Explore the vast range of titles available.

Focusing on married couples separating at ages 50 to 70, we investigate who leaves the joint home upon separation and in the years immediately following separation. Considering ex-couple characteristics, we contrast the bargaining principle, which predicts higher moving-out rates for women, and the fairness principle, which points to the opposite. Using Belgian register and census data, we study marital couples who separated in 2002 at ages 50 to 70 after a marriage of at least 15 years' duration. We follow them for three years and estimate their moving patterns using multinomial logistic regressions and continuous-time models that account for the lagged effect of separation. Older women have a relative advantage in keeping the home at separation and maintain this advantage in the years following the separation. This finding contrasts with prior findings concerning younger ex-couples. Exceptions are women who are significantly younger than their ex-partner, whose children remain with the father, who live at their husband's birthplace, and who rent rather than own the home. Our findings point to a principle of fairness at play in the moving-out decision among older separating couples. Nonetheless, not all women benefit from this advantage.

In 1982, it passed the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA).1 It is well-recognized that a case out of California saying that retirement pensions could not be treated as divisible marital property was the turning point that led to enactment of attempted clarification from Congress.2 The passage of the USFSPA was not an attempt to direct states as to how to divide retirement pensions as marital property, or even that they had to. Most members will opt to waive only so much of their retired pay as is equal to the amount of disability compensation to which they are entitled.4 The incentive to initiate this waiver is that all of the disability payments, unlike normal retirement pensions, are completely exempt from all federal and state income taxes.5 The requirement to waive part of a retirement pension prevents what is often known as \"double dipping,\" which is (in most cases) prohibited.6 It is worth noting that there does exist an exception to the standard for retirees who carry a VA disability rating of 50% or higher. [...]they elect to waive a portion of their monthly pension so they can collect that same amount in the form of tax-free disability payments. [...]for purposes of using nice, clean, round numbers, let's assume the service member is entitled to S200 per month in disability payments, given the 30% rating.14 That means the service member is forfeiting S200 per month from their regular retirement pension, half of which has been going to their spouse each month for several years. Because they waived that money, the monthly retirement payment will decrease by S200 each month, thus decreasing the ex-spouse's share by 50% of S200, or S100 per month.

In their personal lives, people consider it essential to separate economics and intimacy. We have, for example, a long-standing taboo against workplace romance, while we see marital love as different from prostitution because it is not a fundamentally financial exchange. In The Purchase of Intimacy, Viviana Zelizer mounts a provocative challenge to this view. Getting to the heart of one of life's greatest taboos, she shows how we all use economic activity to create, maintain, and renegotiate important ties—especially intimate ties—to other people. In everyday life, we invest intense effort and worry to strike the right balance. For example, when a wife's income equals or surpasses her husband's, how much more time should the man devote to household chores or child care? Sometimes legal disputes arise. Should the surviving partner in a same-sex relationship have received compensation for a partner's death as a result of 9/11? Through a host of compelling examples, Zelizer shows us why price is central to three key areas of intimacy: sexually tinged relations; health care by family members, friends, and professionals; and household economics. She draws both on research and materials ranging from reports on compensation to survivors of 9/11 victims to financial management Web sites and advice books for same-sex couples. From the bedroom to the courtroom, The Purchase of Intimacy opens a fascinating new window on the inner workings of the economic processes that pervade our private lives.

Married couples in the US have an array of legal rights, protections, and obligations. Notably, extensive rules exist for handling property division at the dissolution of a marriage. Courts will look past which partner holds legal title to property and allow for equitable division between the spouses. This approach reflects a conception of marriage that understands the spouses' relationship as something akin to a commercial partnership, wherein each partner adds economically to the enterprise as a whole, which is in turn greater than the sum of each individual contribution. It also explicitly appreciates the economic reality that a spouse who contributes domestic labor to the partnership makes an integral contribution to the development of the partners' jointly produced property. Here, it is argued that although unjust enrichment offers a suitable legal framework for vindicating unmarried intimate partners' economic rights and preventing unjust enrichment while respecting individuals' choices regarding family formation, it must accommodate the value from partners' contributions of domestic labor to fulfill its promise. Currently, courts use two dueling approaches to resolve cases between former cohabitants: contract-based and status-based approaches.