Julie Delegal: Rick Scott should veto alimony “reform” bill

divorce

The world runs on the unpaid and underpaid work of women. Churches, schools, nonprofits, and many business offices would collapse without it.

Something else, however, has been collapsing and crumbling in our society for the past 60 years: the American family. For all the rhetoric about the “breakdown of the traditional family,” our leaders give little more than lip service to the crucial work of caring for vulnerable people: our children, our disabled people, and our parents’ generation.

This work, and the work of creating strong families, is not only enormous, it’s enormously important.

Florida Senate Bill 668 is a slap in the face to the men and women (mostly women) who choose to make themselves available to do the unpaid work of caring, freeing their partners to build bread-winning careers. Gov. Rick Scott should veto it now.

The bill robs judges of discretion in divorces by presuming in all cases that split custody arrangements are best for children, instead of evaluating custody based on the needs of individual kids.

The legislation ignores the economic burden its alimony structure inflicts on the parent who is not the breadwinner, the one who left the workforce to do unpaid labor. By ending lifelong alimony and implementing restrictive spousal payment formulas, the bill  tells marital partners who might choose to step out of the workforce that they should look out for No. 1 instead. Forget about investing your life energy in your family, this policy says, because if you get divorced, you’re screwed.

The bill is misogynist, shortsighted, and anti-family.

In any marriage, the negotiations that go on about who will take care of what on any given day are complex and private. Many two-income couples have developed balanced approaches to child rearing and the endless duties of home. They know that raising children, housecleaning, making meals, and home maintenance all add up to work.

We know it’s work because when we contract it out – to day care centers, baby sitters, maids, restaurants, and fix-it people – we pay for it. With money.

Yet too often we still refer to non-bread-winning spouses as “not working.” It’s a privilege, we tell the likes of Ann Romney, to stay home and care for your children. It’s a luxury, American society says, for parents who can “afford” to make the choice to be their children’s primary caregivers.

Meanwhile, we dole out billions to the day-care industry, which, ironically, is staffed mostly by underpaid women. Feminist writer Anne Marie Slaughter calls it “the work that makes work possible.”

Do we think that people who take care of children in day-care centers are “luxuriating”? Do we view those who clean houses for a living as “privileged”?

As more and more men — but still way too few — take on the caring work that women have traditionally done, the myth of the luxuriating housewife is coming unraveled. We know now that laundry is important because dads are doing Tide commercials.

First-wave feminism is partly to blame for helping to create the privileged-mom myth in the first place. Slaughter contends that as the early equality movement rightfully sought to expand opportunities for women, it inadvertently degraded the traditionally feminine work of caregiving. Working outside the home, the movement said, is more important than what goes on inside of it.

That message is partly responsible for the near-extinction of marriage. But there’s another culprit: the changing labor market. In recent decades, as technology, automation, and overseas outsourcing have gobbled up jobs, the marriageability of menin general, has declined. As the Brookings Institute points out, while changing morals is a factor, policy changes must consider cold, hard, economic facts. Over the same period, job and career opportunities have increased for women. Given the choice of whether to merge finances with men or raise children alone, women are choosing the latter.

Staying out of the workforce to raise children is, all at once, less glamorous than paid work and a luxury for the rich. Either way, it’s trivialized.

The alimony “reform” bill that is now sitting on Scott’s desk further trivializes the critical “work that makes work possible.” If we’re going to value the family, we’re going to have to value all the work that creates and sustains it — not just the kind that gets paychecks.

• • •

Julie Delegal, a University of Florida alumna, is a contributor for Folio Weekly, Jacksonville’s alternative weekly, and writes for the family business, Delegal Law Offices. She lives in Jacksonville, Florida.

Julie Delegal


159 comments

  • Tammy Bickford

    April 6, 2016 at 11:46 am

    Are you saying that because I worked outside the home while raising my children that I didn’t have “an American Family”? Should a SAHP be compensated for their “job”? Perhaps. Although it is hard to tell from this whether it is a job, a privilege or a duty. Either way, any payment should have a value attached to it and should not be permanent. I support SB 668.

    • #CraCra

      April 7, 2016 at 8:24 am

      Oh Tammy…this is QUOTE from your HERO Robin’s news article. Seems you to have the stigmata among you…why haven’t your compadres of hate blasted her health records? I feel for Robin, but hypocrisy is an issue.
      “For years afterward, I suffered extreme guilt, anxiety and depression. It wasn’t until long after the accident that I sought counseling and fully understood the extreme burden delivered when we take the life of another, even if it isn’t our fault.”
      http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/to_reckless_cyclists_from_a_dr.html

      • Robin DesCamp

        April 7, 2016 at 10:42 am

        WTF does that quote have to do with anything? CraCra, your cray cray is showing.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 12:04 pm

          Oh Robin dear, sweetie…you are a hypocrite who blasts everyone for their past, now your past should be questioned. What does my medical history obtained from my ex husband have to do with any of the articles or legislation? What does lying about my children have to do with anything?

          Again…you all overstepped for a year. Deal with the truth for a change.

          Thank your good friends, especially Nannette, Debbie, Tammy and fake Stephen for their constant attacks on others pasts. Everyone has skeletons, I just saved all yours and theirs for a rainy day.

          BTW, my screen name pays homage to the name you gave me.

          • Robin DesCamp

            April 7, 2016 at 12:32 pm

            I didn’t give you that screen name. Also, please learn the definition of the term “skeletons.” When someone writes about a terrible experience for a newspaper to publish, that’s not a skeleton they are trying to hide. You aren’t exposing anything about because you know nothing about me that I myself have not published. Nice try, though. F for effort.

          • #CraCra

            April 7, 2016 at 1:40 pm

            Quit deflecting Robin. You’re a hypocrite that gives verbal tongue lashings non stop. Why should you be off limits???

            Don’t care what you are anyone thinks. You’re still a sell out regardless of you attempting to “school” me.

            B for Bitch…see I’m nice

          • Nannette Cobb

            April 9, 2016 at 2:32 am

            exhibit 1 never been arrested or finger printed except for my conceal permit.

