LOL, I can count on, er, no hands the cases of 61-year-old teachers who dumped their 61-year-old CEO of General Motors. It usually goes the other way and in those cases, I think the women should take the guy to the cleaners.

Also, in my experience, women who cheat and leave do not request or get full custody. The husband usually fights for sole or joint custody, and so the woman does not get much alimony or child support. I'm sure there are cases on these boards where this isn't true, but every WW I've personally seen has given up custody or settled for joint. When women are the primary custodial parent with the ex-husbands doing the EOW visitation thing, it is usually either because the man left and doesn't want the kids or because the cheated-on mother fought and won primary custody.

Should a woman get alimony if SHE'S the lower-earning one who walks out? Unless there was abuse or something, I could see saying no. I also think that is relatively less commmon, though.

Besides, back to your original point, I don't really understand ruling out a woman whose husband walked out and gave up custody, leaving her with three kids to care for and necessitating that she turn down promotions, travel, etc., in order to juggle work and family. In these cases, if she can get the husband to pay alimony, more power to her I say. You really think that indicates some sort of pathetic dependency? If I were you, I would just rule out the women who had cheated and walked out on their marriages. That would probably take care of most of the alimony cases on their own.

I overheard a fellow in a pub the other night bragging to his buddies how his new girlfriends's ex-h is "kindly" making the payments on his new Toyota truck...

The same as a previous discussion on child support...IF alimony is to be granted, the paying spouse should pay into an account against which the "granted" spouse could submit qualified claims.

I remember Joan Lunden bad-mouthing her H for being a SAHD and asking for significant alimony. No one said much about that...

[color:"blue"] Enlightened [/color] ...
Your first post (as I read it) seemed somewhat disparaging towards alimony. It didn’t sound as if that was a preference, but perhaps I misread, and if so, please accept my apology. The word 'wary' has a negative connotation, and one doesn’t usually use it when discussing physical characteristics. You had said:
My intent was to give legitimate circumstances for alimony, to prove we’re not all gold-diggers.
Then you wrote:
I was responding (maybe others here, too) regarding alimony from the betrayed spouse POV and assumed you *magically* knew that. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> Your most recent post about the unfaithful spouse getting alimony opens a whole other subject, and [color:"blue"] Hoopsie [/color] made an excellent point:

Submitting qualified claims? What in the Sam Hill does that mean? LOL, I think our judicial system has enough trouble tracking down the deadbeat noncustodial parents without trying to adjudicate whether the wife's haircut is an expense she is entitled to pay from her "alimony account."

If Joan Lunden's husband cared for the kids while she pursued her lucrative television career, pony up sweetheart.

Easy enough to administer...Americans aready do it for medical flex spending accounts.

Paying a boyfriend's truck payment ain't a qualified expense...

Living expenses ARE...house, food, car, medical, etc.

The deadbeat dad argument doesn't fly...people can think of ways to undermine ANY system...that doesn't mean it would be abad system.

Thanks for all the reponses. This question stemmed from a conversation I had w/my girlfriends. We are all divorced and were once educated professionals who at one point became SAHM. Our Xs are also professionals.

In my case, the X is a doctor. Now, I realize my chances of going into the work world after 8 years and earning what he does are pretty slim. I don't feel guilty accepting alimony for a while either, considering how he behaved during our marriage.

Back to the back porch scene w/the girlfriends. At one point I intimated that maybe it would be fun to date a teacher. Teachers here aren't paid squat for what they do. I don't know any single teachers, but I think a guy in his 40s who does that for a living may have other qualities that I find appealing. My friend immediately pointed out how much my lifestyle would change, how I wouldn't even see my friends as much because we (the imaginary teacher and I) wouldn't be able to afford to do a lot of the things my friends enjoy. I am not saying we were big spenders because I'm not and my X isn't either. I feel lucky that we divided up assets rather than debts. But still, you see what I mean right?

Then I thought of the selfish X and his bimbo assistant and figured the teacher and I could spend our summers exploring (RC is my top EN if you can't tell) and he would be great w/the kids, etc. We wouldn't be poor either.

I realize that I am romanticizing a career but you know what I mean. The guy could be a lot of things. He could be an actor or run the non-profit theater down the street.

Nams is right too, if you want a certain lifestyle, you need to earn it, and I will certainly try. I don't ever plan on being just somebody's wife again. I also don't plan on being financially dependent on anyone again.

The conversation the girls and I had was interesting. I am sure you never know what you would do until it happens, but I thought I'd pose it here to see what you thought. Thanks again.

You know, I hear all the arguments about a woman "sacrificing" herself so her H can pursue a good career.

No one has mentioned the gravy train she got to live on WHILE she was married to this productive guy. I bet she lived in a great house and drove a great car...heck, she must've had it pretty good if he's going to have shell out to keep her in the same lifestyle.

I'm NOT in favor of alimony. I am in favor of splitting assets jointly accrued.

Like EE says...we're all responsible for taking care of ourselves...and if the gravy train crashes...time to get back in the game...

This goes both ways.

