Should alimony be abolished?

[mjkacmom]

In what way is it fair for a the spouse who stayed home (say 20 years) to lose support because he or she is willing to take a likely dead end minimum wage job? If that spouse had worked outside the home during the marriage, he or she would be making a lot more. Why should the spouse who stays home take all the economic risk while the spouse who works outside the home gets all the benefit of their work? Both people in the marriage should take responsibility for the choices they made, and to me, that means the one who worked outside the marriage should acknowledge and pay for how that choice affected the other spouse's income potential.

I think there is still a place for alimony. I was a legal secretary several years ago and it was not uncommon (in Oregon) to see alimony--both temporary and in cases of long marriages, permanent.

I agree. When DH and I started dating, our salaries were similar. I haven't worked in 18 years, while DH's salary has increased dramatically. I would barely be able to make ends meet, while he would be living large. Salary-wise, I'd never even come close, if I could even be hired.

 

[mckelvey72]

I think the problem with the alimony...isn't the alimony itself. I think we all agree that alimony is needed and it should be a case per case basis. I whole heartedly agree that stay at home moms are VERY busy and contribute to the household in an immense way. I work a full time job making VERY good money but I can work from home and have quite a bit of flexibility so I won't quit my job...if I didn't have that benefit I would probably have been fired by now for missing work due to sick kids etc. I also (for free) am the accountant for my hubbys place of business. We have rules...what his money pays for and what mine pay for.

I think where i have a problem with the alimony issue is a "person" taking someone else to the cleaners so to speak. And unfortunately most times the story is the woman who never worked now feels she should get 80% of the guys pay in alimony and child support (if there are children). I think the laws need to protect both parties. I don't think any man/woman should have to live in poverty so the other party can live in the lap of luxury.

We no longer live the June Cleaver era where no matter what people don't get divorced. Sad state of affairs these days is divorce is very common. So the decisions you make as a couple...you need to consider the repercussions if you divorce. Horrible to have to think that way but it is life unfortunately. So in my example....I help profit my hubbys business by working for free. I made that decision knowing I would benefit from the company doing well as long as we are together. If we divorced, I would not get reimbursed for that money. We have a pre-nup and believe me...while I make great money....he has a TON of assets. His money buys them and his company buys them...I don't feel I am entitled to "take him to the cleaners" if we divorced. Our pre-nup indicates I take my assets (car, savings, 401K) with me in the event of divorce and he keeps his company/houses etc. It also indicates that I can live in one of his houses rent free for a year OR if all rentals are full that he will help with rent for a year..up to 1K in a location of my choice. So if I decided to rent a house at 2K the difference is mine to make and after a year I have to consume all of it. We have a kid and child support would be separate obviously. But on paper I make more so I would end up paying him if we divorced and he wanted to take it that far. So there are agreements in place to just split football costs, baseball costs etc. And all of the information is based up me working and making X amount of money. Alot more details/conditions then what i am describing here but you get the point.

Everyone is different and I hate to say it...but I think all marriages need to have these types of conversations sometimes. I want you to be at a stay at home mom...in the event something happened here is what we will do. You hope and pray it never comes to that...but in the event it does you have an agreement that you agreed upon when there were no issues and you just follow up. I know a family that updates their document yearly (if needed) based on the ages of kids etc. So when the kids were young, there was plan in place...then when the kids went back to school the plan changed some etc. I know it sounds horrible to think in these terms but they are both at peace that if something happens there are no questions as to what would happen. And YES, in the document is what would happen if the divorce is due to cheating and there is proof. Think of it as a different kind of life insurance.

Maybe it sounds weird, but a pre-nup worked for me and this document worked for my friends. Hubby and I have been together 8 years and the other couple have been together 15.

And again, everyone may NOT agree with this...I was just trying to give examples of what people do sometimes. Alimony shouldn't be used to suck someone dry. It should be used to protect family members for the decisions they made during their marriage when the marriage was happy.

