If she "gave up" her career voluntarily, why is he responsible for her upkeep after they're divorced? She spent 20 years schlepping around the house while he paid for everything and she thinks he's ripping HER off??? Why should any person have to pay for the lifestyle of another? Why should I buy my ex-wife a house, a car, new clothes, trips to the casino, or anything else? Why does a man's "responsibility" to his ex extend beyond the marriage contract itself?
Mind you, we're not talking about paying for a child here. We're just talking about some women who think they can retire on the extorted largesse of some boob who was stupid enough to marry them. If they want out, let them out. But they take half the bills and half the assets. Nothing more.
In fact, this paternalism (ironic, isn't it?) does women a disservice. If their "independence" from men comes at the price of dependence on the government, they've just traded one master for another. The truly FREE woman is one can stand on her own, without a husband OR a handout. She is also the woman who can then decide if she wants to be married at all, and under what conditions, instead of being forced into a dysfunctional relationship for economic (or biological) reasons.
I don't even think they should get half the bills and assets in most cases ussually they are not responsible for that much of the income.
In this case there was one child under 18, the other still at home eating but over 18. The woman was willing to work ---however with no resume or job in almost 20 years, she was offered at best $6 an hour with no insurance benefits for a part time job. If she had worked, she could have made equal to what he was making I'm sure which was over $20 an hour ----and in this case it was he who chose someone else.
I think in most cases with a divorce rate so high, women should hang on to their careers ---if for no other reason that they tend to be less bitter about things in the case of divorce which is better for the kids.