# Should Adultery Matter in Divorce?



## 20yr (Apr 19, 2019)

It seems like adultery does not really have any effect on property division or support in divorce these days unless the WS was spending/giving money to AP. Am I old-fashioned thinking that their should be some type of penalty for bad behavior in a marriage? 

A friend of mine was cheated on by his wife and now she is openly dating the AP in their small town (before the divorce is even final). Because he was the higher earner, he is paying significant spousal support. It just doesn't seem fair.

Thoughts? Are there states or countries where it does matter?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Of course it should matter and it is a testimony to how far we have fallen as a society that the woman in your story is not shamed under a rock for her brazen behavior.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

IMHO no. As a tax payer, I don't want the courts spending time figuring out who cheated on who when. I don't want PIs, spy cams etc. Having cheating matter would seem to then logically have other sexual activity matter. Is always turning down sex cause for divorce? How often is often enough.

Form a *legal*, not moral point of view, I want the courts to provide the correct money transfer to deal with the economic issues, nothing else.


----------



## Marc878 (Aug 26, 2015)

I think it should negate any alimony.


----------



## jlg07 (Feb 24, 2017)

It should matter if there were justice, but the reality is that the legal system doesn't really provide that. Laws have been watered down and NOTHING is respected anymore.

I agree that SOMETHING should be penalized (property, alimony, SOMETHING) -- why should a partner have to PAY to allow/help his/her cheater to continue cheating.


----------



## 20yr (Apr 19, 2019)

uhtred said:


> IMHO no. As a tax payer, I don't want the courts spending time figuring out who cheated on who when. I don't want PIs, spy cams etc. Having cheating matter would seem to then logically have other sexual activity matter. Is always turning down sex cause for divorce? How often is often enough.
> 
> Form a *legal*, not moral point of view, I want the courts to provide the correct money transfer to deal with the economic issues, nothing else.


In most divorce cases, settlement is encouraged. I would think the BS would often have collected the info through a PI or other means before getting to court. 

But, you make a good point - where is the line drawn? For me, a physical affair is way over that line, abuse is over that line. In those cases, I think the victim should not have to pay the other party.


----------



## Openminded (Feb 21, 2013)

Adultery may still have some impact in a few states (not sure) but certainly not as it should (IMO). What's completely unfair is when the low/no earner is the cheater and ends up with alimony. Back in the day, alimony was intended to help women who had never worked or were minimally employed and were dumped by their cheating husbands. I doubt that's the majority of cases now.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

I don't think it should because we tax payers cannot afford to act like the arbitrator of morality. Further, it's very hard to prove adultery and/or fight false accusations of it. Basically by the time the divorce is final, the lawyers now have all the couple's assets. Just splitting them and moving on with their lives would be a better move financially.

In addition, if adultery can be the basis of divorce, then so should all other bad/immoral behavior. Cheating is bad. But there are a lot of other things that a spouse can do that are equally as bad. Why chose only one of these things?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Agree 100%. (sorry the "like" button didn't seem to be enough



EleGirl said:


> I don't think it should because we tax payers cannot afford to act like the arbitrator of morality. Further, it's very hard to prove adultery and/or fight false accusations of it. Basically by the time the divorce is final, the lawyers now have all the couple's assets. Just splitting them and moving on with their lives would be a better move financially.
> 
> In addition, if adultery can be the basis of divorce, then so should all other bad/immoral behavior. Cheating is bad. But there are a lot of other things that a spouse can do that are equally as bad. Why chose only one of these things?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

EleGirl said:


> I don't think it should because we tax payers cannot afford to act like the arbitrator of morality. Further, it's very hard to prove adultery and/or fight false accusations of it. Basically by the time the divorce is final, the lawyers now have all the couple's assets. Just splitting them and moving on with their lives would be a better move financially.
> 
> In addition, if adultery can be the basis of divorce, then so should all other bad/immoral behavior. Cheating is bad. But there are a lot of other things that a spouse can do that are equally as bad. Why chose only one of these things?


