When Doing the Right Thing Meets Unrealistic Demands

A Different Kind of Paralysis

In my last piece, I wrote about what happens when fear keeps someone from protecting themselves, when the instinct to trust someone else overrides the instinct to survive.

Today, I want to talk about the other side of that coin.

Because financial fear in divorce does not always look like silence. Sometimes it looks like demands, demands that are not grounded in what actually exists.

And if you are the spouse who understands the finances, who has every intention of doing right by your family, and who keeps hearing requests that simply cannot happen… you know exactly what I am talking about.

You are not trying to hide anything. You are not trying to take advantage. You just want to get through this fairly.

But here is what makes this especially difficult: for many breadwinners — particularly men — there is enormous social pressure to tie financial success to identity and moral worth. Settlement negotiations do not feel like a technical exercise. They feel like a test of character.

And when your spouse's demands keep escalating, it can feel like no matter what you offer, you are failing that test.

But somewhere along the way, the conversation stopped being about what is real, and started being about what other people think should happen.

The Reality: Where Unrealistic Expectations Come From

A national survey on marriage conducted by the National Fatherhood Initiative found that 45% of divorced respondents identified unrealistic expectations, by themselves or their spouse, as a major contributor to the end of their marriage.

Nearly half.

And those unrealistic expectations do not come from nowhere. They are shaped by the people around us, often with the best of intentions.

Research from the Framingham Heart Study, one of the longest-running longitudinal studies in American medical history, revealed something remarkable about how divorce spreads through social networks. The study found that divorce clusters within networks, extending up to two degrees of separation. If a close friend or family member divorces, your own likelihood of divorcing increases by 75%. Even a friend-of-a-friend's divorce increases your risk by 33%.

The researchers described it this way: "The contagion of divorce can spread through a social network like a rumor."

What this means in practice: attitudes about divorce, including what someone "should" receive, what is "fair," and what others "got" travel socially. They move from friend to friend, from family member to family member, shaping expectations that may have nothing to do with your actual financial situation.

High-asset divorce practitioners specifically flag "unrealistic expectations regarding lifestyle and spousal support" as one of the most common mistakes, noting that expectations far beyond the marital standard tend to prolong litigation and ultimately lead to disappointment for everyone.

This is how unrealistic demands take root:

Friends and family share what they got in their divorces — without understanding that no two cases are factually identical

Media portrayals and stories create inflated expectations about retaining lifestyle or receiving high levels of support — expectations based on narrative, not the couple's actual balance sheet

Well-meaning but uninformed advice — as one family law firm noted: "Just because Karen's friend got 80% of her matrimonial property pool does not mean that you will be entitled to the same"

Legal counsel that escalates conflict rather than bringing clarity to the actual financial picture

One Certified Divorce Financial Analyst noted that clients often come in expecting 70% or more of the marital estate. But in community property states, the split is typically close to 50/50. The expectation and the reality are worlds apart.

The Pattern: When Demands Become Vindication

Mediation literature has documented a specific pattern that occurs when one spouse feels abandoned, angry, or betrayed.

In these situations, financial demands often have nothing to do with legal entitlement. They become a form of vindication — or punishment.

A spouse may ask for a disproportionate share of assets — all of the home equity, for example — not because the law supports it, but because the demand feels like justice for the pain they are experiencing.

The pattern often looks like this:

Wanting to keep the house — regardless of whether they can afford it.

Expecting to maintain or increase their lifestyle — while the higher-earning spouse absorbs all debt.

Avoiding returning to work — while demanding ongoing support at levels that are not sustainable.

Framing every financial discussion as a test of whether you "really care" about the family.

This is the gap between narrative and financial reality that destroys settlements.

And for the breadwinner on the other side, the one trying to be fair, trying to protect their family, trying to do the right thing, these demands feel impossible. Not because you do not want to help. But because the numbers do not support what is being asked.

The Problem: Fear Creates Its Own Kind of Blindness

Here is what I see in my practice:

A spouse who is frightened about their financial future, often the one who did not manage the money during the marriage, reaches out to the people they trust. Friends. Family. Sometimes attorneys who validate their fears instead of educating them.

And what they hear sounds something like this:

"Do not let them take advantage of you."

"You deserve half of everything — at least."

"My cousin got the house AND alimony. You should too."

"They are hiding money. They always do."

The intention behind this advice is protective. But the impact is often devastating.

Because now, instead of two people trying to understand the same set of facts, you have one person working from reality and one person working from a narrative shaped by fear, comparison, and outside influence.

And that gap, between what is real and what someone believes they deserve, can turn a manageable divorce into a war.

The Psychology: Why Good Intentions Get Lost

Research in cognitive psychology has identified "unrealistic expectations in relationships" as one of three major types of interpersonal cognitive distortions — alongside rejection sensitivity and misperception of others' intentions. These distortions are directly linked with marital conflict and breakdown.

What does this mean? When someone is afraid, their thinking becomes distorted. They may set impossibly high standards for what they should receive. They may misread their spouse's intentions as hostile. They may reject reasonable offers because fear tells them it is not enough.

Research published in the Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy found that an individual's unrealistic or irrational beliefs about the nature of intimate relationships can produce distress and dysfunctional behavioral responses toward their partner — even when the partner is acting in good faith.

