• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should a person's pension be included as an asset in a divorce?

MaggieD

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,665
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I have real mixed feelings about this. I know there are a number of spousal murders that happen because one or the other refuses to share their pension at divorce. What do you think?

(Inspired by our local Drew Peterson (copper) being convicted of murdering his second wife yesterday...and being pretty sure he also murdered his third, for which he hasn't yet been charged.)
 
Hmm - i don't know how it relates to him slaughtering all his wives and getting away with it . . . but It depends - did the spouse have to sacrifice their education or career to further the other?

I have - but it's not like I'm going after my husband's pension in the future :)
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Hmm - i don't know how it relates to him slaughtering all his wives and getting away with it . . . but It depends - did the spouse have to sacrifice their education or career to further the other?

I have - but it's not like I'm going after my husband's pension in the future :)
Click to expand...

It would seem to be his motive...that's why I thought about it. He's a copper with a $79,000 pension.
 
Drew Peterson was convicted, huh? Gotta go look see about that.

As for your question, Mags, yes, I think a pension should be included in the marital estate. It's no different (for that purpose) than funds saved and marked for any other specific purpose, like an education fund for the kids.

Most states start with the premise that each spouse should get 50% of all assets and all debts. Seems fair to me.
 
MaggieD said:
It would seem to be his motive...that's why I thought about it. He's a copper with a $79,000 pension.
Click to expand...

What's really annoying is that he is probably still entitled to that pension. IMO, public employees -- especially safety workers -- should lose their pensions if convicted of major felonies.

Hell, we have public corruption cases here resulting in 25 year sentences in which the defendant is still entitled to his pension. Makes me furious.
 
Yes. All assets should be divided equally. However, the amount of pension received should be proportional to the years married during the job v how long the job was held.
 
Pinkie said:
What's really annoying is that he is probably still entitled to that pension. IMO, public employees -- especially safety workers -- should lose their pensions if convicted of major felonies.

Hell, we have public corruption cases here resulting in 25 year sentences in which the defendant is still entitled to his pension. Makes me furious.
Click to expand...

Actually, as I was looking up info for this question, I read that he just may lose his pension -- if it can be shown that he used his police powers -- or even skills learned as a LEO -- to commit the crime. I would think they'd go after it. That guy is a sociopath's sociopath, that's for certain.

I'd say give 'im back what he paid into it and call it a day.
 
MaggieD said:
Actually, as I was looking up info for this question, I read that he just may lose his pension -- if it can be shown that he used his police powers -- or even skills learned as a LEO -- to commit the crime. I would think they'd go after it. That guy is a sociopath's sociopath, that's for certain.

I'd say give 'im back what he paid into it and call it a day.
Click to expand...

If this is a possibility, Illinois is more advanced than Ohio.

 
ksu_aviator said:
Yes. All assets should be divided equally. However, the amount of pension received should be proportional to the years married during the job v how long the job was held.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with a 50/50 split?
 
Pinkie said:
What's wrong with a 50/50 split?
Click to expand...

50/50 split for the years you're married -- that's the way it is in Illinois. One doesn't get half the pension unless one was married the entire time the pension was in effect.
 
MaggieD said:
It would seem to be his motive...that's why I thought about it. He's a copper with a $79,000 pension.
Click to expand...

Oh - now I got you.

Hmm. Well - honestly - if someone's going to murder another I don't think whether it 'can be legitimately tapped into' would matter. What wold matter is that he would think it would be one way or another. He probably filled his head with all sorts of nonsense against all of them to get himself to that point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom