If we believe living by the means of others has no monetary value, then arguing alimony is neccessary because of “sweat equity” makes some sense. However, if you keep in mind that the person staying at home is living for FREE the entire time, I would suggest establishing a “total value” on the marriage, split the net income of the breadwinner in half (for the duration of the marriage) subtract a fair market value for the home and food and expenditures (as is possible), subtract that from the marriage duration “net income” for the stay home spouse, what remains could be either split into payments or one lump sum…divorcee’s choice.
Requiring future payment for past “sweat equity” is like me saying I used to work at a place, therefore I contributed to it’s financial health, which therefore makes me in some small measure directly responsible for it’s current profitability, therefore the company should pay me profit sharing, even though I haven’t been there for years.
Now…how stupid does THAT sound?
