[ SECRET POST #3237 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3237 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 052 secrets from Secret Submission Post #463.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Is Alimony an obsolete system?

Question for F!S

[(Anonymous)]

Sorry let's try that again...

Do you think Alimony is an obsolete system? Is it still necessary? Is it a good thing or a bad thing?

[(Anonymous)]

As in should it be, or is it?

[(Anonymous)]

As in is it still needed?

[(Anonymous)]

No, I don't. I'm not saying the system necessarily works perfectly - I genuinely don't know - but I think in principle it's still a necessary corrective.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't necessarily disagree, but why?

[(Anonymous)]

Well, because it's still the case that, in many relationships, one person sacrifices part of their earnings & career potential for the sake of the other person. I think it's legitimate to have a system of making recompense for that.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think so. Why would it be? It's based on fairly traditional gender roles where the husband has a job and the wife stays home to raise kids/run the household. They're both important roles, but the former comes with a paycheck and the latter does not. When a marriage like this breaks up, it leaves the worker's ability to support themselves intact, but the other partner has no resume, often few marketable skills that can be quantified in a resume or backed up with references, etc. Unless they can trade upon the skills they've built up during the marriage to support themselves, they're going to need financial support.

And it works the same way if the roles are switched, too.

[(Anonymous)]

Well, in my country it is. People are only expected to take care of their children, not their former spouses. There have been only a few cases where one spouse has been ordered to pay alimony to their ex. For example, husband and wife have been married for decades, and the husband has taken all of the property to his name, while the wife has paid for the food, electricity, kids etc., or the wife has been a recent immigrant with little education and language skills.

It doesn't usually last for long, maybe a couple of years, so that the supported spouse gets their life in order.

[(Anonymous)]

It should be analyzed on a case by case basis. If one person gave up their career to raise the kids or took a part time job instead of a full time job then I do think they should get some form of alimony to compensate for that. At least for a certain time period.

I think this should apply equally to men who make career sacrifices as to women but it will most likely go to women more often as they take care of children more often.

[(Anonymous)]

No.

In most marriages with significantly different earning levels, the lower earner (usually, though not always, the woman) takes on other duties to support the higher earner and other members of the family. This is a necessary contribution to the household, but isn't one that comes with financial compensation. Once the household breaks up, those duties - and the attendant sacrifice of earning potential - need to be addressed alongside any monetary contributions.

There's also the fact that one member of a couple might have financially supported the other before their earning levels were reversed - for example, my mom supported my dad through his masters, which enabled him not to have to take out huge loans to cover the expenses his stipend wouldn't have. He makes more than her now. If they were to divorce, the fact that she supported the education necessary for him to achieve his current position and gave up opportunities for promotions that would've advanced her own career because they would've required relocating would have to be addressed in the division of assets.