[color:"purple"]LO
I believe the generalization was directed at women that sacrifice by living low budget and working while the husband finishes school.

I have a friend who did just that. In fact, she wanted furniture, so she started a second job at a furniture store in order to earn money and get the furniture discounted.
The stereotype is the woman who meets a man in college and marries him. She gets a job and he goes to medical school. The big bucks don't roll in until 8 or 10 years later after all the training is done and some of the loans are paid. Then he spends so much time at the hospital (and so little with his wife) that he falls in love with a coworker and divorces the wife.

But often there are exceptions to every sterotype and generalization, right?

V. [/color]

[color:"purple"]This is a riot - imagine buildings full of accountants "qualifying" expenses. Who is paying for that? [/color]


[color:"purple"]Who is going to pay for the administration of those accounts? The american public? Or maybe they'll just assess the payee an upfront maintenance fee... Then we'll surely hear a lot of complaints about the $100 a month maintenence fee for some accountant to go over the ex's account with you. [/color]



[color:"purple"]I agree - and him joking like that is extremely poor taste. [/color]



[color:"purple"]Agreed - but isn't it a bit much to expect some state or county agency to track all the expenses and qualify them??? [/color]



[color:"purple"]I think the family and domestic courts are clogged enough without adding monthly expenses disputes to the list...

V. [/color]

[color:"purple"]I don't think any of God's children should be taken to the cleaners - is that what we are taught in church? Revenge? [/color]



[color:"purple"]Ya know, sometimes women, like men, just want to walk away from all the responsibility. Why is it only men that are pictured as living the single life and enjoying freedom? Sometime the gals want the same thing. [/color]


[color:"purple"]I think these kind of arguments are exactly why the judicial system got rid of "fault" in divorce. How can a judge or anyone else for that matter make decisions based on someone's "character". How do you make "character judgements" legal?[/color]



[color:"purple"]I can sympathize with this scenario. My ex moved 4 hours away and I have had to pass up any sort of company thing requiring travel. Most travel opportunities come with recognition which means I do give up opportunities to self-promote my work.

V. [/color]

The "sacrifice" usually comes into play once kids enter the picture. If a couple has two power careers, it is often inevitable that one has to scale back or quit in order to care for the little buggers. Usually, it is the wife, which then affects her current and future earning power.

If the couple jointly decided that the wife would stay home with the kids so the husband has the freedom and flexibility and support to become CEO of Microsoft, then the husband needs to recognize his wife's contributions to his success, and pay accordingly, either through alimony or by giving her a larger chunk of the marital assets.

I am not in favor of alimony in all cases, but I can see circustances where it is entirely appropriate and fair.

You know, it odd that the medical flex spending plan accounts don't have ANY of the problems you've mentioned.

I submit a claim online (or by mail). Assign it a claim code from a list of qualified claims.

Occasional audits would "spot check" claims. Fear of audit would keep people honest.

Spending accounts work. Similar programs would work wonderfully for child support.

My H. didn't make anything when we got married. He isn't "loaded" now but he makes a lot more than I probably will. I made the down payment on our house w/ my $$. I still live in it. He has a successful practice which grew during our marriage and I am keeping my grubby hands off of it. He screwed around w/a co-worker who never went to college and has never made more than $10/hour. He knocked her up twice and contracted an incurable STD. Of course, he didn't bother to tell me I wasn't his one and only so he exposed me too and I had to experience the humiliation of being tested for everything. I tried for years to save the marriage but he wouldn't break it off w/her. They are now engaged and have an OC. If anyone is on the gravy train, it must be the OW.

We were saving together for the future. When we had two incomes, I put mine into savings. We used his paycheck for bills and entertainment. I have never owned a nice car, and don't consider cars a solid investment.

There is not and was never was a gravy train. I guess alimony means different things considering where you live. I don't feel guilty taking it since it would be hard to afford a home for our children without it. I will still need a job. I do have some cash but will need it to retire since I am starting over at 42. I still can't figure out how to manage retirement. These are problems though that everyone on this board struggles with.

Now suppose I marry the imaginary teacher, he cheats, and I lose half of what I have left. I am with you Enlightened on the affair prenup.

In my experience, nothing chaps an ex-husband's hide more than the thought that the wife is using the support payments for her botox injections or to buy trinkets for her boyfriend.

However, something like 60 percent of noncustodial fathers do not pay all or some child support. Tracking and enforcing payments across state lines and through various state agencies is often very difficult. Many women cannot afford attorneys to help them with this, and the state agencies that are supposed to help them are backlogged. Wealthy ex-husbands are often the worst at hiding assets and income. Single mothers are at huge risk for poverty.

I'll save a little bit of outrage at the thought that some wives might be using their alimony payments to see an early movie instead of buying a can of tuna, but it's pretty low down on my umbrage list. Sorry. If we have resources to spare, I'd rather streamline and coordinate the child support enforcement system.

Affording a house for your kids is the function of child support...not alimony.

The very fact that life would be tougher for you without the alimony than it was when you were married indicates that you WERE receiving a good benefit from the marriage.

