Sorry, I have to disagree with most of your post. Are you a California lawyer? First of all, spousal support in California, if applicable, is generally based on half the length of what is termed a "long marriage," which has been determined to be approximately 9 years. If I'm not mistaken, Laci and Scott were only married about 3 years. Definitely not spousal support material. Secondly, don't confuse spousal and child support. Some people do get "family support," but others (like me) get separate awards.
I'm a (California) paralegal who had to do my own divorce case pro per, because my crazy ex scared off all the lawyers on both sides. I sat in court for four solid years with my case and watched dozens and dozens of others unfold. You'd better believe the California Family Court imputes income to not only professional women, but oftentimes women who have been in longterm marriages...like ME. Mine lasted 18 years, and even though I stayed home to raise my three children the last 8 years of it, I had income imputed to me. That was when I was NOT working and had been a stay at home mom. Laci WAS working as a substitute teacher. And in my case my kids were small and the man was abusive (we had to flee the house with our lives), and we certainly were not "awarded the house." The house was ordered SOLD by the court. This is commonly done in California.
I don't post this to be disagreeable or make a big deal about my situation, only to point out that I have personal, direct evidence contradicting your contentions. There's more I could disagree with in your post but I won't bother.
BTW, I had much better luck with my case AFTER the attorneys got out. They certainly know how to milk an impossible situation for all it's worth.