Christine Baumgartner, 49, plans to go back to school & enter the workforce

I’ll be honest, I’m really suspicious about the “engagement” some of these Kevin Costner-Christine Baumgartner stories have been getting recently. There’s been a flood of new commenters in the divorce stories and they ALL have an anti-Christine bent. Given Costner’s resources and his anger towards Christine for leaving him, it feels like he and his team asked for “the Johnny Depp special” in bot farms and paid commenters. It’s just something I’m keeping my eye on. To recap, Christine is getting hosed in this divorce – the judge decreased her child support to $60K a month (she was asking for $168K a month) and it’s not looking good for Christine’s attempts to nullify the pre-nup. It feels like Christine knows it’s pretty much over for her too – she told the court that she will get a job.

Kevin Costner and his estranged wife Christine spoke in court about their plans moving forward as their divorce proceedings carry on. The exes showed up to court in Santa Barbara on Thursday and Friday for a child support hearing, which ultimately went in Kevin’s favor as a judge ordered him to pay $63,209 per month instead of the $161,592 Christine sought.

Both Kevin and Christine, who wed in 2004, got emotional while testifying during the proceedings, and shared what they saw as their next steps after the breakup.

Christine — who now lives in a rental that costs $40,000 per month after being court-ordered to move out of their family compound — testified that she is considering going back to school for a college degree.

“I will look into the steps I need to take and any schooling I need to do, and I will enter the workforce,” Christine, 49, said on the stand about how she’ll support herself in the future.

When Kevin, 68, took the stand, he admitted “my world’s been a little shook up” as a result of the split. Addressing how he plans to move forward, the Oscar winner said, “I have to take care of obligations that are already in place, I have a lot of responsibilities I have to take care of.”

[From People]

With three kids at home, she’ll go back to school and re-enter the workforce at the age of 49? Good luck with that. I mean, she’s going to have to do something, I agree. But realistically, she should probably call Andy Cohen and see if she can pitch him The Real Divorcees of Santa Barbara. Like, that’s probably closer to her real post-divorce plans – find a steady reality show gig, find an easy way to make enough money to support herself after she gets hosed in this divorce. Hopefully, she’s got a wealthy jumpoff and maybe she’ll get remarried.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

123 Responses to “Christine Baumgartner, 49, plans to go back to school & enter the workforce”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. K. Tate says:

    I don’t understand why people (even commenters here) are so anti Christine! It’s obvious that she’s getting hosed in the divorce and she should have ended it 10-15 years ago once she realized that she was never going to be an equal partner.

    • The Old Chick says:

      Well I’m not new 🤣.

      It’s difficult. I’m going by regular posters here who are American and often lawyers.

      Christine doesn’t seem to have been sensible in her planning.. She also seems to spend /have access to truck loads of money on a monthly basis but hasn’t put it aside? She also seems to have expected a legit prenup to be put aside. Her legal team don’t seem great.

      However KC is an asshole. He should have settled quickly and easily. It would not even be a blip of his net worth, but would give her a home, some income and his kids won’t be traumatised by his bs moves. She’s the primary parent. I really don’t like either of them.. She seems stupid and he’s a dick. But the kids deserve better than his egocentric bullshit. He won’t lose his shirt. 20k /mo clothing if that’s true is absurd. But she does deserve a decent home and income. It’s not hard.

      • Melissa says:

        I’m certainly not a bot. I don’t think he’s being a kind loving man, but divorcing people rarely are. I say that as someone who has been through 3 years in family court.

        I genuinely don’t know what she expected. The child support could have gone either direction but it’s based on documentation. It isn’t arbitrary.

        They had a prenup she didn’t update over time. Of course she needs to get a job – this is common sense and not something we feel bad for someone about.

        If I were KC yeah I would pay for silence but he didn’t. He’s not being kind but it’s not shocking.

      • Ashley says:

        If I recall correctly, he did try to settle. He offered to pay all of the children’s expenses and pay her what she was owed pursuant to the pre-nup. Whether the pre-nup provides enough is a separate issue, but he did offer to settle.

        But she said no and said she wanted to pay half of the children’s expenses. Which ok, fine. But with what money? The money you expect to receive in alimony? So you want to use his money to pay half of the children’s expenses when he offered to use his money to pay all of it? It doesn’t make sense.

        If she had accepted his initial offer, or even tried to negotiate something a little more favorable than what the pre-nup provides, he might have agreed, because as of now the time and money they have spent on legal fees alone is probably exorbitant. Instead she went super far in the other direction and since he has a solid pre-nup and a lot of money to spend on lawyers, he figured he had nothing to lose and so far looks like he was right. Again, whether he is right or wrong is a separate issue.

        And no, I am not a bot. Long time reader and occasional commenter. I am also a lawyer with family law experience and happen to work in a matrimonial court part, so my comment isn’t based on any pro-Kevin or anti-Christina bias, rather on my own knowledge and professional experiences.

    • B says:

      Wasn’t Kaiser saying that the anti Christine commenters are maybe a few real commenters but probably mostly paid plants?
      I’ll make it a point to go out of my way to never watch anything he stars in or produces or is even tangentially involved in again. Didn’t the Koch brothers fund one of the wonderwoman movies? Well, if Costner funds something I’ll pass.

      Also, Jesus. Her kids may be older but guess what. CPS still probably wouldn’t agree with letting them stay home alone for long periods and there are hideous waitlists for the after school care programs. So what’s she gonna do? The one my kid was in for the summer said tht during the year their waitlist is 79 kids long. Ow.

      • Marigold says:

        His kids are too old for after school programs. I don’t see why they would be alone for more than a few hours each day. Totally normal at their ages.

        I imagine if she wants someone with them, she’ll do what other parents do-hire someone. Surely even 60K a month can cover that?

      • HeatherC says:

        All the kids are teenagers, I think the youngest is 13? California doesn’t appear to have a minimum age requirement to stay home alone after school for a few hours. And it wouldn’t be out of the question for her to ask the oldest to watch the youngest for a few hours a week either. Though they may be too old for after school programs, there are sports and extra curriculars as well that they can do after school if they wanted. And extended family may be willing to help too if available.

        Yes she has 3 kids. But they’re not toddlers. If she wants to pursue a degree, her children are old enough to entertain themselves for a few hours so Mom can study.

        If she and KC were still planning on staying married and he was away for months at a time doing whatever, would we even be having this discussion on whether or not she is able to go back to school?

    • Drea says:

      Not new here in the slightest. Not anti-Christine, either.

      I think he’s probably a jerk, and she’s an idiot.

      She has a prenup. That she signed. When she was fully cognizant.

      Whatever those terms were, she believed (whether it was love or money that did it), that it would be ok for her. Well, now she wants to renegotiate. That’s not how any of this works.

      He’s being totally vindictive here. But had she accepted the terms of the prenup and went quietly, she would have her own life. You don’t get to have your cake and eat it, too.

