And certainly, the longer the parties have been married, the closer that should be in terms of what the objective of spousal support should be. What is not reasonable is the proposition that the paying spouse, usually the husband, maintain his standard of living while the wife's drops to whatever level he claims he can afford to pay. And what is most assuredly not reasonable is for the husband to pay an amount for spousal support to a wife earning little or no income, that represents a fraction only of what he pays each month for his car expenses. In neither event can this be considered to consistent with an equality model of family law. I would say this.
Marriage is a commitment.
It is a responsibility which you assume. The idea that you think that you can assume this responsibility and walk away from it without any implications flowing from it years after the fact, is a false assumption. It is unfair to you, it is unfair to your spouse, it is unfair to your children, and it is unfair to society. Today, unfortunately, there are too many people who want to avoid their personal obligations by downloading those obligations either onto their other spouse or onto the state. And in my view, both approaches are wrong.