Should Lifetime Alimony Be Banned? 

While it worked during the marriage, it is interesting how many forget the real reason one parent stayed home. At some point, the couple, mine as well, did the math and realized it was more expensive to go to work and hire after school child care and set up emergency child care (blame inconsiderate employers, not the ex) than it was to stay home, take care of the house, be home for deliveries (like propane, parcels, etc), appointments like going to the dentist, and be available to the kids as soon as they get out of school or when they are sick and need to go home and to get them to school safely.
 
I don't think it is fair to say, "she is capable of working". He was capable of taking care of the kids too but it didn't make him get off his duff and help every evening did it? That is why she was awarded support. They agreed on this arrangement decades ago. I agree, it shouldn't be extraneous income, however, earning power is significantly reduced as you age. Therefore, after working 20 years, one has capacity for a great deal more income regardless of education than one who just enters the workforce at 35-40 years old.

I can't find work. Evidently 13 years as a stay at home mom is a lousey job reference. Likewise, following my DH around the planet (US Army) for 13 years prevented me from getting an education. Now I am screwed/trapped. Call it what you will, but I think after all the drama, the stay at home parent (male or female, shouldn't matter) deserves that spousal support. BIG TIME.

Rethink the idea of He/She is capable of working and doesn't deserve my spousal support. There is more to this than you first think.

I'm curious as to how many of the 2nd wives instigating the challenge were once the OW and the reason for the divorce in the first place.

Your premise is incorrect !!!!!

While I don't doubt that some women stay home to raise children during marriage, my ex continued her stay-at-home habit for 8 years after my kids were all in school.  This was her choice.  She could have been "building her career".  So in your piece, you don't address women who voluntarily elect to stay home ..... because they can ..... because their husbands earn enough that they don't have to work.  Your one-size-fits-all logic flawed and your inferred conclusion that women are owed lifetime retirement is ludicrous, silly and sexually biased !

Incidentally, as laws that govern marriage are being more understood by men, there are fewer men willing to subject themselves to the liabilities.  It seems that this due to the law of unintended consequences.

I am getting divorced after 21 years marriage. One attorney told me that I need to pay permanent alimony, which is about half of my take-home income, due to the long marriage, regardless the fact that she is working part-time. If I give her permanent alimony, pay the child support, pay the 2nd house mortgage, health insurance, etc, I have only $1000 left for the month, while she will have $6000 even after she pays the mortgage for the current house! It will be very unfair if the judge asks me to pay her alimony to maintain her life style while making me poor! No one can afford the divorce. But how can you live there just as a housemate?!

Your journal entry is very short sited. The lifetime alimony rules only mandate that one of the spouses continue contributing. Many ex-spouses (both women and men) are forced to work and pay alimony for life when the stay at home spouse is literally granted retirement.
At the end of a 20 year marriage, the non-earning spouse is typically only in their 40's. There needs to be a mandate that that spouse make an effort to provide as much self support as they can. In my case, my ex took the tax returns to her attorney and asked "how much will he have to pay me"? She could have worked during marriage but did not have too. She was 45 years old and perfectly capable. But because I provided for her when we were married, she had no obligation to do anything. I am forced to give her half of my take home pay.
Divorce should mean divorce, not retirement! If you don't want to be married to the bread winner anymore, then you leave with half of the assets and temporary support. A fair amount of rehabilatative alimony should be provided. The bill filed in MA (petition 1567) asks for half of the duration of the marriage with reductions begining after 6 years.
The lifetime alimony rules encourage divorce when time should be spent saving the marriage. A spouse would say "I can get half the income without providing any spousal support at all? Why would someone not want that? It's free income." If the alternative to divorce is re-entering the work force and suppoting yourself, there would be much more thought behind working out the problems and fixing the relationship.
I was married for 17 years. I gave my wife the option of working or staying home. She stayed home while I worked 2 full time jobs. I had a financial plan. She wanted no part of it. I saved money for retirement, kids college, paid all the bills, helped with housework and still help pay my step daughters college loan. She got all the perks with no obligations.

Rethink you position. You simply don't get i

I agree, the question I have is that I've been informed that I am not allow to save any money since I receive alimony. What am I suppose to do when the  alimony ends?

Agreed & well said!