Girls and moms want share of husband's wedding house
0 Comment(s)
Print
E-mail
Shanghai Daily, August 22, 2011
Perhaps only one in 10, or even one in 20 local women, would choose love over home ownership, but - and it is a big but - such marriages are usually ill-fated for want of stable financial support and blessing from the in-laws.
Observers note that the recent tinkering with the Marriage Law represents a shift of its focus from family values to individual rights, given the growing divorce rates in recent years and an accompanying spike in disputes over asset division.
Contrary to what its critics say, the "improved" law isn't biased against women, rather, it seeks to better protect their interests, lawyer Ge Shannan was quoted as saying in Tuesday's Xinmin Evening News.
Suppose the husband pays the down payment on a home and the couple shares the mortgage burden. In that case, the wife will have not only the mortgage money back but now also the gains from home value appreciation should they break up.
That said, the interpretation's downside is obvious. In a move that will potentially strain family ties, many parents rushed after the law's revision to add their own names to the ownership papers of homes they plan to bequeath to sons.
In so doing daughters-in-law will secure no more than a quarter of what the properties are worth in case of break-up.
What is intended as a well-meaning measure to prevent marriage of selfish interests may sow the seeds of distrust and tension among family members.
Can love and marriage exist independently of the frills that now too often accompany them? This question reminds me of a political joke I heard long ago.
Before the advent of universal suffrage, Americans had to own a certain amount of property to be qualified to vote. A donkey was all the property one voter had but once the animal died, he lost the right to vote. This joke provoked a preposterous yet revealing question: Who votes, the man or the donkey?
The same logic applies to the home ownership addiction many young women demonstrate when cynically assessing their suitors' qualifications. A marriage built on the premise of home ownership is as absurd and shaky as the right to vote based on ownership of a donkey or other property. And when the fallacious underpinnings are gone, what is left to support them?
It helps to invoke and slightly alter Elvis Presley's lyrics to see the folly of blind love with someone who's in the relationship for a single purpose.
"Wise men say only fools rush in, but I can't help falling in love with your house."