I believe adultery or abuse is worth looking at and considered in divorce.

Not everything is so even when this goes down.

A man paying his ex alimony, while paying for a house he no longer lives in with child support on top, while his ex has her lover over who might actually interact with his children more than him?

This is worth looking into.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

The real issue is not the adultery. It's the fact that men will stay much longer than they should hoping for something to change. Men get lazy and used to what is familiar, even when he knows in his heart she is being unfaithful. 

I do know there are many women the same. I don't mean to leave you out. 

So, how do we change that within ourselves? How do we recognize and get out sooner? How do we know when our dedication to our vows is harming or going to harm us? 

Figure those out and how to not feel like it was your fault that your spouse was unfaithful and you will be okay. When we hurt, some of us will accept blame because the wayward needs an excuse because they aren't mature enough to just say, "I could have gotten a divorce, but I wanted to find security and safety in another before I did". 

Since the marriage is broken when one is unfaithful, maybe it is time for the betrayed to go and look for the same before the divorce? If you are able to handle the emotions. I couldn't have. 

IMO YMMV


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

Well, in my humble opinion, the law is not what makes something "right" or "wrong" (it's wrong before there's a law written), nor should the law attempt to legislate morality. I think we would all agree that adultery is "wrong" and that no one "should" do it, and yet, because I believe in freedom, I also believe that people can choose things with which I disagree. In other words, people can choose to be idiots if that's what they choose! 

Where we fall apart, I think, is in two ways. Let people be free to make their own choices, but then allow them to experience the cost and the benefit of the choice they made (#1), and treat marriage like you would any other business contract (#2). 

For #1 if a person chooses to be an idiot--hey I might disagree but they can do it! But let then experience the BENEFIT of being an idiot (the fun at the moment or the instant gratification) and the COST of being an idiot (jail time, child support...whatever cost we assess). That's where the law comes in: we write down, "If someone does ____, the cost will be ___" 

For #2 if a marriage was like any other business contract, it would be that Party A agrees to partner with Party B. They agree to build a household and family together. Party A will bring A, B, and C to the partnership, and Party B will bring X, Y, and Z...and they agree together to build 1, 2, and 3 and own it jointly. Both parties agree that this partnership will be exclusive. If either party breaches the contract, they lose their rights to the partnership and lose their interest in their partner's property and the jointly owned property...and their partner can sue for damages. 

The end. 

Thus, it's not "adultery" that's allowed or not allowed legally--it's breaking the contract. And the cost of breaking the contract is the same as any other business deal: you breach the contract (and the partner can prove it), you lose. Period.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

ConanHub said:


> I believe adultery or abuse is worth looking at and considered in divorce.
> 
> Not everything is so even when this goes down.
> 
> ...


Keep in mind that alimony is paid in only 15% of all divorces and the average alimony payment is about $300 a month paid for about 3 years. 70% of all married women work. 50% of all married women earn as much or more than their husbands.

It's not the large issue that some paint it to be.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

The solution is no or very short term alimony. Alimony is a 20th century idea whose time has passed. It's the responsibility of everyone man and women to be able to provide for themselves and there is no reason today why they can't. Now if you were taking care of the kids and hadn't worked for years then I can see a short time alimony to give you time to get some training like say 5 years but I don't think one person providing for another grown adult for the rest of their lives makes sense anymore. 

Besides having someone pay for you who is not your immediate relative such as a parent or spouse is not a very healthy lifestyle for the person taking the money. It's disempowering. 

I am all for splitting all wealth earned during the time of the marriage and child support when necessary unless custody is split 50/50 which should be the default.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

20yr said:


> It seems like adultery does not really have any effect on property division or support in divorce these days unless the WS was spending/giving money to AP. Am I old-fashioned thinking that their should be some type of penalty for bad behavior in a marriage?
> 
> A friend of mine was cheated on by his wife and now she is openly dating the AP in their small town (before the divorce is even final). Because he was the higher earner, he is paying significant spousal support. It just doesn't seem fair.
> 
> Thoughts? Are there states or countries where it does matter?


