Should alimony be abolished?

[castleview]

In light of the current anti-alimony bill being vetoed in Florida, it got me thinking. I didn't even know alimony still existed as few people I knew fought for it including my own mother who has been divorced well over 25 years. I guess I just assumed it was either a big lump sum or a temporary fix. I had no idea former spouses (man and women) were going broke over it and that second wives incomes are taken into account.

Curious what others thought.

My thoughts: there are certain circumstances where I can see alimony being in the picture for a while, but lifetime alimony sounds suspicious especially if the marriage was fairly short. I understand the difficulties women face getting back into the job market, but don't understand why alimony should be paid to anyone who has been divorced for decades.

 

[snarlingcoyote]

I think it depends. For example, if one spouse had a career so that the other one could stay home and raise a family, the stay at home spouse should get alimony. If one spouse worked so that the other spouse could go to school and get a lucrative job, yep, I believe in alimony. If someone was married soley to be "arm candy" and all that spouse's time and energy went into keeping up his/her looks and social graces, I believe that spouse should also get alimony.

For 25 years? Probably not unless there are other factors, but a spouse in those situations should get some sort of spousal support to get the spouse through school or other training and into a new career.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

My warehouse guy has a weird deal.

He sends his ex "maintenance" and then she sends him "child support". Why they couldn't just decide one owed the other "X" and the other mails no checks, I don't know.

But when she fails to send her checks for months on end, he isn't allowed to just deduct what she owes. Nope, he still has to send his in full. So, now thyre headed back to court

 

[CupcakeKelly]

My warehouse guy has a weird deal.

He sends his ex "maintenance" and then she sends him "child support". Why they couldn't just decide one owed the other "X" and the other mails no checks, I don't know.

But when she fails to send her checks for months on end, he isn't allowed to just deduct what she owes. Nope, he still has to send his in full. So, now thyre headed back to court

My guess on this specific situation is that they are different for tax purposes. Child support is not included in the recipient's income, and is not tax deductible to the payer. Alimony is included in the recipient's income, and is tax deductible to the payer. Probably more than you wanted to know, don't know why I felt the need to chime in.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

My guess on this specific situation is that they are different for tax purposes. Child support is not included in the recipient's income, and is not tax deductible to the payer. Alimony is included in the recipient's income, and is tax deductible to the payer. Probably more than you wanted to know, don't know why I felt the need to chime in.

No, it actually makes sense - in a twisted govt red tape sort of way

 

[RadioNate]

No. I was married 12 years. In that time we moved to 6 different states to further my now ex-DHs career. Guess how well my career faired during all the moves & having 2 children?

My earning potential is 1/5 of his. Alimony has provided me (& in turn the children I have full custody of) with stability as I rebuild my career. My lifestyle is night & day from what it was.

So no, it is still necessary when they spouses have huge income differences. Until the lesser earning spouse can earn a living wage.

I do not believe in lifetime alimony.

 

[sonnyjane]

No. I was married 12 years. In that time we moved to 6 different states to further my now ex-DHs career. Guess how well my career faired during all the moves & having 2 children?

My earning potential is 1/5 of his. Alimony has provided me (& in turn the children I have full custody of) with stability as I rebuild my career. My lifestyle is night & day from what it was.

So no, it is still necessary when they spouses have huge income differences. Until the lesser earning spouse can earn a living wage.

I do not believe in lifetime alimony.

My mom was in a similar situation. Gave up a great job that would have given a pension to move and marry my ex-stepdad. When he cheated on her and they divorced, she was awarded alimony. She will receive it until/unless she moves in with someone or marries again.

 

[AntePrincess]

Each marriage and each divorce is so unique that I don't think it's possible to set one fair ironclad rule for or against alimony. The best I could come up with on my own is a rule of thumb that you probably ought not to be on the hook for more years of alimony than you were actually married, but I've already thought of a half dozen exceptions to that rule. Your best bet is to have a good prenup, and to put it in writing if you as a couple decide that one will sacrifice their career to stay with the kids while the other works and what you want to do about that if the relationship dissolves.

 

[cmwade77]

Best solution...don't get divorced in the first place. I know that's not always realistic.

Bottom line, my rules would be simple:
You must go to marriage counseling for at least 1 year prior to getting a divorce (3 years if you have children), with no separation during this time, unless the marriage counselor recommends it, without either person asking.

If either person doesn't participate in the marriage counseling, they get nothing.

