Why women walk from their entitlements

The law says equal. The outcomes say otherwise.

In New Zealand, women are entitled to an equal share of relationship property, sometimes more. Most women going through separation know this, at least in broad terms. They know there's something to fight for. They know they're entitled.

And then they settle for less.

The easy explanation is that women don't understand their rights. I don't think that's what's happening. The women who walk away from their full entitlement are not, by and large, walking away uninformed. They're walking away because the circumstances they're in have made exercising those rights genuinely inaccessible.

That's a harder conversation to have. It's also the more honest one.

What the Research Actually Shows

In 2018, the Borrin Foundation published research that looked directly at why women depart from equal sharing in separation settlements.

The findings weren't surprising to anyone who has been through it. Women settle for less to stop conflict. Women settle for less to distance themselves from an abusive partner. Women settle for less because they're operating in what the research describes as "emotional fog" — a state of cognitive and emotional depletion that makes complex financial decision-making almost impossible. And women settle for less because legal representation in the Family Court is expensive in ways that aren't abstract — around 40% of participants in the study found the cost of dividing property both unreasonable and unaffordable.

These aren't failures of knowledge. They're failures of access.

Dr Michael Fletcher at AUT has looked at what happens after settlement, using administrative data from 16,000 separated parents.

What he found: in nearly half of cases, the man gained financially while the woman was worse off. In the first year post-separation, women experience an average 29% drop in household income. Men, on average, see a 15% increase. And these effects don't resolve quickly — they typically persist for at least three years following separation.

A 29% drop. A 15% gain. From the same event.

The System That Makes "Fighting for More" a Luxury

There's a particular cruelty in how financial pressure compounds through separation proceedings. Wealthier partners can — and do — use prolonged proceedings as a tool of financial attrition. They can sustain the fight. The other party often cannot.

Many women find themselves in a gap the system wasn't designed to address: their assets are technically too high to qualify for legal aid, but those assets are inaccessible — frozen, controlled, or tied up in contested property. They have wealth on paper and no means to fund the legal action required to reach it.

In that position, settling isn't giving up. It's surviving.

Women in separation are also rarely managing just one crisis at a time. Custody arrangements, housing instability, children's needs, employment — the financial settlement is one thread in a situation pulling in every direction simultaneously. The cognitive and emotional bandwidth required to fight for a full entitlement is bandwidth that has often already been spent.

I've been in this position myself. I was navigating two legal battles at the same time — custody and financial settlement. With the energy I had, I made a deliberate, informed decision, with legal advice, to prioritise my children's long-term care. The financial settlement took a back seat. That decision came with a real cost, and it's one I think is worth naming openly — because I know I'm not alone in having made it.

What Gets Left on the Table

One of the assets most commonly overlooked in separation is KiwiSaver.

Both partners' KiwiSaver balances are generally considered part of the relationship property pool — yet they are frequently not fully accounted for in settlements, particularly informal or quickly reached ones.

The same applies to other assets that don't show up obviously: share portfolios, business interests, redundancy entitlements, long service leave. When a woman settles under financial or emotional pressure, without full legal advice, these are the assets most likely to be left uncounted.

Getting a complete picture of what exists — on both sides — before any agreement is signed is not a luxury. It's the minimum.

The Question Worth Sitting With

There's a tendency to frame poor settlement outcomes as a problem of women not advocating for themselves. If only they'd known more. If only they'd fought harder.

I want to push back on that.

For the women who settled for less — was pushing hard for their full entitlement genuinely an option? In most cases, if it had been, they would have taken it. Women are not walking away from significant assets because they don't value money. They're walking away because the cost of accessing what they're owed — emotionally, financially, physically — was a cost they couldn't sustain.

That's a systems problem, not a knowledge problem.

What we can do is make sure that every woman going through separation has, at minimum, a clear picture of what she's entitled to before any decision is made. That means understanding what assets exist on both sides — including KiwiSaver. It means getting legal advice, even briefly, before signing anything.

Not because fighting is always the right choice. But because an informed decision to settle is entirely different from an uninformed one. Too many women are making these decisions without the full picture in front of them. And it's costing them — not just now, but for years afterwards.

If you're navigating separation and want to understand your full financial position — including assets that may not be immediately visible — a Clarity Call can help you see what's in the room before you decide what to do about it.

General information only. Not personalised financial or legal advice. Please seek advice tailored to your circumstances from a licensed financial adviser and qualified legal counsel. FoundHer Financial Planning is a licensed FAP in New Zealand.