McTag wrote:ehBeth wrote:The law is one thing, TicoM. His thinking he has a right to ask for anything is something else entirely.
I'm asking why he thinks he has the right to expect anything. You know - as a right-thinking human. Of course, I'm assuming that's what he is.
On the other hand.....plenty of women in this county (if newspaper reports are to be believed) walk away from marriages with far more than they ever contributed.
The argument seems to be, that the ex-husband, if he is rich, has to provide for his wife in the manner to which she has become accustomed (as the direct result of her marriage to a rich man)
It's a minefield, and lawyers make a good living there.
Well, if he's been doing the shopping, the cooking, the cleaning, the laundry, the babysitting and the chauffeuring about (not to mention errands and bill paying), then I would agree that morally anyway he's entitled to half of the house she bought.
That's why women have gotten half, McT, because they're unpaid for all that they do, regardless of whether they have a job outside the home.
Today things are quite different between couples... many men do as much or more of these jobs as women, and many women contribute as much or more of the family income as men. It's not an automatic assumption in BC that the women will get alimony ... but good arguments can be made for it, depending on their agreement, length of marriage, and other factors. Alimony also seems to be for a limited period of time nowadays, too, usually enough to educate the wife for working purposes.