If someone cheats on the other person, the person who cheated is entitled to absolutely nothing, no child support (even if they somehow end up with custody, which would take a lot in my world for this situation), no alimony, no car payments, etc.

If someone entered the marriage under fraudulent pretenses, they also get nothing.



If one person was constantly drunk, again they get nothing.

If either person was convicted of a DUI ever in their life, you guessed it, they get nothing, not even custody or visitations. And absolutely no exceptions to this rule, it is hard and fast. If the other person is unfit, then the children should go to next of kin (again, no DUIs on their record). You are banned from public assistance (for life). If you are found living on the street, you automatically go to jail. Yes, that sounds extreme, but drunk driving is a MAJOR problem and needs to be stopped.

If you are here illegally (even if your kids are citizens), you get nothing and are automatically deported.

As for alimony, if both people were working, there would be no alimony for either party, no matter what the income of each is. There may be some extenuating circumstances, but not many.

There are other situations to, but these would be my basic rules. Aren't you glad I don't rule the world? LOL

I know that this sounds extreme, but seriously, I think it would reduce divorce rates, which are alarmingly high and lower divorce rates would result in a lot better world all around.

 

[Handbag Lady]

My parents were married for 30+ years and my mom did everything for my dad. She deserves lifetime alimony; there are few jobs out there for women with no work experience that would actually sustain her to which she was accustomed. She doesn't even know how to turn on a computer; much less use one.

 

[cymbaldiva]

Best solution...don't get divorced in the first place. I know that's not always realistic.

Bottom line, my rules would be simple:
You must go to marriage counseling for at least 1 year prior to getting a divorce (3 years if you have children), with no separation during this time, unless the marriage counselor recommends it, without either person asking.

If either person doesn't participate in the marriage counseling, they get nothing.

If someone cheats on the other person, the person who cheated is entitled to absolutely nothing, no child support (even if they somehow end up with custody, which would take a lot in my world for this situation), no alimony, no car payments, etc.

If someone entered the marriage under fraudulent pretenses, they also get nothing.

If one person was constantly drunk, again they get nothing.

If either person was convicted of a DUI ever in their life, you guessed it, they get nothing, not even custody or visitations. And absolutely no exceptions to this rule, it is hard and fast. If the other person is unfit, then the children should go to next of kin (again, no DUIs on their record). You are banned from public assistance (for life). If you are found living on the street, you automatically go to jail. Yes, that sounds extreme, but drunk driving is a MAJOR problem and needs to be stopped.

If you are here illegally (even if your kids are citizens), you get nothing and are automatically deported.

As for alimony, if both people were working, there would be no alimony for either party, no matter what the income of each is. There may be some extenuating circumstances, but not many.

There are other situations to, but these would be my basic rules. Aren't you glad I don't rule the world? LOL

I know that this sounds extreme, but seriously, I think it would reduce divorce rates, which are alarmingly high and lower divorce rates would result in a lot better world all around.

Hypothetical of course - what if one person was drunk all the time because the other person was cheating...?

 

[S. C.]

Best solution...don't get divorced in the first place. I know that's not always realistic.

Bottom line, my rules would be simple:
You must go to marriage counseling for at least 1 year prior to getting a divorce (3 years if you have children), with no separation during this time, unless the marriage counselor recommends it, without either person asking.

If either person doesn't participate in the marriage counseling, they get nothing.

If someone cheats on the other person, the person who cheated is entitled to absolutely nothing, no child support (even if they somehow end up with custody, which would take a lot in my world for this situation), no alimony, no car payments, etc.

If someone entered the marriage under fraudulent pretenses, they also get nothing.



If one person was constantly drunk, again they get nothing.

If either person was convicted of a DUI ever in their life, you guessed it, they get nothing, not even custody or visitations. And absolutely no exceptions to this rule, it is hard and fast. If the other person is unfit, then the children should go to next of kin (again, no DUIs on their record). You are banned from public assistance (for life). If you are found living on the street, you automatically go to jail. Yes, that sounds extreme, but drunk driving is a MAJOR problem and needs to be stopped.

If you are here illegally (even if your kids are citizens), you get nothing and are automatically deported.

As for alimony, if both people were working, there would be no alimony for either party, no matter what the income of each is. There may be some extenuating circumstances, but not many.

There are other situations to, but these would be my basic rules. Aren't you glad I don't rule the world? LOL

I know that this sounds extreme, but seriously, I think it would reduce divorce rates, which are alarmingly high and lower divorce rates would result in a lot better world all around.

