I’m not getting the logic behind this principle. I get the general idea—both should be represented. What I don’t understand is the brute force automatic application of it.

• Do courts see ANY stbx as a 50-yo destitute SAHM that gave up a career to raise the kids? Are there no ex-wife’s that are young, educated, etc? Same for alimony—this SAHM mom seems so engrained in the entire divorce legal system and discourse. Not every lower income woman’s life is over, many can and do work, but still that seems to be the standard assumption.

• Why are attorney fee awards needed in simple cases with no custody or if it’s not a high net worth divorce? Like you aren’t fighting about kids or a house or a pension and you have trivial assets and still a judge figures you MUST pay STBX 5-10K?

• Most confusing for me—if STBXW’s know they’ll simply be automatically be awarded attorney fees, what’s the incentive for them to settle and negotiate in good faith? Could they not just endlessly litigate? Or even if not endlessly, they can be like a hostage taker. Basically I’m wondering where is their skin in the game.

• courts can make a high-income earner go into debt to pay STBX attorney fees (or alimony) which seems like using the legal system as a punishment.