In the UK what matters is that most importantly the children are cared for and also that there is a reasonable division of assets. Who did or didn't cause it is irrelevant. While I hate adultery, the cheater still has to live and still has to be able to be a parent. Oh and BTW I am talking as someone whose former husband did worse things that even adultery. I don't believe in vengeance, but dealing with things in a fair and reasonable way for all concerned, especially for any children there are.

Also adultery may not be the only issue. What if one spouse had been very abusive? Does that count as well? Or a long term porn user? Or neglectful?


----------



## oldtruck (Feb 15, 2018)

Marc878 said:


> I think it should negate any alimony.


Because it shows that the WW willingly replaced the BH with the OM.

So if the WW, XWW, needs money than see needs to get it from her
OM. After all she is allowing the OM to be mining in her "tunnels".
I assume all three "tunnels" that she owns.


----------



## AKA Broken Arrow (Feb 19, 2016)

I’m a WH and my spouse is the higher earner. I had an affair in 2015 and we are reconciling. My BW went scorched earth on me and filed before she even confronted me. I fought for us, did the work and now I’m fortunate to still be here with her and our kids. I’m grateful every day for this chance.

Anyway, my BW has an iron clad post-nup drawn up as part of our reconciliation. I didn’t sign it however, as our money has been combined since we first moved in together. Reconciliation is hard, hard work for both of us and there are some days where I’m not 100% sure that we’re gonna make it. I promised her that if she gave us a chance and we couldn’t work through it in the 2-5 years that the experts say it takes, that I would file and leave if that’s what she needed from me.

She also knows that if we ever did eventually split, that I would do the right thing and follow the terms of her document, even though I didn’t sign it. It would be the right thing to do given our circumstances. I have no interest in hurting her financially and she has my word on that. 

So yes, I do think that infidelity should factor into divorce settlements. The reality is though, people just can’t work these matters out on their own so the rules are what they are. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti (Apr 23, 2017)

AKA Broken Arrow said:


> I’m a WH and my spouse is the higher earner. I had an affair in 2015 and we are reconciling. My BW went scorched earth on me and filed before she even confronted me. I fought for us, did the work and now I’m fortunate to still be here with her and our kids. I’m grateful every day for this chance.
> 
> Anyway, my BW has an iron clad post-nup drawn up as part of our reconciliation. I didn’t sign it however, as our money has been combined since we first moved in together. Reconciliation is hard, hard work for both of us and there are some days where I’m not 100% sure that we’re gonna make it. I promised her that if she gave us a chance and we couldn’t work through it in the 2-5 years that the experts say it takes, that I would file and leave if that’s what she needed from me.
> 
> ...


You cheated.
You then refused to sign a post nup.

But she knows you would abide by it even though you refused to sign it. And she knows this how?


----------



## AKA Broken Arrow (Feb 19, 2016)

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> You cheated.
> You then refused to sign a post nup.
> 
> But she knows you would abide by it even though you refused to sign it. And she knows this how?


Yes, I cheated. I own that. 

I wouldn't say that I "refused" but we both agreed that I wouldn't be signing. I would sign it today if she made it a condition of continuing our reconciliation. 

I guess she doesn't know 100% that I would abide by the terms. But, she knows that I am genuine by how remorseful I am. 

20yr, I hope my posting in your thread doesn't trigger you in any way. For the record, I think you're awesome and I'm sorry you're going through this.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson (Mar 4, 2018)

I'd still say yes, adultery should count.

On divorce in general, a couple hood friends of ours were getting a divorce some years ago and the alimony went for basically the former Ws party fund.

