Yes it does work like that, at least in the U.K. it does. It’s based “first and foremost” on “future needs.”
Of course there is no guarantee they’d be as secure the rest of their lives, that’s not how life works. But they leave the marriage with a fair division of assets, often in their favour as any children are usually primarily resident with the mother. What they do with their lives from that point is up to them.
When my mum (SAHM for 14yrs before she decided to go back to work) divorced my Dad she got 100% the house, 50% of his pension and 100% of their savings. Plus my Dad paid 100% of both his and her legal fees, and my dad owed her CMS plus £10k/Yr spouse maintenance until state pension age AND he owed 100% Uni tuition for my two youngest siblings. My mum left the marriage with around half a million in assets plus guaranteed income and my dad with £50k of debt plus a good chunk of his future income due to her.
But my mum got a really really good divorce lawyer and went for the jugular. Plus the divorce was due to her repeatedly cheating on my dad!
I know my anecdote carried as much weight as yours does, but anecdotes aside, it does work as I said. The principles you laid out are the principles already in force.
www.mediateuk.co.uk/the-ultimate-guide-to-financial-settlement-on-divorce/
THE MAIN RULES OF DIVISION CAN BE SUMMARISED AS FOLLOWS:
FAIR DIVISION. On divorce, the aim is to divide the assets fairly. Fairness does not necessarily mean an equal division. What it does mean is that the parties must be left in the position of equal standing and that there must be no discrimination between the respective roles of breadwinner and homemaker - which are regarded as equal. In other words, the roles each party played in the marriage is not considered an important factor when agreeing a financial settlement on divorce. Instead, you should focus on what of you realistically need moving forwards.
NEEDS OF CHILDREN. First consideration must always be given to the needs of the dependent children. In practical terms, this usually means that accommodation must be provided for the children and, therefore, the parent who looks after the children for the majority of the time. In some cases, this will require one of the parents to retain the matrimonial home. Ideally if the available assets permit, the Court will always look to accommodate both parties. If both parents have agreed to share the child arrangements equally, then their housing needs are likely to be equal as well.
SECTION 25 FACTORS. The starting point is an equal division of the assets. The Court is under a duty to consider all the circumstances of the case and in particular the Section 25 factors (see below) and then apply these to the facts of the particular case. Having considered the Section 25 factors, the Court may order an unequal division of the assets. The general rule - called the yardstick of equality is that assets should be divided equally unless there is a good reason to the contrary.
FUTURE NEEDS. First and foremost, the Court will always look to meet the needs of each party to be accommodated. If these needs can be met from the available assets and if there is then a surplus, the Court may go on to consider dividing the remaining assets taking into account their origin. This may require dividing the assets into matrimonial and non-matrimonial property.
Matrimonial property comprises those assets that have been acquired during the marriage from the joint enterprise of both parties. Most assets in most divorces comprise entirely matrimonial property.
Non-matrimonial assets are those assets that have accrued outside the marriage ie. assets brought into the marriage by either party at the outset, assets that have accrued post separation or those assets that have been received during the marriage from a source wholly extraneous to the marriage. Examples of the latter include gifts and inheritances received from one side of the family. Once the reasonable needs of each party to be housed have been met, then any surplus may be divided unequally to take into account any unequal contributions.
The financial contribution made by each party is one of the Section 25 factors. In practical terms, this is only likely to be relevant in cases where the assets are substantial - as future accommodation need trumps the origin of the asset.
FINANCIAL CLEAN BREAK. Wherever practical, the Court will seek to achieve a financial separation between the parties. This is called a clean break. This means that there will be no ongoing financial links between the parties save for child maintenance, if relevant.
If a clean break cannot be achieved immediately, then the Court has the power to order spousal maintenance for a fixed period so as to achieve a clean break in the future. Very rarely, the Court may decide that a financial clean break is not possible and order spousal maintenance for life. In practice, most financial settlements are on the basis of an immediate clean break. But spousal maintenance should always be considered and subsequently dismissed if need be.