Some commentators have argued that what is equal or equitable should be determined, at least in part, by looking at future results. Viewed from this perspective, a division that appears equal or fair on its face may reveal itself as less valuable to a more economically vulnerable spouse who cannot readily replace lost assets.

In dividing property, should the court seek to ensure that the resulting impact of the award is equal or fair, even if this would require making disproportionate allocations?