          • #CraCra

            April 9, 2016 at 7:10 am

            Nannette, congratulations don’t really care that you never got caught for your despicable behavior. G-d knows your truth.

            You are showing you’re weak.

            Tammy I’d expect better behavior and compassion from you all things considered. Living through near death experiences usually humbles people.

      • Tammy Bickford

        April 7, 2016 at 2:48 pm

        Carey Hoffman your baker act is hanging out. Better tuck that business back in. I see your lack of creativity has exposed itself again. Maybe you should ask Stephie for advice on that. Bet you guys are glad I pointed out about pinning a post on your WAGS site since that one pinned post got far more mileage than any of your other drivel. No need for thanks. I’m sure you would have figured it out eventually. You are all soooo kewl.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 5:02 pm

          Tammy, funny considering Robin has a worse record than me. That is my point, she’s your hero but she’s more mentally unstable and killed someone. Why aren’t you name calling her? I only tried to hurt myself after cancer and abuse.

          Why isn’t Robin being held to a higher regard? I guess I’m a special survivor and I made it through what I have…I am better than the rest of you since you do hold me to a higher standard.

          Advocacy is my business and I’m helping a lot more worthy people then you. Thank goodness…

          You’re so kewl Tammy for getting in this and showing how big your balls are.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 5:04 pm

          Your claim to fame is pinning…yep that’s all you’ve got. No life…BTW, Stephanie and I were joking at you with the Wives. That’s why it was pinned.

      • Huh?

        April 7, 2016 at 7:50 pm

        Didn’t a shrink just file a report with the court notiing that CraCra’s son suffers extreme anxiety at his mom’s house and not so much at his dad’s and at school?

        • #CraCra

          April 8, 2016 at 7:45 am

          Really? News to me…check again darling and stop getting false information from my ex husband.

          If you’re looking at our docket…somebody left the entire report from 2 years ago on my child out of his “evidence”. Everyone has the FULL REPORT that is 2 years old.

          Try harder please! Keep listening to the lies LBBL

          This post by you will help my children get what they need. Thanks

        • #CraCra

          April 8, 2016 at 8:17 am

          Oh Huh? Are you aware, if this bill passes you could be made to have 50/50 timesharing?

          That’s right, this bill is NOT just about lifetime alimony like these “supporters” want everyone to think. It is about ALL alimony, child support and child custody.

          #FactsMatter

        • Huh? Times two

          April 8, 2016 at 9:55 am

          Children “act out” with the people they feel most comfortable. So even if the children in question are “acting out” it shows they are more comfortable with the mother than the father. As a parent whose child has received counseling individually and as a part of a more comprehensive family counseling sessions, I was curious about that as well. It was reported back to me by the other parent that our child never acted out while at the other home. This was explained to me that children will act out if there are difficulties with the person for whom they have shown the most connection to. So obviously in the case above, the child is most connected to his mother.

          • #CraCra

            April 8, 2016 at 10:15 am

            Huh? Times two…that is exactly what that very small portion of the 13 page report indicated.

            Huh? Needs to READ ALL the reports and not just one sentence. However, this information is privileged so whomever shared it is in violation yet again. Stop talking about other’s minor children.

          • Nannette Cobb

            April 9, 2016 at 2:35 am

            Cra another account really!

          • #CraCra

            April 9, 2016 at 7:13 am

            Nope Nannette, not another account. I don’t play your hiding games.

            Why are you engaging? You just can’t stay away from me, I knew you really liked me…

  • Diana H.

    April 6, 2016 at 11:48 am

    Women who stay home while tge husband works an out-of-the-house-job DO get paid! They have a roof over their head! Health insurance! Food! Cloths! maybe even vacation! The bill foresees up to 15 years of alimony! This should truly enough to get back to work and at least HELP to cover expenses! The women who feel entitled to permanent aliminony and rather depend on a men (and its alimony payments) than get up and moving are a threat to what we’ve accimplished over the last decades in regards to EQUALITY of men and women!

  • Stephen Yurs

    April 6, 2016 at 11:50 am

    Seems that a lawyer is afraid of losing billable hours here.
    Dirty establishment politics just what Trump is against. Governor Scott said we must unite around Trump because the majority have spoken he’s right. Gov. Scott we are fed up of establishment politics, the FLS is a dirty political establishment , stand up to them and give the majority what they want. Sign SB 668
    #governorscott #rickscott

    • #CraCra

      April 7, 2016 at 8:23 am

      Oh Stephan…this is QUOTE from Robin’s news article. Seems you to have the stigmata among you…why haven’t your compadres of hate blasted her health records? I feel for Robin, but hypocrisy is an issue.
      “For years afterward, I suffered extreme guilt, anxiety and depression. It wasn’t until long after the accident that I sought counseling and fully understood the extreme burden delivered when we take the life of another, even if it isn’t our fault.”
      http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/to_reckless_cyclists_from_a_dr.html

  • Nannette Cobb

    April 6, 2016 at 11:52 am

    I support SB 668 and have asked the Governor to sign this new bill into law!

    • #CraCra

      April 7, 2016 at 8:23 am

      Oh Nannette…this is QUOTE from Robin’s news article. Seems you to have the stigmata among you…why haven’t your compadres of hate blasted her health records? I feel for Robin, but hypocrisy is an issue.
      “For years afterward, I suffered extreme guilt, anxiety and depression. It wasn’t until long after the accident that I sought counseling and fully understood the extreme burden delivered when we take the life of another, even if it isn’t our fault.”
      http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/to_reckless_cyclists_from_a_dr.html

      • Nannette Cobb

        April 7, 2016 at 9:21 pm

        Cra cra you are blocked on my Facebook page leave me alone. You have disabled kids to look after. Start there before you waste your time on trolling the internet for high conflict causes.

        • #CraCra

          April 8, 2016 at 12:22 am

          Nannasty to the rescue…we are not in Facebook Land. If you post in public, I may respond. How do you know about my children? Are you chit chatting with my ex again? You two are a match made in HELL…figures you get along.

          I bet Satan can’t wait for Judgment Day. We have a full house here.

