Divorce rulings on SAHM's alimony?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2003
Divorce rulings on SAHM's alimony?
1358
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

Be who you are and say what you feel because those  who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-28-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 1:25am
Was that meant for me?

Do you have a beef with my marriage or something? What is your fascination with it? Are you somehow jealous?

I honestly can't figure out why you are so hostile about the concept of SAH.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-29-2004
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 5:50am
Hand-in-hand with the family's decision to have a sahp is usually an understanding about when the sahp will return to work. The sahp doesn't stay home forever. Staying home and raising the children is a block of time, not (as I sometimes think) a life sentence! So a husband gives money for food, clothes (Ok, jewelry) for a period of time. My DH is very glad to do that and, unlike some wohms here, respects my job because he knows and thankfully tells me over and over that he could not do what I do. When I was a litigation atty, he could do that.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-29-2004
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 6:03am
It may have been meant for me, because earlier I asked, in light of the wohms' insistence every woman work even if the family prefers and has the means to have a sahm...are there no romantics on this board? I explained, that not every adult is a salty, old "economic unit" as PNJ calls us. Instead, I continue to believe, there are truly young people out there so much in love they don't marry planning for divorce, but can hardly wait until age 21 to marry. Not surprisingly, PNJ didn't believe anyone out there such as yourself and your DH could be so romantic and in love. I was an old, crusty economic unit apparently when I married at 30. But it's lovely to hear stories like yours!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 6:33am
No, LOL, obviously not, Felicia for instance is not one and I know that. I'm not supposed to say what basis I did have for believing karenester to be one.

"Is it so hard to comprehend the fact that some people simply hold a different view?" Not at all. It is hard to comprehend why some people are so bitter and nasty about their different view unless you know the personal involvement they had with the issue. Say what you will about CLW, at least she discussed hers.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 6:41am
Wrong again! Nothing laughable about being a *Texan*. Texas *laws* regarding financial obligations, especially bankruptcy laws, are way out on the fringe, for historical reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with cowboys (although your image is very colorful!) and it is no surprise that their laws regarding the financial obligations of alimony reflect the same let-'em-off-the-financial-hook no matter what, payment-is-punishment attitude, shall we say.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 6:49am
Going way off topic, but I have to wonder if they really do survive....or if people just "settle" at some point.

Misty

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 6:58am

What the lady above me said and besides (some history showing why TX would have the no-alimony law...the state has alot of extremely rich people as well that I am sure had alot to do with getting the law passed)....you just described PA.


We are about as backwards as they come.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 7:35am
But I think that the fact that Texas is a community property state somewhat nullifies your point. If it is all about punishment in Texas then why do both partners get half of the marital assets, even if only one had income. Maybe the fact that the spouse is already receiving half of the marital assets is part of the reason that they do not also receive alimony.

Edited to add:

Except for cases of the extremely rich most people could not afford to pay alimony on half of the marital assets. In the case of the extremely rich the ex-spouse would have recevied enough from the marital assets to make alimony un-needed.


Edited 5/4/2004 7:41 am ET ET by texigan

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 7:42am

If they receive half the marital assets and those assets are high...then neither would most likely NEED alimony for a short period of time in order to also maintain some sort of decent living.


Also, not all states work like TX does.

Misty

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 7:47am

Only if BOTH parties want it. I tried. I was willing to forgive; I was willing to work on the problems we had and go on. He wasn't. It was his choice, not mine.


I don't know why you seem bent on making me out to be some vengeful ex-wife that threw her husband out of her kids' lives the instant he made a mistake.

Choose your friends by their character and your socks by their color.  Choosing your socks by their character makes no sense and choosing your friends by their color is unthinkable.

Pages