I see your point. Contribution inside the partnership is way easier to be estimated for the one who is considered the "provider". I agree that if one of the spouses is staying at home, taking care of kids, etc. they are investing a lot of energy and sacrificing the potential progress they might have had in their respective career.

Having said that, 50/50 definitely doesn't seem as an always working rule in dividing assets after a divorce. My intuition for this logic comes from the difference between the following two scenarios: (1) Very rich household, stay at home husband, which takes care of two kids. The wife is earning all of the money. In the case of a divorce the husband will get half the acquired fortune. (2) Similar family - same number of kids, but the wife is working on minimum wage - the husband will get half of next to nothing savings.

Here, the respective spouses which are not pursuing their careers will get different assets after the divorce, even though they would be would have done similar work inside the household.

Am I missing something in the 50/50 logic?