Wy is Alimony still a thing in the U.S?

[Player Twelve]

Ehm... To my knowledge it's "still a thing" in Europe too.. I don't know of any country where it doesn't exist..

Isn't old fashioned? Sure thing..
But it's still very much in effect..

It exists in Sweden at least but generally speaking it's not the rule to have to pay that.

[Moralgy]

Clearly because the system is out to get men, clearly. /s

It is a thing of the past that is still useful today for a many situations, but gets applied to cases it shouldn't at times.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Alimony isn’t an automatic thing and the cases where it is it could be awarded to men or women. Why? Because maybe as a unit they agreed one would be the home maker the other wouldn’t. It didn’t work out so the benefits to both should be used to make both whole.

[Jngizu]

I think this is one of those things that we Europeans find odd about the United States. That the richer person in a marriage becomes obligated to support the ex-spouse, should a divorce happen.

As I understand it, it had it's place back in the days when (mainly) women weren't expected to work and be stay-at-home wifes. If a divorce happened alimony was put in place so she didn't starve to death.

However, that's not really the case anymore in today's world. Both men and women are expected to sustain themselves, whether they are single or married. So why is it still a thing? I even read an, in my opinion ridiculous, argument that alimony is meant to make sure that the poorer part still lives at the same quality of life as he/she did when they were married. That baffles me, quite frankly, as one shouldn't expect to live as good of a life as single without a shared economy. If anything, it's unfair to those singles who have never been married and could reap such benefits.If you're single, you're single and you're on your own imo.

So what's the deal with alimony?

Dunno where you're from in Europe, but Alimony is a thing there too. At least it used to be. Pretty much every divorced couple I know of that is from the generation of my parents (baby boomers), the man had to pay alimony. Might have changed in the last few years, haven't kept up too much with what's going on since I left 5 years ago.

[Vynny]

One of the reasons why getting married is more of a risk then benefit. Guy or girl. I have a male friend who gets it from his ex. Marriage is such a feeble commitment now with people having far more access to finding new people. I wonder if the person receiving it loses it if they reach that level of sustainability.

The courts themselves don't typically proactively keep tabs on those things. Typically it will be up to the person paying alimony to make a case to the court as to why their alimony order should be adjusted and are expected to cite things such as an increase in their ex-spouses income or their ex-spouse being financially dependent on a new partner such as a long term romantic partner that they're living with or a new spouse all together.

[NihilSustinet]

I think this is one of those things that we Europeans find odd about the United States. That the richer person in a marriage becomes obligated to support the ex-spouse, should a divorce happen.

As I understand it, it had it's place back in the days when (mainly) women weren't expected to work and be stay-at-home wifes. If a divorce happened alimony was put in place so she didn't starve to death.

However, that's not really the case anymore in today's world. Both men and women are expected to sustain themselves, whether they are single or married. So why is it still a thing? I even read an, in my opinion ridiculous, argument that alimony is meant to make sure that the poorer part still lives at the same quality of life as he/she did when they were married. That baffles me, quite frankly, as one shouldn't expect to live as good of a life as single without a shared economy. If anything, it's unfair to those singles who have never been married and could reap such benefits.If you're single, you're single and you're on your own imo.

So what's the deal with alimony?

There are plenty of circumstances where alimony makes sense. Not every divorce includes Alimony, but it is necessary in certain situations.

[Wyrt]

I think it was originally intended because women were more likely to be stay at home wives/mothers and would have a significant break in their resume that would make finding work harder.

Not sure if it's really still needed though. Would probably need to be more of a case by case basis since there are still stay at home mothers and now even some stay at home fathers.

[xenogear3]

Nothing is free.

Just like hearthstone, you think it is free, but it is actually more expensive.
The $60 AAA, no micro transaction game is actually cheaper.

[Zeta333]

Like I said, typical post from you. Apparently you think abused spouses deserve no help.

It's all good, he's finally being made to pay, and he'll keep paying.

Im sorry your magical story said nothing about abuse. It said of a gullible woman who threw her life away and did dick for a retard who couldnt hold down a job. Sounds entirely her fault she stayed with someone like that and wasted her life. How about instead of attempting to be a smartass you explain how it was his fault she stayed and sold her familys gifts and assets to support him? Or just keep being a typical man hater.

[Stelio Kontos]

Im sorry your magical story said nothing about abuse. It said of a gullible woman who threw her life away and did dick for a retard who couldnt hold down a job. Sounds entirely her fault she stayed with someone like that and wasted her life. How about instead of attempting to be a smartass you explain how it was his fault she stayed and sold her familys gifts and assets to support him? Or just keep being a typical man hater.

