Husbands don’t owe you a lifestyle, ladies

His ex-wife Ingrid is now hoping to trouser a cool £11.2 mill, the amount agreed by her hubby in court, pre-meltdown. Could the credit crunch put paid to her plans?

Here's hoping. Her's is a typical case of some being more equal than others. Of course ordinary women need the law's protection in divorce fights, and far too many men scarper the family home without handing over adequate funds for their children. Parents should be made to provide for their offspring, through the courts if necessary.

But with divorcees like Ingrid Myerson and Slavica Ecclestone - just granted a decree nisi from super-rich F1 boss Bernie - we're not talking simple survival funds. The sums involved in these splits amount to ludicrous awards to women who didn't actually earn the money. I'll buy the argument they contribute through wifely duties and home-making skills (if hiring a housekeeper counts). But only up to a point. They don't deserve an equal portion of their ex-husbands' massive wealth.

Perhaps I'd feel differently if I was married but I doubt it. Though I live with my long-term boyfriend I'm wholly responsible for my own finances, always have been. We don't have a joint account and we divvie up expenses as we go. Even if we were hitched, I can't envisage a situation where either of us expected the other to hand over money as compensation for our relationship failing. It makes perfect sense to me that you pay your own way in life. That's what I call equality.

Expecting the better-off partner in a couple to cough up to fund the other's lifestyle is a retrogressive notion that feminists - like me - should reject. Women have come a long way since I was a girl. We're highly educated and extremely capable. Even in a recession most of us can earn our own living.

I'm not privvy to the details of Ingrid or Slavica's claims, but this I know: relationships aren't business transactions. Husbands don't owe us a living. So grow up and get a job, girlfriends.