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: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 7:48am
I know that not all states work like Texas, that was my point. Texas is one of 9 states that have chosen to be community property states. That could be a big part of why we do not have alimony, not because is seen as punishment like others have stated.

BTW, I had gone back an edited my post (probably at the same time you were posting) to add your point.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 7:57am

And those wives most likely didn't move 1000 miles away from their family to support his career in the first place.


The point still holds that I didn't move as punishment to him. And the point still holds that he knew there was a very good chance that I would move if we divorced. I moved because he was the only reason I was in AZ. He knew that. He chose to take that risk. He now gets to live with those consequences.

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.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:05am
A few points of disagreement.

I DO believe faduckeggs (or anyone else) when she says she would keep working no matter what $ she and/or her spouse had. That's not remotely unusual. I do believe people who would crumble if they did not have a job, or sneer at people who don't, have issues. By NO means do all people who work largely because they enjoy it meet that definition.

"Lawyers do not contribute to society. Nurses, drs, social workers, cops do." I disagree completely. IMO, anyone who lives an honest, decent life and is a compassionate person contributes to society, regardless of their job or lack thereof. Some people holding certain jobs almost never get credit but should - my mailman and "sanitation engineer" come to mind. It is an unfortunate stereotype that lawyers and some other professions (journalism comes to mind) don't contribute to society by means of their job. Of course many people contribute through other means, like - gasp! - providing excellent child care or doing volunteer work, or just by being a good friend and example to others.

I did NOT, NOT do any "investigative work" WRT faduckeggs, and I take her at her word when she says my (honest) belief was incorrect.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-03-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:06am
But I've had absolutely zero involvement with alimony. I don't pay it. My dh doesn't pay it. Neither of us have been married before and neither of us receive it either. That I am helping to raise a child not mine that puts me in a step-like situation has nothing at all to do with the debate. If I had real life experience paying or receiving alimony, I'd likely bring that up. But alimony is simply a theory to me, not a part of my life in any real way, except when I've taken the law school courses on family law and community property and done a couple of divorces where there were kids and property to divide.

I'm sorry if it bothers you that I don't feel like discussing all the details of my personal life and the child in it on a board that has nothing to do with him or any transitional issues we've had. But I'll be sure to note your concern in case any new issues arise.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:07am
I didn't know. I do too.

Is your self worth tied to it any more than mine is?

Avatar for taylormomma
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:08am

<>


Wow - I did all that just by pointing out that infidelity isn't automatically the end of a marriage?


I simply don't agree with your argument. Infidelity is a deal breaker in *my* marriage, but I know it isn't in everyone's. Kristie says her father's selfishness destroyed her family. Maybe it did. Or maybe it was his unhappiness. Who knows?

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-03-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:09am
I'd say they survive--just going on the experiences of a few close friends and relatives. (In fact, my gramma insists it can be overcome, and she knows first-hand, since grampa came home from WWII having contracted an STD in the pacific. They still had a very loving 40+ year marriage before grampa died.) There is more to marriage than sex, so even though it *is* a painful betrayal, it can be overcome just like any other betrayal in marriage, assuming both parties want to continue the marriage.
Avatar for taylormomma
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:11am
You and I must have a different definition of "bitter and nasty".
Avatar for taylormomma
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:13am
I didn't say they were the same as in the beginning. But very few marriages are.
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2003
Tue, 05-04-2004 - 8:14am
So why'd you argue with me? I didn't say it was a dealbreaker in every marriage. I certainly didn't think it would be even in my own.

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