 

[dawnball]

I agree. When DH and I started dating, our salaries were similar. I haven't worked in 18 years, while DH's salary has increased dramatically. I would barely be able to make ends meet, while he would be living large. Salary-wise, I'd never even come close, if I could even be hired.

Exactly. when the couple was together, they made decisions that were best for the family unit. If the family divides,there is an obligation for everyone to be made "whole" again. In some marriages the compromises were such that the parties are on equal financial footing. In others, the situations are vastly unequal. IMO, alimony should be a flexible way of mitigating those inequalities. support while you get a degree. support until you get a plausible job. In some cases, support forever, because there's no other way to make things right.

(forgive my typos please. I love the keyboard I use on my phone now, but apparently it sucks for forum posts.)

 

[tasha99]

I think the problem with the alimony...isn't the alimony itself. I think we all agree that alimony is needed and it should be a case per case basis. I whole heartedly agree that stay at home moms are VERY busy and contribute to the household in an immense way. I work a full time job making VERY good money but I can work from home and have quite a bit of flexibility so I won't quit my job...if I didn't have that benefit I would probably have been fired by now for missing work due to sick kids etc. I also (for free) am the accountant for my hubbys place of business. We have rules...what his money pays for and what mine pay for.

I think where i have a problem with the alimony issue is a "person" taking someone else to the cleaners so to speak. And unfortunately most times the story is the woman who never worked now feels she should get 80% of the guys pay in alimony and child support (if there are children). I think the laws need to protect both parties. I don't think any man/woman should have to live in poverty so the other party can live in the lap of luxury. We no longer live the June Cleaver era where no matter what people don't get divorced. Sad state of affairs these days is divorce is very common. So the decisions you make as a couple...you need to consider the repercussions if you divorce. Horrible to have to think that way but it is life unfortunately. So in my example....I help profit my hubbys business by working for free. I made that decision knowing I would benefit from the company doing well as long as we are together. If we divorced, I would not get reimbursed for that money. We have a pre-nup and believe me...while I make great money....he has a TON of assets. His money buys them and his company buys them...I don't feel I am entitled to "take him to the cleaners" if we divorced. Our pre-nup indicates I take my assets (car, savings, 401K) with me in the event of divorce and he keeps his company/houses etc. It also indicates that I can live in one of his houses rent free for a year OR if all rentals are full that he will help with rent for a year..up to 1K in a location of my choice. So if I decided to rent a house at 2K the difference is mine to make and after a year I have to consume all of it. We have a kid and child support would be separate obviously. But on paper I make more so I would end up paying him if we divorced and he wanted to take it that far. So there are agreements in place to just split football costs, baseball costs etc. And all of the information is based up me working and making X amount of money. Alot more details/conditions then what i am describing here but you get the point.

Everyone is different and I hate to say it...but I think all marriages need to have these types of conversations sometimes. I want you to be at a stay at home mom...in the event something happened here is what we will do. You hope and pray it never comes to that...but in the event it does you have an agreement that you agreed upon when there were no issues and you just follow up. I know a family that updates their document yearly (if needed) based on the ages of kids etc. So when the kids were young, there was plan in place...then when the kids went back to school the plan changed some etc. I know it sounds horrible to think in these terms but they are both at peace that if something happens there are no questions as to what would happen. And YES, in the document is what would happen if the divorce is due to cheating and there is proof. Think of it as a different kind of life insurance.

Maybe it sounds weird, but a pre-nup worked for me and this document worked for my friends. Hubby and I have been together 8 years and the other couple have been together 15.

And again, everyone may NOT agree with this...I was just trying to give examples of what people do sometimes. Alimony shouldn't be used to suck someone dry. It should be used to protect family members for the decisions they made during their marriage when the marriage was happy.

