Latest Headlines
- ECSO: Truck Stolen In Bratt, Note Left Behind Claims Woman Was Attacked, Kidnapped
- Two Northview High Career Academies Create Food Cart
- Special Election To Replace Matt Gaetz In Congress Set For April Fools’ Day
- Food Distribution Held Friday In Walnut Hill, Saturday In Cantonment
- Escambia Schools Announce Top 10 Teachers Of The Year
- Still Time To Sign Up! Let The Miracle League Fry Your Thanksgiving Turkey
- Tate Aggies Beat Atmore Blue Devils 71-68 In Nailbiter Home Opener (With Gallery)
- FDLE Charges Escambia Man With Child Porn Possession
- Cantonment Man Charged With Sexual Battery, Molestation Of 5-Year-Old
- Truck Driver Airlifted After Crash On Quintette Road
Florida Lawmakers Take Aim At Alimony
February 14, 2013
After hearing sharply divided opinions from people who have been through divorces, a House panel Wednesday began moving forward with a controversial bill that would place new limits on alimony.
The proposal (HB 231) would take steps such as reining in the amount of time that alimony payments could be required, trying to short-circuit alimony in marriages of 10 years or less and shielding retirees from alimony requirements.
Sponsor Ritch Workman, R-Melbourne, said the state’s current alimony laws are “archaic,” and he wants to provide guidelines to better resolve such issues in divorce cases.
“I want to make this so people can get divorced and move on with their life,” said Workman, who is divorced but indicated he has not paid or received alimony.
But Rep. Cynthia Stafford, D-Miami, described the proposal as one-sided and “anti-woman.”
“I think this bill will do more harm than good, ” she said.
The House Civil Justice Subcommittee voted 10-2 to approve the bill, with Stafford and Rep. Jose Javier Rodriguez, D-Miami, the only dissenters. Workman also proposed a similar measure last year, though he said it “died a slow, painful death in the Senate.”
HB 231 is slated to go next to the House Judiciary Committee. A similar bill (SB 718) was filed last week in the Senate. Alimony payments can be required of men or women involved in divorces.
Wednesday’s vote came after testimony from people who offered far-different views about whether the alimony system needs to be overhauled.
As an example, Deerfield Beach resident Guido Albarran told the subcommittee that 50 percent of his salary goes to his ex-wife. He said it is unfair to require alimony payments decades after divorces occur, at one point likening such situations to “financial enslavement.”
On the other side were people such as Longwood resident Ann Dwyer, who said she was married for more than 20 years and did not work outside the home as her then-husband built his career. She received permanent alimony and, while she was able to later find a job, said the payments from her ex-husband have allowed her to stay in her home and meet other expenses.
The bill would eliminate the concept of permanent alimony, though Workman said judges would have the discretion to extend what is called “durational” alimony for long periods of time if necessary.
The bill says such durational alimony would be limited to 50 percent of the length of the marriage, unless one of the divorcing spouses could show by “clear and convincing evidence that exceptional circumstances justify the need for a longer award of alimony.”
Another heavily discussed part of the bill could help people seek to end or reduce alimony payments as they reach retirement age. Also, the bill would allow what is known as “retroactivity,” which could lead to reopening already-existing alimony arrangements to reduce payments.
Opponents include the Family Law Section of The Florida Bar. David Manz, a past chairman of the Family Law Section, told the subcommittee that the retroactivity, for instance, adds harshness and unfairness to the bill and could lead to a “flood” of litigation.
Workman said he is willing to work with critics, but he said the alimony system needs changes.
“Alimony is broken, and maybe I don’t have the perfect fix,” Workman said. “But there is a fix out there.”
By The News Service of Florida
Comments
21 Responses to “Florida Lawmakers Take Aim At Alimony”
I have not been affected by alimony, but for sure, you have my support to limit the self-regulated divorce industry and their predatory practices, which I consider borderline criminal. Alimony reform is necessary to promote a healthy financial and emotional balance in a post divorce family. The way the law read and it is implemented now allows unscrupulous family lawyers to push people into financial enslavement
The Florida alimony laws are irrational and unfair. They do not help people in need or people who are disadvantaged. In most cases, as with mine, they facilitate gluttony and vanity. How is it fair for one spouse who has given 20 years has a career professional, good husband, and father to give a six figures each year to someone who chose to do nothing except self-serving activities for 14 years? While I go to to work each day to support this posh lifestyle of hers, she goes to the gym and shopping while living in my ex-house with her lawn service boyfriend who I suspect was in the picture well before we were divorced (not of course considering all the other boyfriends she had while we were still married). Is that really what the laws intended? Something has to change, this is ridiculous.
regarding “Our conservative principles are gone out of the window ”
One conservative principle is that a man who has made a committment to one wife and family does not go scott free when he later finds someone more appealing and wants to abancdon those to whom he has responsibilities.
How is this bill conservative?
