I need serious advice - divorce pending, reducing herd

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=Trakehner;7228731]
A problem I can see is the expense of the horses and how the divorce plays out for cause. 7 (?) horses is a lot of horses, even moreso when a lot aren’t rideable…will this enter into the divorce proceedings? I sure can see it being an issue brought up, can’t you? “Your honour, my client worked hard and his wife over time became an animal hoarder, collecting all sorts of crippled horses…these animals became a contention that she wouldn’t give up”. If you put them to sleep, you would give credence to that sort of claim. “She only wanted these horses as long as he was paying for them.” A problem.

Just one thing to consider…remember, we don’t know the facts (none of our business)…but don’t make any changes right now…who knows what’ll happen when the dust settles and the lawyers talk. Always be honest with your lawyer.

Even I thought Wendy was being tough…but I think she’s just making comments that apply to so many of the COTH womenfolk, who when a divorce hits, they’re all whingeing about not being able to afford their horses on their own earnings…and saying don’t be a prisoner to another’s earnings to support yourself.[/QUOTE]

BS. Owning 7 horses isn’t being a hoarder.

Wendy wasn’t being tough, she’s just bitter.

[Pennywell_Bay]

^^^^ Great post.

HundredAcres- what a crappy time. Not the same situation but I relocated the farm across the country, was here 2 years and then found out that I could keep my job, but took a 15K a year pay cut. That brought some hard decisions as well. I have 2 26+ that cost a fortune to keep, plus some very fancy young ones that I am in the WRONG area to unload (though I still have my EC connections). My advice to you is when/if you make the decision to euthanize them, rehome them, hard as it may be, don’t second guess yourself. We make the best decision we can in our situations.

Don’t let negatively invade your thoughts as far as some of the comments on this board. You have gotten a lot of great comments/support/advice/shoulders to lean on. Let THEM be superheros, hell, the rest of us are just humans trying to make ends meet. I love my horses, but comparing having to get rid of horses (which may be part of the family but are still a luxury) to getting rid of a kid - Sweetheart- get back on your meds.

You have a lot of pain going on and have the added heartache of dealing with the loss of animals and trying to spare your daughter additional pain. Your priority is first and foremost, taking care of yourself so you can take care of your daughter and find a situation you can live with (no matter how hard) regarding your animals.

Ignore the ignorant comments, married or not, there but for grace… Times like these (if you like country music) I always hum that little song “When You are Going Through Hell”, keep on moving, don’t look back (blah blah don’t know the words) you might get out before the devil even knows you’re there.

[Megaladon]

OP, very sorry about your predicament. I would prefer my horses died happy, healthy and in comfort than sending them off to an unknown fate. Good luck to you.

[Zu_Zu]

((hugs)) Jingles laced with extra strength ~ AO ~ doing all you can we all know that

[I]
Three thts or comments ~

1. I’m sorry ((hugs)) ~ be kind to yourself during this struggle

2. Jingles “this” works out better than it appears to you right now ~

3. [/I]wendy GO JUMP !

[Louise]

OMG, when Zu Zu tells you off, you know you have done wrong. OP, my best wishes added to all of those already sent your way. You’ll do what’s best, for you, your kids and the horses. That’s all anyone can expect.

[GotGait]

Best of luck to you HundredAcres. I’m sorry you are going through this. Ignore the jerks. When you’re married for that length of time, of course you depend on each other, monetarily and otherwise. I’ve supported my husband when he was laid off, but I bet if I’d walked off and left him no one would berate him for not having a crystal ball. :rolleyes:

[Alagirl]

[QUOTE=Louise;7230534]
OMG, when Zu Zu tells you off, you know you have done wrong. [/QUOTE]

OMG, yes! :lol:

[tazz001]

[QUOTE=wendy;7225658]
I’ve never understood why people feel the need to get rid of animals just because their SO walked out? do people get rid of their kids when the SO walks out? hardly ever. So why the animals?[/QUOTE]

Wow, just wow! What an unbelievable heartless comment. I seriously hope karma comes to bite you real hard!

[Pennywell_Bay]

Tazz - right? Yes, people “feel the need” to get rid of animals. It has NOTHING to do with being able to do right by the animal, your child or yourself. Kids and animals are apples and oranges, as the law requires financial support to children. Stupid comparison, and I’ll leave it at that or get banned from the board.

[hundredacres]

The high point of my day was reading todays responses. Zu Zu, I feel honored - I’ve never seen you tell anyone off!

[candyappy]

[QUOTE=wendy;7225658]
I’ve never understood why people feel the need to get rid of animals just because their SO walked out? do people get rid of their kids when the SO walks out? hardly ever. So why the animals?[/QUOTE]

This question disturbs me on many levels. It seems obvious that OP’s income will be drastically reduced with the divorce. While I know of alimony and child support I have never known a judge to order “horse support”. OP just has too many expenses and an uncertain future and the luxuries are the first way to lighten the load. Animals are a luxury.