      He’s making an example of her for sure.

    • TeamMeg says:

      I wish someone would hose me down with $60,000 a MONTH!!! That is more than the annual salary of most people I know. I don’t care what she was accustomed to. The marriage is over, you lived it up while you could, now come down to earth.

    • Karen says:

      I’m not a bot. She is not getting hosed. She knew what she was getting herself into when she married. Maybe she enjoyed the lifestyle of the rich & famous more than she cared for her spouse. She sure seems way too caught up in money, status, name brands, and, the best of everything. Sadly, she has not learned that these things, at the end of the day, are so unimportant. If she wanted to continue to fly private, she should have stayed married. She won’t get a job, unless it’s through her rich friends. She will remarry. For money. The whole thing is just sad. Yup, I’m on his side. I think she was having affairs. She now feels the grass will be greener. She is in for some tough love. Way too spoiled & entitled. And plastic looking.

  2. Danbury says:

    He definitely ordered the Depp special online package. A tried and true method for abusive, controlling, misongynistic douchebags to thrive in the modern world

    • ML says:

      He’s also got Depp’s divorce lawyer, Laura Wasser. He definitely went for the whole package.

      As to her getting a job—I agree with that. A career is going to be difficult, but she probably can get something that pays her. I’m glad she’s aware that she does need to earn money.
      That said, rich people, especially in the US usually never pay the same percentage of their income as the rest of us. Parking tickets, fines, late fees,… most of these are fixed. Check out Finland:,said%20he%20regrets%20what%20happened.
      Child support is one of the few exceptions and it’s meant to 1. Support the child, and 2. Make sure that the child’s living standard is more or less the same. It amazes me that this rich douche Costner can argue that he doesn’t want to support Christine’s lifestyle and actually pays far less than the going rate for his kids. If you use Halle Berry as an equivalent, Christine really got hosed.

  3. Arizona says:

    lol her kids are teenagers, not young kids – pretty sure that’s not going to be a barrier to her getting a job. not working for the last two decades will be a bigger barrier, but I think you’re right about the type of work she’ll likely end up doing.

    • Surly Gale says:

      @Arizona please let me adjust your wording just a bit: not working outside the home for the last two decades will be a bigger barrier……
      Thought we were past thinking women who did not work outside the home while raising children were not working at all. C’mon now. We have to remember internalized misogyny is a real thing and be ever vigilant. We have to remember to value “women’s work” just as much as we do as say, in this example, making make-believe stories for film & tv.

      • ML says:

        Surly Gale, You’re right! To all of you stay at home moms/ caregivers/ volunteers who work without receiving an official salary, we know you DO work. We also know that it often isn’t easy. It took me a while to get a job living in a foreign country where my English skills aren’t enough of an advantage and I stayed at home for a bit. I also have a friend who has gone through bouts of cancer and his wife works at a paying job instead of him.

      • MadamNoir says:

        I understand what you’re saying but I’m sure her working in the home is not the same as you or I being a stay-at-home mom. I’m sure she had and probably still has a lot of help in the form of nannies, cooks, and cleaning people. Not to say she didn’t take care of her children, but I’m sure she had help that “normal” moms at home do not have. So, yes not being in the workforce for two decades is going to be a bigger obstacle for her than being a stay-at-home home.

      • Ina says:

        I’m not a bot. I’ve been a commenter on this site, albeit not a frequent one, mostly in support of Meghan Markle. Let’s put our blinders away shall we? I agree with Arizona’s statement that “not working for the last two decades will be a bigger barrier”. I’ve seen and helped several former female co-workers who left the workplace to become SAHMs, got divorced or whose spouses were laid off from work, and had to jump back into the workplace. And guess what, the struggle is real. These were ordinary moms. Hardly the type who ‘lunched”. I also know women with children who are married to successful men and have their own careers. Christine had access to immense wealth and privilege, but what did she do with it or her time besides raising her kids, especially now that her kids are teenagers and do not require 100% of her attention anymore? She could’ve done so much more to secure her future but I don’t see any meaningful effort on her part other than paying lip service based on public disclosures. If she is truly seeking employment, then good for her. I will believe it when I see it.

      • Arizona says:

        @Surly Gale I don’t need you to correct my wording. we’re not talking about a traditional SAHM – we’re talking about someone who had nannies, housekeepers, gardeners, chefs, etc. the amount of work that she was doing versus the average SAHM is nowhere near the same.

        I am fully aware of the work that goes into raising kids, and am in full support of SAHMs. it absolutely is hard work! but I think we can admit that it changes if you’re extremely wealthy. I do think it’s funny that the same commenters that crap on Kim Kardashian when she talks about working hard while also parenting are bending over backwards to assert that Christine was working hard this whole time.

    • H says:

      I’ve been Team Christine since the beginning and I’ve always thought Cosner was a jerk (what he did to his first wife). My mother is a retired attorney and we both agree that Christine’s lawyers are horrible.

      As for Christine rejoining the workforce after going to school, that could take a few years. She has to finish a college degree and by then she’ll be in her early 50’s with no work history besides being a SAHM. Meaning if she gets a job as a social worker, she won’t have any experience in that field and employers will look at her as “too old” and getting closer to retirement age and PROBABLY go with a younger worker. Sad but true. Ageism at its finest.

      For example, when I was teaching, I would take a part-time job in the summer and I interviewed at Old Navy where the Tom Cruise-wanna-be 20-something manager told me, “why would YOU want to work here?” He made a couple of inferences about my age (44) and I knew I wasn’t getting the job, even though I didn’t look 44 and was wearing my favorite Old Navy clothing.

      In reality, I think it really depends on the degree Christine gets and what type of work she tries. I wish her and the children nothing but the best and Cosner can go jump in a lake.

    • Ameerah M says:

      Raising children IS work hun. Can we stop devaluing the obvious work that goes into being a parent? I have no children and don’t want any and that is because I understand that it is a 24/7 job. She DID work. She raised kids. And it’s obvious that as far as parental figures go she was the only one of the two actually present.

      • HeatherC says:

        Unless she plans to get a job as a nanny, her experience with raising children doesn’t mean a whole lot in the traditional work force.

        She’s attractive and has developed a fan base in the face of what KC is pulling. I could see her low key launching a life style type brand after the dust settles, based on a formerly SAHM entering college and work force. Blogging, IG, there’s a market for it and I think that market has been underdeveloped and underappreciated.

      • Lorelei says:

        I think most if not all of us commenting here know that staying home and raising children IS work, but come on, in the real world, employers are going to be looking for younger people with more recent educations and experience. A 49-year-old woman who has a 20+ year gap on her resume and no practical experience (if it’s true that she was a model before she was a handbag designer) simply isn’t going to be at the top of the pile when there are far more applicants than available jobs.

  4. Gutterflower says:

    My mil went back to school 10 years ago at the age of about 58 to be a lawyer and is still working today She was a stay at home mom before that.

