Proponents of alimony reform in New Jersey and around the country are bringing a new level of uncertainty to some divorce agreements. Some alimony reform activists would like to see alimony reform laws applied retroactively and impact divorce and alimony settlement agreements that have already been negotiated. This would certainly place some alimony recipients at a disadvantage, especially if they waived their rights to certain assets with the expectation that they would be receiving a fixed alimony amount for a certain length of time.
Will the proposed changes make alimony laws more fair? The answer to that question will likely remain unsettled and contentious. One concern, particularly for older couples, is that the person who is hoping to receive alimony or spousal support payments may be placed at a significant disadvantage and may be exposed to financial harm as a result of the divorce.
These individuals are particularly vulnerable in today's climate because it is not so easy to simply go out and get a job. Those who typically have benefitted from alimony are individuals who have sacrificed their education and career for the benefit of their spouses and, in many cases, their children. For older individuals to pick up and start over again after a long-term marriage is simply not realistic.
That is why it is important to have a divorce attorney on your side who is experienced in negotiating alimony and property settlements that will be fair and equitable both now and in the future so your financial interests can be preserved.
Source: Forbes, "Alimony Reforms Continue to Create More Uncertainty for Divorcing Women," Jeff Landers, Jan. 18, 2012
Comments: 1
1 Comment
Tom Leustek
February 9, 2012 at 8:38 AM
This is a lopsided blog following on a lopsided article by Jeff Landers. For a more balanced review of the fairness of alimony continuing into retirement years please see http://njfamilylaw.foxrothschild.com/2008/09/articles/alimony/when-permanent-alimony-may-be-unfair-part-i/
Alimony laws should be written for the average person, not for the high rollers. It is simply not fair for the average person to be unable to retire in old age and after a lifetime of hard work and savings because an alimony obligation continues. The recipient of alimony needs to be held to some level of accountability for use of their entitlement during the payers working years. They aught to have saved for retirement, just as the payer did.
If marital assets were divided at divorce, those same assets should not be used to pay alimony in retirement. That is 'double dipping' and its unfair. In New Jersey a statute prohibits Double-Dipping, but it is widely ingored by the courts. Most divorces in New Jersey are settled. Most payers agreed to a settlement with the understanding that there would be a review at retirement and a modification of alimony after they had shifted to living on retirement savings and social security. When the NJ family courts reject requests the payer has been denied thier right to retire and their expectation that alimony would be modified when they retired.
Leave a comment