I remember joking with DW if we ever get divorced I'd quit my job and give everything away before I'd ever pay her a red cent, she's an adult, I'm an adult, and everyone should be given their opportunity to live and support themselves according to decisions made.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I think a lot of people are not questioning the morality, but rather the practicality. Infidelity is extremely difficult to prove one way or the other. Situations can be very complex / messy about what exactly constitutes adultery. 

I guess as the full surveillance state develops, those problems will go away




Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> I'd still say yes, adultery should count.
> 
> On divorce in general, a couple hood friends of ours were getting a divorce some years ago and the alimony went for basically the former Ws party fund.
> 
> I remember joking with DW if we ever get divorced I'd quit my job and give everything away before I'd ever pay her a red cent, she's an adult, I'm an adult, and everyone should be given their opportunity to live and support themselves according to decisions made.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson (Mar 4, 2018)

That's the part I get, adultery is very hard to prove in many many cases and harder still, when it starts with "you made me do it".

Hard to make out tangibles in those situations.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"Because it shows that the WW willingly replaced the BH with the OM.

So if the WW, XWW, needs money than see needs to get it from her
OM. After all she is allowing the OM to be mining in her "tunnels".
I assume all three "tunnels" that she owns."

LOL....and if HE, THE HUSBAND, is the one cheating?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Will we also take the following into account when it comes to alimony or support:

Abuse, sexlessness, alcohol/drug addiction....

Because all of those things are as damaging as an affair. Yes… they are. So why is infidelity the pet crime?


----------



## 20yr (Apr 19, 2019)

AKA Broken Arrow said:


> Yes, I cheated. I own that.
> 
> I wouldn't say that I "refused" but we both agreed that I wouldn't be signing. I would sign it today if she made it a condition of continuing our reconciliation.
> 
> ...


I think it is helpful to get your perspective. At least you acknowledge what you did and seem to be sincere about making R work.


----------



## Mr Sad (Feb 18, 2020)

20yr said:


> It seems like adultery does not really have any effect on property division or support in divorce these days unless the WS was spending/giving money to AP. Am I old-fashioned thinking that their should be some type of penalty for bad behavior in a marriage?
> 
> A friend of mine was cheated on by his wife and now she is openly dating the AP in their small town (before the divorce is even final). Because he was the higher earner, he is paying significant spousal support. It just doesn't seem fair.
> 
> Thoughts? Are there states or countries where it does matter?


I agree totally the fact that you can commit adultery and get away with it makes a complete mockery out of marriage.
I'm from the UK and if i want to start divorce proceedings against my wife who cheated on me and is now living with her new man it will cost me twice as much as her if i'm the one who puts in for the divorce whereas you would think that she should be responsible for all the court costs as she's the one who cheated i find the whole thing absurd.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

These issues wouldn't BE issues if people stayed single, and just lived together. There are few real advantages to marriage, yet many real drawbacks due to the legalities involved.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

*Yes! 

More especially in regard to matters of child custody, child support, and division of community assets!

But most states have written their laws to make infidelity a moot issue!*


----------



## WhiskeyVictor (Sep 13, 2016)

I think it should. People shouldn’t get to do whatever and then claim that they deserve the benefits of marriage when they were behaving in a different manner. There should be consequences for your actions


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

The core problem here is that adultery is nearly impossible to prove, and punitive legal punishments for it don't do any good.

Listen, you probably know my stance on cheating. But having it alter a fair split in a divorce isn't the way to go at all, and that's coming from a dude that got cheated on and who's wife took nearly everything.

How do you prove an affair? Even if you get photos or something, how do you prove that it wasn't an open marriage or something?

Is it cheating if you're separated? Is it cheating if one person says they are leaving and then cheats that night, and the other person still wants to work on it?

What is cheating? P in V? Kissing? Sexting? When would it cross a legal threshold? What happens if the husband has P in V with someone else, but the wife gives her boyfriend a BJ? Is that the same? How would that adjust the asset distribution? What if the wife cheated once, but the husband then cheated 100 times? What does that do?

