Listen guys, Karl Stefanovic is not being ripped off by paying his ex-wife
SOME men think the amount Karl Stefanovic is paying to his ex-wife is exorbitant but the facts prove otherwise, writes Katie Bice.
Opinion
Don't miss out on the headlines from Opinion. Followed categories will be added to My News.
NEWS of the monthly payments Karl Stefanovic is reportedly giving his ex-wife was met with opinions divided on gender lines.
Women seemed to think Cassandra Thorburn was entitled to whatever her TV star ex could afford to pay.
Men were outraged that Stefanovic should be forking out such a sum of his own hard earned for whatever Ms Thorburn feels like spending the money on.
KARL STEFANOVIC WEDDING LOCATION UNDECIDED
KARL STEFANOVIC PAYING EX-WIFE $420K A YEAR
Admittedly no one argued that he shouldn’t be contributing to the lives of his children, but men seem to think that once a relationship is over, it’s over and there should be no reason for one partner to financially support an ex who could go out and get a job.
There’s no mistaking that $35,000 a month is a lot of money to pay for a failed marriage. But let’s not imagine the cash is all being spent on buying Ms Thorburn new clothes, facials and exotic holidays.
Men seem to bristle at the idea of spousal maintenance payments, as they’re called in Australia, as if it’s money for jam; that it allows wives to flit around town in the manner to which they have become accustomed.
But that’s an outdated attitude that seems more entrenched in those still sore from their own breakups.
The money is actually designed to make sure one party doesn’t cut and run, leaving the other heartbroken and penniless.
It’s not some arbitrary figure plucked from the air to punish the guilty party in a breakup.
It’s based on age, health, ability to work and a suitable standard of living. And, most importantly, it’s based on how much the other party can afford to pay.
If Ms Thorburn was earning anything like the $2 million plus bonuses Stefanovic is apparently getting, it’s unlikely he would forced to support her.
But they were together for 21 years before the divorce.
There’s no argument, because Stefanovic admitted that Ms Thorburn gave up her career to raise their children after they married.
The money goes some way to acknowledging all the work she contributed to their marriage — which wasn’t monetary and didn’t occur through paid employment.
While it would be nice if neither party ever had to see or speak to each other again after a messy divorce, this isn’t a high school romance or a university coupling where all you have to share when you break up is old furniture and tins of tuna.
Katie Bice is the Sunday Herald Sun deputy editor
Human cost of pandemic goes much further than virus
Whether you are pro or anti-lockdown the grim, unintended consequences of the fixation on coronavirus are undeniable, as other diseases — including cancer and heart disease — go unchecked, and despair from joblessness, poverty and financial stress rises, writes Rita Panahi.
Premier must outline his plan so Melbourne can recover
As the community overwhelmingly complies with the Premier’s stage four restrictions, he must clearly outline his virus strategy so we can make plans to rebuild confidence and employment in our city, which right now is a ghost town, writes Jeff Kennett.