Very glad you don't rule the world! In the real world this would not work.

 

[Darcy03231]

Every state has different laws. In my state the judges will only award alimony for three years, unless there are extenuating circumstances (which are spelled out). At the end of the three years the person receiving alimony has to petition the Court for an extension if they still think they need alimony. Alimony here is considered a "helping hand" to get a person back into the workforce and self-supporting. I've never seen a lifetime alimony award (I did divorce paralegal work for 25 years)

 

[aprilgail2]

If you are here illegally (even if your kids are citizens), you get nothing and are automatically deported.

As for alimony, if both people were working, there would be no alimony for either party, no matter what the income of each is. There may be some extenuating circumstances, but not many.

.

I love these two! I am not a believer in alimony- I would never ever put myself in a position where I would depend on someone elses money and have none of my own. I see guys at work get divorced and have to give their wives half their pensions when they retire-many delay retiring hoping the ex will die first so they don't have to give up half their pensions! No way am I working 30 years to hand half my hard earned money over to someone that didn't work.

 

[mhsjax]

I love these two! I am not a believer in alimony- I would never ever put myself in a position where I would depend on someone elses money and have none of my own. I see guys at work get divorced and have to give their wives half their pensions when they retire-many delay retiring hoping the ex will die first so they don't have to give up half their pensions! No way am I working 30 years to hand half my hard earned money over to someone that didn't work.

Wow. I work, I just don't get paid for it. I stayed home to raise our kids, I took care of things so DH didn't have to Including sick kids, Dr appts and such
I also saw men that he worked with, have wives that stayed home. They went out and cheated on their wives and you think that they shouldn't have to pay alimony?

I bet not all of the men you work with have 100% glowing reputations, I have seen these same situations, where they play the field and then just want their wives to walk away, after giving up their careers to raise kids.

I alos know that some women marry for money, and they have no intention of working and take all that they can get.

ETA. I guess I am lucky, my DH saw what I did as work and appreciates it. He also sees these same men that don't want to pay alimony, moan and complain when it is their turn to have the kids for the weekend, I guess what do yo expect form men who don't want a wife or kids around, just more hassle than they thought.

I pretty much lump them all into the same category.

 

[eliza61]

Wow. I work, I just don't get paid for it. I stayed home to raise our kids, I took care of things so DH didn't have to Including sick kids, Dr appts and such
I also saw men that he worked with, have wives that stayed home. They went out and cheated on their wives and you think that they shouldn't have to pay alimony?

I bet not all of the men you work with have 100% glowing reputations, I have seen these same situations, where they play the field and then just want their wives to walk away, after giving up their careers to raise kids.

I alos know that some women marry for money, and they have no intention of working and take all that they can get.

ETA. I guess I am lucky, my DH saw what I did as work and appreciates it. He also sees these same men that don't want to pay alimony, moan and complain when it is their turn to have the kids for the weekend, I guess what do yo expect form men who don't want a wife or kids around, just more hassle than they thought.

I pretty much lump them all into the same category.

but I think that's a life style choice you make and when you make it, it should be with the full realization that you are handing over your earning potential to some one else.
In no way saying this is a wrong choice, just that I do think it's a bit "naive: to come back and say "well I gave up XYZ" for my spouse and lost this earning potential, unless the spouse put a gun to some ones head, you gave that up with full consent and in no way should you expect after staying out of the workforce for 15 years to be capable of having the same earning potential.

I could never do it, I know it may sound selfish but my independance and career which I worked extremely hard at is very important to me so I always knew going into motherhood that I was not going to be a SAHM longer than 4 years tops.

And I totally admit to not understanding why a women after the kids get into school full time can't go back to work, once again not saying that they should just that if you CHOOSE this life style, I don't think you should cry sour grapes at the end. (in general, I know some one will post about having some special circumstances that prevents them from going back to work. not talking about that)

Today, it's not like the 1950's when choices were so limited for women and where the "normal" was for moms to not work.


But to answer the question, I think alimony should be drastically overhauled. especially now in this day and time. If you are a stay at home mom, after a few years you should be back to work.

child support is a totally different thing.

 

[Jedana]

if one spouse was a stay at home spouse, and had not worked outside the home in years, then yes, there should be alimony. However, it should be limited to no more than 6 years, which gives the spouse time to go to school or get some sort of training to find a job.

If both spouses worked, then no, no alimony at all.


