
Yes
No
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age

Nope. My approach is very simple. If you want out of the marriage you are out with your clothes, jewelry and whatever money you came in with. If you wanted more... guess what you should've stayed married. I am 100% for removing all incentives to divorce. To such a degree that whoever initiates has no claim on vehicles or property purchased during the marriage. They get absolutely nothing unless they can provide video evidence of certain abuses in which case they will receive a 1 time single payment. And it won't be more than $100k.
Video evidence is not accepted in court here… 😞
We just don't have the concept of alimony/spousal support here in Japan and I think that's better.
That does come even with the tradition here that the traditional wife worked alongside her husband. Yet I think that's better too because say the husband dies and the couple had children. Now the wife's helpless if she doesn't have a secure means of her own income unless she quickly secures one or finds another husband to provide for her and her children.
So it makes the most sense to me that both husband and wife secure their own income when possible and that they don't sacrifice that for a marriage.
No, if she was a stay home mom. She needs to return to work.
why life time? I don’t get that.
I don’t get alimony or child support. He makes more than double than me.
Charile are you having to pay her lifetime alimony? Lol
Nope. They don’t do that in Florida
Muy bueno. Cause I’d be moving to Mexico 🇲🇽 lol
Opinion
11Opinion
yes it should. because if you decide to have children as a couple, "someone" has to do the child raising. like in the overwhelming majority of cases not both partners can just stop working in order to bring up the child together. most people will not just give their baby to some care taker and go work full time immediately. so in the vast majority of cases one of the partners has economical disadvantages in favor of taking care of the baby that after a separation become unfair and should be compensated by the other partner.
No, I find it a ridiculous concept that a girl who left you is entitled to your money despite living with another man or you not even being able to visit the children.
So for me there should be 2 clear disqualifiers for Alimony:
1. The girl is living together with a new partner.
2. The father is not allowed or otherwise prevented from seeing his children.
Marriage should only ever be split during legal proceedings, never any extended length of time. Unless it comes to child care through 18. The kids need tending. Fairly.
I think alimony is a dreadful idea in this modern world where divorce is relatively easy and ubiquitous.
If you want to divorce, share up the resources created during the marriage and then go your separate ways.
My grandmother didn't have enough money to own her own place, a daughter was paying for that. My grandfather paid her alimony since they divorced. It wasn't enough.
no, if she can't work then a one time payment and no more. if she works then zero, but laws are insane.
Alimony shouldn't exist, but since it does it shouldn't exist in the way it does. It should be a low amount for a year. Just enough time and money for the person to secure a job
The more expensive divorce gets the more frequent woman will go missing.
Absolutely not. I have a relative that committed suicide over that.
Alimony should not exist. But child support should be ample to age 18.
Depends. Would a woman who stayed at home and raised the kids and did the chores for 30 years get it?
What about a woman in her 70s?
I dont think the men need taking care of by women.
We don't have it, she just takes her own money, clothes and jewelry.😅😅
We don't have that in my state.
No.. that's silly
No never.