I'm not positive that it's universal, but I think most places have laws and rules already in place for this, and anyone who says "my ex wife got 80% of my income!" is probably exaggerating. I think it goes up to 60% when it's a mix of spousal support/pension and child support. I see this with my own checks--as my child support goes down, my military spousal support will go up (and it has gone up gradually as my ex husband has gotten a higher salary). Basically, my first "military spouse retirement" checks were miniscule because they couldn't take more than 60% of his disposable income, and that was already taken for child support.

My ex was livid about the settlement, but it all worked out. It was a struggle for both of us those first years. I had never worked outside the home since marriage except to do home daycare. We moved every 14 months, so while initially I tried to go to school during our marriage, I eventually gave up--too many requirements changed from state to state. It's 10 years later now, and I make a decent living because I went back to college and grad school. My ex makes twice that since he's now a military contractor (in Afghanistan--he deserves every penny he gets). But . . . I do think I'm still entitled to my military spouse portion of his pension for life, and thankfully, so does the army. I see it as my portion of the pension we earned, because I stayed back and took care of the kids every time he was sent overseas. He could not have held his job without me.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

I admit I tend to take the complaints about how much someone is paying with a frain of salt, because the courts do take into consideration the party's ability to pay. Yeah, I know, it's not always "fair", but . . .

Sent from my SCH-I800 using DISBoards

 

[dogluva]

Debating with you on this subject is pointless - you have no idea - and you don't want to understand - just how much non working spouses can contribute to a marriage.

These snarky comments prove my point.

I never said that a stay at home spouse so else not contribute. Please find my post were I said that. Also, I think you are "snarky" yourself-wow love that word.

I was asking when running baths idles not become a reason to stay home, you sound as defensive as me.

 

[dogluva]

NO not touchy in the least. I still want to know why you care. If that poster wants to say home and never go back to work outside the home, why do you care. What concern is it for yours. Maybe her DH likes her at home. I know plenty of people that don't work once their grown.

Sorry bit I see you as the touchy one. YOu seem to be really ticked off that some of us don't work outside the home. Why do you care and what business is it of yours?

I don't care what someone I never met does during the day, really I don't.

She gave reasons for staying home like driving her kids around, giving baths. These things don't have to be done when your kids grow up (usually). Why not just say, I never want to work? You are the one who is "ticked off"!

 

[dogluva]

Oh yes I do! Especially on snow days! LoL. I'm usually running a bath for my older two so I really don't have the time!

I still have one in Middle School - and you be surprised how many of my "friends" also expect me to pick and drop off their adult children when we go get ours from College! They go to OU in Athens - "oh can you swing by Ohio State or Cincinnati to pick up Suzie - I can't miss work!" Ummm no! It's hours out of my way!

Well I am home during snow days of since I work in the school system. Those days are great for running baths!

 

[dogluva]

You are correct - the thread was about alimony. But some very insulting digs insinuating that stay at home spouses don't "work" or contribute to marriages were made. Some of us were disagreeing with that fact and pointing out that what we do merrits alimony even if we aren't earning a paycheck!
So actually it is on topic.

Pot meet kettle. I think I read some very insulting digs here myself about working mothers, one being about daycare "raising" children. In fact I think that was when it started to go off track

 

[dogluva]

I never said that a stay at home spouse so else not contribute. Please find my post were I said that. Also, I think you are "snarky" yourself-wow love that word.

I was asking when running baths idles not become a reason to stay home, you sound as defensive as me.

Okay ignore this post, spell check is killing me.

 

[Colleen27]

The obvious plan if one finds themselves in need if money would be to find a job.
In the time it takes to do that alimony should be awarded for a set period if time.

Now, one may have to take a very non glamorous job, but if you need money, you do what has to be done.

So a woman who gave up significant earning potential to stay at home and by doing so enabled her husband to increase his income should be left with only the minimum wage level jobs she qualifies for after an extended absence from the workforce while he retains all of the benefits earned by the mutually beneficial arrangement of their married years? Alimony should only cover the time it takes her to find a job, and so what if that job leaves her living in poverty unable to make ends meet?

