If you really want out, prove it--accept half of the responsibilities (obligations) but none of the benefits. Expect nothing from the sale of the home, since it is you who are wrecking his future. Give him what he would have had in the event you had honored your commitment.

Do not expect him to suffer financially for your deception, even if you consider yourself innocent for having deceived him unintentionally. Carry your share of the debt load as you leave, and at least honor your commitment not to financially hurt him.

Earlier posters are right: He even deserves the dogs, unless he does not want them due to his travel schedule.

You, my dear, are an irresponsible mess. Selfish, spoiled, inconsiderate. You owe it to this "nice enough guy" to let him benefit SOMEHOW from this marriage, and if financial is the only benefit you can give him, well then so be it. YOU need to suffer, too, and leaving him certainly isn't going to break your heart now, is it?

Ask yourself, "If I have to give him all of the financial benefit from this breakup, do I still want it?" You might just find out that you are subconsciously using this poor soul of a husband.

God, how I feel pity for him. Then again, maybe not; if he knew what a rotten, selfish little tramp you really are, I hope he would want nothing more to do with you. You deserve nothing more!

Something about the man I never trusted. Just seemed too perfect, too plastic, too put-together. Now I know what my internal meter was telling me: "JERK ALERT! JERK ALERT! JERK ALERT!"

I have an aversion to philandering men. To let me know you are a philanderer is to lose every single ounce of my respect, and you will never get it back so don't bother trying.

To reveal a cheating past is to tell me you are a bum. No woman should have had her life ruined by the likes of you. Okay, maybe not her whole life, but any part of her life. No woman deserves to be cheated on. The man has only to speak up and say, "This is not working for me, I'm leaving." There is never a valid reason to dally outside a relationship and then make excuses.

John Edwards' wife should turn her back and RUN. Same as Hillary Clinton should have turned her back and RUN. And I should have turned my back and RUN.

Eventually, each of us learns to stop tolerating the emotional abuse. I have already reached that point--I hope Mrs. Edwards and Mrs. Clinton are heading down the hallway behind me.

Hillary, it's still not too late for you to do the right thing. Do not pander to those who would have you support a nogoodnik like Obama: Instead, find someone to support who has some experience in politics. To put a kindergardener in the White House, behind the big red button, will be a tragedy for us all!

The most glaring part of the story, which was never addressed by one response of those I read, was that the author is DIVORCED and that her ex was required to contribute a pittiance as child support.

Quite simply, noncustodial parents should be required by law to contribute HALF for daycare, food, clothing, shelter and entertainment for his/her own children, period. This nonsense of judges feeling sorry for Daddies or Mommies who have a mouth full of excuses is an embarrassment to our judicial system. The ones who should suffer are the exes who fail to hold up their end of the bargain when it comes to marriage and parenting. Doesn't matter who wanted the divorce, if you got hitched and helped build a baby, then you damned sure had better contribute to its support _in the manner to which it has grown accustomed to living_.

I hope the father of these children is proud of the fact that his children are forced, because of his lack of support, to eat in a soup kitchen. I hope each child tells the grandparents and all of Daddy's friends, during their next court-ordered visit--that they have been relegated to the occasional free meal with the homeless and down-and-out people in their community BECAUSE DADDY IS A SELF-SERVING JERK.

Ms. Ryan, I commend you for doing all that you can to hold what's left of your family together for the sake of your children. I hope your Chloe learns a lesson in humility (if not now, then someday) and that she learns to appreciate you for your resourcefulness.

I know what it's like to stretch a food supply until you fear it will break, and what it takes to knuckle under and take help when you would rather die, yet you swallow your pride for the sake of your children.

College degrees do not make humans ineligible for assistance; on the contrary, Ms. Ryan, you have earned your right to need a hand up. The people who criticize you for having children without an infinite emergency fund to help you raise them are "Dave Ramsey Zealots" who probably have zero children and a million dollars of a dead relative's money. It's easy to put down your situation when someone's never been there.

I have been there, and I admire your courage and resourcefulness. Don't let your critics bring you down.

The Emmy Awards is soooooooooo not worth watching. Of SIXTY awards, exactly THREE were things I had watched, and each was a single-episode winner.

Who really watches the shows that won? Jeez, I thought I was a bona fide couch potato, but those viewers must be dull-squared!

Heidi Klum should drag herself back to her unattractive husband and their unMommylike babies and find something to do, like pick flowers. That any of them are on television hurts.