Well sorry about the guys from first few post but I was married 25years and my ex lied to his lawyer and judge got away with everything left me on streets without anything I get 20.00 dollars a week and after not having worked in the most of 25 years no one would hire a 47 year old so stop whining and go pay
for a 5000.00 lawyer like my ex did he got the house one block from my moms 6 cars and all house goods
I disagree with lifetime alimony for women/ men who say that they were forced to stay home while their husbands/ wives worked. I think it’s wrongly unjust to punish these men and women who have had to work, and now that they are divorced they are forced to pay lifetime alimony. But yet you have to keep them connected for life? The legal system in Florida believes its okay to give them a better lifestyle then when they were married? My brother was forced to move in with me with his two children, while the one who cheated, lied and abused the children was granted the marital home and awarded lifetime alimony. WOW! Great that the judge awarded her with that behavior, all the while for over a year my brother and his kids had to sleep on my floor as I really didn’t have the room. It was also okay with the judge that I help take care of two more kids, while their dad had to work more just so his ex could have her vacations and live her life to the max. These laws need to be changed! Stop this “alimony lottery” for the payee’s who are quite capable of working and living off the alimony system. Get your head out of the sand and set these people free to live their lives and be able to move on!
I also am an alimony payer was married 19 years, divorced she got 85% of everything, but I got the kids. She pays no child support but I have to pay lifetime alimony to someone who not only cheated, lied and manipulated all throughout the marriage, but I am paying that same person who physically and emotionally abused my kids. Not to mention where is divorce really a divorce? I can not help my children out but I have to pay for someone who plays the system. Has her live in boyfriend. Not only is she getting lifetime alimony but I am also considered retired in which she is also getting a paycheck from that too. It seems to me that she is getting a half of half of some more half’s, or double dipping. She is entitled to a lifestyle that my children and I don’t even get to have. We are not in the 40’s and 50’s anymore. My ex was employed at the time of our divorce. As soon as the judge handed her lifetime alimony she decided she didn’t need to work anymore. I don’t know how this makes sense to anyone. She goes on vacation, sky diving, motorcycle classes, zip line etc…And me and the kids live paycheck to pay check. Their mother really isn’t involved with their lives. Due to my high risk job, according to the statistics the survival rate is 9 1/2 years after retirement. With as much as the judge awarded her, you would think she worked my job. When are the lawyers going to wake up? When they go through this nightmare? I am not only fighting for myself, but also fighting for my two girls so they never have to worry about being future alimony payers. I’m not against paying alimony to help get the other person on their feet. But paying for life? That’s just slavery!
My ex wanted the divorce and cheated on me the last 3 years of our marriage with several different guys and I have proof. She said to my face that she’s going to stay at home and sit back collecting alimony from me for the rest of my life. She has a Bachelor degree in accounting and is perfectly able to get a job, but refuses. We have been divorced for three years and is still having affairs and refuses to re-marry. (I wonder why!) I am forced to continue working (have 33 years in now) and it has put a heavy financial burden on me. I have my older sons college I’m paying on and will have my younger son going to college this fall. She doesn’t help or lift a finger to help. If I retire, she gets half of my retirement, which is 25% less that what I make now. I have spent almost $35K in attorney fees and still owe $15K, And after 2 years of divorce she is still dragging me to court demanding more and fight the court’s final settlement. She has received well over and above half of everything and continues to fight for more. I see now that divorces for some are being used as a business. If she wanted the divorce, then part ways and move on!
I think Mike hit the nail on the head. Good post!
Let me ask you this, why should I have to give my spouse who cheated on me repeatedly, for which I have proof (video tape), a single solitary dime.
There is nothing wrong with short term alimony to enable an ex spouse to get some job training and a career, but awarding life time or long term alimony is terribly unjust, and should be stopped.
Just imagine the amount of money to be made if PROP 8 goes into effect nationally. There will be even more couples to make money off of when these civil union break-ups. And there will be break ups and the court will be right there to tell them how to split the money up, custody, alimony, child support, and all of the above. I can see it coming a mile away. Believe that..
The legislature makes laws to guide the courts while making money off of the court cost and fees. Keep it coming.
People wed and vow to be together for the rest of their lives.
Sometimes they break those vows.
Courts have to decide what is fair and proper as a result of those broken vows, that there are still obligations to be met even as they are sundered.
The legislature makes the laws to guide the courts.
Sometimes they make good laws.
Sometimes they make bad laws.
Sometimes they change bad laws to make them better.
Sometimes they change good laws to make them worse.
Making and changing laws is not inherently bad.
What they make them into is what matters, if it is good or bad.
David for better marriages
so the questions come up less often
I work with a guy who pays half his salary to his ex. He is old enough to retire but will probably never be able to. He is paying permanent alimony. She will only lose it if she remarries. Needless to say even though she has been dating a financially well off man for several years they have no wedding plans.