 

[BeachGirlFLA]

Not in a "no-fault" state. No Fault means exactly that and despite being stomped on, lied to, cheated on and treated like dirt"...my alimony is temporary until I can get back on my feet and get a job like I used to have BEFORE I married my ex-husband. I was awarded 6 years. Yup, right before the economy went into a nose-dive. I am still unemployed. ExH is living in the house we bought together with his new wife (my friend he cheated with) and I am renting a townhouse 100 miles away. PS...I was married 13 years and at ExH's insistance, quit to work for him for nothing.
Amazing how a gap of 9 years in your employment history (I ran ExH's business for no pay) can affect your resume' and employability...(is that a word?)

If alimony didn't exist, I'd be living with my adult children in the guest room.

I was more saying how it would be if it were up to me. I have absolutely no toleration for men who cheat or the little homewreckers who are also involved in the affair.

 

[BeachGirlFLA]

Here's a question kind of the SAHP line of thinking but not exactly. My husband and I don't have kids (we have 5 dogs, but no kids yet.) I have a job where I make almost $100 K per year and he has his own business which isn't doing very well and a part-time (10 hour a week) accounting job because he hasn't been able to find anything else. If he and I were to "fall out of love" and get a divorce (we don't believe in that but it's the closest to neither of us being at fault I could find), should I have to pay him alimony? We DID move here from Colorado so that I could take this job which pays over twice what the job I had in Colorado paid.

 

[jodifla]

So a woman who gave up significant earning potential to stay at home and by doing so enabled her husband to increase his income should be left with only the minimum wage level jobs she qualifies for after an extended absence from the workforce while he retains all of the benefits earned by the mutually beneficial arrangement of their married years? Alimony should only cover the time it takes her to find a job, and so what if that job leaves her living in poverty unable to make ends meet?

This line of reasoning is so appalling, but I've seen it a lot of times. It's one of the reasons I've always worked except for about a 2 year stint when we moved.

I don't know what world people are living in where a woman who has been home for 20 years can remotely step into the workforce and make a living wage. People have a total disconnect from reality here. And yet everybody wants women to stay home with their kids when they are young.

It's such a double standard.

Divorce is expensive. And a husband (or a wife) who wants out of a marriage where one person has been a SAP should be prepared to pay.

 

[Laura66]

Exactly!

 

[Buckalew11]

This line of reasoning is so appalling, but I've seen it a lot of times. It's one of the reasons I've always worked except for about a 2 year stint when we moved.

I don't know what world people are living in where a woman who has been home for 20 years can remotely step into the workforce and make a living wage. People have a total disconnect from reality here. And yet everybody wants women to stay home with their kids when they are young.

It's such a double standard.

Divorce is expensive. And a husband (or a wife) who wants out of a marriage where one person has been a SAP should be prepared to pay.

I totally agree.

My sister was married for over 30+ years. She put her (ex)DH thru college, more college, more college and then vet school. He did not work (don't get me started on that) all those years but she did. Then after baby #2 she stayed home and helped him open his own practice, did the books, payroll, that type of thing.

He then took up with someone else, wanted a divorce, and was adamant about not paying spousal support.

I truly thought he should pay spousal and yes, she should have had to go out and find work too but it is tough when you have been basically out of the workforce, helping to build a business, raising 4 kids, are over 50, etc. It was all a scary thought for her, the business was to help with their retirement also. Looking into the face of all that loss--besides your marriage itself, is devastating.

Therefore I think it should be on a case to case basis. Here, they look at about 8 or 10 things (things like one's education level compared to the other, etc.) to award spousal support.

 

[Colleen27]

I don't care what someone I never met does during the day, really I don't.

She gave reasons for staying home like driving her kids around, giving baths. These things don't have to be done when your kids grow up (usually). Why not just say, I never want to work? You are the one who is "ticked off"!