[Anne_FS]

[QUOTE=grayarabpony;7230226]
BS. Owning 7 horses isn’t being a hoarder.[/QUOTE]

I think Trakehner was just saying that’s the argument that would be used, and I believe it. That word “hoarder” gets thrown around all the time now. Most definitely a bitter ex would use the opportunity to present 7 as “hoarding.”

[hundredacres]

[QUOTE=Anne FS;7230948]
I think Trakehner was just saying that’s the argument that would be used, and I believe it. That word “hoarder” gets thrown around all the time now. Most definitely a bitter ex would use the opportunity to present 7 as “hoarding.”[/QUOTE]

I understood it the same way. I wasn’t offended much.

[LexInVA]

[QUOTE=Anne FS;7230948]
I think Trakehner was just saying that’s the argument that would be used, and I believe it. That word “hoarder” gets thrown around all the time now. Most definitely a bitter ex would use the opportunity to present 7 as “hoarding.”[/QUOTE]

I concur. Any divorce lawyer worth their billables would get in front of a judge and rip Wendy a new orifice by portraying her as an animal hoarding whack-job who didn’t give a damn about her family or marriage if they had enough facts to spin in the right context. That’s just how the game is played in divorce court, regardless of the truth.

[hundredacres]

LOL…thanks for the laugh Lex :).

For what it’s worth, this is a no-fault state, so whether or not I am a hoarder, is irrelevant. The only things that can be brought up to the court have to do with illegal activity and documented addictions.

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=Anne FS;7230948]
I think Trakehner was just saying that’s the argument that would be used, and I believe it. That word “hoarder” gets thrown around all the time now. Most definitely a bitter ex would use the opportunity to present 7 as “hoarding.”[/QUOTE]

I understand that. But IF that happened, a lawyer worth 2 cents should be able to counter such a claim.

[Trakehner]

[QUOTE=grayarabpony;7230226]
BS. Owning 7 horses isn’t being a hoarder. Wendy wasn’t being tough, she’s just bitter.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it is to most of the world. I said I would expect it to be brought up in the divorce hearing…“How many of these horses can/do you ride?” “Why do you have so many horses when you haven’t time to ride one?” Etc. Etc. Etc. It’s not going to be portrayed as the normal person owning one maybe two horses. It’s going to be the perception used against the OP.

I don’t know Wendy but saw her comments differently than you did…was what she said incorrect or do you just not like the messenger?

[Trakehner]

[QUOTE=grayarabpony;7231213]
I understand that. But IF that happened, a lawyer worth 2 cents should be able to counter such a claim.[/QUOTE]

Mrs. Trakehner is a lawyer, so are two friends who are riders…I asked them what her response would be when during a divorce one party brought up the other party owned 7 horses. All 3 (females) said anyone who owned 7 horses would not be seen as very sympathetic and someone abusing the family budget.

I wish the OP luck, but the horses are an achilles heel and an easy target.

[grayarabpony]

[QUOTE=Trakehner;7231348]
Yes, it is to most of the world. I said I would expect it to be brought up in the divorce hearing…“How many of these horses can/do you ride?” “Why do you have so many horses when you haven’t time to ride one?” Etc. Etc. Etc. It’s not going to be portrayed as the normal person owning one maybe two horses. It’s going to be the perception used against the OP.

I don’t know Wendy but saw her comments differently than you did…was what she said incorrect or do you just not like the messenger?[/QUOTE]

I don’t like the message, and thought Wendy was being rather stupid and an ass about the whole thing. Marriage is supposed to be a PARTNERSHIP. Wendy didn’t keep any horses when the relationships she was in fell apart, she doesn’t even own one.

Having 7 horses isn’t abusing the family budget if one has a farm. I don’t know if the OP has a farm, but if she does, the idea of having 7 horses and abusing the budget seems ridiculous. It’s not most of the world, that’s in your own small circle.

The OP isn’t expecting her husband to continue to pay for the horses, that’s why she’s trying to deal with the situation she’s in now.

Btw the OP has my full sympathy.

[LauraKY]

[QUOTE=Trakehner;7231361]
Mrs. Trakehner is a lawyer, so are two friends who are riders…I asked them what her response would be when during a divorce one party brought up the other party owned 7 horses. All 3 (females) said anyone who owned 7 horses would not be seen as very sympathetic and someone abusing the family budget.

I wish the OP luck, but the horses are an achilles heel and an easy target.[/QUOTE]

What part of “no fault divorce state” do you not understand?