And even if you could deal with the things above, what's the point? It's not going to stop anyone from cheating. Hell, when people got stoned for cheating, people still did it. People will just hide it even more. 

Just divorce, split your assets, and move on.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

We may not look at it this way, but marriage is only a legal arrangement, nothing more. We pour our emotions into weddings and I do's, but the state doesn't. It only needs your signature and a witness.

The state therefore does not look at your divorce as an emotional event either, simply a legal one.

Who did what to who during the marriage is irrelevant *legally* to a divorce. Deciding how the couple will split their assets and custody is the only thing a divorce does. The law is about the law only and not about emotions.

Your emotions about the pain from a divorce need to be handled with care by other types of professionals. Because that's not what judges are for.


----------



## TheDudeLebowski (Oct 10, 2017)

20yr said:


> In most divorce cases, settlement is encouraged. I would think the BS would often have collected the info through a PI or other means before getting to court.
> 
> But, you make a good point - where is the line drawn? For me, a physical affair is way over that line, abuse is over that line. In those cases, I think the victim should not have to pay the other party.


What abuse do you find over the line? Would subtle emotional abuse employed against your spouse due to your own FOO issues and development of negative coping mechanisms created as a small child to shield yourself from the trauma your parents are creating in your life, do those instances of abuse count to you? What are you talking about when it comes to abuse? Simply physical abuse like somebody is getting smacked around? Or all forms of abuse and is some abuse more acceptable in your eyes than other forms of abuse? How about emotionally manipulative people who have checked out on the marriage? What if say someone cheated on that partner? Do they pay a penalty too? Someone who is abused and damaged and turns and has an affair, being extremely prone to one as they are constantly belittled and beaten down by their partner, they eventually meet another who is kind and shows them love and affection. So one person cheated technically. The other was an abuser and checked out of the marriage long ago. Who pays who in this situation? Does it just cancel out everything?

What about the cheater who earns literally all the money? The other partner hasn't worked at all in their life. Sure they do crap around the house, but so does everyone else mostly in life. Even most kids have some chores. So person earns every single dime ever spent ever and they cheat. Are the subject to some sort of penalty just the same? 

Same couple as above. The one who has never earned a cent in their life. What penalty do they pay? Obviously the other partner is on the hook for a lot in this situation. They should be allowed to settle at a lower amount? Well, i mean what if they have kids. Do the kids now suffer because the person who doesn't earn a dime gets a penalty in their divorce settlement? What if the zero earner gets awarded custody? 

Are we prepared to build in every single variable to where it feels fair to every party involved in divorce? Because otherwise it will always seem unfair. 

What I'm faced with today is in no way fair. It is right for my kids however. Would it be fair of me to force a sale on the house, force a buy out of my half, uproot my kids and stbxw out of their home to fend for themselves however they can. I take my half and send in 30% of my check every month. Never see anyone again. Legally that would be fair and right. Im entitled to my half. Is that fair to my kids? How about my wife? How about me? Would it be fair of me to take my half and simply **** off from their lives forever? Seems it is. 

My idea is the government needs to **** off out of our lives. Then again, I was the moron that invited them into my relationship to begin with. Gay people should think long and hard about what they want. Cause if gay marriage is outlawed, thats actually the government doing them a favor haha!


----------



## Mr Sad (Feb 18, 2020)

I personally think that the fact there are no consequences for adultery makes a complete mockery out of being married. Here in the UK if i want to divorce my wife who committed adultery it would cost me twice as much as it would her just because i initiate the divorce when surely to god the person who committed adultery should have to pay all the court costs.....it just doesn't make sense.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

Mr Sad said:


> I personally think that the fact there are no consequences for adultery makes a complete mockery out of being married. Here in the UK if i want to divorce my wife who committed adultery it would cost me twice as much as it would her just because i initiate the divorce when surely to god the person who committed adultery should have to pay all the court costs.....it just doesn't make sense.


In most divorces in the UK each pays their own legal fees.