    • Mcmmom says:

      I understand she signed that lousy prenup, but it still stuns me that she is walking away with so little of her own assets. Very little cash, no property, no true assets of any kind. It’s amazing to me that after twenty years, she has zero nest egg. Let this be a warning to every stay at home spouse or parent – build some sort of net worth. I don’t understand how she didn’t get better counsel before or after the marriage.

      • ShazBot says:

        Agree. She knew the pre-nup she signed and she knew who she married. It’s wild to me that she thought she’d get around any of it and had zero plan b/ nest egg set aside.
        Women, smarten up and don’t put all your eggs in your spouses basket.

        Wasn’t she a purse designer when they met? Maybe she can go back to that.

      • Debbie says:

        Usually, well-written prenuptial agreements have built-in “escalator” clauses so to speak, which provide that if the couple remain married for 5 years, then the amount paid to the other parent increases by so much, then 10 years, etc. Some even provide that the prenuptial agreement sunsets or expires after X number of years. But that’s also if both parties agree to such an arrangement. Given Kevin Costner’s reported feelings after his first divorce, I guess he was in no mood to sign or have his lawyers write a more generous prenuptial agreement when he was getting married again. So, that’s understandable, but in retrospect it doesn’t seem like Christine had the best legal help at the time of the prenup or now. I’ll still reserve judgement because this was only one phase of their divorce, there’s still alimony, etc. to be resolved so who knows what will happen.

        I also think that she will fare better most divorcees, even those who don’t get awarded everything they were expecting. During her marriage, I’m guessing that she lived a life of luxury and after this all gets sorted out, her options will also be better than others in her position. She can continue to design bags as someone said, write books, do TV, online blogs or go back to school if she wants.

      • Aurora says:

        Yes we can agree K is a d*ck and she’s not the brightest. Precisely bc he’s a d*ck and she was under an airtight prenup, she should have hoarded cash or assets of her own. Instead, she was splurging money like there’s no tomorrow. 20k/month in clothes to stay at home watching staff do chores? Had she put aside half of this amount, she’d be sitting on a passive capital of 2.5 mil plus a wardrobe she still won’t get to wear in a lifetime. And that’s just an example, let’s leave aside hairdressing, cosmetic procedures, atm withdrawals. (Why did she need 8,000 cash/ month?) She chose to go frontal vs him when so many of her aspirations depend on his goodwill bc of the prenup. Apparently he’s a b*stard who can give her a house and a reasonable stipend. But oddly enough she can’t claim infidelity, abandonment, physical or emotional violence… anything on his side that could invalidate the prenup or be used as leverage. It’s not impossible for her to get an education and a job, but both would be hardly related.

    • Renee says:

      I believe she has a degree in business from Cal State-Fullerton. She could certainly go back to school for a graduate degree (like Doria Ragland went back to school for her MSW and then worked as a social worker for several years).

  5. Mel says:

    While I don’t actually see her returning to college and looking for a normal job, at 49 it IS possible to start again. My MIL returned to school at that age to completely switch careers and worked for over 15 years in her new field, successfully climbing the ladder and loving life. She is not going to work in a cubicle farm, but maybe she has other interests that she can finally pursue that she didn’t as Mrs Costner.

    • Josephine says:

      Agree with this. She’s young, wealthy (compared to most people), attractive, and likely connected. She has a lot going for her, and too many people are treating her like a child who married at 18. She wanted a divorce so maybe she was looking for her next phase in life. Tons of women do so at her age. And ick to the suggestions (not yours) that she can always remarry another wealthy dude.

      • H says:

        It IS icky, but … also realistic. Like, honestly, we are not all that removed from our history of women as chattel, especially in upper classes where girls are often literally raised to marry well and be the good country club wives who live a life of input and leisure and have people to see to all the normal everyday tasks of living and child-rearing. A woman in that social rung, when she’s divorced, either gets enough to live respectably in a quiet “humble” little home (the Dowager trope lol), or has to rely on her own family or go down the rung to get a job like the rest of us (a life she was NOT raised for) … or, yes, marrying another wealthy man. Not ALL wealthy women face this fate of course! But my point is that we are not as far removed from our history of women as chattel as we like to think, and that view perpetuates itself in many many ways in our modern society (misogyny in general, stats on women’s issues in the workplace, the fact that our rape laws are literally based on and originated in property laws…)

        So I understand the point. For a woman like her, married to a wealthy man for the last 20 years with no other educational or professional experience during that time (and please let’s stop screeching about how raising his kids was work – she’s not pulling laundry out of her washer and into her dryer and cleaning the fridge every month like the rest of us; she has SO MANY PEOPLE who have done that for her all those years) yeah, marrying another wealthy man is a likely and viable option for her.

        unless she has the drive to go to school and enter into a profession that is more like a calling – journalism, law, social work, jobs that do lend themselves well to a passion, a mission, a calling. And she might! But she hasn’t pursued that and her kids are teens, and it seems unlikely it was an interest of hers at all. So. Okay.

  6. blue says:

    There is a pre-nup. Chris knew the terms, did a blindside filing, went on a vacation right away with one of Kevin’s “friends.”
    She graduated from college as a business major & set up a successful totebag company with Kevin’s backing.
    $63,000 a month for CS alone buys lots of orthodontia, sneakers, clothing, ipads & computers, school tuition & trips, entertainment, sporting goods, etc.
    How is she getting the short end of the stick?

    • Becks1 says:

      I agree, but also, I think the 63k includes Kevin paying for tuition, healthcare, sports, camps, things like that. That was the original offer anyway.

    • Ck3 says:

      She’s getting the short end of the stick because she’s not getting everything she’s asked for. Simple as that. I’m officially team no one, but let’s not pretend that these articles haven’t been decidedly pro-Christine from the jump and that every bad legal decision and ask has been uncritically deemed the necessary and proper course of action. Her side requested that she remain on the premises, in violation of the prenup, which she wasn’t contesting at the time, until both sides came to an agreeable child support agreement. That should have been the biggest red flag that her legal team wasn’t on the up and up. I mean there was a big hoopla about her hiring a forensic accountant, probably on the advice of her lawyers, but no one thought to secure a residence or apartment for when the judge inevitably said “No, you can’t leverage your presence to get a better deal.” There’s no conspiracy to get Christine. She’s just playing with a bad legal hand with an individual who doesn’t really care about their public image.

    • AD says:

      I agree. Some say Kevin is a horrible person. What makes him so? Because he wouldn’t let her take him for a ride? This is a divorce. Believe you me , if I get blindsided and you serve me divorce papers I am not going to be all happy go lucky about it. And so would many on here saying otherwise.

      He takes care of the kids expenses. All of their expenses. He even told her he’ll get her a house, just not the one she currently resides. But she chose to make it all public, refuse to move, challenge the prenup. And she’s expecting him to open his pocket book. Let’s be real and call a thing a thing. A lot of people saying otherwise will do exactly the same thing. It’s not that her lawyers are bad, it’s the nature of the beast.