If this were a rational poster here, I'd be inclined to discuss it further. But it's you, so I won't bother. You'd probably just start sputtering about feminazis, or calling me a cuck or beta for not immediately taking a man's side in every story, regardless of the facts.

[Deleted]

The american system is so outlandish and outrageous it boggles the mind. I just can't understand how america can be so great in some areas yet so hopelessly backwards and idiotic in others.

Some states like California is a complete fucking joke when it comes to marital law. Talk about completely and utterly screwing over the man for life. How such injustices stand invites madness to contemplate.

[Zeta333]

If this were a rational poster here, I'd be inclined to discuss it further. But it's you, so I won't bother. You'd probably just start sputtering about feminazis, or calling me a cuck or beta for not immediately taking a man's side in every story, regardless of the facts.

yeh i figured you had no counter, you keep dodging and spouting nonsense, why dont you come back when your prepared to talk like an adult.

[Stelio Kontos]

yeh i figured you had no counter, you keep dodging and spouting nonsense, why dont you come back when your prepared to talk like an adult.

I would, if there was an adult to debate with.

[exochaft]

The american system is so outlandish and outrageous it boggles the mind. I just can't understand how america can be so great in some areas yet so hopelessly backwards and idiotic in others.

Some states like California is a complete fucking joke when it comes to marital law. Talk about completely and utterly screwing over the man for life. How such injustices stand invites madness to contemplate.

The part that annoys me is that typically the man is considered at a disadvantage in the US. Where I live, there's actually attorney offices for divorce/custody/alimony services that are just for men only because said disadvantage is that huge. That being said, someone already stated correctly that alimony isn't the automatic rule when a divorce or separation occurs. It's certainly not necessary in every instance, nor is it requested in every instance. My sister-in-law would probably be a case where alimony is probably due, who currently has two kids while her ex-husband decimated their finances while have two additional kids with two different women while they were married.

Someone did mention government welfare programs, and I can shed some light on them, as well. There's certainly some stigma involved with the programs (hence why food stamps is now SNAP, same thing but a different name), but realistically speaking those who don't take the benefits due to stigma are in the vast minority. Even then, if you can make ends meet without said assistance, good on you since those programs were supposed to be for those that couldn't survive without them either temporarily or due to incapacity/disability/etc. Where I live, I technically qualify for food stamps and get told by the VA all the time to take my handouts because "you deserve them", but I don't take them because I don't need them. However, where I live it's not uncommon for people to get arrested for cashing in the SNAP cards literally for cash... guarantee you they aren't using that cash to buy food. That's the real issue with many (all?) of these programs: they're being used by too many people who don't need them but think they deserve them or exploit them.

[Airlick]

It is only fair to be granted alimony if you are taking care of the kids from the marriage and if you gave up own career to take care of the household. With marriage come responsibilities, the same as with becoming a parent, and they come for life. If you were on equal ground financially, then divorce may mean you no longer have to provide for the other party, but it doesn't negate your parental responsibilities.

[ranzino]

Ehm... To my knowledge it's "still a thing" in Europe too.. I don't know of any country where it doesn't exist..

Isn't old fashioned? Sure thing..
But it's still very much in effect..

you are expected to work ASAP, to be able to care for yourself. besides the 50/50 agreement of all wealth accumulated during marriage: nothing more.
pay mother of your offspring for childcare is another thing, but also not forever. childs receive their own alimony, that's not the current issue.

[Huntingbear_grimbatol]

Because the USA is 50+ years behind the rest of the Western world when it comes to development, equal rights, social aid and healthcare?
The only good things about the USA is their military and seemingly unlimited funds for research and science in the private sector, which comes at the cost of the workers not earning anywhere close to what they should earn.

[Seidhe]

If this were a rational poster here, I'd be inclined to discuss it further. But it's you, so I won't bother. You'd probably just start sputtering about feminazis, or calling me a cuck or beta for not immediately taking a man's side in every story, regardless of the facts.

Funny how you counter people because they posted something before. Cant you just dsciuss this topic and dont tell us about how bad is ur opponent and thats why you wont discuss it. Because it sounds so stupid.

[Puupi]

In Finland you need to pay alimony for your kids - not the ex-wife/husband. Like if you divorce and the kids stay with the mom, the dad needs to pay like 200-300e/month per kid.

Other than that, there is no alimony here.

[shadowmouse]

So, lots of people posting from Sweden and Norway to pat themselves on the back. Did you guys run out of stories about immigrants and goats today?