----------



## MaiChi (Jun 20, 2018)

20yr said:


> It seems like adultery does not really have any effect on property division or support in divorce these days unless the WS was spending/giving money to AP. Am I old-fashioned thinking that their should be some type of penalty for bad behavior in a marriage?
> 
> A friend of mine was cheated on by his wife and now she is openly dating the AP in their small town (before the divorce is even final). Because he was the higher earner, he is paying significant spousal support. It just doesn't seem fair.
> 
> Thoughts? Are there states or countries where it does matter?


My personal opinion, which I really wish many governments would accept and put on their statutes, is that:
As soon as adultery is alleged, all parties involves should be tested for known STIs and if it is found that adultery took place and an STI was transmitted to the spouse, or could have been transmitted to the spouse, the adulterer should automatically qualify for a death sentence but only after a court hearing.

It should be law that before anyone starts a new relationship, they must officially end the last one whether through registering a separation or getting a divorce. If they fail to do that then a minimum sentence of say 15 years in prison should be expected. 

It should also be unlawful to have sex with a married person whether they initiate it or not and a minimum sentence of say 2 years in prison should be imposed on offenders. 
It should also be an offence to have sex with someone you are not married to without using contraception and having proof of such. to avoid using contraception the two should show evidence that they discussed and agreed that they want a baby and both accept responsibility for the baby of it comes. 

All citizens who are above the age of 14 must study and pass a parenting course before they are allowed to marry or to agree to have a baby. Failure to comply should result in a minimum of 5 years prison term. 

Pregnancy should be good evidence of non-compliance with the law and after a DNA test on the baby, the state should be able to pick up those due to go to prison. 

This is my view and if I ever become a national leader, that is what I will campaign for the law to say. 

There has never been a good reason for adultery
Nobody can do adultery by mistake


----------



## ReformedHubby (Jan 9, 2013)

MaiChi said:


> My personal opinion, which I really wish many governments would accept and put on their statutes, is that:
> As soon as adultery is alleged, all parties involves should be tested for known STIs and if it is found that adultery took place and an STI was transmitted to the spouse, or could have been transmitted to the spouse, the adulterer should automatically qualify for a death sentence but only after a court hearing.
> 
> It should be law that before anyone starts a new relationship, they must officially end the last one whether through registering a separation or getting a divorce. If they fail to do that then a minimum sentence of say 15 years in prison should be expected.
> ...


You're kidding right? Your suggestions sound like Taliban rule. What do you propose for murder? Should we resume hanging people in the public square? Basically you are saying you want to put roughly a third of the people in western countries in jail. 

Assuming you are serious as a serial cheater I should be either dead or in jail. Which would leave my kids without a father, and my ex-wife with no financial support. I hope you have a solution for that in your plan. I do think having both parents in a kids life is better than one, even if that person cheated on you. People find a way to move past it and co-parent, just like they do when marriages end for other reasons. Really glad my ex-wife realizes that I do have a lot to offer my children despite the fact that I was a lousy husband when it came to fidelity. I will further add I am glad my mother didn't put my dad in jail when he cheated on her, not that it was an option. IMO what you are proposing is far more damaging to society and families than the cheating itself.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

MaiChi said:


> My personal opinion, which I really wish many governments would accept and put on their statutes, is that:
> As soon as adultery is alleged, all parties involves should be tested for known STIs and if it is found that adultery took place and an STI was transmitted to the spouse, or could have been transmitted to the spouse, the adulterer should automatically qualify for a death sentence but only after a court hearing.
> 
> It should be law that before anyone starts a new relationship, they must officially end the last one whether through registering a separation or getting a divorce. If they fail to do that then a minimum sentence of say 15 years in prison should be expected.
> ...


I think that this would dissuade people from getting married. Keep the government out of their relationship yet still have kids and such out of wedlock.


