Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Point was, your anecdotal example of two, in response to a statement about the typical outcome of fathers seeking custody, has no relevance to whether or not such outcome is "typical".
My post was not really directed at you. Although, I can understand why you may have perceived it that way.
The point I'm trying to make is that alimony exists because there are different circumstances in life. Perhaps, if we wanted to start tomorrow and have a presentation that's given in elementary school, junior high school, and high school that emphasizes we have made a decision as a culture, as a society, to no longer grant alimony to spouses in divorce cases than I could go along with this sort of approach. However, nothing like that does take place and some people are lulled into marriages--even this day-- that are particularly inequitable.
I know many spouses that worked tough even menial jobs to pay for their spouse go to law school, engineering school, or pharmacy school. Sometimes those marriages last. Other times, they don't last. I know other spouses who were literally bullied into being a stay home parent. The bullying sometimes came from all sides. Sometimes, it was their mother who told them to stay home. Sometimes it was father/mother/spouse combined. Maybe it wasn't wise to listen to such advice, but I certainly understand the pressures involved and why they did listen. Sometimes spouses become disabled or handicapped during a marriage. No, its not acceptable to say that they should look solely towards social security disability. Family members (and I include ex-spouses in that) have an obligation to step up and help.
Alimony shouldn't be the rule. However, there are a minority of cases where its clearly the equitable and appropriate thing to do. ColoradoAlimony can ramble on all he/she wants too. It doesn't change the basic equities involved. He obviously has a "dog in this fight" and I take much of what I read here with a big grain of salt.
There are situations and than there are situations.
First I'd like to point out that alimony is basically non-existent in several states, Texas and Indiana being the most known. As far as I know, there are no presentations in schools there at any level pointing this out. And yet somehow, there is no social crisis in either of these states where people who did not receive alimony are begging on the streets. Can you explain this?
Blah, blah, blah to the rest of your post. Every single supporter of alimony, the few that there are, always paint the same picture: some poor, poor abused woman who was "forced" to stay home by her evil husband. If that is the case in 0.1% of divorce cases, which I doubt, we can write exceptions into laws to accommodate those.
What is *much* more common is the man or woman who has an affair, moves in with their new partner, and files for divorce knowing that the alimony laws in many states will simply look at income difference and length of marriage, and hand the offender a windfall. The person paying alimony is thus placed into indentured servitude to someone who cheated on them. This tends to make the person who got screwed very mad, and often, suicidal. The suicide rate among divorced men in general is the highest of any demographic, and since 96% of alimony is paid by men, there is certain to be a large intersection there. Does anyone care? Do YOU care?
Alimony supporters also keep trying to make alimony a gender issue. The number of women paying alimony rises by 15% a year. Eventually, people will be forced to drop their gender filter on this issue, and see it for what it is - an archaic concept designed originally when women were the property of men, and now simply a way for the "Family Law" industry to remove as much marital wealth as possible during a divorce.
Finally, personal attacks simply make you look desperate. Stick to the facts.
First I'd like to point out that alimony is basically non-existent in several states, Texas and Indiana being the most known. As far as I know, there are no presentations in schools there at any level pointing this out. And yet somehow, there is no social crisis in either of these states where people who did not receive alimony are begging on the streets. Can you explain this?
What is *much* more common is the man or woman who has an affair, moves in with their new partner, and files for divorce knowing that the alimony laws in many states will simply look at income difference and length of marriage, and hand the offender a windfall. The person paying alimony is thus placed into indentured servitude to someone who cheated on them. This tends to make the person who got screwed very mad, and often, suicidal. The suicide rate among divorced men in general is the highest of any demographic, and since 96% of alimony is paid by men, there is certain to be a large intersection there. Does anyone care? Do YOU care?
I cant claim to know how alimony works in other states or how many men are placed in indentured servitude. I know states are beginning to revamp their outdated alimony laws, as they should. Also with marriage dynamics chaning there is naturally less and less alimony or need for it.
So, what can be done to get states to get with the program.
I know many spouses that worked tough even menial jobs to pay for their spouse go to law school, engineering school, or pharmacy school. Sometimes those marriages last. Other times, they don't last. I know other spouses who were literally bullied into being a stay home parent. The bullying sometimes came from all sides. Sometimes, it was their mother who told them to stay home. Sometimes it was father/mother/spouse combined. .
In all of those examples, the common thread is that it was a CHOICE someone made.
We all suffer the consequences of the choices we make.
