Comment by bradenb | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bradenb | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

On the one hand you say spouses should not be responsible for maintaining a standard of living but on the other you say people should know what they’re getting into with marriage. This cuts both ways. If you don’t want to be solely responsible for someone else’s standard of living then maybe make sure they plan to be self-sufficient BEFORE you get married. Or sign a prenup. Alimony is no secret.

This becomes even more unrealistic when you introduce the concept of a “homemaker.” Usually that involves kids but it doesn’t necessarily have to. If a couple decides to have one get an education and a paying job and the other has responsibilities around the home then that is how they’ve chosen to divide their labor. You can’t just maintain a balance for your marriage but come divorce time say “oh well, they can take care of themself.” The working spouse has a massive head start and the non-working spouse has (possibly unwillingly) had a massive downgrade in QOL forced on them.

Alimony seeks to create equality. Either equality in success or equality in hardship. It probably isn’t a perfect system and I’ve seen instances where it is massively abused but I don’t think the concept or execution is overly flawed. Perhaps too many adults are jumping into marriage without fully understanding what it means and how it might end.

People change. The ex in my case was self sufficient when I met her and then chose not to be. Was I supposed to withhold food and shelter from her to force her back into the workforce?

Alimony was not obvious to me as a 21 year old introverted virgin getting married.

If you want a specific arrangement then you should draft it in your marriage contract. It should not be the default assumption imposed by the state under the threat of incarceration.

Alimony is an antiquated concept based on outdated gender stereotypes and not in line with the modern workforce. Alimony seeks to create equality when none should exist. Alimony rewards deadbeats and forces exploitative relationships to continue, often indefinitely or without end. It is abusive to many, it is unjust, and it must be reformed.

What about the case where the couple both agreed that the wife should leave the workforce to stay at home with the kids? After kids are grown, they get a divorce and then what?

Put it in the contract. Don't apply your rules to every marriage by default.

It’s not in every marriage by default. Divorce is negotiated between lawyers, judges and juries(?).

No, it is, at least in CA, and you have to have both parties agree if you want something else.

Get married to a person who refuses to work and then get a divorce. Guess what? They will, by default, be entitled to the standard of living established during the marriage.

Do prenups work? My understanding is that many states effectively void them (including California).

I’m not a lawyer, but as I understand it, prenups protect premarital assets (like your childhood pet or a necklace your grandma gave you), but would not protect you from income that was generated during the marriage, like if you started and sold a company.

There are special exemptions on inheritances that happen during the marriage, but you have to be careful with commingling assets and it depends state to state. Like if you provide the down payment, but split the mortgage, the house is 50/50 owned

This is not correct AFAIK. Prenups protect what you decide they protect, assuming they are created in a legally binding manner.

In California and many states, inheritance and gifts are always sole property of the recipient and not considered community property. My ex was gifted property from a relative during the marriage(so they could illegally claim state benefits, but that's another story), and it was not even on the table during the divorce.

In CA, if you provided the down payment on the mortgage with non-community money and then used community money to pay th mortgage, you could ask for the non-community down payment back and get 50% of the community interest in the home after that.

My understanding is that many states effectively void them (including California).

This is false. Courts generally uphold prenups. You only hear about the times they don't because that's news. See, for example, the McCourt divorce (upholding a postnup).

Talk to a lawyer. AFAIK they work. They require both parties to have their own legal counsel. If you have one lawyer act as counsel for both parties you are risking the prenup being tossed.

They work if done properly. Get a good family law attorneys who specializes in prenups.

Not sure. I’m no expert. I guess this is part of your pre-marriage research that you should be doing. And of course a frank discussion with your soon-to-be spouse about expectations is a good idea.

What if you've been struggling to get your partner to make an income and trade (or at least share) homemaking and child rearing with you, and they drag their feet for years? Should you still owe them anything?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com