----------



## MaiChi (Jun 20, 2018)

ReformedHubby said:


> You're kidding right? Your suggestions sound like Taliban rule. What do you propose for murder? Should we resume hanging people in the public square? Basically you are saying you want to put roughly a third of the people in western countries in jail.
> 
> Assuming you are serious as a serial cheater I should be either dead or in jail. Which would leave my kids without a father, and my ex-wife with no financial support. I hope you have a solution for that in your plan. I do think having both parents in a kids life is better than one, even if that person cheated on you. People find a way to move past it and co-parent, just like they do when marriages end for other reasons. Really glad my ex-wife realizes that I do have a lot to offer my children despite the fact that I was a lousy husband when it came to fidelity. I will further add I am glad my mother didn't put my dad in jail when he cheated on her, not that it was an option. IMO what you are proposing is far more damaging to society and families than the cheating itself.


it is what I believe should happen to those who cheat. i really do not see any difference between cheating and murder. There are a lot of people worldwide who have died because they were infected with an incurable disease from their cheating spouse. How is that not murder? The law should be that one officially finishes a relationship by registering a separation or by filing for a divorce before starting a new one. 

There is no reason to cheat and nobody cheat by mistake or accident. 

As for children, I, if I were organising a government, would put a law in place that says anyone can have children if they want them but they must pass a parenting course first. If a woman goes to register a pregnancy at the doctors, the doctor must ask for evidence of a pass certificate for a parenting course, if not she must enrol on one, the same as the man who made her pregnant. 

I have no issues with whether or not one is married, that is their choice, but if they choose to have sex with no contraception, they are accepting parental responsibility for the baby that might result. 

When I worked in South Africa I had some women on my surgery list who I knew to be claiming child support from several men for the same child. To me that is an excellent idea to get all men who did not use condoms to pay for the one child that they could have fathered along with the one man who actually fathered the baby. 

If the Taliban already use these methods then they are more advanced than I thought they were. But I dare say the Taliban only know to give women the responsibility and not men. Babies are made by both.

These are my personal opinions. I have nowhere professional to practise them yet.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

MaiChi said:


> it is what I believe should happen to those who cheat. i really do not see any difference between cheating and murder. There are a lot of people worldwide who have died because they were infected with an incurable disease from their cheating spouse. How is that not murder? The law should be that one officially finishes a relationship by registering a separation or by filing for a divorce before starting a new one.
> 
> There is no reason to cheat and nobody cheat by mistake or accident.
> 
> ...


This is a serious flaw in the government's system for assigning child support responsibility. They could have done a DNA test and figured out which of the men fathered the child. They also could have prevented her form collecting child support from more than one man. 



MaiChi said:


> If the Taliban already use these methods then they are more advanced than I thought they were. But I dare say the Taliban only know to give women the responsibility and not men. Babies are made by both.
> 
> These are my personal opinions. I have nowhere professional to practise them yet.


You are right, the Taliban generally hold the woman responsible and punish her. The men generally go free. Now if the husband or family of the woman are rich and powerful and the man she had sex with is some poor guy, the family will very often put pressure on the authorities to get him punish (stoned) as well.

IMO, your scheme here ignores many things.

* Condoms break and leak all the time. Over a period of time, they will eventually lead to a pregnancy due to failure. They are not completely effective in preventing the spread of STDs for the same reason.

* just because one person is caught cheating, it does not mean that both were not cheating. Let's say that a married couple ends up with an STD. There is no way to prove which spouse brought it into the relationship. It's very easy to hide infidelity. At least 50% of infidelity is never discovered.

* In societies that do punish infidelity, such and the Taliban, Saudi, Iran, etc. it's assume that when a woman is raped it was actually conventual sex. It takes 4 men testifying that they witnessed the rape. Women cannot be used as witnesses in rape cases. So if 4 men did not witness the rape, it was fornication or adultery and the woman is punished for it. She is either hung, stunned, or imprisoned for years. 

* It is almost impossible to prove adultery. Few people can afford the PIs and other methods needed to prove infidelity. 

