How do you measure your life?

“Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count, and everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted.” 

Albert Einstein.

I've been reading the happiness studies. The AARP has one, and so does Harvard. AARP's study says that middle age is the least happy time in your life – happiness is a U-shaped curve which bottoms out during middle age. I suppose the upside is that there is an upside and happiness increases as we age. Good to know. The Harvard study contends that happiness and money are correlated, and that we need around a $75,000. annual income to be happy. I can understand that there is some sort of financial benchmark that can help measure happiness. I believe, however, that it is not so cut and dried. After all, one person is flush with a 75k income, and another is broke. All relative.


Carl Jung said that the more we pursue happiness, the less likely we are to find it. I don't agree with that statement. I think that if you don't pursue a goal, you're unlikely to reach it. So, in my opinion, we're best off, actively pursuing happiness. I agree, though, with Jung's short list of happiness factors:

1. Good physical and mental health.
2. Good personal and intimate relationships, such as those of marriage, the family, and friendships.
3. The faculty for perceiving beauty in art and nature.
4. Reasonable standards of living and satisfactory work.
5. A philosophic or religious point of view capable of coping successfully with the vicissitudes of life.

All of these ring true to me, except for being a bit too general. If our physical and mental health decline as we age, how is it that we are generally happier as we age? The only mention of economic factors relating to happiness is - “Reasonable standards of living”. I think that statement is more true than trying to pin down an actual amount. Income and standard of living are both relative to a community; and subjective as to whether the income and comparison are personally satisfying.

Here are some of my happiness factors:

Freedom from want – picture the Norman Rockwell painting inspired by FDR's speech.
The privilege of being self-directed – I am my own favorite boss.
The opportunity to make a positive contribution to someone's life – the rewards surprise me.
Spending quality time with friends and family – thank you.
Sharing my gratitude – thanks again.

Having outlets for self-expression and creativity – I write, create websites, and in business - make something from nothing -thoughts are things.

Dr. Clayton Christensen, a professor at Harvard Business School recently co-wrote, “How Will You Measure Your Life?”, a book which applies business management theory to our personal lives. The take away value appears to be (and no I haven't read it yet … I'll follow up if anything changes) – first of all, don't measure your happiness by your paycheck. That's what I'm saying too. That's a fool's game – he who dies with the most toys wins – but you're dead so who cares if you have the most toys! To a point, I'm a throwback to the sixties when it was commonplace and perfectly acceptable to measure your life by your intrinsic factors – your inner goals, and spiritual motivations.

According to “Why Seeking More Money Hurts Happiness” an excerpt from the U.S. News Ebook - “How to Live to 100” - “People pursue life goals that reflect different mixes of what social scientists call intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. "The intrinsic factors are about personal growth and self-knowledge, connections and social intimacy with other people, and wanting to help the human community for altruistic reasons," says Kennon Sheldon, professor of psychology at the University of Missouri. Extrinsic goals, he says, are about 'money, luxury, appearance, attractiveness, status, popularity, looks, and power.'"

From all of these theories, I have gleaned some important ideas. One is that relationships matter. We're not happy isolating ourselves from others, or letting our key relationships go untended. We also need a plan to achieve happiness. We know that we need a certain standard of living to be happy. How are we going to get there. And what about satisfactory work?

I'm lucky in the work that I do. It is a calling. I find the creative aspects of building and running my business endlessly intriguing. The personal reward in helping others is extraordinary. I would never have believed this in myself. I'm not a world saver. I am ever grateful that I fell into this business due to a horrible marriage that literally nearly killed me (not my son's dad). When I returned to school after that fiasco, my intention was to attend law school after completing a B.A in Legal Studies. Family circumstances prohibited me from moving; and there is no law school in Daytona. I am now ever grateful that I did not attend law school. I was lucky to fall into this occupation. How do you measure your happiness? Comments welcome.

Vision or Mirage?

The following is displayed on the Florida Supreme Court's website:

Mission of the Florida Judicial Branch

The mission of the judicial branch is to protect rights and liberties, uphold and interpret the law, and provide for the peaceful resolution of disputes.

Vision of the Florida Judicial Branch

Justice in Florida will be accessible, fair, effective, responsive, and accountable. To be accessible, the Florida justice system will be convenient, understandable, timely, and affordable to everyone.

To be fair, it will respect the dignity of every person, regardless of race, class, gender or other characteristic, apply the law appropriately to the circumstances of individual cases, and include judges and court staff that reflect the community's diversity.

To be effective, it will uphold the law and apply rules and procedures consistently and in a timely manner, resolve cases with finality, and provide enforceable decisions.

