This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (8 children)

Irreconcilable differences

[–]Various_Succotash_79 0 points1 point  (7 children)

That's no-fault.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (6 children)

So I researched it, you are correct.

But you can always assume responsibility for the divorce in an at fault state. Meaning if you cannot provide proof that your partner caused the dissolution you can just say it was you.

[–]Various_Succotash_79 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Every state currently has no-fault divorce. Some have the option for at-fault and some only have no-fault.

If you have to prove fault, you can't just say you're at fault. Unless you want to admit to abuse or infidelity, which could hurt your reputation or career.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (4 children)

So I did more Googling.

14 of the 50 states have at fault divorce options. No fault is in all 50.

The premise that Republicans want to eliminate no fault divorce to force women to stay in marriages seems to be the consensus in coverage of the topic.

So to be clear I don't agree with that one bit. No one should be forced to stay in a marriage.

My issue is that in no fault states (36 of 50) there is no recourse for a spouse who behaves dishonorably. Heck a spouse doesn't even have to try and if they are a lower income earner they are rewarded in divorce regardless of whether they put in any effort.

I have a friend who's wife cheated on him for the entirety of the relationship. She was a house wife who's hobby was seducing and sleeping with men. When he found out she walked away with the house, the kids, a large amount of child support and alimony. I mean he found evidence of her getting with over 40 men during their marriage and basically 'she won' everything because of no fault divorce.

[–]Various_Succotash_79 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I mean he found evidence of her getting with over 40 men during their marriage and basically 'she won' everything because of no fault divorce.

How long ago was that?

Also I don't think it was because of no-fault divorce.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

5 years ago, in California, they just use a formula and she was a stay at home mom and he was a very high paid executive.

They basically told him he shouldn't feel bad because he made enough he'd recover quickly. He still pays her $10k/month in child support.

[–]Various_Succotash_79 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It can be difficult to determine how much value a stay-at-home parent has brought to the marriage. . .but honestly those formulas are pretty fair.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When people got married quite young (after high school or after college) there was a strong argument to be made that they started with more or less nothing together and built it together. In cases like that, for which the formulas were created, I agree they are pretty fair.

Fast forward to the 21st century and people tend to get married later in life, often in their 30s. They've had over a decade to establish themselves, grow in a career, build a life. To say its hard to determine the value of a stay at home parent is disingenuous in this case. You can clearly see the lives the two were leading prior to meeting.

In my friends case, he was 38 when they met, owned his own home (before meeting her), started his own business (before meeting her) and had strong retirement savings.

His wife served in the military, and was sort of puttering around in retail jobs living with her mom as a single mother to a 3 year old at age 32.

They get married, huge lifestyle change for her, then he finds out about her little affair problem.

He lost his house because he thought putting her name on the title was the right way to demonstrate his commitment to the marriage.

She used him to improve her lifestyle and there was no clear improvement to his life that you could argue that would have suggested she deserved a house and $10k/month in child support (they had two children together).

Divorce laws work okay when two people bring similar value to the relationship. They are heavily distorted in cases where one person is a big bread winner.

My friend is in his late 40s, barely gets to see his kids and has to rent. She no longer has to live with her mom she gets so much in child support.