DH Still Carries Life Insurance on Deadbeat BM!!!
:sick:
Hi, I'm new here. Thanks for a great forum! Married 3.5 years to a pastor/custodial father of SS16. No biokids for us. Here's the deal: This life insurance thing was a source of anguish for me and much heated discussion for me and DH even before we got married. I decided to let it go but it still irks me! BM was/is supposed to pay CS to DH. She used to but stopped several years ago. DH let her off the hook by writing a letter to CS enforcement and telling them that he was OK with her not paying. Essentially he gave her a GET OUT OF JAIL FREE card...coz that's exactly where she was about to be sent! But anytime I would ask about it - early in our relationship - he would always say "I don't need it." Yeah right. That's why you took a PT job at Taco Bell for several months when your son was young...cause you don't need the money! (Rolls eyes...)
This same woman used to get on Myspace and FB bragging about her drinking habits, strip club visits and wild parties she would both host or attend. (Poor SS...perfectly good college fund going down the drain because DH's too wimpy to require BM to do her part.)
Anyway, DH insisted on maintaining a life ins. policy on the deadbeat. My question to him (when we were still dating) was this: Why would you carry life insurance on a woman who is not doing her part while she's alive. Life insurance is designed to replace income. She is providing you none of that. You've already said you don't "need it." So why continue paying premiums on a policy on her???? I let him know exactly how I perceived the whole thing: "You've got too much pride to require her to help while she's alive, yet you want to maintain the right to benefit if she dies." The whole scenario is ultra hypocritical to me. Either you need financial help raising your son or you don't. Carrying life insurance proves that you need it, so why would you not require the skank to do her part while she's alive? To add to all this, SS is actually spending more time w/BM now. DH still calls the shots where it concerns visitation because he has that legal right. But because SS had been asking to spend more time w/BM, DH allowed him to do so. So the insurance is all the more unnecessary as SS is with BM about 70% of the time now. (And no, we don't pay her CS and she dare not ask, considering that she owes DH in excess of $30K or CS arrears.) She wasn't very enthusiastic about SS coming to spend more time w/her, and we get the feeling she basically uses him for free babysitting for her younger children - from two add'l fathers. Ho, ho, ho...Merry Christmas! (My bad, couldn't resist that one.)
I don't know why the insurance has started to annoy me again, when I had pretty much washed my hands of the whole situation. Probably just the fact that so many other issues are cropping up in our marriage and blended family, and this one just fans the flames. (Note: I should add that DH's mother tried to sneak around behind my back and take out a life policy on DH...he didn't like the idea, told his mom as much, but he STILL agreed to it...until I learned of it and blew a fuse and let him know that it was sooooo unnecessary. He pays NONE of MIL's bills, so it was totally unnecessary. She is NOT the kind of woman that would make sure DH's bills were paid or that me and SS were cared for. She'd just be trying to cash in on DH's death! UGH!!! I shared that to say that to say that it probably shouldn't surprise me that DH also espouses this "lottery" mentality about life insurance.)
In the final analysis, it makes me feel like I'm not DH's one and only. It feels too much like he has "another woman" in that he insures someone else. Am I overreacting or is it a bit strange to carry life insurance on someone who provides you no financial support whatsoever? Your thoughts please?
Thank you Sueu2. Your points
Thank you Sueu2. Your points duly noted. I agree that other issues are affecting my thinking and obsession with this particular one.
I too stopped my ex-wife from
I too stopped my ex-wife from being jailed when I didn't produce a final piece of evidence that she had no defense against my charge that she was violating a court order of visitation. Since I had proven my case but "missed" a technicality the judge severely admonished her to not appear in court again.
You see I didn't want my children seeing their mother jailed by me.
As for the life insurance isn't he the beneficiary? So he's betting she'll be dead before he pays out more than he pays in. Considering the life style described by you it sounds like a good investment.
"what is it to you now or in
"what is it to you now or in the future if your MIL has a life insurance policy on her son. It can be considered an investment. MIL didn't ask you or DH to pay for the policy..."
'What' it is to me is that DH's mother carrying a policy on him is nothing more than her gambling on him preceding her in death. Gee, forgive me, but that disgusts me! While I'd be somewhere grieving over having lost my lifelong companion, she'd be cashing in and living it up. I repeat: it's unnecessary! Life insurance is to REPLACE INCOME! Not to treat like a ghetto lottery or roll-the-dice kinda thing where the last man standing gets the cash prize. When and if DH ever started paying her bills, then yes, I could see her having a policy. But at this point, he doesn't, so she doesn't need it. And quite frankly, it matters very little about WHY I am uncomfortable with it, if it's not something that DH and I agree on mutually, then MIL is outta luck. I'M his wife, not her. And I see too many spineless men who don't know how to stand up to their mothers and exes.
Please reread the part of the post where I mention the fact that even DH didn't like the idea. BEFORE he ever shared it with me that MIL had already scheduled to have the nurse come over to draw DH's blood, he had already questioned her: "Mother, I'm a grown man, why do you need life insurance on me?" Her answer was that she carries a policy on all her kids and grandkids. (Yet when her car breaks down or she can't pay her bills, or she's broke due to her still "breastfeeding" a 30 y-o deadbeat daughter, then we do indeed start to chip in to help keep her afloat. Translated: her priorities are out of wack.) Aging parents' main concern should be making sure that THEY THEMSELVES (or their children) have a policy on them so that their burial and bills are not a burden on their offspring. Of course, we never know the order in which we will leave Earth, but in the natural and sensible course of life, we expect the elders to leave first.
Furthermore, any truly caring mother who was considerate of her son's feelings would've immediately backed off of the insurance idea when she saw that her son was not amenable to the idea. But noooooo, not this woman. She completely disregarded his feelings and misgivings and kept pushing the issue (during a conversation she's carrying on with DH on his cell phone during work hours because she's trying to get him to make a decision WITHOUT his wife's input.) Honey, if having a problem with her backhanded methods of trying to control my husband and put dollar signs on his life makes me controlling, then I wear the label as a badge of honor! This is much less about control than about DH and I making decisions that we mutual agreement on...or at least as much as possible.
In terms of the life policy on the ex...yeah, I can see where it's a good one to have. My mind is OK with it, but my heart still doesn't like it. There will always be something hypocritical to me about "I don't need the money" while she's alive, but I d*mn sure plan to get it if she dies. Wussy, wussy, wussy! I know plenty of men who have absolutely no problem with holding their exes accountable and accepting CS from them. It doesn't make them less than a man or provider, it makes them WISE! College is expensive and so are many of the other planned and incidental needs of young adult children. Sock it away in a trust fund if you don't "need it."
Thanks for all the advice. The good thing now is that BM has been allowed to have SS for the bulk of the time. I get a GOOD LAUGH when SS comes home whining to DH with the same complaints he had about me when DH and I first got together. Now he says BM is "fussing all the time" at him. (He's so incredibly spoiled and doesn't think he should be corrected for anything.) Tee, he, he. I GUESS SO. DH provides for SS when he's with us, and BM provides for her son when he's with her - which is the majority of the time. I guess I would be fussing too if I had an extra mouth to feed without a CS check to go with it. She was never interested in SS coming to live with her...that was SS's idea. Yep! Call me evil, but it's quite laughable to know that she gets to see what it feels like to carry the bulk of the weight. So yeah, the more I think about it, you guys are right. The policy's good to have! If she should croak before SS is an independent adult, at least I wouldn't be expending so much of my income helping to care for him (like I was doing before the visitation schedule was changed).
What was I thinking?!?!