In a recent interview with the Star Ledger newspaper, I told the reporter that it is not just men who are being hurt by the current alimony laws, but women also. I think there is a misperception amongst the general public that the current outcry to change alimony laws is to help men. What I tried to get across to the Star Ledger reporter in our recent interview was that in my practice, I see just as many high-income earning women being hurt by our antiquated alimony laws as men.
Our alimony laws were created when economic times were substantially different than today. In current times, it is very common for both parties to work and contribute to marital expenses. Under current law, fault in a marriage is generally not a factor to be considered for alimony. If one person (man or woman) works hard each day to support the family, and the other is simply lazy and does not work or contribute to the marriage, the person who worked hard can be penalized at time of divorce and the lazy person rewarded with alimony-regardless of gender. When I share this information with prospective clients during initial interviews the most common response is that "we fought about him/her not working all the time". The problem is if parties fight about one person not working and contributing, but allow it to go on over time, it makes no difference for alimony purposes. The "marital standard" for alimony purposes is established.
Similar injustices occur with credit card spending. Even if money is not available due to one party not working, and one party spends above his/her earnings by running up credit card debt, the credit card debt can be considered part of the marital lifestyle increasing an alimony award. Again, regardless of gender, one party ends up paying for the irresponsible spending of the other.
Additionally, marital fidelity is not a factor when determining alimony. As such, despite one party fully supporting the other during the marriage, if the other party decides to simply leave the marriage for someone else, he or she is generally still entitled to alimony, regardless of fault.
While I hope that alimony laws are reviewed and changed, it is important for anyone who is earning more than his or her spouse, and contemplating a divorce, to realize that under current laws time is generally not on your side. If you are earning more than your spouse in a marital relationship, and contemplating ending that relationship, you must realize that the longer you allow "bad behavior" to continue in a marital relationship, the greater the risk is that the other party will receive support or alimony at time of the divorce. This is true regardless of gender, or whether the "bad behavior" involves overspending, failing to work or contribute to the marriage, or marital infidelity. If you find yourself in such a situation you should consult a qualified divorce attorney without delay.
In my opinion New Jersey alimony laws need to be reformed to address these types of injustices. However, until they are anyone contemplating divorce should be aware of just how economically dangerous these laws can be today.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/01/activists_work_to_introduce_bi.html
8 Comments
Bea
January 14, 2012 at 12:36 PM
Thank You, Mr Weitzman for injecting a little common sense into the alimony discussion. I read your comments in the fox news article and I believe that the payers (men and women) must be given a chance to get their lives back. I personally know a man whose business is really hurting due to the economy and he has been unable to get his payments modified. The Judge told him ' go out and get 1 or 2 more jobs". Why should he have to work 3 or more jobs to support the EX? Isn't his freedom worth as much as hers? It is a sad commentary when a man doesn't have enough money to buy health insurance and his parents have to pay his dental bills because all the money is going to the ex wife to keep her "in the marital lifestyle" which was way above what they could afford. That was one of the reasons for the divorce but the courts punish him for her spending habits. Something must be done to help these men and women!!
Kathi
January 16, 2012 at 11:33 AM
I thank you for that reasonable approach that the abuse you withstand is going to be your own demise. Situations relayed by "Bea" is far more common than ought to be and the reason why there is such a strong support for alimony reform. Current laws, as you say prevail and until changed will continue to provide lifetime alimony as a crutch for any dependent spouse to lean upon. Lifestyles change during a marriage. The lifestyle change can be argued during modification, but is costly, ignored and unforgiven. Denials are devastating, emotionally and financially. It is good to see that you have attempted to enlighten those accessing your site to the fact that the law is not fair. Nonetheless, it is the law and one worth the effort putting forth to change.
Tom Leustek
January 16, 2012 at 1:08 PM
I also thank Mr. Weitzman for his frank assessment of the problems with NJ alimony laws. His opinions are in-step with how many feel about lifetime alimony including Judge Jeanine Pirro of Fox News, and participants of Massachusetts study panel that wrote that states alimony reform law including Mass Bar Association President Denise Squillante, the chief justice of the Massachusetts probate court, and the American Association of Matrimonial Lawyers.
It is therefore extremely disturbing to read the opinion of another divorce attorney, Mr. Thomas Snyder, former Chairman of the New Jersey State Bar Association's family law section. Mr. Snyder is quoted in the January 12 Star Ledger article on alimony reform as saying "I don't think alimony laws are antiquated by any means". It is my opinion that Mr. Snyder is so completely out of step that one can only wonder about the factors on which his opinion is based.