        • #CraCra

          April 8, 2016 at 12:24 am

          BTW, Nannette…I blocked YOU! Stop hiding behind the First Harassers Abusers pages to troll the entire internet. We all know who is behind the hood.

          • Nannette Cobb

            April 9, 2016 at 2:17 am

            You blocked me ONLY after you made a second FB page get a life.

          • Nannette Cobb

            April 9, 2016 at 2:29 am

            Social Security are public information maybe we need to post them. Leave me alone. With both of your Facebook pages. Leave me alone.

          • #CraCra

            April 9, 2016 at 7:16 am

            Nannette WTF are you talking about? I don’t have a second page, why would I?

            Oh, you’re talking about the copy page one of your compadres made with my name and jacked my photos.

            Thanks for that. You are all ridiculous.

          • #CraCra

            April 9, 2016 at 7:17 am

            Nannette again WTF are you talking about? Why are you stalking me? You are looking through my Social Security records now??? The HELL is wrong with you?

            Nannette you really have some serious issues.

          • #CraCra

            April 9, 2016 at 7:20 am

            Nannette I really believe you are dangerous. The way you insert yourself into people’s lives that you don’t know is SICK!

            Your behavior is very worrisome. I will be looking into options.

  • Diana Haller

    April 6, 2016 at 12:19 pm

    Women who stay home while the husband is working an out-of-the house job DO get paid!
    They have a roof over their head, health insurance, cloths, food, most likely a car, maybe even vacation. Short: they have all that the husband has that works for the money to pay for it all.
    if the marriage fails, the marital assets are split in half. Again: the women will receive just as much as the husband to start a new life. Yes, I am all for alimony. But it should be to get the receiver back on their feet to become self sufficent or at THE LEAST help to cover expenses. The fill forees up to 15(!) years of alimony! this should be enough
    Women who feel entitled to permanent alimony are a threat to what we have accomplished over the last decades in regards of EQUALITY of men and women! I am all for empowering women! I support SB668

    • Robert Sell

      April 6, 2016 at 9:04 pm

      What stay at home mom’s receive while married is only part of the equation. If it was a long term marriage and the husband was successful due to their contribution to the marriage, many times these women will receive the family home either fully paid for or being paid for by the husband. At least half of his retirement fund and other investments. Many times under the threat of higher alimony, they will receive more than 50% of the assets resulting from the marrige. How do I know? It happened to me.

      • Karen librizzi

        April 7, 2016 at 9:22 am

        In many divorces now a days there r no assets as u describe. I got over a million in debt handed to me. It’s now evident to me he used someone like Alan Fischer FLR to make any assets we had disappear before I realized what was going on. So alimony is my only way out. At 58 it’s the only thing I can count on. He managed to destroy my excellent credit so I can’t even get another car. All divorces r different. One size does not fit all.

  • Suk E Flowers

    April 6, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    My husband was married to his exwife for 10 years; during the divorce she had an attorney, he did not. She got 10 years of alimony (totaling $36,000.00), she also got the home (the mortgage was soley in his name), she had a bachelor degree in accounting, he has his basic education….tell me again, how this is fair?

  • Manuala D. Strebel

    April 6, 2016 at 12:27 pm

    I am a women and I support SB668! We’ve been working hard to be considered equal to men and this is a step more in the right direction. We can work, we can get education. Why do we have to depend on a men after a marriage fails? Alimony is there to help us gettin back on our feet. It is not an Annuity. Permanent alimony does nothing for one’s selfrespect, or for starting a new life. I asked the Governor to please sign SB668!

    • Karen librizzi

      April 7, 2016 at 9:28 am

      Permanent alimony is only awarded to those in a twenty plus year marriage and to people who r older like in their fifties. Also there are many other qualifiers for that. U act like permanent alimony is handed out to everyone. U don’t know what u r talking about. Read the laws then leave your comments.

      • Tammy Bickford

        April 7, 2016 at 2:49 pm

        Nope…not true. Permanent alimony is FAR more prevalent than that. Check actual cases.

      • Stephen Yurs

        April 7, 2016 at 6:00 pm

        http://www.cyclejustice.com/News/Featured-Case-Results.aspx

        Million Dollar Verdicts & Settlements – Motor Vehicles – Punitive Damages – Wrongful Death – Motorcycle Accident – Alcohol Provided to Minors at Party

        RESULT: $ 3,029,875.56 for Plaintiffs. (verdict)

        ($ 11,875.56 — loss of property damage; $ 18,000 — punitive damages; $ 1,500,000 for Jeanine: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering; $ 1,500,000 for Jeffrey: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering).

        Cause Of Injury: Defendants Karen and Robert Librizzi hosted a sleep over on August 12, 2006, at their residence in Bradenton for their daughter, Defendant Lauren, who was eighteen years old, and some of her girlfriends, to celebrate Lauren going off to college. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants Karen and Robert provided alcohol to minors, including decedent and Defendant Ricky Rowell, who was twenty years old. Decedent and Defendant Ricky met at the Librizzi house; after consuming some drinks, Defendant Ricky offered to take decedent for a ride on his motorcycle, which was owned by himself and his father, Defendant Grover. Defendant Ricky then crashed the motorcycle at a high rate of speed at or near Rye Road at the intersection of Upper Manatee River Road. Decedent died from injuries sustained in the crash. Decedent’s blood-alcohol content was .88 percent at the time of her death.

        Nature Of Injury: Death. Decedent was survived by her parents, Jeanine Gregory and Jeffrey Bien, and a sister, Johnna Brennan.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 8:37 pm

          ^^The Real #CraCra aka Fake Stephen.
          Repeater Repeater Repeater

      • Nannette Cobb

        April 7, 2016 at 10:01 pm

        100% not true awarded after an childless 18 year marriage. Wife had the 4 year degree husband had none.

      • Jeff Dombeck

        April 12, 2016 at 6:04 pm

        You don’t know what younarentalking about, my ex was 42 yrs old and I have been paying for 22 years with only death in sight to cancel the permanent alimony. Grow up and take responsibility and stop hanging on to your ex spouse for an annuity.

