I think the problem is that - for spousal support anyhow - there AREN'T specific laws in place. I don't begrudge CS because even though I may disagree with the figures on the chart, there is a chart. There are specific rules about amounts to be paid and duration. I know when it starts, I know when it ends and I know how much I'll have to pay.
The problem with spousal is that there are no such guidelines. If I had gone to court to settle the matter, I would have no idea how much they'd zing me for. I'd have no clue how long it would last. I'd have no clue what criteria would need to be met in order for it to end. I'd have no idea what situations could cause my ex to be granted an increase. These are all widely variable and inconsistantly applied by judges.
Because of this, SS payers can get bitter about the whole thing. My ex refused to work while we were married despite our financial woes. Family Law states that I have to pay her support as compensation for the lost income and work experience she purposefully avoided for the entirety of our relationship. If she refuses to be self-supporting in the future, Family Law will ensure that I continue to support her laziness for an indeterminate amount of time. That's the law, but that's not fair.
Now there are many times where SS is justified and used appropriately for the mutual benefit of the children. For every story of fairness and reason, however, there are usually two more stories of greed and injustice. SS is viewed by some payors as a handout because that's precisely how it's used by some payees.
|