Q: I know two guys who were divorced from women who held executive jobs. In both cases, the women got the house and an order for their ex-husbands to pay child support. The guys are living in rental units.
   
Why, in this day and age of equality and women climbing the corporate ladder, does the court still treat them as if they are living in the ’50s and need to be cared for?
   
A: It is obvious that you know only one side in each case. Did you ask what other assets the men may have been awarded to offset the equity in their homes? And, was there any equity in the houses?
   
Typically, the “net” value of marital assets is divided fairly equally. The law says nothing about having to sell each item of value and dividing the cash.
   
Most courts try to maintain the family residence for the benefit of children – if it makes sound economic sense to do so.
   
We must assume that each husband received some other assets equal in value to equity in the homes.
   
As for child support, Ohio law requires both parents to help support their children. Could it be that the women are earning enough that the court lessened the financial burden on the dads?
   
Few decisions coming from our courts reflect a 1950s attitude.
   
Q: For the past couple of years, our marriage has been going downhill. My husband does nothing other than read, watch television or play with his expensive model airplanes. He brings in only a few dollars a week doing deliveries for a friend.
  
 I would like to have him removed from our home so that he will see how valuable my providing for him really is. Can I kick him out?
   
A: No law prohibits one spouse from demanding that the other move out, but there’s no law requiring a spouse to leave in that case.
   
Courts can order that a spouse vacate the marital residence, but that is typically reserved for cases more threatening than playing with model airplanes.

Click here to read the rest of the article

What do you think? Leave a comment below!