It does seem like you have not been served well by our current alimony system. Hopefully, there will be some improvements sooner than later. Thanks again for your contributions to the conversation!

Steve McDonough

So, consider this typical scenario: The “breadwinner” is married and has a number of beautiful, bright children. The primary care-taker parent (we could call this person the bread-maker perhaps) had a good job and is well-educated, gives up the good job and works about 300 hours a week taking care of the kids, driving them all over the eastern seaboard to lessons, sports, doctor appointments, school, etc. Perhaps the at home spouse even does your laundry, makes food, keeps your nice house clean, and all of the things so you can be the bread-winner. This goes on for many years, since, after all, marriage is about supporting each other. In fact, one might even say that the at home spouses are enslaved – to use your own term- to being at home and taking care of lots of stuff.

Time marches on…fast forward 10 years or more… The at-home spouse has been out of work for a long time and of course that person does not have the resume or work experience since the at – home spouse was AT HOME taking care of you, your kids, the dog, etc. Maybe the at home spouse goes back to work part or full-time as the kids get older, but she or he is certainly not making what she or he would have if they had been working all along. Now, unfortunately, the marriage comes apart. Your opinion is that the very considerable contributions and career sacrifices that an at-home spouse made should just be cast aside, and fails to recognize some very basic principles that relate to the core of many families and other things like fairness and the partnership theory of marriage.

To think that spousal support is slavery is frankly ridiculous. If you want to feel enslaved try being home with a couple of sick kids, lots of laundry, dishes, and daytime TV. I was a “bread-maker” spouse during law school by the way. Anger can also enslave us.

There are unfair alimony decisions both in amounts and length. There are also unfair criminal convictions, unfair civil lawsuits, and I am too short for my weight. Not all alimony awards are unreasonable. Our system does a pretty decent job of dealing with these competing interests most of the time. Obviously, people don’t like paying alimony, but that does not mean that spousal support is unfair. There are protections for married people – luckily both people – in a marriage. I suggest you review all of the factors the court must consider when reaching an award of spousal support. Sure, there is clearly room for improvement in the alimony system, but plenty of people get divorced in a respectful manner and do not consider themselves to be in hell. Not everyone is as angry as you believe. You might not like it, but alimony has a place in many cases based upon long standing concepts. Not just legal concepts, either. The cases are fact-specific. Can a statute properly address all of these situations? Probably not, but some limitations and a more detailed statute would probably be an improvement.

As a side note, If your own situation seems unfair, then perhaps your order could be modified?

Remember that very few cases go to trial, so this issue is not all about litigation. I think my colleagues are more concerned about the fact that it is extremely difficult to handle the issue of spousal support without a detailed consideration of the facts at hand. They system is certainly not perfect, but I don’t think 1785 is the exact answer either – although I think it is headed in the right direction! I think I will have job security no matter what. I hope you do not decide to stay unhappily married because of alimony. Not all cases involve unjust alimony awards or agreements as some info out there would have people believe. Thanks for your insightful post.

Another late contribution. I am married nearly 20 years. We have one child in college. My wife is a singer who make a couple of hundred bucks a months. She doesn’t like sex and is unnaffectionate and critical. She hasn’t worked a regular job since our marriage, because she doesn’t “like” it. I make six figures and would be forced to live on about 30k per year if I were divorced. Even if my salary is lowered or I were laid off, both quite distinct possibilities, I would have to pay this amount, until my retirement, which would be impossible due to having to pay the alimoney. I am well aware of this because I’ve done my homework.

My question to you: how do divorce lawyers earn their money? By divorce proceedings and subsequent litigation, correct? So if a law passed that mandated the terms of most divorces, then this would greatly reduce the need for litigation, correct? And if the law made things “fairer”, as is the intent of 1785, this would further reduce the need for litigation, no? Therefore, as you yourself admit, divorce lawyers stand to lose money if 1785 passes. Thus it seems that the reason the lawyers association came out in favor 1616 (or no change) is simply to preserver lawyers’ income streams. This is understandable – who want to revamp their career mid-stream? But this stand cynically ignores the injustice the system is inflicting on divorced men who are living in near poverty under threat of being jailed, while ex-wives refuse to work and take vacations and refuse to re-marry. It’s a very scary situation for someone considering divorce; and as a result I’m destined to live out my life unhappily married. Doesn’t it seem more sensible and humane to allow divorces to happen under a reasonable, well-understood law which would take much of the hostility out of divorce proceedings? Please correct me if I’m wrong, but again it appears to me the lawyer’s associations are favoring the status quo because it provides an income stream.

Thanks for hearing me out.
Jack

Let me just clarify my “baggage” before proceeding. I am divorced in the state of MA, but we had nothing, I gave him everything of my nothing, just to get it over with, and am not receiving or paying alimony.

Having said that, I find your first point
“Is the law really responsible for maximizing animosity between divorcing couples?” I know that if my ex were to take me back into court I would be very angry. I would not be traipsing back in with a smile on my face. Would it increase my animosity? OF COURSE IT WOULD! Anytime anyone takes another party into court it will be contentious.

To the gentleman who said
“The most vocal proponents of sweeping alimony reform tend to be those that had to pay alimony in a way they would claim to be unfair, thus their opinions are primarily based on this single experience. Practitioners on the other hand are involved in hundreds of cases and draw their views on a much wider sample.”

You must know a lot of amicably divorced couples. I on the other hand know zero. As we know 50% of marriages end in divorce, this means that there are MANY divorced people in this world and any person has a 50% chance that the person they are talking to in any given place at any given time is divorced. If the conversation turns to divorce, it’s never exactly a love fest. So to you, Mr Practitioner, I congratulate you on contributing to amicability in so many divorces that you’ve obviously been privy to. Bravo. Perhaps you could speak to my Ex for me?

My main objection with the current alimony laws of MA is that too many upper middle class women are not taking responsibility for their own well being, and ultimately that of their children’s. I think a reasonable amount of time for a woman to ‘get up to speed’ in terms of earnings is fair, but to take the luxury of being a stay at home mom, while kids are in high school and the alimony is coming in, is unfathomable. It should be time for them to get their feet wet and get a degree or experience under their belt. Lower class women routinely have 1 to 2 jobs to make ends meet and take care of their children. Why do upper middle class women feel so entitled to take it easy? Life isn’t fair and divorce happens. Suck it up and get to work. If you think you are the only working mom out there, think again. I have children, a full time job and a part time job and I’m thankful to have those jobs right now. I worked through college and I’ll be working through their college and beyond I’m sure. I don’t ask for support and I don’t want it.

Under current law if I were to remarry the ex could take my hard earned money to subsidize her lifestyle. I can’t even tell you how contentious THAT litigation would be.

That being said, I don’t think it is reasonable to say that I have not been involved in a divorce in MA since I work with divorcing people every day as a lawyer and a mediator. I have had clients pay alimony and receive alimony. I also have the experience of practicing in another state besides MA, adding to my perspective.

The most vocal proponents of sweeping alimony reform tend to be those that had to pay alimony in a way they would claim to be unfair, thus their opinions are primarily based on this single experience. Practitioners on the other hand are involved in hundreds of cases and draw their views on a much wider sample. I am not saying that your opinion is less valuable or important, only that although I agree that our alimony system should be updated, trying to find the right mix of statutory updates and judicial discretion is not a simple task.

Thanks again for your contribution to the blog.

-Steve