Post: #1

If this keeps catching on, it could be revolutionary...

Quote:Ex-wives who live off maintenance payments from their husbands are increasingly being ordered to get a job instead.

No longer can they live a life of leisure and rely on a monthly slice of their former spouse’s earnings, divorce lawyers said yesterday.

Courts are far less willing to grant them the right to be supported for life – sounding the death knell of ‘meal ticket’ divorces.

Even if a mother in her fifties has not worked for decades, to raise a family, she will be expected to retrain and find work.

The shift follows a landmark case last year in which the ex-wife of a millionaire racehorse surgeon was told she should find work.

The Appeal Court backed Tracey Wright’s ex-husband Ian Wright after he complained it was unfair that he be expected to support her indefinitely, even after his retirement, while she made ‘no effort whatsoever to seek work’.
Now other courts are following suit, imposing time limits on maintenance orders rather than making them life-long.

Holly Tootill, a family lawyer with JMW Solicitors, which handles about 300 divorces a year, said the result of the Wright case had had a ‘marked impact’ on all such cases.

She said: ‘What we’re effectively seeing is the death of the so-called “meal ticket” which maintenance had long been regarded as.

‘Indefinite awards – or “joint-lives” orders – used to be something of a norm, a means of ensuring that the financially weaker spouse was provided for, especially until a couple’s children had grown up, when the arrangement might be revised.’
But she said since the ruling, in February last year, time-limited maintenance arrangements were becoming more common.

‘That is a perceptible shift. As a result, the current expectation in divorces heard across the country appears to be that wives should only receive support for such a period of time which, it is felt, allows them to retrain, if necessary, and find work rather than remain dependent on their ex-husband into the future.

‘I’m aware of numerous examples of women who have been forced to come to terms with the prospect of providing for themselves, including cases of women who had not worked for three decades in order to raise a family, being obliged to find a job in their fifties.’

‘Wives can, of course, challenge that view but few seem willing to do so.’

The case of Ian and Tracey Wright last year went all the way to the Court of Appeal after Mrs Wright challenged the ‘harsh words’ of a family court judge who said there was no good reason why she had done no work since her divorce.

Picture of [shitlord?] Ian Wright:

Quote:The case of Ian Wright last year went all the way to the Court of Appeal after his ex-wife Tracey challenged the ‘harsh words’ of a family court judge who said there was no good reason why she did not have a job

It appears that this thread was not a flash in the pan.



G

Post: #2

Isn't this a dupe of that thread?

Post: #3

(07-22-2016 12:29 PM)spokepoker Wrote:  Isn't this a dupe of that thread?

Motherfucker - you're right. I thought that story was a different couple and didn't read it with enough attention.

I'm guilty of dupe thread here.

/closedown.

G

Post: #4

*IF* the woman is a true housewife and without gainful/meaningful employment at time of divorce and *IF* the husband is the sole breadwinner and makes several times (say, three times) the median adjusted income of the area in which they reside and if they have children together, then and have been married for at least three years, then...

Base of six months spousal support as a livable monthly amount, i.e. median adjusted income for a female in the area, one additional month for every year of marriage (i.e. 10 year marriage = 6 mo (3yr base) + 7 mo (7yr additional) = 13 months of support).

Wife can petition for additional time/income in extinuting circumstances, like current state of chronic illness or disability. Merits evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

The point is that spousal support or alimony should be provided in order to provide as much continuity as possible for the children and to allow the wife to obtain gainful employment in order to maintain that continuity. Its not a lottery system.

Post: #5

Actually they have a movement to end spousal paymets in many states now. Massachusets just made a new law that limits payments.

That being said, I always threaten my wife that she would be forced to get a job and I can collect on her since I am legally disabled.
MY income is either from disability pension which isn't marital property and from interest income on non marital property.

Post: #6

This ruling may also temper the attitude of gold-diggers with a mercenary view of marriage.

Post: #7

(07-22-2016 05:10 PM)lemko Wrote:  This ruling may also temper the attitude of gold-diggers with a mercenary view of marriage.

And the endemic of wives divorcing because they're not haaaaapppy and want to find themselves a la Eat, Pray, Love style.

Post: #8

Don't get your hopes up, Americans. This is the UK, and I haven't heard anything about the U.S. moving in this direction.

Don't get married. If you must, agree to the religious ceremony but do not get a marriage license and do not live in a state that recognizes common law marriage. If you do, make sure you get a pre-nup first from a lawyer in your state who knows what they're doing.

Post: #9