Thought for the day:
Could alimony and child support laws be challenged as unconstitutional under "disparate impact" theory since they overwhelmingly harm men despite their gender-neutral wording?
Would lefties, especially women's groups, go nuts if that were ever proposed?
Discuss.
8 comments:
Yes, of course. However, in the early 70s, my DH and I had divorced colleague who had custody of the four kids and whose ex-wife paid child support. Admittedly, there was significant income disparity; he was active-duty military and she was a lawyer in a big-name DC law firm.
Of course there are women paying child support. I know one. One.
That complete absence of women in that category isn't the thesis I've posited, though.
Both are based on income differentials. I don't see a gender bias there ...What I would say, however, is that we should eliminate no fault divorce. A marriage contract is a contract; it has provisions in it. If there is a breach of contract -- then, alimony is fine. But if one party just decides they aren't happy? Well, grant the divorce, but no alimony, and child support base on percentage of time with one parent.
Perhaps my thesis isn't clear: "disparate impact" is a stupid legal theory.
It's not clear, I guess.
Read the post again. Read what I wrote, not what you think I wrote, and see if your original comment bears much resemblance at all to my point.
I did. I think my first two sentences addressed your question exactly. If there is disparate impact in the case of child support, it is because men either make more money, or have their kids less time, or both; you might make a case for alimony, I guess... but the alimony case would feed right in to the rest of my response. I guess what I was trying to say is there isn't evidence of disparate impact, whether or not it's a stupid argument. And, I don't think it's a stupid argument if you can show that all else being equal, a gender or racial difference overwhelmingly favors one side ...I just doubt you can ever show the all else being equal part.
Perhaps you're not familiar with "disparate impact theory" in law.
Post a Comment