  • James Junior

    April 6, 2016 at 1:59 pm

    Ms. Delegal has either not read SB 668, doesn’t understand SB 668, or is intentionally misstating what the bill clearly states. This article is entirely off base, more absurd than anything. The traditional family hasn’t broken down, it has changed due to a large number of circumstances, including technology, education, on and on. Today, all persons have high speed access, and inexpensive devices to get online. Employment for all Floridians is available, and work from home is very common for an individual that isn’t formally educated, a nice living can be made from the comfort of home. Times have changed Ms. Delegal, but Permanent Lifetime Alimony is a boat anchor fixed to an individual and their kids, it is a horrible situation under current law. Governor Scott will make it right when he SIGNS SB 668 INTO LAW

    • #CraCra

      April 7, 2016 at 6:21 pm

      Hi Tony Not Sopranno

  • Patricia L Sevier

    April 6, 2016 at 2:25 pm

    This situation is especially detrimental to women over 50 or retirement age who have no retirement of their own. They are forced into poverty with no safety net and no possibility of employment that will pay a living wage let alone healthcare benefits.

  • Tina Granstrom

    April 6, 2016 at 2:57 pm

    You are an uneducated feminist talking out of your ass about issues that you don’t even know about and have never probably experienced and a disgrace to women. I had 3 children under age 3 when I divorced. I had no trade and no job skills when I divorced. I went to school for a year and got a trade as a dental assistant with no alimony and my ex husband was severely disabled so he couldn’t work to pay child support. Guess what?? We survived!! My kids are adults that know the value of hard work, they don’t have an entitled attitude. Did you know that another new law puts limits on welfare? So where are all the “cry babies” on that issue?? The state can have limits on welfare but ex spouses are slaves for life?? Also, children have rights to equal acces . of both loving parents.

    • bs

      April 6, 2016 at 4:59 pm

      Your ex was not disabled unless you count the 1990 felony for grand theft, the 1993 felony grand theft and burglary, the 1998 felony burglary, the 1999 felony dealing in stolen property all disabilities. He was not employable which is why you received no child support or even alimony for a 3 yr marriage. You also obtained sole parental rights and the father received supervised visitation.

      • Tina M Granstrom

        April 7, 2016 at 11:59 am

        He’s severely disabled with type 1 diabetes, kidney issues, etc. He had been severely abused as a child. His issues have nothing to do with me, our his love for his kids. I still openly shared them with him. I did not get alimony and he never had me hounding him for unpaid child support. So don’t talk about matters you don’t know. Also, do NOT lump me in with people who have brought up your personal issues because I’ve NEVER to my knowledge gotten nasty with any of you who oppose this bill. I’ve disagreed with you and shared my opinion(even if you didn’t like it)… To bring up people’s personal matters like you have is low… hitting below the belt shows your character.

        • Lies

          April 7, 2016 at 1:37 pm

          Tina if you lie with dogs you might wake up with fleas. Confused? Watch the company you keep. When you stand by and do nothing, it is just as bad as if you had engaged in the bs in the first place.

          • Tammy Bickford

            April 7, 2016 at 2:52 pm

            Carey why don’t you post under your own name. Coward

          • #CraCra

            April 7, 2016 at 5:07 pm

            Tammy you know who it is…your stupid is showing again.

    • Karen librizzi

      April 7, 2016 at 9:30 am

      U see to leave out how old u were when u divorced. Someone in their fifties is a completely different story. U can’t lump everyone in together.

      • Tina Granstrom

        April 7, 2016 at 1:53 pm

        Actually I have several friends in their fifties who are now CNA’s earning $15/hr after only one year in school. They were hired over the 20 something’s… What’s your excuse again?

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 2:18 pm

          Tina should open her own headhunting firm. She has the inside scoop on all things for employability of all women over 50. I thought your kind didn’t judge???

      • Stephen Yurs

        April 7, 2016 at 5:59 pm

        http://www.cyclejustice.com/News/Featured-Case-Results.aspx

        Million Dollar Verdicts & Settlements – Motor Vehicles – Punitive Damages – Wrongful Death – Motorcycle Accident – Alcohol Provided to Minors at Party

        RESULT: $ 3,029,875.56 for Plaintiffs. (verdict)

        ($ 11,875.56 — loss of property damage; $ 18,000 — punitive damages; $ 1,500,000 for Jeanine: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering; $ 1,500,000 for Jeffrey: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering).

        Cause Of Injury: Defendants Karen and Robert Librizzi hosted a sleep over on August 12, 2006, at their residence in Bradenton for their daughter, Defendant Lauren, who was eighteen years old, and some of her girlfriends, to celebrate Lauren going off to college. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants Karen and Robert provided alcohol to minors, including decedent and Defendant Ricky Rowell, who was twenty years old. Decedent and Defendant Ricky met at the Librizzi house; after consuming some drinks, Defendant Ricky offered to take decedent for a ride on his motorcycle, which was owned by himself and his father, Defendant Grover. Defendant Ricky then crashed the motorcycle at a high rate of speed at or near Rye Road at the intersection of Upper Manatee River Road. Decedent died from injuries sustained in the crash. Decedent’s blood-alcohol content was .88 percent at the time of her death.

        Nature Of Injury: Death. Decedent was survived by her parents, Jeanine Gregory and Jeffrey Bien, and a sister, Johnna Brennan.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 8:36 pm

          ^^^^The Real #CraCra aka Fake Stephen.
          Repeater Repeater Repeater

    • #CraCra

      April 7, 2016 at 1:44 pm

      Cough…arrest record…Cough

      • Tina Granstrom

        April 7, 2016 at 1:58 pm

        Let he(or she) who has no “skeletons” cast the first stone… I’m sure I could dig up crap in your life that would make heads spin but you people bore me. * Yawns! * If Carey Hoffman or JH spent this kind of energy on getting JOBS they’d be rich and none of us would have this debate. Good luck in your lives girls…. (Or girl if you’re the same troll)

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 5:10 pm

          No Tina, Nannasty already did that. Nothing left for you to find. I don’t do church lady talk…sorry. I’m allowed to judge whomever I want since I don’t claim to be what I’m not.

