Comments on: Florida Alimony Overhaul In The Works

By: Dee

Dee — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 12:34:53 +0000

What happens to some of us who are disabled and cannot work. Is there anything in the bill about what happens to us. My husband left me when I got disabled and now we are divorcing. Is there anything to protect me?

By: Maurice A. Ramirez

Maurice A. Ramirez — Tue, 29 Mar 2016 17:36:54 +0000

Governor Rick Scott should sign SB 668 into law.

Four years ago, my ex-wife and I divorced. She petitioned for permanent alimony. Fair is fair, we were married for 18 years.

Currently I am paying $1000 per month, HALF of my Social Security Disability Income, as permanent alimony to my ex-spouse. My ex-spouse is a healthy, educated and employed PHYSICIAN.

She receives HALF of my Social Security Disability Income. Meanwhile, my ex-spouse pays ME less than $100 per month child support. This is not nearly fair.

Current alimony laws are extremely inequitable. Child support is formula based and time limited, but alimony amounts and durations are at the whim of the judge.

The same judge who awarded me child support until our son is 18, awarded my physician ex-wife permanent alimony despite her greater income.

Alimony discourages both the payor and recipient from working, achieving their potential or remarriage. Temporary assistance is certainly needed by some to transition from married to single, but it must be equitable and certainly not permanent.

This is a fairness issue, not a man/woman issue, not a rich/poor issue, not a young/old issue and not a black/white issue. Men and women are equally able to work in today’s society and equally able to pay alimony. Our society has changed and so must our laws.

By: me

me — Fri, 11 Mar 2016 15:47:49 +0000

@ stephanie, you are 100% right. Most of the time, it is by design to be used as an insurance policy, and punishment for the husband when they split. People who draw alimony are leaches, pure and simple.

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Tue, 08 Mar 2016 21:34:57 +0000

When I was a young person and a teenager, my parents fought bitterly about my mother not working. My father had suggested she work part-time, she refused. My father, as a last resort, suggested she volunteer with her free time, just so she would get out of the house during the day. She refused that, too. And now she’s been living off a six-figure alimony for 17 years: so she got what she was gunning for–a live-in-boyfriend, a completely paid off house, a “bubble” existence, completely insulated from the worries that normal people have.

I absolutely refuse to believe that most couples “agreed” on the future recipient not working. Any practical person knows that a family of two earners, even if one if part-time, is more secure and able to weather emergencies and crises than one.

By: Jan Killilea

Jan Killilea — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 12:04:14 +0000

Backers want you to believe this is a ‘worker v. non-worker’ issue but it is NOT. At 56 years young, I worked before, during and after my divorce in 2009. I have gone back to school, I have taken courses and I currently WORK as a legal assistant for a collaborative divorce attorney who also opposes this bill. Backers call any attorney who opposes this bill a renegade attorney. Although this bill doesn’t say RETROACTIVE in the bill it certainly is. The 10% trigger, which they call a substantial change in circumstances, allows for a modification of alimony if I were to realize a 10% increase in my pay. That would allow my former spouse, who earned $356,000. in 2015 to take me back to court if my $16.00/hour salary increases by 10%. So which is it? Do we want to encourage women to ‘reinvent’ themselves after a divorce or do we want to penalize them when they do?

By: Davis Williams

Davis Williams — Sat, 05 Mar 2016 12:04:08 +0000

John, stop throwing your bible quotes at everyone and pull your head from the sand. Many people struggle to keep their marriages but there are those certain things that cannot be repaired. You say most are quitters so please show us what research you have to prove your fact?

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 21:20:07 +0000

John,

Marriages are not always repairable. When you have a household full of animosity and strife with kids involved, the kids are hurt more by having to listen to the bickering and fighting. Best then to move on and separate.

By: Pam

Pam — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 12:12:52 +0000

Child sharing should be split between both parents. It provides psychological support for the child that stands in the middle of two divorcees. I believe that alimony should be available for temporary support to provide a financial adjustment period for a lower income ex-spouse. By no means should it be permanent. Permanent alimony encourages harassment, laziness, and the inability for the payee to become progress in their life because they become dependent on their ex-spouse income.

By: Melodies4us

Melodies4us — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 02:07:57 +0000

Children thrive on stability.

By: Concerned

Concerned — Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:46:17 +0000

This ammendment is a bad idea. This bill doesn’t recognize the person who put thier life/career on hold to stay home & raise a family. Which I’m sure is a decision that both parties agreed to. There’s no compensation(retirement plan which you would get had a outside job been done) for the one who actually sacrificed so much so that there kids we taken care of. I do not agree with this particular order overhaul. The current one needs work, but this one would be 2 steps backward.