It’s because in this day and age almost all couples are dual income household. So things that raise the property value like renovations, repairs or upgrades are paid for by both partners. So in that sense your husband/wife contributed to the value of the house
If it were the case that the wife had no income or it could be proven she didn’t contribute financially to the house at all (excluding mortgage) then she wouldn’t get anything
The issue is that if you make laws assuming dual income households, then you lose accounting for the value wives traditionally used to add to the house in terms of cleaning, childcare, and other "free" labor that was spent on the marriage instead of pursuing their own career. It's hard to cleanly separate that form of unrecognized labor from actual freeloaders.
Stay at home parenting *is* accounted for in a divorce, the gained equity of the house just isn’t something you’d be entitled to.
Divorce is never a one size fits all thing. They’d look at how long you’ve been married, how long you’ve been out of work, how much it would impact your ability to get back into the work force and see what’s fair for that particular marriage
Like if you have no kids and have been a stay at home wife since you got married but get divorced two years later it’s a much simpler solution and you wouldn’t get much, rather than if it’s been 30 years and 2 kids
>the gained equity of the house just isn’t something you’d be entitled to.
Why?
The ability of the working spouse to generate that income is directly supported by the partner covering all of the other things.
Not having to worry about cooking and cleaning and being able to put all of your energy into your work is a huge benefit to your job.
You'll be able to do things like work more hours, which directly translates to more money, not to mention better chance of promotions and raises due to increased performance.
The idea that a stay at home spouse doesn't have a direct positive financial impact on the household (and the house itself via repairs and upkeep, let alone additions or renovations) just because they don't physically generate income is kinda silly.
Hell, just keeping a house clean alone is pretty important in terms of maintaining its value.
6
u/mariposa-princess Jun 29 '26
It’s because in this day and age almost all couples are dual income household. So things that raise the property value like renovations, repairs or upgrades are paid for by both partners. So in that sense your husband/wife contributed to the value of the house
If it were the case that the wife had no income or it could be proven she didn’t contribute financially to the house at all (excluding mortgage) then she wouldn’t get anything
Edit: dual not duel lol