But even if she had to start from scratch, I'm not sure it would take the rest of her life? I agree that, assuming that it was a joint decision for her to give up her job (I don't know if this was disputed?), and given that it was 18 years, she should be entitled to some fairly large payments - I'm not sure why it should be for life, though. The Miller case on the other hand is completely absurd. I couldn't disagree more. Being cheated on sucks, but it does not entitle you to money, not should it be punished through the courts. This issue should only be about compensation for lost earnings. If people cheating on you entitles you to millions, then I'd like some please! And what about all the people who don't find a partner to settle down with in the first place? Why don't they get their "wealthy lifestyle"? No one has a right to a lasting marriage. If you really believe that no marriage is better than risking one, then you are free to remain single - but otherwise, you should be glad that you're still getting what some people never have. And does this mean she has to give the money back if she remarries? After all, she couldn't do that if she remained in the "wealthy lifestyle" that she expected... The thing I dislike about this is that it basically punishes a person for being genorous and supportive towards their partner - if you give them money and tell them they don't have to work, it means you're going to be even worse off in the case of a divorce.