      They base child support on current income. They don’t just pull a number out of a hat. He is paying all the kids expenses, so she will be fine. She was kept in style, had access to his money and then some. I am not here crying for her. SHe should have been smarter. I agree. She started the divorce proceedings without any plan thinking she is going to get a wind fall. This man paid his ex 80 million. Tell why he wouldn’t have a prenup. Only a senseless person will do that.

      • Mel says:

        This! I think he’s an AH but he had her sign of prenup to protect his assets, not for sh*** and giggles. She signed it willingly then left him stupidly. She needed to think and plan this thing out for an entire year before she did this. Either her legal team is sloppy and gives really bad advice, in which case she can sue them or she’s entitled, not that bright and thought he and the courts would just roll over for her.She’s getting 60k a month and he pays all the kids expenses, how is she losing really? No he doesn’t have to give HER the lifestyle she’s used to. If anyone here had that kind of money or any REAL assets, they would legally protect them and fight to keep them. You’re lying to yourself if you say you wouldn’t. My siblings and I have homes in another country, if something happens to me, my husband already knows he is NOT entitled to them or any profits from them, it goes to our kids. He can pitch a fit if he wants to, but the deal is done and he won’t win if he tries. I protected my assets, am I wrong for that?

      • Dutch says:

        The reports of her spending habits had me thinking that might be a reason beyond pure spite as to why Costner is fighting this so hard. There’s nothing from the reported testimony and the bad advice she seems to be following so far that makes one believe that Baumgartner wouldn’t pretty quickly burn through any size payout she’d get. And Costner seems to have a big enough ego to think that before he shuffles off the mortal coil, he could double whatever theoretical eight-figure payout people are expecting him to agree to, hence more to pass down to his kids.

      • Ina says:

        The pro-Christine commenters on this site expect KC to roll over and play dead and fork over to Christine everything she demands. Easy to say when it’s not your own money. And the comments about “invalidating the prenup” —-What’s the point of a prenup if it’s meant to be invalidated? Why have one to begin with? And If there are bots on this site, what makes us so sure that there aren’t plants from Christine’s side as well? The singular finger pointing on KC is quite breathtaking.

    • Col says:

      Her bag company wasn’t successful and isn’t operating.

  7. GrnieWnie says:

    It’s never too late to get an education and she could certainly work in education if that’s where her interest lies. Good for her.

    I hope she gets compensated for all the labour she did raising 3 kids so Kevin Costner could earn millions without interruption.

    • Ciotog says:

      Yes. Team No One here, but she contributed to the success of his career and should be compensated for that.

      • Flower says:

        ^^ This 100%

        She took care of the kids and house and that allowed him to focus on his work as an Actor, director and producer.

        Anyone who disagrees with me, read the (UK) judgement of Sir Terence Conran and Caroline Herbert (his third wife).

        She got a record settlement of over £10Million in the mid 90’s, which was unprecedented in the UK and paved the way for London Courts becoming the divorce capital of world.

        Caroline’s argument was based exactly on this principle – i.e. her contribution to the home, hosting their guests etc was a huge factor in her husbands success and therefore she should share monetarily in that success. I actually urge people to read the judgement – someone needs to put Christine’s lawyers onto that judgement.

        She needs to also sue Kevin for financial compensation for the last 20 years for everything i.e. looking after/ supervising the running of the home, looking after their children, missed 401k contributions, hosting his guests, attending awards – basically everything. That list alone will cobble together at least $10M, which she could then invest over the next 8-10 years while the youngest reaches majority and graduates college.

        I knew little about Christine before all this and slightly more about Kevin. The whole case has made me view KC with very different eyes, the way the media has been weaponised against her is pretty disgusting. Applying normal people standards to these marriages is also disingenuous. No one is asking KC to roll over and empty his pockets, but I am pretty sure if you totted up his earnings over the last 20 years that even just 10-20% of that would have stopped the horrible way this has been publicly played out.

        Calling CB a gold digger after 20 years is massively disingenuous, she has given the best years of her life to a man whom has discarded her like a live in escort, and it seems he never really viewed her as a spouse or equal.

        If you’re able to treat the mother of your three children like this, it massively speaks to a persons character or lack thereof.

        The law needs to be changed for this situation and especially for long marriages where children are involved.

      • Ocho says:

        Absolutely YES to @Flower and @Ciotog’s comments!

        It is a complete mistake to review the number she will get without thinking about it as a percentage of the total amount earned over the 20 year marriage. Context. That total amount earned is ridiculously large. Be mad about that, if you want something to yell at. But she still deserves a fair percentage of that ridiculous amount.

        While you may not choose to be a stay at home parent, that job should not be denigrated as inferior or selfish.

        Some of the commenters on this story make me sad. I am a LONG time reader and admirer of the writers. I used to adore Celebitchy people.

        More nuanced conversation on how to compensate stay at home partners to treat them as equal, valued members of society and provide them with financial security and how to better compensate stereotypically “feminine” work (teaching, nursing, administrative…) in general would be more interesting. And less depressing.

    • GrnieWnie says:

      @Ocho I’ve learned from experience that very few people share the view that care work is actual labour (subject to compensation!) unless it’s coming from someone employed by a company.

      Kevin laboured throughout their 20-year marriage and earned a certain amount. So did she, and earned nothing due to the way our society is set up. Put differently, her labour earned her job benefits exclusively via her husband. Her access to those benefits disappeared with the end of the marriage. So after 20 years of marriage/care work, she has….child support (?) and gets to retrain and switch careers while he gets to carry on as normal.

      IMO no pre-nup should be able to deny you fair compensation for your labour. That’s a system that harms women. Kevin would’ve had to pay through the nose for an army of care workers to provide the quality of care that she likely provided simply by virtue of having a deep emotional investment in their children. That’s what he should pay her now, in addition to compensation for labour she did to benefit his career (anything that involved him appearing publicly with his family or using his family image to some benefit, any contribution of her soft skills, etc.). It’s often hard to enumerate these contributions so hey, a proportionate percentage of his income would work.

  8. Roo says:

    She’s definitely getting hosed by that old judge. I hope that she finds happiness at the end of this hard road, whether that’s through school and a new career, peaceful times away from Costner, new love, or all of the above.

    • AnneL says:

      Yes, that old judge is sticking it to her. He doesn’t strike me as the least bit balanced or measured and IMO has no business being on the bench if this is how he’s going to adjudicate family matters. But it happens all the time. My husband is a trial lawyer and has been in front of some nightmare judges.

  9. Brassy Rebel says:

    I definitely don’t see a 9 to 5 job in her future. And she will need some source of income while completing her degree in what? She’s been basically a single parent for a long time. I wish she had thought this divorce through better before she filed. Someone gave her bad advice about getting the prenup cancelled.

