her husband’s ‘hidden’ pay rises<\/b><\/p>\n Among the women waiving that right is Grace*, 48, from the Midlands, who feels “forced to take the bare minimum” in her ongoing divorce proceedings.<\/p>\n Her husband has offered her \u00a370,000 if she doesn’t make a claim to his pension or future earnings, she said, and she feels she has to agree so she can leave their home as quickly as possible with a deposit for another house.<\/p>\n “I’m devastated if I’m being honest with you because all I ever worked for was just to have a solid home and a family.”<\/p>\n In 2005, she gave up her \u00a326,000 job at an energy company and the \u00a3160,000 home she owned in Greater London to move in with her husband-to-be and his children.<\/p>\n Grace said she invested \u00a330,000 in renovating their home in the Midlands and, while still working full-time, took on the role of “homemaker”.<\/p>\n “I would be the one looking after the house, the general running, the washing, the cleaning and all the typical wifey things.”<\/p>\n Her husband took control of all the finances \u2013 to the point she was “shocked” to find out he had not disclosed pay rises from \u00a350,000 to \u00a380,000. Grace earns \u00a326,000.<\/p>\n “I feel incredibly ripped off – manipulated. I feel hopeless,” she said, adding the house she once owned in Greater London is now worth approximately \u00a3400,000.<\/p>\n “The worst thing is that I feel it’s really hard to wrap my head around everything after having let go for so many years to let him control everything – and then trying to make the right decisions when you’re emotionally distraught all the time.”<\/p>\n Knowledge is power<\/b><\/p>\n Lack of understanding is common in divorce proceedings, Professor Hitchings’ study found.<\/p>\n Again, the division of pensions provides a perfect illustration.<\/p>\n That’s because pension sharing requires a court order, and there is less understanding of the process since legal aid for private family proceedings in England and Wales was cut in 2015, she said.<\/p>\n In 2023, only 11% of divorcees with a pension yet to be drawn had made an arrangement for pension sharing.<\/p>\n Some 37% did not know the value of their own (let alone their ex-spouse’s) pension.<\/p>\n Around 10% of homeowners with a mortgage did not know what the equity in their home was at the point of divorce.<\/p>\n Karen Stainton, 55, found her background in finance invaluable during a protracted and painful divorce 10 years ago.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n She offered to pay her ex-husband a \u00a3135,000 lump sum out of the proceeds of the house, in return for him waiving access to her pension.<\/p>\n “And why should he, after he’d not given me any child benefit or helped me look after the kids after the split,” she said.<\/p>\n She took on three jobs and worked seven days a week to earn the \u00a345,000 she needed to look after their children, Joe, John and Peter, aged 18, 15 and eight, at the time of the divorce.<\/p>\n “I was completely running on adrenaline. It wasn’t good,” she said.<\/p>\n But a decade later, her pension is valued at \u00a3450,000 \u2013 far more than the lump sum.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Law ‘definitely needs reform’<\/b><\/p>\n Professor Hitchings added that there are areas of the law that “definitely need reform”.<\/p>\n It gives couples too much discretion at the expense of having a full account of all of their assets and their future prospects, particularly pensions.<\/p>\n In December, the Law Commission published a scoping report on whether the existing law – the more than 50-year-old Matrimonial Causes Act of 1973 – needs reform.<\/p>\n The government was given six months to respond to the report and decide whether the commission should investigate further and suggest options for reform.<\/p>\n “We are grateful to the Law Commission for reviewing the current laws governing finances in divorce, including in relation to pensions,” said a\u00a0Ministry of Justice spokesperson.<\/p>\n “The government is carefully considering the findings of the report and will provide a response in due course.”<\/p>\n What divorcees can do<\/b><\/p>\n Whether a divorcee should prioritise pension sharing, capital, or the family home depends on their circumstances, said Shah.<\/p>\n “Gather as much information as you can up front; try to get some financial advice if you can afford it or guidance otherwise,” she added, pointing to a financial health checking service Legal and General provide\u00a0online<\/a>.<\/p>\n “Divorce is a really emotional time for everybody involved. But being able to take that step back and actually look at it from a logical perspective on really what is the best for both parties, both at the time and in the longer term, is really important.”<\/p>\n *Names have been changed to hide the identity of some interviewees.<\/i><\/p>\n <\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/dominiclevent.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/footer-300x100.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n