As long as we keep trying to jerryrig our relationships into nonsensical legal categories, like adoption and convoluted contracts for probably bogus consideration, we will have these kinds of unintended and unfair outcomes — that may be perfectly legally valid. In a twisted way, I’m almost rooting for Spado, if only to make this point both clear and high-profile.

Had Spado and Watson been able to legally marry, when they split up, there would have been a clear body of law governing the distribution of their marital assets. While they might have had a legitimate fight over the amount of IBM family fortune to which Spado was entitled, the legal fight would have made sense and not involved anyone feeling as though the former spouse was trying to perpetrate a fraud.