  10. Becks1 says:

    I don’t think people having a different view mean its the “Depp package”. Most people on here that are saying Christine misplayed this (*raises hand*) are ALSO saying Costner is being cheap and should have just given her a larger settlement upfront and not had this play out in courts so publicly. But that doesn’t mean he’s wrong, legally, which is what some of the pure-pro christine people seem to keep arguing (like asking for her to answer interrogatories before the discovery deadline…..that was perfectly normal and legal and typical.)

    both things can be true here, that he’s being a cheap ahole and that she’s made some huge miscalculations, both in her legal strategy and her PR strategy (saying “luxury is in their DNA” was not the win that she might have thought it was going to be….)

    As for her getting a job – people act like its a suggestion that she becomes a cashier at Walmart. Of course that’s not what she’s going to do. She’s going to get a job as some sort of TV host, an E! red carpet fashion consultant, a co-host on the Talk, a side gig on the Today show, whatever. She’s going to be fine. The kind of “job” she is going to get is not what most divorced moms have to get after being SAHMs for two decades.

    • Celebitchy says:

      It’s the Depp package, we see the details on the back end and there’s no doubt. -edit- there’s a lot that we clean up before it gets here and the patterns are unmistakable

      • Kaiser says:

        I agree, the commenting on Labor Day was sus

      • Becks1 says:

        Well that makes sense for the deleted comments then. I just don’t see it based on what you ladies let through, that’s all! Which must mean your comment reviewing is going into overtime, lol.

      • girl_ninja says:

        Yup. I saw the Depp all over Twitter too and it was so obvious to me. No one was paying attention to this divorce really except for a few articles here and there and of course here on CB.

      • Kate says:

        Ugh that’s so gross of him. So so gross. I don’t care what insanity she asked for or how entitled she is I can’t be “team no one” because he’s throwing his money away with this skeezy bot campaign to change public perception, rather than be a fkn grownup and resolve this amicably.

      • Flower says:

        WOW !

        In a way it’s good because sites like this soon learn who the real instigators are.

      • Meh says:

        It’s been incredibly obvious for a while. Thank you, @celebitchy, for keeping this space safe.

    • AnneL says:

      I agree that she misplayed her hand but also that he is a cheap petty a-hole. I know he’s angry but he doesn’t even seem to value the work she did raising their kids. Neither does that old judge.

      She’ll be fine. She’ll get a gig of some sort. It’s hard to feel sorry for a woman who is getting $60K a month in child support but the way this has played out just chaps me. I don’t think she should get half his fortune, but she should get more than this.

      • AD says:

        So you will open your pocket book and be all agreeable if you were blindsided with a divorce. lol! He is not cheap. After all she had access to all his money before the divorce. It’s a divorce. You want to make it contentious well better tighten your loins. Just don’t start crying when you don’t get what you expected.

      • Yesgirl says:

        @AD I felt the same way but to be honest she did earn the money she didn’t get. Did she come off as out of touch, a snob, and a lack of self awareness when she talked abut “Luxury in their DNA” ect.. yes. Hear me out, when all was well and they were in love he came back to a real home to his home because of her and the children. She took on all the parenting so he could work and waited for 20 years so he would hopefully retired and spend more time together. Then he gets the Yellowstone gig and his fame and demand grew so much that his ego might not fit into the room anymore. She saw no end in sight now and his new “Horizon” project meant this would go on for years. He wasn’t this in demand during the marriage so she might have felt tossed aside. She wasn’t with him at the peak of his career. While he remained successful through the years i think this was new to her. That side of him when he lives for his work and not his family. It meant still having to do everything alone and when he got home had little interest in any of it. Almost 50 and realizing her life was passing her by and the kids are not super dependent on her anymore might have led to resenting KC and for good reason. I think he did finally say in court that she turned that place into a home and complimented her a lot. He might be kicking himself in the ass for going to hard on her because of his past trauma. It all happened so fast. With that said she and her lawyers blew it in court and public opinion. I wish she had just not gone into the white rich lady speech in court.

      • Lorelei says:

        I was Team Christine from day one, but she played this really, really badly and eroded a lot of her own support.

        IDK if she had poor legal counsel or if she ignored good advice from her team, but she went WAY too far with the “luxury is in their DNA” and “the kids are used to having 40 tons of snow shipped into Santa Barbara for Christmas,” etc. Oh, and “we’re used to having music piped through the trees when we go tobogganing at our Aspen home!”
        Going on vacation with another man so shortly after she filed was also a bad look.

        I think Costner is a total asshole, cannot stand him. But he’s worth— I’ve heard from $400 million to $500 million, so let’s just say it’s somewhere in between— and yes, this does make him look cheap and petty and terrible. He’s been married to her for almost 20 years and she’s the mother of three (?) of his children.

        It was a bad idea for Christine to count on getting the prenup invalidated and IMO the attorney who advised her when she first signed it deserves some of the blame for not advocating for a better agreement for his client (again, maybe that attorney did, and she didn’t listen— who knows).

        But Costner, who allegedly impregnated a women on the set of Yellowstone (which is relevant IMO!), could easily give her a shit-ton more money and it wouldn’t make a DENT in his lifestyle, considering how much he’s worth overall. He would still have HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars— more than he could spend in his lifetime— and he wouldn’t have taken this hit to his reputation.

        I get that he had a bad experience during the divorce with his first wife, but Christine was married to him for 19 years, was the primary person raising his children during those years, and deserves better, IMO. Even though Kevin is an insufferable prick, I think she should be getting more $.

    • Yesgirl says:

      Agree @Becky1

      I’m not seeing a bunch of bots. I am seeing people that were on her side change their minds because of how badly she and her lawyers handled it all. KC doesn’t come out of this looking good either. I still hope once he is less in his feelings that he will do the right thing and send her a nice direct deposit. I think she will be able to work. She is very well connected and lets be real she isn’t going to be working as a waitress. I think she will get a job from a connected friend that pays a lot of little work. To be honest I hope that happens so she can put this all behind her. Team no one.

  11. Chaine says:

    Good for her kids if she does, I hope she is sincere about it. Her kids sound like they have lived in a sphere of ridiculous wealth and privilege. Best thing in the world for them to see their mom working on a degree and supporting herself financially.

  12. MrsFonzieFace says:

    This whole story underlines again how vulnerable SAHP can be and how important an education is.

    I remember the relief in being able to get back on there career ladder after my time as a SAHM, it was a real thing.

    • AnneL says:

      Yes, the struggle is real.

      I worked as an attorney for 10 years and stopped when my younger one was in kindergarten. I made the decision to stay at home for several years, knowing that I would not be able to get back on the same rung of the ladder. But luckily for me, it wasn’t a ladder I wanted to keep climbing and my husband was making enough to support us by then.

      Switching careers isn’t easier, exactly, but it can be a better option depending on your circumstances. I’m not sure if Christine has ever worked, but she has a college degree and she can certainly do something.

