Talk Walker

As I navigate my divorce to through the Family Courts of California, I am coming across a law that victimizes women and families in a way of which few people are aware. Basically, when one spouse vacates the house, saddling the remaining spouse with making the mortgage payment, paying utility bills and maintaining the property, not to mention manage the fallout of wounded children, his financial interest in the house remains intact. Most people the  think the unfairness of a community property state, is that both parties still split any equity 50/50 regardless if one person carried more of the weight than the other. I get that, but what about when one spouse contributes nothing and is in fact toxic to the family that lives in the house?

What a lot of people don’t know is  it is possible and not unusual for the runaway spouse to claim that by the remaining partner staying in the home, the abandoner was deprived of potential rental income. If the fair-market rent is say, $1,000.00 and the mortgage payment is $700.00, the one who ditched his/her family without providing any financial support, can claim he/she is entitled to 50% of the difference. In this case, it would be $150 per month for the duration of the separation, regardless of not having contributed one dime to the maintenance of that property during that same time.

The new trend of runaway husbands on wives fighting cancer is frightening, abominable and needs to change. In my case, my ex promised in writing he would provide me with half of the mortgage payment as long as he did not live in the home. I thought that was fair, because if he were living in the home, he would be able to contribute to its upkeep.

Now, I am told it is possible his lawyer may argue that agreement is not binding because he did not consult with a lawyer before signing it (a friend suggested he show it to a lawyer, and for whatever reason, he never got around to it), and he was under duress.

What duress? I was the one going through chemotherapy, exhausted and bald, radiation and fear for my life. What kind of duress is it to be asked for compassion? What kind of final straw is that? We weren’t fighting, were for the most part cordial,  and he had moved into another room. When he wasn’t in the house, he was in the garage getting tanked and emailing jokes, taking online harmonica lessons or doing some kind of chat room.

In spite of this, as far as I was concerned, I wanted him to stay until I had at least gotten my first  six-month check-up with an all clear, but he couldn’t be bothered. I also figured, since he was looking at starting a new life, he should spend that time working and saving up a reserve fund. Like always, he couldn’t wait, and now with no job or money, he figures I am the best source, regardles if it means  losing our family home, which by the way I share with our daughter.  “Lose the house, keep the house, it’s all up to you,” to quote the man of my dreams…. Who knew?

So I played fair, and now California Family Law has more respect for his “investment” than our family or my health. Something is very wrong with that. I am presently petitioning my state representative along with the National Organization for Women (NOW) to change the law that protects the interests of a runaway spouse, at the expense of those suffering from their neglect, regardless if they are alcoholics, drug addicts or simply irresponsible. I encourage others in other states to do the same.