In his letter to the editor Mr. Manz suggests preserving permanent alimony laws are good for families and taxpayers. Unfortunately Mr. Manz claim is based on weak factual evidence and largely on an assertion that this is the way we've always done things in Florida, it's good for everyone, and change is bad. I do agree with Mr. Manz that alimony laws should support fairness and equity among divorcing couples and the long-term health of the family particularly where children are involved. However, Florida's current outdated alimony laws force acrimony between divorcing couples and divide families when it is completely unnecessary and could be changed for the better for everyone.
In my experience the current system of defaulting to permanent alimony for long-term marriages is in need of reform. As Mr. Manz states Judges are given free reign to determine "need" and "ability to pay". In a perfect world one could easily distinguish between a spouses need for money they do not earn and the other spouse's ability to pay from their earnings. Or one could simply use a rule of thumb that seems to prevail under current laws. That rule of thumb can be summarized as, if you've been married 20 years or more and if one spouse is making more than three times the other there will be permanent alimony, to the tune of about 30% of the higher wage earner, even when the kids are grown. As an aside I agreed to mediation after researching Florida's divorce laws and feared of ruining our life-savings from legal fees in the process of defending myself in court from my ex-wife who had admitted to having an affair.
My ex-wife had and I believe still has a great job as in the emergency room nursing industry working great hours with decent pay. I believe this as I no longer have any desire to talk or interact with her in any way. The ability of someone to cheat in a marriage and then demand and receive permanent alimony is disgusting. It is certainly a shame to our family as I have two grown boys that moved in with me as my wife and I were separating, and although I tried to isolate them from my feelings of disrespect, disgust, and disappointment about my wife some of these feelings were almost certainly felt by them.
Prior to our settlement I paid many of my wife's bills as she was getting on her feet. As such I can certainly understand bridge the gap type alimony in addition to splitting assets. But unfortunately due to Florida's dated, heavy-handed alimony laws this is not an option in long term marriages.
Mr. Wittman has some very valid questions. Why should he pay lifetime alimony to the individual that wanted out of the marriage "contract"? Was his crime having the "ability to pay"? Current alimony laws reward bad behavior. It's that simple. And children learn from what they see.
Parents are not responsible for children beyond the age of 18, welfare has a time limit, but alimony goes on, even beyond death. Many times the payer has to keep a life insurance policy on themselves, paying the premiums themselves, with their ex-spouse as the beneficiary. This insurance policy goes on even after child support ends. Alimony doesn't even end at death!
The spouse who wanted out of the marriage, (In Mr. Wittman's case) knowing she would receive lifetime alimony has absolutely no incentive to support herself. Mr. Manz, is this the type of "progressive" law you support? One that rewards infidelity? Our legislators need to understand the issue of alimony and it's affect on families and our society.
Please go to www.FloridaAlimonyReform.com and get involved. There are 6 committees that need your help. Let's make things right for Mr. Wittman, and all the other's suffering from Florida's outdated alimony laws.
Our children certainly deserve to enter into marriage without fear of going through what they have seen their parents go through.
The current Florida Alimony laws represent a cutting-edge legal solution to the needs of the family.....but in 1940, not 2012.
When even uber-liberal Massachusetts recognizes (and passes, without a single no-vote from any legislator at all!) the need to amend these old laws, it further underscores the need for Florida to finally catch up with the rest of the country and change these laws to represent the reality of our society.
I don't pay anybody alimony - that's because my divorce is now in it's 50th month with no end in sight. The bill that the Florida Law Lobbyists killed (it passed the House by better than a 2-1 margin, only to be shelved by the attorney's lobby in the Senate, never even getting to a vote there) would have ordered my Judge to grant me a divorce since I'd been at this circus for more than a year.
Of course, if my divorce was finalized, the cash payments to the attorneys would end. And that is just something that your friendly family court attorney can't stand to see happen.
Attorney's don't like "shall" orders, formulas, tables, etc., since they argue that it takes away "judicial discretion". This means that there's nothing for the attorneys to fight about. And bill for.
They'll spend thousands of your dollars to have you fight about a $500 couch. And they'll do it over and over and over again.
Nobody fights about how much and for how long a parent has to pay child support.
There's a set formula and there's a term when it ends. Alimony should work exactly the same way. And to have to pay someone for the rest of their life after being married for just a few years is insane.
Nearly half of all marriages will end in divorce. It may not be your marriage, but it might be your son, daughter, or parent. And the family court attorneys will feast on their financial assets like it's their own personal piggy bank - which it is under the current laws in the State of Florida.
No wonder the Florida Bar has okayed hiring a public relations firm to fight alimony reform in next year's session. Their big cash cow is about to be put out to pasture. And it won't come soon enough.
Contact your legislators and request that they support the reform bill coming to the Florida Legislature in 2013. And thank the overwhelming numbers of your elected representatives who already know the system is broken and needs to be fixed.