Bea V. Larsen . . . .Commentaries

Bea V. Larsen is a Senior Mediator at the Center for Resolution of Disputes in
Cincinnati, Ohio 
Bea V. Larsen

For a number of years Bea V. Larsen, senior mediator at the Center for Resolution of Disputes in Cincinnati, Ohio [www.cfrdmediation.com], presented weekly commentaries on WVXU radio, both on her professional work as a mediator and on more personal or general experiences. These broadcasts reached thousands of listeners in a number of midwestern states and elicited many comments. This new series of online commentaries will continue that tradition, now broadcast to the world via the internet. Comments, which can be posted directly to this blog, are warmly encouraged. More personal background information can be read in the "Introductions" category below.
 

A Taste of Power

Print the article

This entry was posted on 2/17/2007 4:55 PM and is filed under Relationship Dynamics.

    I have friends, in a distant city, who divorced some years ago and are now contemplating remarriage, to each other.

    For over a year, they lived separately, shared their children's time, and then slowly drifted back into each other's orbit in loving ways. Now the entire family is once again under the same roof, and they are recommitted to each other.

    So, the question they are pondering is, should they remarry? Religious considerations aside, which for them are not wholly insignificant, could they accept the practice of their children's generation and simply live together? Perhaps.

    What is most confusing to them now is how to handle their money, which they've gradually come to realize presents puzzles greater than the sexual conundrum.

    Let's call them John and Mary. John has always been the sole breadwinner. Mary has now returned to graduate school, anticipating a future career, but some years off. During their marriage, John's earnings, if not invested or added to a retirement account, were always placed in a joint account from which they both drew for day to day needs, consulting on all major expenditures. Money was not tight, and rarely did either question the spending decisions of the other.

    So, why not simply return to their old comfortable ways? John suggests this path.

    But, things have changed, particularly for Mary.

    The terms of their divorce decree require that John pay significant monthly support to Mary. He continues to do so. Mary places these funds in an account in her name alone. As she did during their separation, she still provides for her own and the children's needs, pays the household expenses and saves what is not needed. This could be seen as Mary receiving a substantial salary for her homemaking efforts. She also now controls, in her own name, half of the assets which they had accumulated, and which were divided at the time of their divorce.

    Mary has come to value her financial autonomy, and would not welcome a return to total economic dependence on John, to relinquish the power the Court support order provides, which has put her on something of an equal footing with her former husband.

    What games are played in relationships where one person's security and future well being is wholly dependent on the largess, however benevolent, of another? Is an equilibrium sought in covert ways? It is interesting to contemplate how many relationships might flower, if the equality achieved by my divorced friends, happened before rather than after disaster struck.

    And here's a twist. John's and Mary's children very much want them to remarry, so with some new agreements, possibly even formalized in a legal document, that is likely what they will do.

 
 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
    Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

    • 2/18/2007 9:59 PM marie hill wrote:
      Financial Independence for married women is such a delicate and substantial issue. The reciprocal partnership so many divorcing women seek often has eluded them in their marriages. What a great idea to invite couples trying to enrich and deepen their commitment to wrestle with this idea and actually equalize the assets in his and her buckets. As men and women struggled with the implications and meaning of money in their relationship, it is to be hoped that rigidities might be softened, respect deepened and trust enhanced. But for others the opening of Pandora's box could prove mightily problematic. The former possibility is exciting!
      Reply to this
      1. 2/25/2007 1:24 PM Bea Larsen wrote:
            When both marriage partners have significant, even if unequal, earning power, this issue is easier to address. The more difficult challenge is faced when both value having a stay-at-home parent when the children are young, and one career is put on hold or not developed. I think the idea of a salary for homemakers is a good one. It would be interesting to contemplate the amount to be paid. Perhaps the public policy behind the statutory assumption that both parties have contributed equally to the accumulation of marital assets subject to equal division on divorce should apply to a salary entitlement during marriage. After all, the love and attention given to young children by a parent is truly priceless .

        Reply to this
    • 2/20/2007 10:11 PM marie bader wrote:
      Whether it is the male or the female that contibutes the majority of financial resources to a partnership the resulting power inbalance is often a source of contention. It is an unfortunate cultural reality that we value the monetary contribution more than other contributions made to the relationship.
      Reply to this
      1. 2/25/2007 1:32 PM Bea Larsen wrote:
        This is certainly most often true at the time of divorce, sadly. I am aware of a marriage counselor who suggests to parties that they acknowlege the power imbalance and divide assets and income prior to divorce (since it will happen to a certainty with assets should they divorce) and by addressing the power imbalance in this way during the marriage, see what changes might be wrought.

        Reply to this
    Leave a comment

    Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

     Name

     Email (will not be published)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.



      
    Copyright . http://BEALARSEN.COM. All rights reserved.