To be responsive, it will anticipate and respond to the needs of all members of society, and provide a variety of dispute resolution methods.

To be accountable, the Florida justice system will use public resources efficiently, and in a way that the public can understand.

Do you believe that Florida's judicial branch makes a continuing and diligent effort to realize the vision? I have my opinion. I want to hear yours. Please comment.

Florida Permanent Alimony – Permanent. – Really?

I'm not the first to be outraged, and not likely to be the last. The courts continue to award permanent alimony, almost always in favor of the former wife. Theoretically, a former husband could be awarded alimony, but I am having a hard time locating any of those cases. Until recently, I was under the impression that alimony was an archaic system that was rarely used in our enlightened modern times. It turns out that it is an archaic system, still alive and well in 2012 Florida. In fact, it amazes me that women would even want permanent alimony, after fighting so hard for equality.

The good news is that women are no longer considered chattel. Chattel, derived from old French, for (you guessed it!) – cattle. Chattel means property. In colonial times, women had few rights of their own. Their rights varied from state to state, with some of the New England states the most progressive. Up until women won the right to vote, many of the following laws remained in full force and effect:

Women were denied a separate legal status from their husbands.

A husband and wife were considered one person under the law and that one person was the husband.

Women were denied rights of inheritance.

Women were denied the right to own property in their own right.

Men could be compensated for the loss of a wife due to another man's negligence.

Men paid a bride price to the parents of his wife in the same way he purchased livestock.

Even after women won the right to vote, it still took some time to get past some of the customs and mind-sets surrounding women, and women owning property. Thankfully and formally, the doctrine of necessaries, and coverture have long been laid to rest. The doctrine of necessaries held that husbands were responsible for their wife's debts. The idea that a husband was responsible to third parties for the debts of his wife, was abolished in many states, including Florida, based on equal protection grounds. Some states have made both parties in a marriage responsible for the debts of the other spouse and so there is no burden on the husband – the rule is gender neutral.

Coverture was at common law the idea that a woman's identity was merged with her husband. She could not own property; enter into contracts; or establish her own credit. Coverture created the need for the doctrine of necessaries because a married woman was dependent upon her husband for maintenance and support. These systems sound so very ancient to us now. But they are not as ancient as you might think and the vestiges remain. Florida Constitution Article 10, Section V - states:

“There shall be no distinction between married women and married men in the holding, control, disposition, or encumbering of their property, both real and personal; except that dower or curtesy may be established and regulated by law.”

The Florida legislature abolished dower and curtesy with – Florida Statute – 732.111 —Dower and curtesy are abolished.

The terms Dower and Curtesy refer to provisions under the English common law and early American statutes granting widows and widowers special inheritance rights in the separate property owned by their deceased spouses. In addition, married women suffered severe burdens and limitations in dealing with their separate property. The significance of these doctrines at present is only part of the historical background of marital property rights.

Florida Statutes Sections 732.201-215, provide the surviving spouse of a person dying domiciled in Florida on or after October 1, 1973, with the right to a share of the decedent's estate, equal to 30% of the net fair market value on the date of death of all Florida Real Property which is subject to administration. Such right is known as the "Elective Share", and replaces all former spousal claims in the nature of dower and curtesy.

Curtesy - An estate to which a man is entitled by common-law right on the death of his wife, in all the lands that his wife owned at any time during their marriage, provided a child is born of the marriage who could inherit the land.

Alimony, particularly permanent alimony is a throw back to old customs. Admittedly, traditions die hard. Despite great strides, women have not yet achieved economic equality to men. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) –

“In 2010, women who were full time wage and salary workers had median weekly earnings of $669. Women earned 81% of the weekly earnings of their male counterparts - $824. In 1979, the first year for which comparable earnings data are available, women earned 62% of what men earned. The women-to-men's earnings ratio has been in the 80-81% range since 2004.”

I can see certain situations where alimony is appropriate. If either the husband or the wife stayed home for years raising children, and needs time to re-enter the job market – fair enough. Temporary, or rehabilitative alimony are available for these situations. I can even imagine certain situations when permanent alimony is appropriate. If one of the parties stayed home their entire married life to raise children; or if that party not only stayed home to raise children, but is also disabled; or did not stay home the entire time, but only half of the marriage, but spent the working time putting the other party through school and paying all the bills, then ok.

But when you hear the stories of the men in nursing homes having their social security checks garnished for alimony – come on. I have to wonder what became of that former wife's self respect, not to mention her humanity, that she would accept those alimony payments. And I also have to wonder how collecting permanent alimony can help a woman ever achieve economic equality. Fair is fair.