Question: My wife, a lawyer, and I were married for 22 years before she announced that she was leaving me – and our two children, ages 14 and 12 -- for the man she had been working for the past six years. I had suspected something was going on, but she kept denying it, and I believed her.

I accumulated very little retirement savings because we put most of the money I earned toward her college and law school education after our children were born. Then, as the job market went south, I stopped working four years ago and took on the task of raising our children.

All we have is a home that is not paid for, two cars, and some furniture. We have two children to educate, meaning that I will have to go back to work because she says that at 44, she can’t see herself working too much longer. Her boyfriend is very successful, and his parents are wealthy. I have come to find out that his parents knew about and helped hide their relationship for the past couple of years.

I have seen a lawyer who tells me that he can probably get me the house (if I take the debt), the furniture, some support for the children, and maybe some alimony for me until I get employed. My problem is that there is no way that my children and I can ever be compensated in the state we live for the terrible economic wrong this other man inflicted on us by taking away my wife and their mother.

I would like to know why, if people can get damages for everything else in the world, my children and I are not entitled to be made whole economically, if not emotionally, by suing him – and maybe his parents.

Answer: Alienation of affection – money damages for interference with the marriage relationship by a third person that results in loss of consortium – has its roots back in the days when wives, like livestock, were considered to be their husbands’ property. A companion cause of action – “criminal conversation" – is based upon a sexual relationship between one’s spouse and a third person during the marriage.

While these causes of action were brought to the United States by our forefathers, as our society had become “more civilized”, most states, over time – either by legislation or judicial decision – have banned these causes of action based upon a variety of what we consider to be poor reasons. These include: 1) avoiding harassment of innocent people, 2) avoiding vindictiveness and bitterness, and 3) keeping these nasty cases off already crowded court dockets – presumably so that judges will have time to try more important cases, such as children suing parents and siblings over interference with inheritance; people suing partners over interference with business relationships; and spouses suing each other for a variety of marital torts, including infecting each other with venereal diseases or assaulting each other. Oh yes, and deciding whether a third grader should be required to recite the Pledge of Allegiance because it contains the words “under God.”

To us, the institution of marriage is a sufficiently important relationship and contract to be protected from interference by third persons who, as you point out, can remove the wage earner and, with impunity, leave the family in a financial world of hurt and emotional turmoil.

If you are not able to get an award of equitable division based on the economic value of your wife’s legal degree, ongoing alimony, and support for your children, you are getting the short end of the stick because legislators and appellate courts have decided that avoiding bitterness in our “kinder and gentler” society is more important than you and your children being financially whole.

Bottom Line: Had you lost your wife’s earning capacity and companionship as a result of a traffic accident or a medical procedure gone awry, the legal system would open its arms to welcome you and help you get damages. It really doesn’t make much sense, does it? So how can lawmakers and appellate courts promote themselves as protectors of traditional marriage while, at the same time, encourage philandering by spouses without so much as a slap on the wrist?

For a list of states where alienation of affection is – and is not -- viable, go to "frequently asked questions" on this site.