          • Nannette Cobb

            April 7, 2016 at 9:25 pm

            Cra cra you are blocked on my Facebook page leave me alone. You have disabled kids to look after. Start there before you waste your time on trolling the internet for high conflict causes.

        • JH

          April 8, 2016 at 4:53 am

          Tina, I HAVE A JOB. Full time. I have had a job full time since leaving my ex except for one small period when the broke down vehicle he so willingly (NOT!) gave me in our divorce finally broke down for good. In fact my recent job is so good and my job performance is so good that my current supervisor has asked me to follow her wherever she goes and has gotten me more money than my co workers. I work hard and she knows it. So spill again. Now I am also confused, is it your ex or you that has diabetes? And again – why is it YOUR PLACE to judge me. Guess we will see how that one works for you 🙂

      • Tammy Bickford

        April 7, 2016 at 2:53 pm

        chirp chirp….baker act X 3…chirp chirp

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 5:12 pm

          And??? Tell everyone something you haven’t told before. Robin KILLED someone and had the same diagnosis as me. Imagine that!

          Tina REALLY did lose her kids. I never did.

          Seems you all need to vet your bitches better.

          • Tina Granstrom

            April 7, 2016 at 5:17 pm

            Excuse me?? You must be getting your lies mixed up…. Not only did I NOT lose my kids but I raised them with no help from anyone but myself!! I have two sons in the US Military and my daughter is a nurse. Go crawl back under the rock from which you came and get your facts straight.

          • #CraCra

            April 7, 2016 at 6:03 pm

            Oh Tina, why so defensive? Your First Harassers Abuse Group have stated on numerous occasions I lost my kids, which I HAVE NOT. What did I hear YOUR story wrong from people who may or may not know???

            My apologies, your parents raised them…right? I want to make sure I hear it from the horses mouth.

            I’m glad your kids turned out great considering. Does Nannette judge you harshly too or just behind your back?

            Don’t get it twisted on who turned things ugly. What you and your crew have done to families is EVIL pure EVIL to the core. You all do know I have children, but Nannette, Debbie, Robin, Stephen and the rest of you spew non factual personal information. We all could have worked together to improve the courts, but instead you all chose this route. Hateful, Hurtful and Horrible people you all are.

        • #CraCra

          April 8, 2016 at 12:32 am

          Nannette you have been blocked for a year. Stop lying. I hope you enjoy talking to my ex husband about our children, you two are a match made in hell. What kind of person speaks to strangers about another persons children??? Better get help for that condition.

      • Bs

        April 7, 2016 at 7:20 pm

        So why did u sign over guardianship of your daughter to your mother after she filed suit against you. And didn’t your son join the military as a condition of his felony conviction for 4 counts of breaking and entering vehicles which was lowered to a misdemeanor. Good job telling your daughter to stop asking her baby daddy for child support. I’m sure his equal parenting time more than provides for his daughter’s basic needs and your daughter can save for the child’s college education. Which u say is so important to women so they are able to provide for themselves. And since u were on welfare raising those 3 babies you just had the taxpayers providing the child support. So don’t claim u did it all on your own. Glad u support women and children living in poverty…after all u did it so everyone should follow in your footsteps and not be better off than you were and are.

        • Tina Granstrom

          April 7, 2016 at 8:16 pm

          Lol… you people (trolls) are the most evil I’ve ever encountered. You don’t know crap about my life or what I’ve been thru. My point to all this was that I survived by hard work. So what if I used RESOURCES available to me to raise myself from the pit I was in. I used welfare for what it was designed for… I used the job training program to get thru school for ONE YEAR!! THEN I PAID MY OWN WAY, and my taxes paid for someone else, so what??? What excuses to you have for being a bitch ass lazy leech?? You bring out the nasty in people…. why don’t you practice what you preach?? How do you sleep at night and look yourself in the mirror?? You’re nasty, vile and horrible!

          • Tina Granstrom

            April 7, 2016 at 8:18 pm

            By the way, not one time in this entire thread have I attacked you like you’ve attacked me. You bring up personal shit but not once have I aired your dirty laundry…. Again, shows the type of nasty COW you are..

        • Tina Granstrom

          April 7, 2016 at 8:21 pm

          I never signed over any of my kids to anyone…. I was going to when I first thought of joining the military myself. Again, you don’t know shit. My kids lives are none of your effing business you whore!! Leave them out of this you POS.

          • #CraCra

            April 7, 2016 at 8:30 pm

            I’ve learned a lot on this thread today. Damn! Glad to see you’re human after all.

            Seems most of you like to air everyone’s dirty laundry hiding behind Facebook pages one a “Greedy Golfer” and the other “Bitchy Riveter”

          • JH

            April 8, 2016 at 5:05 am

            Tina, people have made us aware of who and what you are after they saw you going after us. Poor person, I didn’t know who they were and reported them as a fake Facebook page lol. Their page is still up though. Too bad for you huh? They gave me your former last name so it was really easy to look up the court records here in Florida. ALL THE COURT RECORDS. Now I will ask again. Why do you – all of you – feel the need to shame someone who has been through a very traumatic period in their life (and place blame where there has previously been no blame) for things that were beyond that person’s control. I personally have shared my testimony. I have been told by many who are in the system and out of it that my story is a testament to true strength, to someone who has faced the worst adversities and managed to move on beyond it. Yet you, Nannette (owner of the bastard child comment), Robin (does anyone know a PI in Orlando, I want dirt) and many of your other cohorts must spew evil nasty statements about me, about Carey, about our children. You have tried to destroy my child.