I am sorry that he infected you with an STD. I do believe you deserve some kind of compensation for that. I would suspect the alimony isn't enough to cover that damage and I'd back you taking him to court for compensation. At the very least, he should be required to pay your medical insurance premiums for the rest of your lives.

Of 10 million custodial mothers, only 700,000 (7%) do not receive child support because of "deadbeat dads". This is not minimize the problems that those custodial mothers face. But "deadbeats" are by far the minority. Keep this in mind the next time you hear yet another story about all of those "deadbeats".
(Sources for data: GAO/HRD-92-39FS, January 9, 1992, and DHHS Greenbook, chapter 11)

So far, all tests negative. Thank goodness.

Alimony and support have to do w/taxes.

"According to the Federal Office of Child Support, in 2003, $96 billion in accumulated unpaid support was due to children in the United States; 68 percent of child support cases were in arrears. An overwhelming majority of children, particularly minorities, living in single-parent homes where child support is not paid live in poverty."

In fairness, the fathers in some of the arrears cases argue that the support payments were set too high, or that they are in arrears because they have lost their job and have not been able to get the order modified, etc. The Bradley Amendment, which I believe is still in force, does not allow any judicial discretion in past due arrears -- in other words, you can get your child support order modified if you lose your job or are disabled, but you will owe whatever your backlog was up to that point, even if it takes you years to get a hearing.

Men's and women's rights groups argue back and forth about this sort of thing. However, whatever the dueling policy papers indicate, I can tell you that requiring the wife to submit claims for her alimony spending is way, way down on everyone's list, LOL.

Courts typically award custody who already has the kids. So if a WW takes her kids with her to have her affair, like my XW did, then she will probably get custody. Presidence plays a large role in custody.

From what I've found, the courts really don't care about fidelity, otherwise, we wouldn't have no-fault divorce.

In Illinois, fidelity has NO bearing on the custody or alimony decisions.

I am fortunate that I don't pay alimony. However, that didn't stop my wayward ex-wife from asking for it.

I am still of the opinion that if you are getting divorced, you take care of your own stuff, even if you are the 61 year old teacher who divorced the CEO of XOM, even if he was the cheat.

Perhaps I should adjust my position a bit. I don't believe a spouse should seek alimony. Getting their share of the assets, sure! Child support, yes, as long as it's being used for the child and not personal trips to Key West. Getting paid for months or years or forever just for being married to someone. Nope!

If you are the WS, then let your affair partner pay what your BS was paying.

Can you believe my XWW wanted me to pay for her lawyer for a divorce I didn't even want?

It's crazy.

So I'm not attracted to women who want someone else to pick up the tab, even if they were the BS.

And I'm certainly not attracted to women who were the WS.

Am I picky? Yeah!

But I have to live with my decision, not you.

I have to disagree with your train of thought.Being at the receiving end of a WH I do receive a large sum of alimony/CS as my STBXH makes a lot of money.Financial security is a top three need for me if you go by needs,and so it was always important to be financially secure.I never wanted my children to struggle nor did my WH so we made decisions,joint decisions,based on our desires for our future.

So,I put my career on hold,or shelved it indefinitely,to be a SAHM which my WH initially respected and wanted me to do.He afforded us all the things we needed and wanted and we lived a good life because of his hard work.I worked hard too though just never got a "salary" for it but I didn't want for anything.I was in charge of the finances,we both agreed.

I am back to work now but still only make a small portion of what I could have had I stayed in the workforce all this time and let my kids stay in daycare all day long and it's a fraction of what my STBX makes.We bought our dream home and then a year later my H cheated and decided he wanted to be a bachelor again.He wanted me and the kids to be in the home so he could somehow feel better about what he was doing,as if he was still taking care of us in some warped way by not threatening to sell the home thru D.So he pays me alimony which I use for the mortgage and child support..What I make extra in my job now is for savings and whatever else the children need,myself a close second.

Should I accept any less just because he had a sudden change of heart in lifestyle? And wants to spend on some OW instead of us? No.I made sure of that.He can go off and cheat all he wants and do whatever but I would not allow him to destroy every part of our lives for some bimbo.So the children and I have our home that we love,have not needed to move to some low rent apartment,can still stay in the same school and community we love and we are financially secure.I don't take trips that I cannot pay for with my money from my job and while my STBXWH goes to Europe with the bimbo on a vacation that was supposed to be for us as a family and the first long awaited trip of our married lives,I end up staying home to care for my children which I would not have any other way.I get to overhear all the fun things he did and pictures he took all the while knowing it should have been us there.

You just cannot be married for multiple years and not take into account what women( and men too) put on hold or give up to be caretakers to our children.They should have to suffer as little if at all possible and if it means that a spouse continues to pay for their wellbeing in all forms then so be it.There have been plenty of stories here of spouses shirking their financial responsibilities toward their kids.It's shameful.

One day I hope to meet a man that can appreciate what I have been through,the choices I made and all that I have to offer.And not turn me away just because I receive money I deserve.This is NOT me wanting someone to pick up the "tab" as you so eloquently put it.