Mr. Snyder does acknowledge that people have a problem with how the statute is applied, and suggests that the remedy is the appellate court. To this I ask, how is an unemployed alimony payer who has been bankrupted by alimony and legal fees for unsuccessful alimony modification motions to pay for an appeal?
The case stories of people who have been abused by NJ antiquated alimony laws abound. Just go tohttp://njalimonyreform.org and read some of them.
LARiley
January 16, 2012 at 5:45 PM
Thank you for a very well written blog, Mr.Weitzman, and for helping to correct a common misconception that only men are hurt by the current NJ alimony laws. New Jersey should ENCOURAGE INDEPENDENCE for divorcing couples. Alimony must serve as a transition to independence, not an “Award” and certainly not a lifetime entitlement. After all, a divorce takes place when two people no longer wish to remain in a relationship with one another. Having a long-term financial tie to an ex-spouse means that they are never truly divorced.
Personally, I dislike the very idea of alimony. But I understand that there are circumstances where a “hand up” (not hand-out) is needed. Term limited rehabilitative alimony is a fair compromise. Alimony set for a term just long enough to allow the alimony recipient to learn the skills necessary to become financial independent (ie – complete an associates degree, training, obtain work experience, etc) but not so long as to discourage independence or cultivate laziness or the feeling of entitlement. BOTH parties should expect to give up things they love and BOTH parties should expect to work harder. That is just part of creating a new life.
Thank you once again for helping to shine some light on this too often ignored issue.
Carmine
January 16, 2012 at 5:52 PM
Thank you, Mr. Weitzman, for your writing on this subject. As a payer of permanent alimony to a lazy, non-working former spouse, I strongly support the need to reform these laws. There simply should be no such thing as alimony for life! I am stuck paying forever in order to keep her in the "marital lifestyle" while she has no incentive to work. I will reach a point in my life where I will be paying her alimony LONGER than the actual marriage itself.
I recently saw a sweepstakes where the prize was "$1000 a week for life". Well, my ex won her own lottery of sorts, as she gets $300 a week for life.
Steve Klapy
January 17, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Thank you for writing on this subject this has been hardship. I have to pay 500.00 a week for life thats half my take home salery. In other words I pay her mortgage plus.split my annuity, pension, and had to come up with money to by my house back 30,000. But in order for me to stay in my house l have a border to make ends meet. While the ex can work part time because im paying her bills. How can that be fare Thanks for your support.
Marty Owens
January 17, 2012 at 7:17 PM
Very well said Mr. Weitzman, your comments to the NJ Star Ledger are 100 percent dead on. I also am shackled with lifetime alimony to a person who continued her appeals through the Middlesex Family Court for over a decade, with her parents footing her legal bills, me losing and having to pick up her legal tab until I no longer had the funding or a job to fight her with an attorney. I was caught in the “Lifetime Alimony Legal Revolving Door”. I did take my appeal to the Appellate Court in Trenton as Pro-Se Litigant and found no remedy there Mr. Snyder. I can tell you based on my experience, after waiting 14 months for a decision (Nov 2009 – Jan 2010) I didn’t get any relief in a very unfair Judgment handed to by the Middlesex Superior court and no alimony reduction even though I had been out of work with proof that my home was in foreclosure. The Appellate Courts decision was like reading a form letter responding to someone else’s appeal.
To add insult to injury the Appellate Court remanded my plea for Alimony Reduction back to the Superior Court to have them reconsider my original request. I was dumfounded since this was the basis of my appeal to Trenton when the Middlesex Family Court denied my original appeal for alimony reduction.
How is it possible that Mr. Thomas Snyder, as former Chairman of the NJ Bar Association Family Section, being quoted in the NJ Star Ledger on January 12th that “I don’t think alimony laws are antiquated by any means” and that “remedy can be found there” meaning the NJ Appellate Court. No wonder the NJ Family Courts and Appellate Division are so log jammed with cases. I am sure if I consulted with Mr. Snyder in his office to represent me with my divorce, he would have many plaques hanging over his head in his office with many distinguishing awards alongside of his law degree.
I applaud Mr. Weitzman saying both woman and men “are being hurt by current alimony laws” and supporting change in laws that were created during much different times. New Jersey Lifetime Alimony Laws need change now!
Sheri D
March 13, 2012 at 9:54 PM
I know who I am contacting for a reduction as soon as reform passes!
Leave a comment