Posted on 07/03/2023 11:45:28 AM PDT by proust
My mom’s financial distress was temporary, she pulled herself out of it and honestly, was a better and happier person for it. More compassionate and confident. Had he divorced her, and she had lifetime alimony, I don’t believe she would have grown as a person. To me it is like what happens to people on welfare too long - as a stopgap it’s a good thing, but then it becomes a crutch.
A schoolmate wanted me to move to Florida to be with her, but she didn’t want to marry because she gets permanent alimony. It pays her mortgage. I declined. Now she will have trouble paying on her place. Sucks to be her
- minus the state = smart guy.
Jane Long wrote: “Did you stay on friendly terms? For the kids, I mean.”
She wasn’t my ex. I knew her from work.
The only ‘kids’ of her’s I knew of had fur and paws.
Due to my age I assume I did not get interviews. Had I gotten interviews I think I would have done quite well.
Yes you can get a starter job and there is no shame in that.
However if you are the innocent spouse in a divorce it is not fair to you.
You get half the assets ok.
Now hubs can continue to work his $90,000 a year job and you can start as a bank teller for $25,000.
This is not right.
All I am saying is a judge needs to look at the whole story and that sometime lifetime alimony is fair. Not all the time.
Absolutely, if the wife was faithful and the husband is the one who breaks the agreement they made "at the altar" and also in terms of family goals, such as having a parent raise the children and not a series of strangers. His future earnings are a marital asset.
What some states do is have the husband pay for some sort of retraining of the wife so she can get a job. But it is rarely possible for the average person to stay out of the work force for a decade or more and then have the same opportunities as the spouse, especially a man, whose family helped him go through professional grad school and he then has an uninterrupted licensed career. It especially stings if he marries another professional with other kids, and then focuses their combined higher incomes on their "lifestyle."
In the pre-"no-fault" days, adultery was a civil crime, and the abandoning spouse did not get rewarded for it as they do under "no-fault", whether male or female. They just get to break their partner's heart, mess up the kids, and "change partners and dance." The one who cared more, loved more, sacrificed more and tried to make the marriage work is the one who gets hosed, whether male or female.
But on lifetime alimony, again that makes no sense. If a divorcee stayed married, he would only work and contribute till 62 to the marriage on average while getting something from that relationship. Why should you add another 20-30 years to retirement beyond what they would while married. Doesn’t make any sense as you wouldn’t have come close to that in the marriage.
The real problem is no fault divorce ...
If one spouse heads to Florida to file for divorce and take advantage of the law there, the other may head to Alaska and file there. Alaska has no residency requirement for divorce or dissolution. One can file for divorce in Alaska as long as they file in Alaska and they "intend to stay as a resident".
South Dakota and Washington State don't have much of a residency requirement either.
The statistic alone doesn't tell the whole story. There are a host of tactical reasons for the woman making a self-protective move, such as the man expecting to continue cheating, drinking to excess, lying on the tax returns, gambling, etc—and still stay married; or the husband or his family having connections in the court system, so she needs to change the venue. Sometimes a man starts moving most of his assets to individual ownership or sharing money with a mistress, and the wife needs to put a stake in the ground by filing before all the assets get cleaned out. So many reasons.
Yes, I do believe that historically the males were the most likely to break the marriage and behave badly. These days, it's moving rapidly towards 50-50.
“The approval drew an outcry from members of the “First Wives Advocacy Group,” a coalition of mostly older women who receive permanent alimony and who assert that their lives will be upended without the payments “
GET A JOB, YOU MOOCHERS!
My experience is the 70/30 filing and causee of the divorce are related, or even more so. Especially today, everyone one of those reasons are also true for women and they get the added prize of divorce bonuses while men do not. Social media has really screwed up relationships in general. One example personal to me of many is the pastor that married my wife and I. He was married 27 years, had 3 kids all under 18, wife found her HS sweetheart online and just left her whole family one afternoon while they were away for sports, to go be with him and she filed for divorce as soon as 366 days hit (1 year here).
From what I can see, no-fault has become a bonanza for divorce lawyers and all the hangers-on in the divorce industry it created, such as forensic accountants, mediators, child advocates, etc.
I am old. Several of my friends are having their grandchildren caught up in this horrible "no-fault" mess. Their sons are losing any parental rights over their kids and getting absolutely slayed in court by cheating, feckless, entitled third-wave "feminist" wives, especially the college-educated wives who have been inducted into communism, such a schoolteachers.
As for the daughters of friends, it's the ones who have a low-to-middle-level work experience, married a big earner, gave up working at his urging to care for him, the bome and kids, then get humilitated and put through years of baseless accusations and coercive custody fights that he can afford and she can't, with the other woman in her face colonizing her kids, and not getting a fair settlement financially because of the emotional torture.
God hates divorce.
Rare are the couples who can make a dignified split and remain civil for the sake of the kids once the no-fault industry gets a hold of them and starts making maximum trouble—which is the road to greaater profits for the industry professionals.
I must agree with that. Several of my friends' DILs or SILs hooked up with someone online within a year of two of the big expensive wedding.
We have one in our family who kicked her husband of nearly 50 years to the curb over an out-and-out grifter she "met" online. The husband literally died from the shock, and she moved that bassterd into the marital house about ten minutes after the funeral. Her bringing a fox into the henhouse destroyed the unity of the extended Christian family (consisting of ten to twenty other married couples, depending on how many in-law couples show up at family events). Many tears have been shed by everyone but the happy couple. Some tolerate him being at family gatherings, and others are plain disgusted even being around him. Or her, either. I'm one of the latter.
Tired old feminist solipsism.
“I knew one case, so overthrow all of society, and lie about the consequences.”
Divorce rape and false allegations of sexual abuse in divorce, and the Duluth Model, are what happen most of the time.
So *that* explains your attitude. 🤪
“There is a type of man who abandons an older wife for a new model after she has given him all the best years of her life faithfully. We have all seen it.“
Although that does happen, it is the exception rather than the rule. Women initiate the vast majority of divorces in the country today, and have for at least the past 50 years. And women have caught up to men on the infidelity scale.
Alimony should not be a lifetime. Its bad enough a woman can leave a man, get his house, half his stuff, keep him from seeing the kids, and then get child support also.
Alimony should never be a lifetime. I recognize a man can be a dick and leave his wife, but shouldn’t getting the house, half his stuff, custody of the kids, and child support be enough.
Thank you, I am not personally in need. I just share my experience from ten years ago when as a woman in her 50s having not built a career nor gotten a degree, I got a grand total of two interviews after scores of applications. Even though I had worked PT all my life and had excellent local references.
One interview resulted in an ardent job offer with much pursuit but it had 2-3 hour schedules at a time paying minimum wage. After commute it was virtually nothing, silly to accept it.
The other, the hire ng male wanted me but his butch lesbian cohort came in late, sat at the table for ten minutes, then got up and left. She had Kersey decided to hire someone else obviously. Male called me and profusely apologized, asked if I would apply for an alternate job that I did not feel qualified for. He was very nice. So. I interview very well.
When you are a woman in your fifties with no degree and no career built, you may get an entry level job depending on what they want. Many of those involve being in your feet all day (food service, Amazon, ups, retail). By the time we are in our fifties eight hours in your feet is way beyond doable.
For the office jobs they want the twenty year olds it seemed to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.