And for the poster who said one year mandatory counseling before divorce...I wouldn't have made it through that year. My ex was very abusive. The only way I got through the divorce process safely was because he was in jail in another state. (Not for abusing me, shockingly...he stole a pickup and was caught).


Child support, well, both parents need to be supporting their kids. One parent has the kids full time, the other pays...parents split the time, no one pays....the kids should be first in this situation. I know it's not always that way, but it should be.

 

[mhsjax]

but I think that's a life style choice you make and when you make it, it should be with the full realization that you are handing over your earning potential to some one else.
In no way saying this is a wrong choice, just that I do think it's a bit "naive: to come back and say "well I gave up XYZ" for my spouse and lost this earning potential, unless the spouse put a gun to some ones head, you gave that up with full consent and in no way should you expect after staying out of the workforce for 15 years to be capable of having the same earning potential.

I could never do it, I know it may sound selfish but my independance and career which I worked extremely hard at is very important to me so I always knew going into motherhood that I was not going to be a SAHM longer than 4 years tops.

And I totally admit to not understanding why a women after the kids get into school full time can't go back to work, once again not saying that they should just that if you CHOOSE this life style, I don't think you should cry sour grapes at the end. (in general, I know some one will post about having some special circumstances that prevents them from going back to work. not talking about that)

Today, it's not like the 1950's when choices were so limited for women and where the "normal" was for moms to not work.


But to answer the question, I think alimony should be drastically overhauled. especially now in this day and time. If you are a stay at home mom, after a few years you should be back to work.

child support is a totally different thing.

Well I get what you are saying, but for us, even when the kids got back in school, if I went back to work my DH and I would have never seen each other. He worked nights and weekends and for us, having a relationship was far more important than me working. I know this isn' the norm, but for us it worked. I also didn't want my kids going to after school care, I preferred to stay home with them and get them to their after school activities. I had plenty of moms that worked depend on me to get their kids where they needed to be.

In the end, my DH wanted me at home and I wanted to be home, everyone is different and I realize that this doesn't work for most people, but I felt it more important to be home and actually see my DH and be there for my kids. It worked for us and is still working.
That being said, I don't think that unlimited alimony is a good idea, there has be be some boundaries.

ETA, Just because kids go to school, doesn't mean that they don't need you when school is out. My priority was them, not a job or a career, but my kids. Others feel differently and have different circumstances, as will my DD, but it worked for me, and I wouldn't change a thing.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

Best solution...don't get divorced in the first place. I know that's not always realistic.

Bottom line, my rules would be simple:
You must go to marriage counseling for at least 1 year prior to getting a divorce (3 years if you have children), with no separation during this time, unless the marriage counselor recommends it, without either person asking.

If either person doesn't participate in the marriage counseling, they get nothing.

If someone cheats on the other person, the person who cheated is entitled to absolutely nothing, no child support (even if they somehow end up with custody, which would take a lot in my world for this situation), no alimony, no car payments, etc.

If someone entered the marriage under fraudulent pretenses, they also get nothing.

If one person was constantly drunk, again they get nothing.

If either person was convicted of a DUI ever in their life, you guessed it, they get nothing, not even custody or visitations. And absolutely no exceptions to this rule, it is hard and fast. If the other person is unfit, then the children should go to next of kin (again, no DUIs on their record). You are banned from public assistance (for life). If you are found living on the street, you automatically go to jail. Yes, that sounds extreme, but drunk driving is a MAJOR problem and needs to be stopped.

If you are here illegally (even if your kids are citizens), you get nothing and are automatically deported.

As for alimony, if both people were working, there would be no alimony for either party, no matter what the income of each is. There may be some extenuating circumstances, but not many.

There are other situations to, but these would be my basic rules. Aren't you glad I don't rule the world? LOL

I know that this sounds extreme, but seriously, I think it would reduce divorce rates, which are alarmingly high and lower divorce rates would result in a lot better world all around.

Abd thank G-d our laws are much mire realistic than what you're suggesting. This in 2013, not 1952.

Sent from my SCH-I800 using DISBoards

 

[Lorelei Lee]

My warehouse guy has a weird deal.

He sends his ex "maintenance" and then she sends him "child support". Why they couldn't just decide one owed the other "X" and the other mails no checks, I don't know.

But when she fails to send her checks for months on end, he isn't allowed to just deduct what she owes. Nope, he still has to send his in full. So, now thyre headed back to court

Maintenance and alimony are taxed as income to the recipient and are a deduction for thise who pay it. Child support has no tax consequences.

Sent from my SCH-I800 using DISBoards