This is post 6 in a 6 part series. Read the first post HERE.

My Story

I am 56 years old. I have raised three boys — now grown and thriving — and I did it while sacrificing my own career, my financial independence, and, in many ways, my health.

Now, at an age when I should be preparing for retirement, healing from decades of strain, and finding peace, I am instead dragged back into court. My ex — remarried, with a new baby, and financially secure — is trying yet again to cut off spousal support.

I am enraged. And I know I am not alone.

The Human Cost

I live every day with the impact of this broken system. My health is failing. The stress of years of litigation has left its mark — physically, mentally, emotionally. And yet, somehow, the courts still act as though spousal support is a “luxury,” not the recognition of sacrifice and disadvantage that the law says it is.

The Rule of 65 should protect me. The Divorce Act recognizes that illness and hardship are legitimate grounds for ongoing support.¹² But what good are laws if they are not enforced?

The Betrayal of Binding Arbitration

I paid more than $200,000 for a binding arbitration agreement — an agreement I believed would finally give me certainty, closure, and peace of mind. “Binding” was supposed to mean final. It was supposed to mean enforceable.

But here I am, dragged back yet again, facing the same battles I thought were already settled. What does “binding” even mean if it can be undone at will? Why did I invest my life savings in a process that now seems meaningless?

Worse still, I am forced to sit across from my ex — a sociopathic narcissist who thrives on conflict and control — while the system itself enables him. Each time I walk back into that room, it feels like standing before judge, jury, and executioner. And I ask myself: how is this justice?

Why I’m Enraged

• Because twenty years of unpaid caregiving are treated as though they had no value.
• Because even “binding” arbitration, secured at enormous cost, can be reopened as though it never mattered.
• Because the courts repeatedly force me to relive abuse by putting me back in the same room with someone who weaponizes the system.
• Because at 56, with failing health, I am told to “stand on my own two feet” — after decades of standing for everyone else.

What This Says About the System

My story is not unique. This is what happens to women across Canada who gave up careers for caregiving. The system abandons us at the very stage of life when we most need protection.

Divorce law promises recognition. It promises fairness. Arbitration promises finality. But in practice, both leave too many of us in poverty, despair, and rage.

Why Rage Matters

For years, I carried my pain quietly. I endured. I explained. I rationalized. But rage has its place. Rage tells the truth: that what is happening to caregivers is not just unfair — it is abusive.

It is financial abuse when disclosure is withheld.
It is systemic abuse when agreements are endlessly reopened.
It is cultural abuse when women’s sacrifices are dismissed as invisible.

What Needs to Change

• Enforce the law: Apply the Rule of 65, enforce disclosure, and uphold arbitration agreements.
• Value caregiving: Recognize it as work, with economic value and lasting impact.
• Protect aging women: Ensure spousal support does what it was intended to do — provide security when re-entry into the workforce is not realistic.

My Perspective as a Divorce Coach

When I work with clients, I see the same story repeated: women who sacrificed, who raised children, who supported their spouses’ careers — and who are then discarded. I help them strategize, budget, and rebuild. But the truth is, no amount of coaching can erase a system that refuses to value what they gave.

At 56, with failing health and decades of sacrifice behind me, I am still being forced to prove my worth. I am still being forced into rooms with someone who uses the system as a weapon. I am enraged — and I will not stop speaking out.

Citations:

1. Bracklow v. Bracklow, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 420 (illness and hardship as grounds for support)
2. Spousal Support Advisory Guidelines, “Rule of 65”