Divorce rulings on SAHM's alimony?
Find a Conversation
Divorce rulings on SAHM's alimony?
| Thu, 04-29-2004 - 10:29pm |
I have seen this many times, and I am wondering what your guys' opinion on this. Of course with divorce rates so high we find couples with children in court all the time finding out what is entitled to mothers for alimony. The argument is, should SAHM's receive more alimony then WOHM's? This meaning SAHM's who have through the whole marriage stayed at home with the children while the fathers successeds in their careers. This also meaning if they are going to pursue a career after the fact is their income be significant enough compared to the EX since they have been out of the work force for years and has not gained experience in what ever career the would have pursued.
I personally know someone who went through the exsact same thing and had a hard time finding a job(with income compareable) after the divorse since she hadn't worked for 25yrs.
The question also arise, does the SAHM contribute to the Fathers success because they choose to stay home therefore they should receive a cut now that they are divorced (the same as many would if they were still married)?
Thoughts? Please state weather you are a SAHM or WOHM when you place your comments

Pages
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
BTW things are fine with CLW's ddil now that she's working. All she needed was a job. And she needed one with her views on what constitutes a fair division of labor as a SAHM.
Edited 5/2/2004 10:01 pm ET ET by grimalkinskeeper
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
This is about the kids NOT what mom can get out of the deal. If mom has minimal houseing and dad has better housing with better schools, etc, etc... YES the kids belong with him. Why wouldn't they? There is no reason to assume dad is unfit or even uninvolved. There is no reason to think that dad would make a worse single WP than mom would make a single WP. Standard of living matters. The quality of schools a child attends matters. Not struggling financially vs. struggling finacially matters. The kids should be with the parent who can best provide for them. In general, there is no reason to even assume mom is a better parent than dad. In fact, her abilities to be a WM are more in question than dads ability to be a WD. After all, he's been doing it for years so he's had practice.
Tell me why children should live a minimal existence when they can live a good one?? If there is significant difference between what each parent can provide, especially if one is in a minimal situation, the kids belong with the parent who can best provide for them. Why would the kids deserve anything less??? Why would we want them in the minimal situation?? You are so concerned with whether mom gets her kids that you're not thinking about what's best for the kids!! Like it or not, SOL matters. I'll give you it matters less as you go up the SES ladder but the difference between lower middle class just making it and stable upper middle class is signficant and worth giving the kids. If it's a difference between upper middle class and upper class, the differences don't mean as much but if mom is living just meeting the minimum or struggling, it can make a big difference. One the kids should have.
Edited 5/2/2004 10:04 pm ET ET by grimalkinskeeper
Edited 5/2/2004 9:56 pm ET ET by grimalkinskeeper
Pages