I think that a lot of vets will be happy about the ex-spouse law changes if they do happen. Panel Votes to End Pay-Benefit Slide, Tweak Ex-Spouse Law
"...Ex-Spouse Law Tweaked – The 1982 Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act allows divorce courts to divide military retired pay as property jointly earned in marriage. Congress hasn’t considered even modest changes to the USFSPA for more than a decade. But on Wednesday freshman congressman Steve Russell (R-Okla.), a combat veteran and retired infantry officer, won bipartisan support for a USFSPA amendment to benefit members who divorce after the defense bill is enacted into law...." Apparently, if this gets passed and signed into law, this change won't be retro-active. But at least it will make it more fair in the future. I knew a Navy JO whose husband intentonally waited to file for divorce until after she had over 10 years active duty AND after they had 10 consecutive years of marriage. So he stood to get both his Social Security based on her earned income and of course, a good part of her military benefits, too. Yep. Men play this game, too. nwlivewire
I just looked up the definition of veteran. It said "a person who has served or is serving in the armed forces." I did not see where gender was specified.
Why not? Military benefits are a part of your total pay. If you are going into the military then the salary might be an opportunity cost to options in the private sector. The government partially makes up for this by providing these benefits (which have X cost and considered as part of your pay). A pension is just an investment which was added as part of your compensation. If you were married during this time and agreed to split assets, then this investment should be part of that. And you should watch who you marry and learn to recognize when that person doesn't want to be around you anymore.
No difference to my mind, either. Parts is parts. Yes The Dude - sage advice given. Many military marriages and divorces have an element of strategy or strategic planning with them. nwlivewire
You made sure to inform everyone that men were equally culpable in your response to my first post in this thread. I said "vets". I did not say "only male vets". In light of your response to that post it appears to me that there is a difference in your mind.
See my above thread. Nowadays, parts is parts. Equal opportunity parasitism. "All men are created equal", right? Language can be a curiously used thing sometimes. Ask Abigail Adams. Education & Resources - National Women's History Museum - NWHM nwlivewire
