Under the statute regarding Equitable distribution (ie, re exceptions to the normal 50/50 split) it lists one of the exceptions as the “need of a custodial parent to occupy or own the marital residence for the benefit of the parties’ children.” My wife (we are recently separated) earns substantially more than me, but because she will be the sole/primary physical custodian, she believes that I owe her more than 50% (she wants 55%) of the equity in the house (she is buying me out), because she will be burdened with most of the child care and home responsibilities (I work out of state and can only come to visit my daughters for about a third of the year on average…) Is her argument valid at all, based on the statue? Thank you very much for your attention! (PS: Also, she wants to buy me out by reducing the amount of retirement assets I will give her. Are the house and retirement assets essentially apples and apples or (as some have said to me) the retirement may be worth less, because of tax issues? And finally, is it legitimate for me to ask her to give me some cash as part of the buy-out (to have a cushion for possible future $ hardship, if I lose my job, etc but need to keep making child support payments)?.. Thanks!