            Your groups have shared information on a young lady (15 years old, I know I found her FB page) who has been speaking out FOR shared parenting in her parents divorce. Why is it so horrible that my child wants to speak out AGAINST shared parenting in her life? She is only a fe months younger than your poster child. Her life has been affected by family law. So PLEASE explain the difference to me. Why is one child praised for speaking up, and another is vilified? Is it because the second child is saying something you don’t want to hear? I have never vilified the other young lady for speaking out for her desires. In fact I think it is wonderful she has found her voice and her parents give her the chance to speak out like that. Even though I don’t agree with her message, she delivers it without attacks, she is passionate, and it is her beliefs. I will never vilify her over that. Yet your groups do that to my child, threaten to contact her other parent, threaten to contact a GAL who is no longer in the picture, threaten to contact my lawyer (who BTW was only my lawyer for one instance – I don’t have the money to have a lawyer on retainer) and even go so far as to request that the followers of your pages contact my lawyer. What is the point and purpose behind all of that?

  • Alan Ross Frisher

    April 6, 2016 at 3:01 pm

    Current alimony law doesn’t allow alimony payers to work harder for fear of being dragged back to court and paying more alimony to an ex-spouse; alimony recipients are trained not to work for fear of losing their gravy train of payments. Under those conditions, how does current law allow for an appropriate work ethic? There is quite a difference in caring for vulnerable people and allowing for continued welfare when someone has the capability to work , but chooses not to because of faulty law. In so far as the shared custody, I would invite you to read the truth about time sharing with regard to SB668 at http://familylawreformusa.com/counter-arguments-to-misstatements-about-child-custody-under-sb-668/. Your position is unjustified based on current research, and your allegience to litigating lawyers are suspect. But then again, you are entitled to your opinion as other alimony recipents seem to feel they are entitled to their perpetual income.

  • Lee Kallett

    April 6, 2016 at 3:01 pm

    The Family Law SB 668 was passed by an overwhelming 2/3 majority by the House and Senate after public testimony and constituents contacting their legislators. These legislators listened to what the people wanted. Now it is time for Governor Scott to listen to the people and sign this equitable and fair bill for the good of Florida families. The current antiquated family law badly needs reform and 2016 is the year for it to be accomplished.

    • Lies

      April 7, 2016 at 8:46 am

      Actually it was NOT an overwhelming 2/3 majority.

      • Mike Bakker

        April 7, 2016 at 12:22 pm

        I can see why the person calling themselves “Lies” isn’t using their real name. Facts are here: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2016/0668/ByVersion

        Senate passed 24 to 14 house 74 to 38. Let’s hope the special interests don’t kill this bill with their false statements.

        • JH

          April 8, 2016 at 5:09 am

          That is not an overwhelming 2/3 majority however. Do the math. Lies is correct – it is below the 2/3 mark. You would have needed 26 votes to be at 2/3 in the Senate and 75 in the House. That is not “overwhelmingly” anything. That is missing the mark in the Senate and barely scraping under the wire in the House.

  • Chris Spears

    April 6, 2016 at 3:04 pm

    I believe SB668 should be signed into law. The majority have spoken by having both the senate and house chambers pass this by a 2/3 majority. Special interest groups (FL Bar and NOW- only represents women who stay home) are trying to derail this bill with false information. This is a good bill.

  • Lee Kallett

    April 6, 2016 at 3:09 pm

    Reform in Florida is long overdue.
    Governor Scott, please SIGN SB 668. It’s a good bill for all Floridians.

  • Disgusted

    April 6, 2016 at 3:26 pm

    Wow, what a pile of misleading crap. Its truly disappointing that this kind of drivel makes it into the media. Not only are the facts incorrect, the message is a mess. 1). There is no “robbing of judge’s discretion” as this article incorrectly states. 2) The “near extinction” of marriage is now down to 74% (depending upon which age bracket is used). Maybe another reason for this trend of the likelihood in Florida that shorter-term marriages can result in permanent perpetual alimony that stretched for decades due to outdated laws. The silliness of this article is almost too much, but in summary, please do yourself a favor, (and your friends and neighbors) and stay away form the Law Offices of Delegal Law Offices unless you appreciate poorly reasoned and inaccurate and “facts”. Such a sad state of legal affairs in Fla. We should be embarrassed! Support SB 668 like most citizen who don’t make their living from perpetuating misery of former spouses.

  • Elvina Bergmann Kallett

    April 6, 2016 at 3:31 pm

    Governor Scott needs to listen to what the people want. The legislators did with a 2/3 majority vote for the bill. Governor Scott needs to sign this bill and listen to what Floridians want. This bill is a good start for further necessary family law reform. Other states like Texas have caps and guidelines that Florida should follow with further necessary reform that would include retroactivity of all judgments and MSA’s.

    • Lies

      April 7, 2016 at 11:17 am

      LW4SP has questionable leadership and membership. One need only do an Internet search to discover this. I will even give you two hints. Membership: search for the woman who had this to say about childhood sexual abuse – before we called it molestation we called it expirementation. Leadership: genitally caress a child (hint Warren Farrell)

  • Kathi Bender

    April 6, 2016 at 3:46 pm

    I support the passing of this reform bill.

  • Terry Power

    April 6, 2016 at 4:32 pm

    No surprise that an attorney would hate this. Alimony Reform is bad for business.
    Shameless self-interests.

  • Mike Baker

    April 6, 2016 at 5:04 pm

    I support the alimony reform. Everyone wins – the only losers are attorneys who wrack up fees for unnecessary suits and alimony receivers that refuse to work even if they are able and educated. The current awful law punishes alimony payers for marrying a working spouse. This bill was long overdue so that divorced alimony payers can marry without interference from a former spouse.

  • Rose Carbobe

    April 6, 2016 at 5:32 pm

    SB668 is a good bill and the will of the people.
    The formulas provided in the bill with respect to alimony awards are more than fair to the recipient. Temporary assistance is absolutely necessary to transition to single life, but permanent alimony should be reserved for rare instances rather than the norm. The bill also provides clear guidelines for judges as well as clearer provisions for modifications at retirement. Alimony is not retroactive. Nearly all settlement agreements are modifiable based on a change in circumstances. The bill only provides a clear definition of change in circumstances. Judges keep discretion to decide timesharing based on the best interest of the children. The premise is only a starting point for parents to be viewed as equals.

    Gloria Steinem has said that “women are not going to be equal outside the home until men are equal in it.”