Meanwhile, the breadwinner carries a different psychological burden. Commentary on men and divorce highlights that men in particular face strong social pressure to be financially successful — to see money as tied to identity and moral worth. This makes "doing the right thing" in settlement negotiations feel less like a technical exercise and more like a test of who they are as a person.

Add to this the real post-divorce financial risks: child support obligations, health insurance changes, the need to rebuild financial stability while potentially maintaining two households. These are significant burdens that require careful planning and realistic goal-setting to avoid long-term strain.

And here is what gets lost in this emotional chaos: the actual financial reality.

When guilt meets fear, and fear meets outside influence, the conversation stops being about numbers. It becomes about narratives. About stories people tell themselves to justify their positions.

And when one spouse is operating from facts and the other is operating from a story shaped by cognitive distortions and social influence, there is no common ground to negotiate from.

The Psychology: Why Good Intentions Get Lost

Person #1 — "I just want this to be fair"

They understood the finances. They had been the one managing the investments, running the business, tracking the accounts.

They wanted to do right by their spouse. They offered what they believed was fair — a reasonable split that would allow both of them to move forward.

But their spouse's attorney pushed for more. Friends whispered that they were being taken advantage of. Family members insisted the numbers were wrong.

So the demands escalated. The house. Ongoing support at levels that did not match the marital standard. An expectation of maintaining lifestyle while the breadwinner absorbed all the debt and risk.

Exhausted and guilt-ridden, they gave in. They agreed to terms that were not sustainable — terms that would create financial strain for years to come.

They thought they were doing the right thing. They were actually doing the expected thing.

Person #2 — "I need someone in my corner who understands the numbers"

They were in the same position. Same intention to be fair. Same escalating demands from the other side.

But instead of trying to argue the numbers themselves, which only created more conflict, they brought in a financial expert who could present their position clearly and credibly.

Someone who could say: "Here is what actually exists. Here is what is sustainable. Here is what a fair outcome looks like based on the real numbers, not assumptions, not stories, not what someone's cousin received."

Not to fight harder. Not to "win." But to see clearly, and to present that clarity in a way that could actually be heard.

And here is what they discovered: their spouse needed the same thing.

Because unrealistic demands often hurt the person making them. They prolong litigation. They rack up attorney fees. They create disappointment when the final outcome does not match the expectation. And they damage the co-parenting relationship for years to come.

When both spouses have someone in their corner who understands the actual numbers — not to escalate the fight, but to ground it in reality — the conversation changes.

Same intention. Different approach. Different outcome.

The difference was not giving in. The difference was bringing in clarity.

What Changes Everything: When Both Sides See Clearly

When fear drives decisions — on either side — everyone loses.

The spouse who gives in to unreasonable demands loses financially, and often faces years of strain trying to meet obligations that were never sustainable.

The spouse who makes unreasonable demands loses too, spending more on litigation, waiting longer for resolution, and often ending up with less than they would have received through reasonable negotiation.

The children lose time with both parents while the adults battle.

The attorneys gain. The process gains. But the family loses.

Financial clarity is the antidote to this — for both sides.

Both spouses deserve someone in their corner who understands the actual numbers. Not to fight harder, but to see clearly. To know what is realistic. To make decisions based on what actually exists rather than what fear or friends or attorneys are telling them.

When both sides have that clarity, the gap between expectation and reality closes. The demands become grounded.

The settlement becomes possible.

Financial Fear Works Both Ways

In my first piece, I wrote about what happens when fear keeps someone silent, unable to protect themselves because they have been conditioned to trust someone else with the money.

In this piece, I have written about what happens when fear drives unrealistic demands, when outside influence creates a gap between expectation and reality that makes negotiation impossible.

Both dynamics stem from fear. Both prevent good decision-making. Both are solved the same way: by bringing someone into your corner who can show you what is actually there.

In my next piece, I will bring these together, and talk about what it looks like when both sides finally operate from the same set of facts.

If This Is Your Situation

If you are the spouse trying to do right — carrying the weight of financial responsibility while facing demands that do not match reality — you do not have to fight this alone.

And you do not have to give in just to make it stop.

What you need is someone in your corner who can establish the facts, clearly, credibly, and in a way that stands up to scrutiny.

That is exactly what I do.

Because clarity is not about winning. Clarity is about making decisions that you — and everyone in your family — can actually live with.

Ready for clarity? Schedule a call in confidence here.

About Me: 

I am Gabriella E. Martinelli, CDFA® CDS® NCMP®, the founder at Ever After Wealth® and a  Private Divorce Financial Strategist. With over 22 years of experience identifying financial blind spots, I help physicians, business owners, and high-net-worth individuals see clearly, so they can make divorce decisions that protect their businesses, their wealth, and their legacy.

References

National Fatherhood Initiative. (2005). With This Ring: A National Survey on Marriage in America. https://www.fatherhood.org/with-this-ring-survey

McDermott, R., Fowler, J.H., & Christakis, N.A. (2013). Breaking Up is Hard to Do, Unless Everyone Else is Doing it Too: Social Network Effects on Divorce in a Longitudinal Sample. Social Forces. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3990282/

Pew Research Center. (2013). Is Divorce Contagious? https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2013/10/21/is-divorce-contagious/

Epstein, N. (1986). Cognitive marital therapy. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01073481

Hamamci, Z. & Buyukozturk, S. (2004). The Interpersonal Cognitive Distortions Scale: Development of the scale and investigation of its psychometric characteristics. Psychological Reports, 95, 291-303.