MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Why is divorce a 50/50 split?

Why is divorce a 50/50 split?


Sometimes a wealthy man whose hard work and intelligence creates a vast fortune.

Let's say he falls for a gold digger who files for divorce after a year. She wants 50%.

How is she entitled to his millions?


reply

She is not. Marital property are assets acquired during the course of the marriage, not before.

Now if he were to die, that would be different. She would be his surviving spouse even if the marriage lasted one day.

This is why there are things like pre-nuptial agreements.

reply

In Australia, even if unmarried (called defacto), you can claim your partner's money after 12 months of being a couple.

reply

So date them for 11 months and get a new one👍

reply

http://www.familycourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/fcoaweb/family-law-matters/separation-and-divorce/defacto-relationships/

Interesting. I also clicked on the link for the Family Law Act of 1975. This is all very different than the U.S., where "palimony" suits typically fail, most famously Michelle Triola v. Lee Marvin - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Triola_Marvin.

In the U.S only a handful of States recognize common-law marriage, the closest thing I can think of to de facto relationship.

reply

Yeah that's just another term for de facto.

reply

In most states after one year, a stay-at-home spouse is generally entitled to 50% of whatever the working spouse earned during that year, not 50% of his entire fortune or inheritance (give or take whatever the lawyers can blackmail the other into giving up). I believe a 50/50 split of all assets, including house and savings, is generally reserved for longer-term marriages.

This is done under the assumption that the spouse without a career is contributing to the career of the working spouse, which is something I've seen in real life. I knew an official "genius" who'd made big bucks in the computer industry, and FYI his social skills were so poor I still wonder if he's on the autism spectrum. He would not have had the career he's had without his very socially acute wife smoothing things over and getting along with people on his behalf, so if they ever get a divorce after being married forty-plus years, I'd agree with her getting half because she's earned it.

reply

If that could be proven, of course.

reply

If by "that", you mean "the non-earning partner's contribution to the earning partner's career success", it would not need to be proven in a divorce trial. The law in my state says that if a couple gets divorced after many decades of marriage, the community property gets split 50/50, on the assumption that both spouses made valuable contributions to the marriage and the couple's finances. The only time anything would need to be proven is if there was a prenup in place, or if the couple had cohabitated and were not married, and even then there are laws about "common-law marriage" (long-term live-in relationships) than I don't know much about.

But of course, like I said, the final financials tend to actually be based on which lawyer can out-accuse or out-blackmail the other.

reply

a single divorced women spend there money on brand name bullshit and government gets to collect tax on all the dumb things they buy. a single divorced man will spend his extra money on prostitutes and cocaine more often than buy dumb brand name stuff advertised on media. the government cant collect any money on purchases of "hood riches". this is the main reason the laws are stacked so much against men. the government doesnt want the person who worked there ass off for their fortune to have it because hard working self made men spend their money very sparingly. gold diggers on the other hand didnt work for their money at all. and everybody knows that it is much easier to blow someone elses fortune than one you worked for yourself. marriage is a trap, especially if you are a wealthy person. the age old saying that hookers are cheaper in the long run has never been more true than in this current economy....

reply

That's an angle I'd never thought of.

reply

Interesting.

reply

because it's 2021

reply

Ahhhh, the "Current Year" argument that presents no actual argument. Well done.

reply

I VILL BREAK YOU!🤬

reply

Okie doke, Drago. Good luck with that.

reply

most women have careers today.

reply

POST AND PREMISE ARE THE NORMAL SEXIST GARBAGE I HAVE COME TO EXPECT FROM YOU.

reply

Till money do us part, lol. :)

reply