Point was, your anecdotal example of two, in response to a statement about the typical outcome of fathers seeking custody, has no relevance to whether or not such outcome is "typical".
No. I agree. The plural of anecdote is not data.
However, I don't know many guys who fight for 50/50 custody.
In any walk of life/socioeconomic level.
The person paying alimony is thus placed into indentured servitude
Can't rep you again, but I'm shouting amen to your post. I definitely feel that my husband and I are indentured servants to his ex. I try to not think about it much, because harboring resentment is not going to change our situation. But when those "slap us in the face" things happen, like finding out we can't qualify for a mortgage because of the alimony payments, I do become angry at the unfairness of it all.
But usually we say "Our exes got the money, but we got the happiness!"
First I'd like to point out that alimony is basically non-existent in several states, Texas and Indiana being the most known. As far as I know, there are no presentations in schools there at any level pointing this out. And yet somehow, there is no social crisis in either of these states where people who did not receive alimony are begging on the streets. Can you explain this?
Not particularly. Income inequities are greater in some states than others. I wouldn't live in either Texas or Indiana, but that's just a personal opinion.
Quote:
Blah, blah, blah to the rest of your post. Every single supporter of alimony, the few that there are, always paint the same picture: some poor, poor abused woman who was "forced" to stay home by her evil husband. If that is the case in 0.1% of divorce cases, which I doubt, we can write exceptions into laws to accommodate those.
You seem to confuse "being adamant, with having the best opinion". You certainly win the prize for being forceful about your point of view. As far as your notion that alimony ought to be eliminated though? Why don't you convince the legislatures in states that have alimony to repeal it? Can't do it? Maybe they think their opinion is better than yours (as I do).
Quote:
What is *much* more common is the man or woman who has an affair, moves in with their new partner, and files for divorce knowing that the alimony laws in many states will simply look at income difference and length of marriage, and hand the offender a windfall. The person paying alimony is thus placed into indentured servitude to someone who cheated on them. This tends to make the person who got screwed very mad, and often, suicidal. The suicide rate among divorced men in general is the highest of any demographic, and since 96% of alimony is paid by men, there is certain to be a large intersection there. Does anyone care? Do YOU care?
I don't want anyone to commit suicide, but I don't believe that the threats to commit suicide should be used to hold the rest of us as sorts of hostages. All the states are entitled to decide on their own whether courts shall award alimony and set the criteria for doing it. Don't like that? Either get the law changed in Colorado or move.
Quote:
Alimony supporters also keep trying to make alimony a gender issue. The number of women paying alimony rises by 15% a year. Eventually, people will be forced to drop their gender filter on this issue, and see it for what it is - an archaic concept designed originally when women were the property of men, and now simply a way for the "Family Law" industry to remove as much marital wealth as possible during a divorce.
I don't think it will ever be seen as archaic in some situations. Although, as women obtain pay parity with men, I do expect the need for alimony to gradually decline.
Quote:
Finally, personal attacks simply make you look desperate. Stick to the facts.
Personal attacks? I recall a former post where you asserted that anyone taking my position was "stupid".
Here's what you haven't produced in support of your position:
1. A study showing what percent of the decline in marriage is due to alimony awards in divorce cases.
2. A study showing how many suicides are due to alimony awards in divorce cases.
3. Any real argument that would refute the idea that a disabled spouse should receive alimony (as opposed to making the taxpayers foot the entire bill for their care).
What percentage of divorce cases is alimony actually awarded in? I suspect its fairly small. Don't give me anecdotal crap. Get me some real numbers (if you can).
When you make an absurd claim like "alimony is responsible for the drop in marriage" and can't produce any numbers that give us an idea how much that is so, do you realize how ridiculous you sound? "Grasping at straws"? Do you know what the term "projection" means. Go look it up.
What your position is mostly nothing more than bullying and bluster. What you lack is real evidence that supports your position.
Finally, a question. There is saying in life that says "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime" Ultimately, YOU are responsible for whom YOU marry. If they turn out to be a dud, you can't expect the system to bail you out.
In all of those examples, the common thread is that it was a CHOICE someone made.
We all suffer the consequences of the choices we make.
A better argument can be made that that is true today than it was yesterday with respect to women and their choices. Where we part company is that I (and many others) believe that life is simply more complicated than that. People make choices, but those choices can be limited by their families, by their culture, by the economy, by their intelligence level, and their physical limitations.
