In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

>> 185 Conclusion Many of the primary caregivers at work in today’s homes are going about their business unaware that if their marriages end they are likely to become the law’s suckers, set free to alone bear the long-term costs of the role they thought was part of marital teamwork. Archaic alimony laws are to blame. Alimony is often the only available tool for ensuring that divorce does not impose all the long-term costs of marital roles on caregivers while freeing the other spouse to enjoy all the long-term benefits. Yet in its current incarnation, alimony is not up to the task before it. Beset by myths, disdain, and neglect, the law of alimony inspires orders that are unpredictable, inconsistent, short-lived, and uncommon. Alimony’s problems are exacerbated by the absence of any contemporary rationale to justify its existence in an age of no-fault divorce and supposed gender equality. Concerned commentators have offered an array of alimony theories and reform proposals, but none has carried the day. Meanwhile, grassroots alimony reform groups in numerous states are working hard to publicize alimony horror stories and promote legislative reform to limit alimony, most recently succeeding in Massachusetts. 186 << conclusion Alimony may be a broken tool, but it is an essential tool for avoiding injustice when marriage ends. Drawing on a loose analogy to partnership , I have proposed that alimony be reconceptualized as a marriage buyout. Buyouts may be based on either an enhanced-earnings or a pooled-human-capital model and, in either case, can be quantified under presumptive formulae designed to make these new awards more certain and predictable than their current alimony counterparts. In addition to their practical importance, buyouts support new default rules that reinforce egalitarian, gender-neutral, communal visions of marriage, encourage expectations consistent with that vision, and in all but very low-income cases, protect primary caregivers who rely on marriage promises. Looking beyond alimony, I also propose a new coparenting partnership model, which provides the conceptual basis for income sharing between divorced parents of minor children and an answer to the vexing problem of how to deal with the opportunity costs associated with post-divorce caregiving. Alimony’s future is uncertain, and much is at stake—for today’s primary caregivers, for those who care about them and benefit from their labor, and for everyone concerned about the integrity of family law. My hope is that this book will inform reform discourse and ensure that Casey’s story is a part of it. ...

Share