There is a persistent misconception that alimony is compensation provided to a wife for her raising the children while the husband pursued a career. There is little, if any evidence to support this. Indeed, there is much to refute it.
The book, The Marriage Buyout: The Troubled Trajectory of U.S. Alimony Law by Cynthia Lee Starnes (which I have not read) seems to support this notion if you look at it's conclusion posted online:
Many of the primary caregivers at work in today’s homes are going about their business unaware that if their marriages end they are likely to become the law’s suckers, set free to alone bear the long-term costs of the role they thought was part of marital teamwork. Archaic alimony laws are to blame. Alimony is often the only available tool for ensuring that divorce does not impose all the long-term costs of marital roles on caregivers while freeing the other spouse to enjoy all the long-term benefits. Yet in its current incarnation, alimony is not up to the task before it. Beset by myths, disdain, and neglect, the law of alimony inspires orders that are unpredictable, inconsistent, short-lived, and uncommon. Alimony’s problems are exacerbated by the absence of any contemporary rationale to justify its existence in an age of no-fault divorce and supposed gender equality. Concerned commentators have offered an array of alimony theories and reform proposals, but none has carried the day. Meanwhile, grassroots alimony reform groups in numerous states are working hard to publicize alimony horror stories and promote legislative reform to limit alimony, most recently succeeding in Massachusetts
In my own case the court ordered custody evaluator concluded that Spring was not the primary caregiver during the marriage and the vocational evaluator concluded she could make just as much money as me. Yet she was able to walk away from the marriage with well over half the assets (none of which represented her earnings), no responsibility for the children whatsoever, and massive alimony income.
96% of alimony payers are men. Women do not stay home to raise children 96% of the time.
As I stated, Spring, received far more than half of marital assets at the time of divorce with no responsibility for the children. Even if somehow she deserved more why was that not handled as at the time of the divorce rather than through alimony? Two reasons:
- Lawyers and the whole divorce industry make far more money if the divorce drags on.
- Misogynistic beliefs that women are unable to handle money so need an income rather than a settlement.
No comments:
Post a Comment