Ultimately what this discussion seems to turn on for many is a personal philosophy of conservatism which fails to take any extraneous factors into account and places all the blame for failings on an individual.
I'll say again what I've told many conservatives/libertarians with respect to issues on this forum: You're entitled to pursue what is "good for you". However, its unreasonable to expect the majority of people, or legislators, to vote for a particular public policy or law based simply on "what is good for you". I think this attitude is precisely why conservatives are losing so many political battles these days. The rest of us don't see it as "good for us".
A better argument can be made that that is true today than it was yesterday with respect to women and their choices. Where we part company is that I (and many others) believe that life is simply more complicated than that. People make choices, but those choices can be limited by their families, by their culture, by the economy, by their intelligence level, and their physical limitations. ".
Where we part company is not there (life is indeed complicated and full of gray areas)...it's with the idea that someone needs to pay for the poor choices made by someone merely by virtue of marrying them.
Why is that the magic threshold?
Not particularly. Income inequities are greater in some states than others. I wouldn't live in either Texas or Indiana, but that's just a personal opinion.
You seem to confuse "being adamant, with having the best opinion". You certainly win the prize for being forceful about your point of view. As far as your notion that alimony ought to be eliminated though? Why don't you convince the legislatures in states that have alimony to repeal it? Can't do it? Maybe they think their opinion is better than yours (as I do).
I don't want anyone to commit suicide, but I don't believe that the threats to commit suicide should be used to hold the rest of us as sorts of hostages. All the states are entitled to decide on their own whether courts shall award alimony and set the criteria for doing it. Don't like that? Either get the law changed in Colorado or move.
I don't think it will ever be seen as archaic in some situations. Although, as women obtain pay parity with men, I do expect the need for alimony to gradually decline.
Personal attacks? I recall a former post where you asserted that anyone taking my position was "stupid".
Here's what you haven't produced in support of your position:
1. A study showing what percent of the decline in marriage is due to alimony awards in divorce cases.
2. A study showing how many suicides are due to alimony awards in divorce cases.
3. Any real argument that would refute the idea that a disabled spouse should receive alimony (as opposed to making the taxpayers foot the entire bill for their care).
What percentage of divorce cases is alimony actually awarded in? I suspect its fairly small. Don't give me anecdotal crap. Get me some real numbers (if you can).
When you make an absurd claim like "alimony is responsible for the drop in marriage" and can't produce any numbers that give us an idea how much that is so, do you realize how ridiculous you sound? "Grasping at straws"? Do you know what the term "projection" means. Go look it up.
What your position is mostly nothing more than bullying and bluster. What you lack is real evidence that supports your position.
Finally, a question. There is saying in life that says "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime" Ultimately, YOU are responsible for whom YOU marry. If they turn out to be a dud, you can't expect the system to bail you out.
I have tried to get statistics on divorce and alimony from Colorado. Guess what? A few years ago, the Colorado Bar Association sensed that there was beginning to be a backlash against alimony. In response, they had a bill passed that seals ALL divorce records unless BOTH parties to the divorce sign a waiver. The ONLY number about divorce published in this state is the raw number of divorces for the entire state for an entire year. They did this so that the numbers couldn't be used in a public campaign to reform the divorce laws.
So, all we have is anecdotal evidence, which is huge. Most people believe alimony is a factor in the negotiations in at least 75% of divorces of marriages over 5 years, and nearly 100% of divorces over 10 years. The number of people actually paying alimony doesn't matter, because the THREAT of alimony is used virtually every divorce here, to get an inequitable amount of marital assets. Most people who would receive alimony would prefer to have more marital property awarded instead of taking alimony, for a lot of reasons. Taxes are a huge reason, the fact that remarrying while you are receiving alimony is forbidden, the fact that the alimony payer always has the option of blowing their brains out or going to Argentina is another. Consequently you have the majority of cases where alimony would have been paid actually ending up like my female friend who gave up $400,000 of the $500,000 in marital assets and took all the marital debt, over $100,000 worth, in order to avoid paying lifetime alimony to her deadbeat, cheating, pot-addicted husband.
So you have endless sympathy for the person who made poor decisions and is now being bailed out by the divorce system on the back of their ex-spouse. Do you have any sympathy for my friend, who was married for 25 years to a guy who was a good father and equal provider until the last three years when he found a girlfriend, blew his entire $100,000 savings account, and then raped her in court such that he ended up with $400,000 free and clear and she ended up with a negative net worth? This is the way it works in real life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
