Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think some misread the Ops question which was clearly addressing two SS incomes when a present spouse dies .I do know having not experience myself and both wife and my parents having planned for it. But I know what I hear most often is women and men expressing they never really appreciated the contribution to join benefit the other meant until they died. None where talking financial either.
My pension (which is greater than either SS) will continue to my lovely bride should I go first. And her SS would be increased to = mine. IRA would also go to her, plus life insurance. She won't be broke, but won't be rich either. Should she go first, I'd lose her SS (which is less than mine) but otherwise receive my pension & SS. And of course the IRA would still be there. Not a lot, but enough to avoid living under the freeway overpass and the food banks. Worse case, the surviving spouse calls my son and let him and his lovey bride know they are going to have "company" for, oh, 10 or 20 years.. (My youngest grandson is in charge of gathering both our ashes and our two fur children's ashes and spreading them in the Pacific somewhere around the Big Island.)
How unfortunate. Somebody must have misunderstood her situation.. After 20 years of marriage and never having remarried, she would have been eligible (at FRA) to collect 50% of her former husband's benefits while he was living, even if he was collecting benefits for himself, and even if he had remarried. If she had outlived him, she would have been able to collect 100% of his benefit amount.
ETA: Cross-posted with Renee.
This is really interesting. Not only did they tell her she couldn't qualify, they also informed him that she had applied.
This is really interesting. Not only did they tell her she couldn't qualify, they also informed him that she had applied.
Wow. That sounds like an ethical breach right there, setting aside the issue of the incorrect information your mother was given about her eligibility to claim benefits on her ex-husband's record.
The ex spouse is not supposed to be informed that his/her former spouse has applied for SS benefits, whether on his/her record or not. For one thing, it's none of the ex spouse's business, and for another thing, it does not affect his/her benefits one whit.
Did this happen a very long time ago? Are the people who denied your mother benefits based on her ex-spouse's record--and then violated her privacy by informing her ex-spouse that she had applied--still working for Social Security?
I feel for your mother struggling to get by on her small benefit amount when she was actually eligible to receive half of her higher-earning ex-spouse's benefit amount. It's women like her that this "ex spouse" SS rule is supposed to help.
Wow. That sounds like an ethical breach right there, setting aside the issue of the incorrect information your mother was given about her eligibility to claim benefits on her ex-husband's record.
The ex spouse is not supposed to be informed that his/her former spouse has applied for SS benefits, whether on his/her record or not. For one thing, it's none of the ex spouse's business, and for another thing, it does not affect his/her benefits one whit.
Did this happen a very long time ago? Are the people who denied your mother benefits based on her ex-spouse's record--and then violated her privacy by informing her ex-spouse that she had applied--still working for Social Security?
I feel for your mother struggling to get by on her small benefit amount when she was actually eligible to receive half of her higher-earning ex-spouse's benefit amount. It's women like her that this "ex spouse" SS rule is supposed to help.
This happened in 1984, and yes she really did have to struggle. It is particularly sad because she actually worked doing clerical work for almost 30 years starting in the 1950's! The pay was very low of course, even though she had 2 years of college at USC.
Most retirement projections that I have read are based on couples with two social security checks and two or more streams of income. I would like to know how people are doing when there is only one person left. I don't want to hear about plans set up for plans that are being set up in the event of each dies. I want to hear the stories of the survivors and how they manage going on alone unexpectedly and their financial pitfalls and surprises. I want to hear from people who expected to have a companion to share the expenses who are now doing it alone and what they have learned.
My husband died unexpectedly at age 49 when I was 44. I am an R.N. and was self supporting until I married at age 29 so it was not too difficult for me to financially manage after my husband's death. What helped was our mortgage was paid off, we had no other major outstanding debt, and no children to have to provide for. Also being age 44, I had 20 years or so ahead of me to work which would fund my own retirement no different than the millions of single individuals who go it alone before and after retirment.
My dad died at age 32; my mom was just 27. My brother and I were very young, just toddlers, and we have very little memory of him. One thing he did have - not mentioned here - was life insurance! The proceeds from that policy enabled us to live quite well. My mom started college, took 11 years to get her degree (she was also working), and then went on to get a good-paying state job.
I find that women fare better emotionally than men to the loss of a spouse. Of the older/retired men that I've known who've lost their wives, all of them were totally lost. They grieved for years, and didn't know what to do with themselves. The women grieve also, but seem better able to pick up and carry on.
I owned a business before I retired. The sale of the business not only provides us income (we are still ahareholders) but I am also on the books as an employee until death, getting both medical and life insurance. The medical will continue for my survivaing wife (as will the income) and the life insurance will pay out enough for all my final expenses (actually all paid for) as well as a large blanket sum for my wife to receive and do with as she wishes.
I cannot emphasize life insurance enough for older couples - above and beyond final expenses. It can mean the difference between a good later life and elder poverty. Buy up!
I lost my husband to divorce. Whether widowed or divorced, as long as you meet certain criteria regarding age, length of marriage, and marital status, you will qualify to receive your deceased husband's or ex-husband's entire Social Security benefit. When I get worried about future finances, I feel a bit calmer keeping this in mind.
Not in addition to your own, right? Whichever is higher, yours or his. Unless I'm mistaken.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
@ 68 and counting
