Melissa Etheridge’s Ex: I Can’t Live On $23K A Month

[Snake Alchemist]

Twenty grand a month or so probably sounds like a nice payout to most average divorcees out there. However, Melissa Etheridge's ex-partner, Tammy Lynn Michaels, isn't one of them. The 37-year-old former actress has filed documents claiming she cannot survive on the $23,000 Etheridge is granting her monthly in child and spousal support.

So, how much money does Michaels need, exactly? Well, according to the paperwork, she explains she became accustomed to a monthly budget of $128,000 during her nearly 9-year relationship with the iconic rocker. Etheridge and Michaels

Michaels also noted that she "has limited income and virtually no savings," while Etheridge "has extensive resources at her disposal and a tremendous earning capacity."

The couple weathered an acrimonious split in April 2010 and share custody of their 5-year-old twins--daughter Johnnie Rose and son Miller. Michaels' most recent court filing also seeks to reduce Etheridge's custodial time with the children, claiming that Etheridge is teaching them to be "distant and withdrawn" to her.

http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/stop-the-presses/melissa-etheridge-ex-t-live-23k-month-170820392.html

My mind reels at these figures.

[Demeter]

1. She should try $23K a year

with a disabled adult in tow...

[cindyperry2010]

2. really some people

[Rambis]

3. Never understood

I am used to a certain lifestyle therefore I am entitled to it even when circumstances change

[Snake Alchemist]

4. I'm with you. I never think I could be accustomed to a lifestyle where I was spending 120K a month.

nt

[ParkieDem]

5. I am surprised ...

... that Etheridge could even pay that amount.

I know she's a big star, but I didn't think she earned enough coin to live THAT lavish of a lifestyle.

[HiPointDem]

10. Yeah, that's $1.5 million/yr. Hard to believe Etheridge makes that much these days after taxes,

let alone that x 2 or more.

Maybe she has good investments.

[1StrongBlackMan]

6. Putting on his Flame-proof suit, 1SBM asks ...

Why do significant others think that because they became accustom to a certain lifestyle based on their former S/O earnings/earning potential; they are somehow entitled to it after the relationship goes south?

Now, I'm in no way advocating no support or resignation to poverty after the lesser earning partner has sacrificed to advance the other's career; but come on!!!!

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. 123K a month is not exactly poverty

[treestar]

13. Agreed. It's child support - the children should be able to share the lifestyle

of the wealthier parent. But it is easier said than done when it comes to applying that rule if the children live with the other parent.

[Initech]

7. Go cry me a river. Try living on $12.50 an hour.

[qb]

8. According to my lawyer, spousal support is intended for longer marriages (15+ years)

during which one spouse gave up educational and employment opportunities in order to contribute to the marriage.
Child support? Definitely. But thousands in spousal support? Sheesh! Get a life!

[ParkieDem]

11. That's the way it is in Texas

There is NO alimony in Texas. Just "spousal support," which is VERY limited and only available if the marriage lasted 10+ years and the recipient spouse is quite destitute or disabled.

Of course, we're community property, too, which makes a big difference. Quite frankly, I've never understood lavish alimony/spousal support regimes in community property states.

[yardwork]

9. This is the idiot who loves Rick Warren.