  • Jim Haskin

    April 6, 2016 at 5:37 pm

    Wow – the “unpaid work” of caregivers….because the are volunteers? Because the lifestyle (house, food, clothes, vacations, cars, etc) during the marriage and the split of assets was not payment enough? The alimony recipient, even though the children are grown and gone is entitled to a lifetime severence payment from that job? Get real. The objections to this bill are from the legal “profession” that rapes and pillages the families of divorce as a matter of course, and the alimony recipients who are quite happy with the “retirement” they were gifted by the state of Florida at the young age of 50 or 40 – while the PAYOR got awared the right to keep working forever to provide for the recipient. Fair – no, the bill does not go near far enough – but it is a step in the right direction. Texas has a much more fair statue. Limiited duration in limited amounts. Alimony should enable transition for both parties to full independence.

    • Jamie Karl

      April 8, 2016 at 12:06 am

      Yeah, its funny isn’t it. Being a stay at home mum is such a special job that it requires a near lifetime retirement plan, on the back of a man who stastically gave away complete control of his earnings to his wife.
      Isn’t that just adding insult to injurt, rather than some weird entitlement for being a god of society, and better than everyone else?

      Honestly feminists just sound like seven year old girls at the sweet counter, demanding free lollies, more and more to me these days.

      You get, what you earn. You want a big career girl paycheck instead of the pleasure of raising children (and they are as delightful as they are trouble don’t deny it) – forget the kids, and work. That’s how it works. That’s accountability, and responsibility. You own your choices. You don’t demand other people make choices to compensate for your choices, or that your role/job is somehow more important than anyone elses.

  • Jack Williams

    April 6, 2016 at 6:47 pm

    This is what a conflict of interest looks like. Attorneys profit from our family laws at the expense of families, and they want to keep it that way

  • Deborah Leff-Kelapire

    April 6, 2016 at 6:52 pm

    Using Robin Decamp’s words: Can you play a quick game of “spot the lies” in this article?
    1. “…women (mostly women) who choose to make themselves available to do the unpaid work of caring…”
    yeah, no. It’s not “unpaid” work. It is paid in food, clothing, housing, vacations, and all the other things most gals have to PAY for by working.
    2.”The bill robs judges of discretion in divorces by presuming in all cases that split custody arrangements are best for children, instead of evaluating custody based on the needs of individual kids.”
    The biggest and most disgusting lie of all. Wow – someone who works in the legal profession wrote this? Go back to school, honey, apparently you were absent the day the professor defined “presumption” to the class.
    3. “The legislation ignores the economic burden its alimony structure inflicts on the parent who is not the breadwinner, the one who left the workforce to do unpaid labor.” No, not unpaid labor. Also, you assume women can’t go back to work after kids are in school. Finally, do you give a whit for the financial burden placed upon payers? Of course not.
    4. “The bill is misogynist, shortsighted, and anti-family.” Opposition to the bill is all those three things. Your hyperbole does not convince. I guess you don’t think dads should get to see their kids as much as moms, which makes YOU antifamily. You also think women are too weak and stupid to learn how to support themselves, which makes YOU the misogynist.
    5.”We know it’s work because when we contract it out – to day care centers, baby sitters, maids, restaurants, and fix-it people – we pay for it. With money.” Exactly. We don’t have the maid move in with us, buy her everything she needs and much she does not in life, give her the luxury of staying home to raise kids (while denying that luxury to the maid’s husband, of course). Instead, we pay her money. Compensation comes in many different forms. I hope you don’t give your firm’s clients financial advice.
    6.”We know now that laundry is important because dads are doing Tide commercials.” Huh? Now you’ve just lost us all.
    7. “Over the same period, job and career opportunities have increased for women.” This was literally the ONLY thing you got right. Congratulations; go buy yourself a popsicle.
    9. I have developed a migraine after reading this tripe. Please put yourself in timeout and consider donating your computer to a local charity, because you are using it to disseminate lies and as such your rights to the Internet have been revoked.

    • #CraCra

      April 7, 2016 at 8:21 am

      Oh Debbie…this is QUOTE from Robin’s news article. Seems you to have the stigmata among you…why haven’t your compadres of hate blasted her health records? I feel for Robin, but hypocrisy is an issue.

      “For years afterward, I suffered extreme guilt, anxiety and depression. It wasn’t until long after the accident that I sought counseling and fully understood the extreme burden delivered when we take the life of another, even if it isn’t our fault.”

      http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2013/09/to_reckless_cyclists_from_a_dr.html

      • Diana H

        April 7, 2016 at 8:55 am

        Oh my god! You are using a persons personal pain and the fact that she’d open up publicly to pick on people, in a discussion about a COMPLETELY different subject? How disgusting! I feel for you. No alimony in the world can help your dark soul!

        • Jennifer D.

          April 7, 2016 at 11:21 am

          Diana H – the reformers have done just that to me, my family, and my children. This includes a child who is still just a teenager. She and her friends see THEIR TRIPE posted all over the Internet also. Are you going to jump on their case for being nasty to me, to my daughter and to my three children who are deceased? Still waiting for an answer. And I will tell you each and every one who has done so.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 11:37 am

          Diana, do you know what they have done to many who oppose this legislation?

          They are lucky this is all I’ve posted from the dirt I have. I held onto this information for awhile and Robin, Nannette, Terry, Tina, Lee, Tammy, Debbie and fake Stephen have posted my medical history (half thrusts) and other information about my children that they searched for and obtained from myex husband.

          They also scour Google searching for information to defame anyone who disagrees and posts about everywhere.

          Don’t be a hypocrite and we won’t have a problem. Open your eyes…many have documentation of their harassment. As the First Husbands and their Hate Groupies say…”If you can’t run with the big dogs, stay on the porch”

          • Robin DesCamp

            April 7, 2016 at 12:34 pm

            LOL: “held onto this information.” That I published. In the newspaper. And on my blog. Wow – you’d make a great detective, Carey Hoffman.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 11:40 am

          Oh Diana, I’d be happy to share the crap they share all over social media about me and have so for a year!

