Everyone needs a wife. But can we afford one? In a landmark ruling last week Shan Lambert - who was a stay-at-home home-maker while her husband made a £20m fortune - was awarded half his money. The judge reasoned that her contribution to the marriage had been the exact equal of his.
Well yes, but...
Home-making is certainly severely undervalued. Anyone who comes in after a hard day to a well-ordered home, supportive wife, and no domestic worries is clearly much more able to concentrate on making the money. The homemaker deserves a terrific amount of credit. But half?
The thing is that for most women at home, their responsibilities, work and effort are pretty much the same - whether they're married to a dustman, doctor or a millionaire. The school run is the school run whether in a battered Fiesta to the village primary or a four wheel drive to a fee-paying prep. Food still has to be bought, meals cooked, homework assisted and gym kit found on Fridays.
What makes the difference to the household is how much the husband earns. And that - apart from cases where husbands and wives have run a business jointly - is still largely down to his efforts.
However well the wife cooked, cleaned or entertained, it wouldn't always make that much difference to the income.
So that's why, sadly and reluctantly, I cannot agree with Shan Lambert's half share of the income. A large chunk, definitely, more than I would ever likely see, certainly. But half, no.
And what about couples who employ housekeepers, nannies, secretaries, professional caterers? How do you draw the line?
What about a wife who has worked as well as took care of the house?
It is a very tricky minefield and the latest ruling has probably made it worse.
And if you are crowing with glee and think that the wife deserved every penny, well just consider this - more women are becoming the main breadwinners, while men do a greater share of the child care and housework.
If you had worked to build up your own business while your husband stayed at home - however supportively - would you want to give him half of everything you'd earned?
Seems different then, doesn't it?
Headmaster James Colquhon has suspended 100 pupils in the first nine weeks of term at All Saints College in Newcastle. Most have been suspended for two days, many twice. Well yes, I can see that something has to be done and it makes the school a safer, quieter place, more suitable for learning.
But what are those suspended pupils doing? A few are grounded at home, but the rest, no doubt, are roaming Newcastle unsupervised and uncontrolled.
Suspending and excluding problem children is a sensible idea - but only when we have somewhere else to keep them out of trouble.
Published: 20/11/2002
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article