Because it is more complicated than "want to", and frankly, because "I never want to work" just doesn't seem to fit. First of all, it implies that what I do isn't work, but more than that it sounds like something a Kardashian would say. Baths and driving around are where I'm at right now, so that's what came immediately to mind, but the priorities and values behind our decision that dual full-time careers aren't the ideal situation for our family are more timeless than that.

 

[Southernmiss]

I am late to this thread because my part time outside the home job and my job of mom have had me very busy.

This is such a complicated issue. I was earning more than dh when we jointly decided that I should take a part time job and be home more. I had been working 50 plus hours and cut back to 15 in an unrelated, but more flexible place of employment.

For us, the kids have needed a flexible parent much more as teens than as young children. No, I am not running baths for them, but the bigger they are the bigger the need for a parent to be around.

As to the original question, yes if we were to divorce, I would expect alimony. I helped dh finish his bachelor's and as he got his master's and promotions I have taken on many tasks to allow him to accomplish and achieve what he has. I would expect to be able to complete my degree and hopefully become self supporting. But as the years click away, I realize my earning potential would not be what it would have if I wouldn't have taken a long sabbatical to raise our family.

 

[dogluva]

Because it is more complicated than "want to", and frankly, because "I never want to work" just doesn't seem to fit. First of all, it implies that what I do isn't work, but more than that it sounds like something a Kardashian would say. Baths and driving around are where I'm at right now, so that's what came immediately to mind, but the priorities and values behind our decision that dual full-time careers aren't the ideal situation for our family are more timeless than that.

First off, I am sorry I offended you. I was my not my intent. Yes, what you do is work, I didn't mean that, I meant outside the home. I just was curious (not mad)when someone, not sure if it was you said they never had any plans to work outside the home and listed reasons that would eventually not apply when your kids are grown. I actually know many people of pre retirement age who jus don't feel the need to have a job outside the home and they have no children or they have grown ones.. Personally it is not for me because I get a lot of enjoyment out of my job but they must feel the same about being home. Actually, I wish I found more enjoyment in my house but that is not me. I can retire in ten years and hope I have grandchildren I can watch!

Sorry about derailing this thread.

 

[Lolsmum]

First off, I am sorry I offended you. I was my not my intent. Yes, what you do is work, I didn't mean that, I meant outside the home. I just was curious (not mad)when someone, not sure if it was you said they never had any plans to work outside the home and listed reasons that would eventually not apply when your kids are grown. I actually know many people of pre retirement age who jus don't feel the need to have a job outside the home and they have no children or they have grown ones.. Personally it is not for me because I get a lot of enjoyment out of my job but they must feel the same about being home. Actually, I wish I found more enjoyment in my house but that is not me. I can retire in ten years and hope I have grandchildren I can watch!

Sorry about derailing this thread.

I might never have paid employment again. Assuming we are done with kids, I will be about 50 when my kids go to university or otherwise leave home. That doesn't mean I plan to sit around my house all day. I already spend a good chunk of my week volunteering and will do more as I have more free time.

If the mythical job that would allow me the flexibility to deal with child illness, doctor appointments, school holidays, children's activities, etc. and also pays enough to cover any needed child care while I am working plus be worth my time appears, I'll likely take it. Of course, I'll be fighting with loads of other parents to get that job.

If somehow we end up divorced, DH already knows he either needs to pay a significant amount of spousal support or drastically change his own career in order to take over at least half of what I currently do. I've been mostly out of action the last week or so due to illness (a nasty chest infection that left me breathless if I even walked up the stairs). I did the school run, getting the kids to activities and basic things like feeding them dinner and running baths, but that was it. DH did not enjoy taking over the rest of what I do for even a week, and I'm suddenly much more appreciated than I was 2 weeks ago. He works hard and so do I. We're a team and we share the benefits of both of our work. If we were to stop being a team, I am just as entitled to a portion of the material wealth as he is.