Also, she is the one who wanted the divorce so she could be with her boyfriend. She also doesn’t work yet has a college degree.
I can understand the woman married all her life and being a homemaker by mutual decision not being abandoned in her old age. However I think these cases need to be looked at individually.
The Family Section of the Florida Bar is scrambling to save the gravy train of multiple visits to court by both parties over and over again to modify
The FLS also wants you to believe that permanent alimony rarely happens. If this is the case why are they fighting against it so hard. On the flip side they say that modification cases will clog the courts…if permanent alimony is so rare, then the “clogging” of the courts won’t happen. They also say they are protecting the rights o the recipients. Guess what? Recipients hire them too! How can any Senator or Representative not see through this diatribe of lies?
My husband will be forced to retire in 12 years. At that time we will have paid her over 1 million dollars. She is able bodied and chose not to work or improve herself. She garners 48,000/ yr. That is what I make working overtime.
Durational alimony is fair. Permanent alimony is a life sentence for choosing the wrong person. Even jail sentences have a set duration.
And let me add, when you’re divorced, you split the assets, the debt, AND the income. Whether it’s child support or alimony. Life by higher standards and respect your spouse; whether married or divorced; whether you left him or she left you.
Alimony should be an issue in certain circumstances. Hypothetically speaking (well, not really because this happens a lot), the husband was the bread winner the entire marriage (45 years for example). Let’s say he’s retired military but for the duration of active duty, he was transferred all over the world with the military so his family went with him. It was a mutual decision that it was best for the wife/mother to stay at home and be a homemaker and stay at home mom. Now, he’s retired from the military and has a civilian career. The kids are grown and have families of their own. The wife is still at home – no need to work because it’s just the two of them. If he decides to divorce his wife after 45 years of marriage for whatever reason, you better believe she deserves alimony! She raised their kids, kept their house clean, put dinner on the table. That’s a job in itself. Should he be allowed to divorce her and just “throw” her out on the streets?? Heck no!
If my father did this to my mother, you better believe I’d pay the best lawyer in town to take him for all he’s got – and that would be A LOT!
Well said @Concerned citizen. You would be surprised at the amount of people that live years off of this system. I have brothers that have been put through the ringer in these types of cases. Just like @Wake Up wrote, it’s welfare no matter how you look at it. If I were to get divorced today, there is no way I would want anything from my EX if it happened to not work out. Who says that I am entitled to take what this man has worked for.
This is the biggest silent epidemic in our society and everyone is scared to touch the subject either because they know the system is too big or they love the payments too much. Everyone cries about Obama giving handouts to people who sit on there butts and get paid for having children and do nothing. Well I agree, this is no different. The only thing that is different is that a man is the one paying instead of tax payers. I witnessed too many relationships get destroyed AFTER these unfair judgments to these men. Most of it results in destroyed relationships with the child because the child has been volunteered to be the weapon used to get the money.
And if you are only married for say 2 years you shouldnt get alimony for the rest of your life. bunch of gold diggers out there…male and females….
It should be made fair both both genders, divorce and go your on way. Leave the other party alone…
.And for the dad’s that don’t find out you have a child until this child is either grown or in there pre teens, it’s such bull crap to go back on the man with child support..He can never get caought up.. And you wonder why they want to run. This low life female that got pregnant and ooops, forgot to tell the man.. If the woman would have been woman enough to tell the man about the child before, she had to advise Family Servies of a hand full of men that this could be his child, he might be more willing to help support… Woman know you have a child you gave bith to it.. Men on the other hand,( and yes there are some dead beat) they never know about a child until it’s almost to late to have a relationship with the child. Just dish out money.. So unfair to both father & child…
SO WORK ON THIS… leave the divorce people alone. PASS A bill for the fathers, that should have rights too….. And no I am not a man writing this… I have children of my own that I raised with no help from there father, nor welfare….
This is nothing but the new modern welfare system and of course Florida is one of the leaders in it. This is no different from people that wait every month for the state to pay them for something that they didn’t work for. Let’s not forget that the state profits from separated families, especially in divorce settlements where these judges rule for inflated child support and alimony payments. How?? Instead of one house payment, you now have two, instead of one utility bill, they make more on 2 separate ones. Now, you see the cycle.
And I want get into the fact that Rep. Stafford unveiled the one-sided agenda. How can a bill that is supposed to be impartial, be anti-woman only? Oops! Seems like she knows who would benefit from the payments the most. Equality?? More like Entitlements?
Our conservative principles are gone out of the window because you have some who profess conservatism and still wait every month for these welfare payments. It’s just like the long cheese and butter lines of the 80’s. I know I am dim voice in the wilderness, but the truth is the truth. Whatever happened to receiving what you worked for. This entitlement society only wants to make a living off of someone else trying to make a living. It’s just sad.
Also, any spouse who abandons ( without getting divorced) the family unit for their own special, selfish interests should certainly not receive any alimony in a future divorce settlement.