  13. Concern Fae says:

    It astonishes me that it is legal for a prenup to say that you get nothing if you challenge it. There at least needs to be a time limit on that. There also needs to be the assumption that inflation and buying power need to be taken into account should there be a divorce. Every prenup should be required to have the language of $X in year of signing value language. Otherwise you are severely penalizing someone for having been in a long marriage.

    I wouldn’t be surprised to see this case pushing California lawmakers to look at divorce law reform. A judge shouldn’t be able to screw over a SAHM in a long term marriage to an extremely wealthy man this hard.

    • Josephine says:

      I would also like to see some legislative restraints put on these draconian prenups. I do think that prenups are valuable and legit, and no one would blink at theirs had they remained married for only a short time.

      Because it is a private contract, though, it really was on her to renegotiate over time or after she started having kids. She desperately wanted him and she’s unfortunately paying the price.

    • Phyllis says:

      Came here to say the very same thing…he could at least, at the very damn minimum, adjust the prenup for inflation. But his level of butthurt, wound licking, and revenge simply because a woman had the audacity to tell him she didn’t love him anymore is pretty crazy. Maybe Kevin’s bot farm/troll team can let him know there are most likely loads of ladies out there in line who will get with him and the goodwill he would generate from simply being decent ex spouse and fairly compensating her for the 20 years of her life that she gave him would go a long way. As it stands, he looks greedy, selfish, bitter (about his first marriage), and a user….because yes he used her and took years of her life from her. Looooong time reader, team Christine 100%.

    • Dutch says:

      Adjustments for cost of living and inflation are the arguments her lawyers should be making because they are based on fiscal realities, And maybe that is their fall back position once they are done swinging for the fences. If you use that $1.5 million as the base payout, give it a 5% annual interest compound (or more if Costner’s average rate of return on his investments during the marriage is higher) over 18 years of marriage, a “bonus” for each one of the kids and base the housing payout on the median price of a 4 bedroom/4 bath house in the zip code of the kids’ primary residence. That would add up to more reasonable settlement.

      • Cosmic Cow says:

        @Dutch. I expect this is where this will go after the November court hearing challenging it.

      • Lorelei says:

        It’s incredible that at the very least, the prenup didn’t account for INFLATION. Who was her lawyer, good god?

      • Dutch says:

        @Lorelei: Or something like kickers when the marriage passed certain longevity milestones.

      • Debbie says:

        Based on what’s been made public about the prenuptial settlement of $1.5 million, I tend to agree with @Josephine above who said that her signing the prenuptial agreement as it was could be due to the fact that she really wanted to marry him at the time and was willing to sign it as/is because maybe it seemed like a large amount of money to her. Maybe she expected the marriage to last and didn’t want him to think that she was out for his money, so who knows. I don’t know if she’s been married before or not, but the fact that he has been through a divorce before certainly shows. It shows that even when they were happy together and contemplating marriage, he was thinking about what could happen in the future if things turned bad.

  14. LeahTheFrench says:

    On the “engagement” part: I’m wondering if the Depp/Heard divorce has completely redefined the playbook for divorce of high profile celebrities and altered it permanently. Depp and his team made a determined, concerted effort to tap into public opinion (well…if you can call ingrained misogyny “opinion”) and decided to basically win this outside of court by swaying parts of the media and broader audience (those who seem to have deep, unaddressed issues with women, and that’s probably a larger contingent than any of us expected). And it worked.
    I don’t think Christine is being subject to the same level of character assassination as Amber Heard, and she’s certainly got herself to blame for some pretty unfortunate own goals, but I certainly would not want for her (and any other woman for that matter) the ordeal Heard had to go through. If that’s really what’s happening, then I hope someone challenges that “Kevin thinks all the dignity is on his side” narrative, because the Depp package was more than below the belt. Also, he’s taking great risks if that’s true, because if that comes to light at a later stage, imagine his kids’ reaction…

  15. Nikomikaelx says:

    Housewives fans on twitter have been talking about her joining the franchise since the start of the divorce.
    She would fit right in with the BH ladies maybe? And considering her status/ex she would probably get a nice million a season from the start.

    • Southern Fried says:

      Oh gawd no. No housewives, Andy Cohen, bravo garbage. I know it’s a guilty pleasure for many but it would be the worst possible thing for her exposing her to endless abuse and humiliation.

  16. Satci says:

    She’s going to be getting $60k a MONTH!!!!! Even in LA that’s enough to just sit back and do nothing forever.

    • Josephine says:

      that’s child support, and it’s going to end. her kids are teens. and that money is for them. she’s not supposed to be banking it for herself. i agree that it is a huge amount of money, but the reality is a lot different than a lifetime of getting that kind of support.

  17. Canadian says:

    There’s a nuance here I feel gets missed – she is not the SAHM who sacrificed her career to raise children and support her husband’s career only to be dumped for a younger model. She chose to divorce and seemed to expect her lifestyle wouldn’t suffer. Her children will still have their lifestyle and access to their home and vacation homes. She is the one losing not them. Her youngest is 13, she needed a better plan and better lawyers. His original offer if I recall was substantially better than what she’s getting now – she took a gamble and lost. He should have leased her a house nearby for 5 years in addition to what he originally offered.

    • Southern Fried says:

      How are we so certain she didn’t sacrifice a career for him and a family? Facts please.

      • Canadian says:

        Fair – the only reports of a career prior to her marriage are as a model. At 29 when they married, unfortunately that career wasn’t going to be lucrative unless she was already a household name.

      • Cosmic Cow says:

        I thought she designed handbags for her company Cat Bag Couture?

      • Dutch says:

        The handbag company came after they were married and the seed money came from KC

  18. shanaynay says:

    Sorry I’m totally team Kevin!,

    What she is given is more than enough to live a nice life. When my parent’s divorced my mom got much less than that and we lived nicely. It can be done. Sure we didn’t get everything we wanted, but we learned to deal with that.

  19. Cosmic Cow says:

    I think she can get an educational upgrade and re-enter the workforce. People, including women, do it all the time. I thought she had a degree and was involved in some other personal business ventures before? And I’m sure she’ probably quite well connected. Anyone can find their interest, their purpose, their independence and their bliss, anytime. Go girl.

    • Granger says:

      I stayed at home for 8 years, went back to school at 44 to get a Master’s (my kids were 7 and 9), then got a full-time job and within four years I was promoted to VP. I had a boss who appreciated the experience I brought from the job I had before kids, but also my maturity. So maybe I was lucky? But my point is, starting fresh in your mid to late 40s can totally be done — especially for someone with her connections. As someone else already said, she’ll probably get a job as a red-carpet or talk-show host. She’ll be fine.

  20. Ameerah M says:

    While I’m not surprised that she wasn’t able to nullify the pre-nup I am really taken aback at how BAD her lawyers are. They have done a real disservice to her in this. But also it’s clear the Judge is trash too. Is Costner paying for the children’s school expenses, etc? Or does that have to come out of the monthly child support? If he is paying for all of their activities then it’s an okay deal in regard to the CS. But if he isn’t? Girlfriend is being HOSED.

