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
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:16am
That's the ideal, but even in good marriages, aren't spouses sometimes nicer or not as nice to each other?

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:17am
Nicer because by coming in late, he's imposed on me beyond what I'd agreed to do.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:18am
Yes, I agree.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:25am
I could have written about 9/10 of suzymomm's post (except for the part about being restrained about telling you how offensive I find the tone of your posts, esp. lately, to have been). What is that "something" you're spending time on that you think suzymomm thinks is not what really matters in life? You sound like you think she means WOH. (I don't think that's what she means.) You say "I do not see getting validation from WOH and mother roles as being inferior to getting validation fron your mother role only." That would be fine and I would agree with you if that were as far as it went, but we repeatedly, repeatedly get from you that IYE there is something lacking or obsessive or immature or subservient or shiftless about anyone who isn't interested in pursuing a job when she has small kids and who enjoys and values time spent with and taking care of her family more than anything else. I used to enjoy the opportunity to think about my beliefs and discuss them with you, but lately, it seems like time out of my life that's gone and that I can never get back.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:31am

If a spouse's WOH enabled a SAHP to SAH, wouldn't the SAHP be especially nice?


The point I guess I'm missing is that apparently in the overwhelming majority of marriages with a SAHP, the WOHP not only agrees to the arrangement but fully supports it and thinks the SAHP has just as tough a row to hoe as the WOHP.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:35am
1) If I were going to be late, I'd have the decency to call. 2) I don't see why getting in at 2am v. 10pm wouldn't be an imposition of anything. 3) Acting out of guilt is not the same as being nice.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:52am

"(I don't think that's what she means.) "


Ok, can you or she tell me what she means?


"...something lacking or obsessive or immature or subservient or shiftless about anyone who isn't interested in pursuing a job when she has small kids and who enjoys and values time spent with and taking care of her family more than anything else."


No. I am absolutely surprised though at the lack of gratitude on the part of SAHMs that the WOHPs' work is what enables them the luxury of not pursuing paid employment, as I mentioned earlier in one of my posts this morning.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-29-2004
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:57am
But if you know it's going to happen every yr, what's the big deal? Honestly - and especially if it were a biz conference - I'd let DH sleep-in the next morning. (4.5 hrs. is so little for a weekend night.) And it's not like you were left alone to care for the children between 10 and 2 since they were sleeping. So you had some "me-time" and the bed to yourself for an extra few hrs.

I've seen this way of thinking among other woman, and I just don't understand why they waste their energy and put up a fight about it. If my DH were at a biz conf., out playing golf, or at the local pub with his friends, I'd encourage it, especially if it's just once in a while. I can handle the children on the occasional night like that. DH comes home with stories about everyone's problems, lives, marriages, kids and tells me the latest gossip which I like. Or he just has some alone time which is healthy for him and for a marriage.

Won't there be times when you want to go out with friends, your family or co-workers and DH will have to take care of the boys on his own, probably while they're awake? It will even out in the end.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 9:59am

1) Assuming you didn't call, what then?


2) I'm confused - did you mean why it is an imposition to come home in the middle of the night, instead of at bedtime? If so, it's because I'm always asleep at 2 am and rarely at 10 pm and it's rude to wake me up.


3).

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:01am
It was just an example. As I mentioned right in the example, he thinks it bothers me much more than it does. Pick another example.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Pages