* In the past, men with money and power were able to get rid of their wives by simply accusing them of adultery and fabricating a bit of evidence. The women, who did not control the finances, had no way to defend themselves in court. They were divorced, lost their children and thrown out in the street with nothing.

Those are just a few of the problems that exist in societies that do implement most of what you suggest. Now add your idea of legally requiting a contract about condoms and we tax payers will be paying billions to handle the cost of courts and prisons for just these cases. 

The sorts of ideas you have, except the requirement for condoms, been used in societies for thousands of years. Just about every 1st world country has moved away from them because they lead to horrible outcomes.

I'm very glad that you are not in a position to return some poor country to medieval times.


----------



## ReformedHubby (Jan 9, 2013)

MaiChi said:


> If the Taliban already use these methods then they are more advanced than I thought they were. But I dare say the Taliban only know to give women the responsibility and not men. Babies are made by both.


I still am having a hard time believing you are serious. I would suggest you watch the show Handsmaid's Tale. The fictitious country of Gilead sounds right up your alley. I've seen some pretty harsh posts related to cheaters on here. I have to say you win the prize if there is such a thing. I don't think any of the folks on the CWI board would think that what you're suggesting is a good thing. I will give you credit for sticking to your guns though.


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

20yr said:


> It seems like adultery does not really have any effect on property division or support in divorce these days unless the WS was spending/giving money to AP. Am I old-fashioned thinking that their should be some type of penalty for bad behavior in a marriage?
> 
> A friend of mine was cheated on by his wife and now she is openly dating the AP in their small town (before the divorce is even final). Because he was the higher earner, he is paying significant spousal support. It just doesn't seem fair.
> 
> Thoughts? Are there states or countries where it does matter?


Yes, it should matter. I haven't read all the posts in the thread so I hope I'm not repeating what someone has already said. The problem is that is if it matters, they will keep it a secret until the divorce is final.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

ReformedHubby said:


> I still am having a hard time believing you are serious. I would suggest you watch the show Handsmaid's Tale. The fictitious country of Gilead sounds right up your alley. I've seen some pretty harsh posts related to cheaters on here. I have to say you win the prize if there is such a thing. I don't think any of the folks on the CWI board would think that what you're suggesting is a good thing. I will give you credit for sticking to your guns though.


I’ve spoken to Atwood back when I was in university. 

Handmaid’s Tale was meant to be cautionary. 

I think we’re closer to it than we ever have been before.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Marduk said:


> I’ve spoken to Atwood back when I was in university.
> 
> Handmaid’s Tale was meant to be cautionary.
> 
> I think we’re closer to it than we ever have been before.


Seems more than a bit over the top!


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

MaiChi said:


> My personal opinion, which I really wish many governments would accept and put on their statutes, is that:
> As soon as adultery is alleged, all parties involves should be tested for known STIs and if it is found that adultery took place and an STI was transmitted to the spouse, or could have been transmitted to the spouse, the adulterer should automatically qualify for a death sentence but only after a court hearing.
> 
> It should be law that before anyone starts a new relationship, they must officially end the last one whether through registering a separation or getting a divorce. If they fail to do that then a minimum sentence of say 15 years in prison should be expected.
> ...


Gulp. Hope I never have to live in the police state you've instituted here.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

MaiChi said:


> it is what I believe should happen to those who cheat. i really do not see any difference between cheating and murder.


So my ex could have/should have murdered me instead of cheating? Or should I have murdered her for cheating. If the penalties for doing so were the same as current penalties for cheating, that's a very good deal!


----------



## LisaDiane (Jul 22, 2019)

Married but Happy said:


> So my ex could have/should have murdered me instead of cheating? Or should I have murdered her for cheating. If the penalties for doing so were the same as current penalties for cheating, that's a very good deal!


Lol!! GOOD POINT!!!


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

ReformedHubby said:


> EleGirl said:
> 
> 
> > Start a thread then.
> ...


My point is to not thread jack.


----------

