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: 03-25-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:27am

Do you think it would beneficial to temporily remove a child from who they would be better of with for a short period of time, possibly changing their friends, etc and then moving them again for a final time?


What about continuation of care and keeping them on some sort of normalcy?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:32am

Even before we had the nanny, with the exception of othercare, as dual WOHPs we still managed to take care of the cleaning, shopping, cooking, etc.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:33am
"Does everyone else's DHs just voluntarily do 50% or more of everything that the family needs done?"

Well, um, in our case yes. We might debate at times about what constitutes 50% (and that debate usually revolves around chores we both hate), but there has never even been a hint of a discussion about the need for both of us to contribute to the household chores and kid duties, and dh usually just pitches right in and deals with what needs to be done. Most families I know are like that, but I'll admit it is not universal and I know several families who have similar struggles to yours.

Laura

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2000
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:35am

Wow, that stinks!

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:42am
I don't see why you would bother to have a SAHP either, clearly there would be no benefits to your family and there would be a lot to lose. Hopefully, your life plan won't face any major upsets (seriously/chronically ill child or parent, sudden job loss with no new job in sight....) because it sounds as though it is the only life plan that works for you as a couple.

"I do certainly see that not everyone wishes to have or can afford a nanny, or might have more "life things" that require a spouse to do.  We don't have home based businesses or real estate or other investments that require time consuming management.  We don't have such an active social life that we must spend time to arrange to host and attend parties.  There are a million other variables (pets are a good example) of where a SAHP might be valuable.  "

We had none of the above factors and yet there were reasons why having a SAHP when we did made absolute sense. One other thing I think you tend to miss out a lot on is that people's plans, needs and goals can change over time and require a certain amount of flexibility. You seem to assume that having a SAHP at some point means a family aims to have a SAHP for life. That is just not the reality I know. The vast majority of women (even in the US) return to the work force by the time (and often before) the children start school.

Laura


Edited 5/5/2004 10:45 am ET ET by laura_w2

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-07-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:43am
No, not all SAHPs gave up career plans, but many do. There are doctors, lawyers, professors, business men and women, teachers, etc., who have given up their career plans, because the SAHP and WOHP decided it would be best to have someone at home with the children. It happens. Sometimes the SAHP isn't particularly happy about SAH, but the family came to the conclusion that it is best for one parent to SAH. Should these SAHP be intrinsically grateful to their WOH spouse for "allowing" them to SAH? I don't think so. It is very hard to generalize about SAHP, just as it is to generalize about WOHP. I personally could not imagine SAH after all of my children were in school, but I can see the advantages of SAH, before they reach school age. That's just my take. SAH is usually a joint decision-- not something the WOHP decides or the SAHP decides. It is a give and take for both parties. One party does not necessarily need to be grateful to the other party. Sure, in some cases the SAHP may want a SAHP more- in which case I could concede that this person should be grateful to his or her spouse for making it possible. Just as if the WOHP wants a SAHP more-- he or she should be grateful that his or her spouse is willing to SAH. My big thing is that it is not necessary to put down either choice SAH or WOH. I know that as a WOHP, you have most likely encountered criticism for making this decision. Was that fun? Neither would it be, I imagine, to be be put down for deciding to be a SAHP.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:44am
The working for the Employee of the Month plaque part, the external pat on the head part, is what I find a shallow and not really important reason for working. It's nice and all if someone (spouse perhaps) gives you kudos for it, but not the same as working because enjoying what you do and doing a good job in and of itself feels good, which is what we all, WOH or SAH, ought to strive for.

"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. . . ." This is a classic example of what I mean by your premise that women who SAH either are, or darned well ought to be, subservient to their WOH spouses. We DO realize and appreciate that our WOH spouse contributes to our family, just as our WOH spouses realize that WE contribute to our family. No boot-licking necessary or desirable on EITHER part. Your very premise that SAH is a 'luxury' given to the SAHS by the WOHS and that our 'appreciation' for that 'luxury' ought to look like putting china on the table and spreading our legs afterward is colossally offensive.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-28-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:46am
But by that train of thought my dh should be extra nice to me because I go to work and bring home an income? That makes no sense. The stuff you mentioned have been cited by the SAHMs as their "job description."
Avatar for laurenmom2boys
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:47am
Well, let me check.... if I move my big butt over this way.... yeah, there's room! LOL!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 05-05-2004 - 10:53am

"People's plans, needs and goals can change over time and require a certain amount of flexibility."

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

Pages