Replies

If your wife lost her job, she would still be responsible for her expenses without extra help from you. If you have to get three jobs at McDonalds, Home Depot, etc to meet your obligations, hop to it. You should only be expected to do what your ex is expected to do if she is in the same situation.

No, his ex-wife is a woman with custody of children so she could get welfare. He cannot get welfare.

<> Yes, you should ONLY be expected to do what your ex is expected to do if she is in the same situation. But what's that? Well, she can dip into her savings. You don't have any because the court has bled you dry. She can borrow from the bank until she gets back on your feet. Your credit has been destroyed by the divorce. She can apply for government assistance if you're out of the picture. You can't get that because you're a male without custody. (And the reason you don't have custody is your sex). She can find ONE McDonald's job to take her over the rough spot, whereas YOU will need 3. If you are paying the usual percentage of support, it can take about half your paycheck. What lay people don't know or care to know is that even though the court doesn't usually quite take HALF your money as a non-custodial parent, since you are also obliged to pay the TAXES--both federal and state--on the money you give her, you can wind up easily paying her half. That's not what it takes to raise a child. This isn't about CHILD support, it's about wealth redistribution, and that's not American, it's Soviet. How many of us are aware that even as the Wall was falling in the East, its counterpart was being bolstered here in the West and now stands firm as a reminder that our enemy is us? (mention)

If your wife lost her job, she would still be responsible for her expenses without extra help from you. If you have to get three jobs at McDonalds, Home Depot, etc to meet your obligations, hop to it. You should only be expected to do what your ex is expected to do if she is in the same situation.

I disagree with this, because according to my understanding, alimony and child support is determined by income at the time of separation. What if the husband was making 150k (internet boom) and was forced to pay 40k in alimony and child support - if he was making 50k, he may only be responsible for 15-20k. In today's economy, with the overall reduction in wages, is it reasonable to expect him to continue to pay the 40k, even though his wages may have dropped to 40k? I don't think so...

Finally, I can understand why the husband should be required to pay his fair share of child support, but I do not understand the necessity of paying alimony - why does he remain responsible for the expenses of the ex-wife? Unless during the marriage, they had agreed that she would stay at home and thus, her ability to earn income was adversely affected, I do not understand why the man remains responsible for supporting the woman...