Active Users:1162 Time:22/11/2024 12:43:25 PM
Poor life choices? Legolas Send a noteboard - 30/09/2010 09:46:14 PM
Except in unusual circumstance you should be able to continue to get your ex-husband’s money if you get divorced and even then it should be for a limited amount of time. You have a right to half of what was earned during the marriage but nothing afterwards. Women are not children and they need child support. They can go out and get jobs and support themselves. Courts should not be in position of compensating for people’s poor life choices.

I'm with Phelix here. There are most definitely cases in which the wife deserves alimony (and, rarer but still existing, cases in which the husband deserves alimony). Men in many of the highest-paying jobs - CEO's, say, top surgeons, that sort of thing - spend so much time on their job that most of the household and care of the children has to fall on their partner's shoulders, who as a result has it difficult in her (or his) professional career. In very few families does the couple think it desirable for both partners to make the kind of family sacrifices required for a career in the top echelons of many fields - and I think most people will agree with that, that it's really not a good idea to leave kids to be raised by the housekeeper or whatever, with the parents always gone. Hence, there's almost inevitably one partner in such families who sacrifices his or her career, not necessarily entirely but at least to some degree, for the sake of the other. That is not a "poor life choice", that is labour division between a married couple. And when that married couple decides to get a divorce, then yes, the partner who made sacrifices should get something in return.

Now you do say that there's a right to get half of what was earned during the marriage, or what remains of it, which in some cases may be sufficient, but there are certainly situations in which that just isn't enough. Take a couple, let's see, gets kids at thirty, divorces at forty-five, wife has largely given up her career, maybe kept working part-time or some such. With your suggestion, she'd get her share of what remains of the earnings during their marriage, but nothing more? She's been prevented from serious career progression during fifteen years, while her husband kept working and progressing, and at forty-five is beginning to reach a level where he makes good money. And then when they divorce you think it's fair for both of them to just continue where they are, with no compensation of any kind for the woman having put her career on hold for all those years? It really isn't.
Reply to message
Scuzziest politcal ad of the season... so far - 29/09/2010 08:06:19 PM 1046 Views
You think that's worse than Renee Elmer's one in North Carolina? - 29/09/2010 08:38:30 PM 1038 Views
you may not like her position but it isn't a blatant lie - 29/09/2010 08:47:44 PM 697 Views
Yes, much - 29/09/2010 08:55:38 PM 700 Views
The ad didn't make me cringe, but the interview afterward certainly did - 29/09/2010 09:07:06 PM 673 Views
Yeah... oh dear, this is painful. - 29/09/2010 09:37:26 PM 661 Views
I'm with the other people responding. - 29/09/2010 09:18:50 PM 712 Views
The bad news he will lose in November - 29/09/2010 08:42:22 PM 647 Views
His name is Daniel Webster. That is awesome *NM* - 29/09/2010 09:02:15 PM 329 Views
To be fair... - 29/09/2010 11:59:33 PM 757 Views
What little I found in the time I had... - 30/09/2010 04:02:51 AM 778 Views
Why should a woman get alimony for cheating on her husband? - 30/09/2010 05:23:03 AM 671 Views
Because the law in question only eliminated it for women. - 30/09/2010 05:27:12 AM 928 Views
What law? - 30/09/2010 07:49:59 PM 760 Views
Shedding a little light on the "Law" in question. - 01/10/2010 12:40:00 AM 793 Views
You can argue almost any position but that doesn’t make it right - 30/09/2010 08:17:03 PM 777 Views
Poor life choices? - 30/09/2010 09:46:14 PM 747 Views
I did say in rare case they deserve limited alimony - 30/09/2010 10:47:39 PM 762 Views
I'm not saying that alimony should be very high, of course. - 30/09/2010 11:27:08 PM 678 Views
This is why I hate politics. *NM* - 30/09/2010 12:11:08 AM 320 Views
Pathetic. *NM* - 30/09/2010 12:25:52 AM 329 Views
I like how he disabled comments for the video. Pussy. *NM* - 30/09/2010 06:40:57 AM 327 Views

Reply to Message