    • Becks1 says:

      The original offer from him was for her to get 60k a month and he would pay for everything – tuition, healthcare, extracurriculars, etc. Then when she got the temporary increase to 125k the expenses were going to be split 50/50. I’m not sure if its back to him paying for tuition etc, but I’m going to presume so with the number back to his original offer.

    • Cosmic Cow says:

      I believe that the court date to contest the pre-nup is in November.

  21. lucy2 says:

    I think she’s stuck with that lousy pre-nup, whether she or her lawyers are to blame for that one, but I think she’s getting hosed with child support, if his income is what was reported. If he’s going to pay so little (relatively) per month, he should purchase a home for her and the kids to use. He could put it in trust for the kids if he doesn’t want her to have it.
    That said, going back to school and/or having a new career isn’t a bad thing, so hopefully she finds something fulfilling.

  22. Solace says:

    Oh my god, what part of she’s being financially abused is not clear to all bozos both siding here. She’s not a gold digger, he is a youth digger. Point me one women who didn’t think she would be the exception for the guy.

    And stop comparing your life story/money to celebrities and their child support. They are not in the same realm. 60k is nothing. 7 million to Amber was nothing and turned out to be nothing. These men are very derogatory in their assessment of what they owe a woman.

    Ps…when the celebitchy team says it’s a bot attack pattern, please stop telling everyone what you think is Ackshually happening lol.
    Use some critical thinking.

    • Oceancitygirl says:

      Agreed!! Costner is absolutely using money to hurt her for leaving him.

      Costner could cut her a check for a few million and not miss it. Instead he’s out there fighting her over a few thousand in child support. She probably thought the marriage would last when she signed the prenup and now after all these years she just wants out. Imagine how bad living with him must have been that she’s willing to go through this just to get away from the guy.

      Everyone I’ve discussed this with in real life thinks she’s getting screwed by Costner and the old man (88 year old) judge who clearly favors his side. The pro Costner side comments feel like a paid hit job on her.

    • Ula1010 says:

      Costner fought her over taking the dog bed out of the house, what makes anyone think she would have been able to squirrel away a little nest egg over the years or have property put in her name? She could spend money on the kids and on her looks but she couldn’t have anything that was hers. He’s fighting her on everything that she wants to take with her.

      When she filed for divorce, I saw quite a bit of gossip about his cheating ways but that has magically gone away. I doubt he was truly blindsided. He might not have listened but wasn’t blindsided. He’s a spoiled man who has never wanted to be held accountable for his behavior. Unfortunately, he will probably get away with it. All women should stay away from him in the future.

    • Josephine says:

      “Point me one women who didn’t think she would be the exception for the guy.”

      To me, your comment above is kinda the point. She really wanted to marry him and apparently thought it was worth it to sign away her rights as his partner. Interviews of them in early days made it pretty clear that she really wanted marriage and kids and he was dragging his feet. I could be wrong but I feel like he admitted that she gave him an ultimatum at some point. I feel bad for her because so many of us do stupid things for the sake of having a partner. But feeling bad and feeling like she was legally wronged as the result of her decisions (decisions made as an adult with options) are two different things.

    • bisynaptic says:


    • The Old Chick says:

      Look, I sorta both sided it and I totally agree this is financial abuse. I think many commenters feel that way. I also agree all the wow 60k comments are missing the point that it’s CHILD SUPPORT not for her and it reduces /ends as the kids hit 18 or whatever. Regardless of it being financial abuse, especially with the Depp package included which is hideous, reality is reality. The legal team have not given her good advice, she did sign that absurd prenup, and at the moment the law is on his side. Now he’s cheating on her as well. I hoped it could be overturned but we’ll see in November.

  23. Beautifuldreamer says:

    I really respect that she is choosing to go back to school and get a job rather than join the real housewives or some other reality tv situation. Even though it’s the harder option, I think it’s the healthiest option overall for her and her kids. She’s setting a good example for her kids of how to better themselves in a crappy situation. Yes, a reality tv job would be nice and easier but would it be worth exposing yourself and your kids to the media (even more than they are already now) and all the potential unhealthiness that could come with that?

  24. B says:

    Let’s count the lamé misogynistic tropes about women so far in the hate comments.
    A) she’s lazy and doesn’t want to work and was so happy to be a financial parasite on the hard working sincere talented guy
    B) related but still different – she’s a gold digger
    C) she’s psychologically damaging her kids by trying to (insert so many options here)
    D). She didn’t contribute in a real way to his ability to earn that paycheck
    E) she’s a (I don’t even want to use the word but it starts with wh and ends with re)

    I could put a few more down but I’m already refluxing.

    The digital campaign against her should at least challenge themselves to come up with something creative and demonstrative of an actual IQ.

    His team’s job appears to suck. Like, totally suck.

  25. KB says:

    I’ve been a stay at home mom going through a divorce with small kids and it absolutely is doable with the right support system. I don’t know why that irks me so much from the article (“Good luck with that…”). It’s what she wants to do, so why roll your eyes at it? I had so many people do the same to me when I wanted to go back to school. They’d rather me get a job right away at McDonalds and the grocery store and probably three other part time jobs instead of investing in a real career. That drives me crazy. Good for her for considering that an option & I hope she’s around people who support that decision.

  26. Qtpi says:

    I wonder if the terms of the prenup state she can’t make any $$$ doing interviews or writing a tell all. Because she could probably make decent money telling behind the scenes stories.

  27. Brenda says:

    I was in medical school in my 30’s, and finished 10 years later, and the energy difference for night call and post-call between me and the other older students, vs the early to mid 20-somethings was distinctly noticeable.

    I agree that it can be done (maybe with a regular prescription of nuvigil – whoever invented that stuff should definitely die rich) but I’m exhausted just thinking about starting it all over again at the age of 47. I would love to do an ER residency followed by a fellowship in austere medicine or disaster medicine on top of what I already have, but I’m too damn tired and I have kids. Also, soon I’ll have the hot flashes and poor sleep of menopause to look forward to.

    Yes, a job is a regular part of life. But, sometimes I read these ‘she should just go get a …..’ comments and I think that people have forgotten the intense hustle of those initial years.

    People who are going to go do that – yes it’s possible. It’s also a -lot-.

  28. Jeanette says:

    But on the other hand, the only thing I saw about her and this boyfriend was where their reps denied they were in a thing..cheating..boning..whatever you want to call it. Then they show up in Hawaii together on vacation. Then Costner calls him her boyfriend in court and says he gave her 200k. I cant believe the press hasnt been all over the cheating angle?

    • Lorelei says:

      @Jeanette, I’d read that it was $20K that the “family friend,” or “boyfriend” or whoever that dude is had given her, not $200K— but the amount doesn’t really matter, your point totally still stands.

