It seems pretty simple to me.
During marriage, the child lives a lifestyle according to the income of the parents. After divorce this should continue - CS according to income - that's what the tables are for. If you don't make much, little CS, if you make a lot, a lot of CS. The fact that the CP benefits directly from a lot of CS can't be helped.
Spousal support is very valid in the case where one person, in the financial arrangement of marriage, sacrifices their earning potential while the other does not - a decision made by both. After divorce, SS should be granted, decreasing over time to compensate that person for that financial sacrifice. It SHOULD NOT depend on what happens after the marriage (ie if they work or not, or try to improve their job status), but rather what happened during the marriage - compensatory SS. Also in some cases (a long term marriage with a stay at home parent), there is no recovery from loss of career - in that case permanent SS is valid as there is permanent damage.
Unlike CS, SS needs to be looked at on a case by case basis.
Also as for the point of reducing support to make the recipients prepared for the death of the payor - kind of a silly argument. Any normal parent should have life insurance in place to take care of their children in the event of their death.
During marriage, the child lives a lifestyle according to the income of the parents. After divorce this should continue - CS according to income - that's what the tables are for. If you don't make much, little CS, if you make a lot, a lot of CS. The fact that the CP benefits directly from a lot of CS can't be helped.
Spousal support is very valid in the case where one person, in the financial arrangement of marriage, sacrifices their earning potential while the other does not - a decision made by both. After divorce, SS should be granted, decreasing over time to compensate that person for that financial sacrifice. It SHOULD NOT depend on what happens after the marriage (ie if they work or not, or try to improve their job status), but rather what happened during the marriage - compensatory SS. Also in some cases (a long term marriage with a stay at home parent), there is no recovery from loss of career - in that case permanent SS is valid as there is permanent damage.
Unlike CS, SS needs to be looked at on a case by case basis.
Also as for the point of reducing support to make the recipients prepared for the death of the payor - kind of a silly argument. Any normal parent should have life insurance in place to take care of their children in the event of their death.
Comment