      That was such an unbelievably bad move to go on vacation with another guy so quickly after filing! I’m also surprised that Kevin didn’t make a bigger issue of it, but maybe he wanted to minimize the discussion of *his* alleged cheating in court, so they both sort of stayed away from that topic?

      The entire thing is a mess and at this point I’m also Team No One, although I do believe Kevin should just quietly give her more money; she deserves more than what she’s receiving, despite the fact that her testimony about her “luxury” lifestyle was…ill-advised, to put it mildly.

      • Carolnr says:

        @ CIOTOG
        Kevin Costner was very very successful with his career WAY before he married Christine Baumgartner! He had the prenup drawn up BEFORE they married that if they divorced, he would keep HIS house, which he had & earned way before he married Christine. What if it was her home & not his & she had the prenup drawn up stating that if they divorced, SHE would keep the house she had & earned? Would you be ok with that?
        Why is it then different for Kevin?
        Those children will be well provided for& will want for nothing from Kevin.
        I thought I even read that their children, not Christine will inherit all his properties. Kevin offered to pay all of their children’s expenses & she argued that she wanted to pay 1/2.
        They are divorcing & Kevin does not have to pay for her previous lifestyle., nor would she have to pay for his ( if the roles were reversed).
        Glad she realized that she needs to enter the workforce…

      • Jeanette says:

        @Lorelai totally agree, and if im not mistaken the kids were also on that vacation as well. Ick. Its too early for that nonsense..too early for the kids to see it for sure. There arent any winners here especially the kids.

    • B says:

      A) I think that most of us can understand how someone might look for emotional support wherever it’s available
      B) Costner might not be ready to be in a relationship (this is the kind way to say it)
      C) who says that’s true any more than Megan and Harry are on the rocks?
      D) most of us have probably had the experience of a good friend being mistaken for a maybe liaison
      E) again with the condemn her because of her vagina angle
      F) could this friend be doing stealth service to Kevin by doing something to a vulnerable woman that would make her look bad. They didn’t need to sleep together they just needed to be photographed together. Also, 200k might be chump change to him and he might have been reimbursed already for it

  29. Dylan says:

    I was dumped at age 42 (and after a serious illness). Four kids. I had made the choice to run a home business in 1986 in order to be with the kids, and was quite successful for 16 years, until two of his corporate transfers later, one outside of the US, had lost most of my business contacts. I was drubbed in the divorce proceedings (see above). Not only were we divorced in butthole small Texas, where women were school teachers or realtors, but he (like Costner) enjoyed all of the perks the corporation had to offer (jacked with the resale value of the home, ability to take off as many hours as he pleased, opportunity to play poor aggrieved parent). I burned through settlement money just to have an apartment large enough to see my kids and pay down joint marital debt that he deliberately accrued. I was lucky to be hired as a contractor after my divorce, where I made good money, but the hours were so brutal I had to leave the kids in his school district. As a valued corporate employee he was allowed to come and go for schools, doctors’ visits. I made good money until 2008 then never recovered after the crash. By the age of 50 it was very difficult to land any assignments and even though I finally was hired as an employee at a Fortune 500 was laid off again in another round of cutbacks. I really identify with Christine, even though it is hard to feel sorry at $63K a year. Hers is a cautionary tale for all women and Kevin Costner is the poster manchild for the patriarchy, which the family court enables.

    • Brenda says:

      There was an attorney commenting here on Celebitchy this summer that she is expected to work like she doesn’t have children and mom it up like she doesn’t have a job.

      That woman hit the nail on the head.

      Can you imagine if society just imposed that expectation on men as a group? And, the bar for parenting is for men where it is for women?

      “She should go and do…..”
      So easily done.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Dylan, I’m so sorry that happened to you. I mean, I get it, when you hear that she’s getting more than $60K/month the initial reaction is that’s so much, but for someone in her situation, it really isn’t. That area of CA is outrageously expensive. ITA with your last sentence, but am so sorry you have personal experience in this area. So many men are just trash.

  30. Elfie says:

    $60K a month is getting hosed?! Half of America doesn’t make that in a year.

    • B says:

      Does anyone here think his legal team will ask for meticulous accounting to verify that the 60k/mo went to the kids and did not get diverted to her?

      You know, given his seeming level of vindictiveness and rigidity?

  31. duchess of hazard says:

    She hustled backwards.

    Wasn’t Christine paying for her parents mortgage and cars and such? I’m surprised that she didn’t have money squirrelled away when she was married, especially if she was fixing to divorce. Because women just don’t get up one day (with children and a marriage) and go, “I’m out.” She must have been dwelling on it for a long time, so… why didn’t she get all her ducks in a row? See top lawyers for a consult so that Costner couldn’t? Or tried to renegotiate her prenup before she decided to go that way.

    I’m not going to whinge about her being subjected to a contract that she signed, because that’s why you have contracts.

  32. beauxblue says:

    the horrors, 49 year old woman has to go to work to take care of herself

  33. Haylie says:

    All this does is reinforce for me the idea of never being financially dependent on a man. Especially a rich one.

  34. BeanieBean says:

    Well, good for her! As someone who finally got around to finishing her masters degree at 48 & finally, finally getting her career on track, I’d like to say this is entirely doable. She’s got lots of resources & help to make this happen. My own mother was 44 when she got herself a full time job at Kmart in order to prep for the divorce with my dad (she put up with him for far too long, no doubt thinking it was best for us kids). This is not an impossible task for a woman, particularly a mature woman who perhaps has been out of the workforce for a while. Difficult yes, but not impossible.
    Costner still stinks, though. What a selfish SOB.

  35. yellowy says:

    I assume a woman like Christine has links to established women in the local community. No one is suggesting she can pull in hundreds of thousands a year off the bat, or even attempt to pay for half of her children’s requirements, but if she has an interest in fashion, she could work a couple of days a week in a boutique learning the trade whilst she studies for design and marketing, or goes for her real estate licence or something. Kevin’s ain’t making this easy in any way, but the reality is most “trophy wives” have an income stream of their own in this day and age.

  36. Arabella says:

    Women can’t win! Christine is being bashed as a gold digger because she’s a stay at home mom. Sophie Turner is being called a bad mom because she works. Can we stop with the misogyny?

    • Shell says:

      Sophie makes her own money. In fact, she came into her marriage with her own capital. Kevin Costner on the other hand, didn’t even want to get married and have children but Christine insisted. She signed a prenup. She should’ve been creating her own capital during the marriage. She had access to a 100,000 credit limit and etc. Kevin was paying her mother’s home mortgage. She comes off as not bright.

      • Carolnr says:

        @ Shell
        Yes, Kevin admitted he did not want to get married & have children & I believe I read they broke up for awhile because of it. He did not want to lose her & realized he would & I am sure loved her, so he agreed. I don’t believe that he regrets ever marrying her or having those children with her. I think he was afraid of going through another divorce & unfortunately he is!

  37. Dani says:

    Does anyone know what Christine was doing for a living when she met Kevin?