          You can find me on Facebook, PM me…the harassers have my name all over their pages, unless they deleted their vitriol.

        • Robin DesCamp

          April 7, 2016 at 12:39 pm

          Diana, thanks but I am proud of this article. I find it frankly hilarious that Carey Hoffman thinks she is “digging up dirt” on me when I wrote this for publication in my local newspaper and then reposted it on my blog. I have no problem with it being reposted everywhere because I love people reading my work but I just wonder what she thinks she is accomplishing here, besides making herself look unbalanced. What’s next, posting my Facebook profile photo and claiming to have “dug that up” too? My goodness, some people are too clueless even for pity.

          • #CraCra

            April 7, 2016 at 1:54 pm

            I know you know it exists and I know the hate groupies know it exists. Not my point, the point is to show it off. Kinda like your Hate Gang do when telling everyone about the half truth of my medical history. I’m proud I survived, but you all hate the real reasons and would rather use it as your golden ticket of finds. I share my story, I don’t share the lies you and the hate groupies spread.

            It’s not the information about you, it’s your hate groupies slamming me for far less than the crap you’ve done. THEY need to question you, not me. Can’t hold you up as a hero when you have done worse than me or Karen. Get It, Got It, GOOD!

          • #CraCra

            April 7, 2016 at 5:17 pm

            Oh Tammy, you care about killers and mental illness. You remind so many about it everyday. Every post, every waking moment of your life is filled with telling others about me, Karen and Jennifer. Don’t know if you can kiss anymore ass, you’ve already got sores.

  • LS

    April 6, 2016 at 7:40 pm

    Does this bill take into consideration that there may be extreme circumstances relating to both husband and wife, as well as children?
    If so, how is that addressed?
    And how are the extreme circumstances defined?

    • Jack Williams

      April 7, 2016 at 8:28 am

      Judges still have discretion to take circumstances into account, and with regard to child custody there is virtually no change.

    • Mike Bakker

      April 7, 2016 at 12:11 pm

      It in fact does by allowing judges to deviate from the formulas but they have to back up their reasons in writing. This discretion allows judges to consider all one-off and unusual situations.

    • JH

      April 8, 2016 at 10:20 am

      LS the judges will be ordered to make a written set of facts that will be included in the divorce file which is public and will forever be in the divorce file. This “written set of facts” will be available for anyone to troll on the internet to find. That pushes the wire since dependency court cases are done under secrecy to protect the child’s identity (and in fact when those cases are appealed, only the parents and child’s initials are used in the appeals case). Having written finding of facts that would be available for all to see in a divorce case concerning a minor child will be traumatic for the child as he or she grows up at best, and problematic at worst concerning opportunities for said child.

  • #CraCra

    April 6, 2016 at 8:18 pm

    The entire First Harassers Abuse Group and their Hate Groupies are all (one is missing) here to spread half truths, lies and demean women and mothers.

    Now, that I posted…just wait for them to attack. That is their tactic when anyone disagrees with these people. Lets see how many derogatory remarks each one will make about me…anyone want to place bets??? Oh wait, I don’t gamble…that is why my family has no money.

    • Robin DesCamp

      April 7, 2016 at 10:46 am

      I don’t see anyone attacking you, yet you are doing just that.

      • #CraCra

        April 7, 2016 at 11:44 am

        Robin, Just making up for loss time from EVERY OTHER article where you horrible hypocrites have attacked me. You laid low, but now was the time to share facts that can be backed up by your truth. Thanks for coming out of hibernation.

      • #CraCra

        April 7, 2016 at 11:46 am

        Sucks when YOU get called out for what these horrible hypocrites have been calling everyone else out on. Sorry, not sorry you win sacrificial lamb.

        It doesn’t feel good, does it? Oh well!

    • Mke Baker

      April 7, 2016 at 5:50 pm

      Nobody is attacking women or children – that is ridiculous. The new law recognizes both parents matter and that a person is allowed to retire or remarry without going into poverty.

      • Karen Librizzi

        April 8, 2016 at 8:07 am

        Mike r u a newcomer? Go to First Husbands advocate group on FB. Search deep. They are trying to not be as obvious with the hatred now that they have been called out in it. They still manage to make their message clear though. Postings all about women abusing men and children and so forth. If u need to see the old stuff I’ll happily send it to u.

      • #CraCra

        April 7, 2016 at 5:20 pm

        You care, every time you post you care.

      • Karen Librizzi

        April 8, 2016 at 8:09 am

        Tammy of course u don’t care what they post about women and children. U r just being used as a means to a end for them. If this is ever over u will find this out the hard way. Just as our husbands used us.

  • Jim

    April 6, 2016 at 9:08 pm

    Wow, this is a completely one-sided and biased article. Women are not superior to men, and there is no reason they should be supported by their ex-husbands just because they don’t want to work anymore. Alimony may have made sense in the 19th century when it was socially unacceptable for women to work outside the house, but it has no place in 2016. It should be reformed, and eventually eliminated.

    • Karen Librizzi

      April 8, 2016 at 8:12 am

      Jim some of us married in the seventies or eighties when times were different. Yet they r trying to pass a law to include everyone. That’s like convicting someone of a crime when it wasn’t a crime.

      • Diana H.

        April 8, 2016 at 10:03 am

        Geez! The bill is NOT retroactive!

        • #CraCra

          April 8, 2016 at 10:32 am

          Diana, please explain modification and the 10% trigger. Please don’t give the excuse that no one will file for a modification if the receiver gets a 10% raise while earning minimum wage. Many of us have been taken back to court over nothing just out of spite regardless of the mounting lawyer and court fees.

          Some people are just vengeful.

          • Diana H.

            April 8, 2016 at 12:50 pm

            The current law already allows for modification (as you experienced yourself!) The current law has NO treshold. So NO criteria have to be met to file for modefication. Under the new law there is a treshold. geez! Getting tired to explain the bill to people who have not read it but only had their lawyer told them lies!

        • Karen librizzi

          April 8, 2016 at 4:45 pm

          Diana so what u r saying is it’s okay if someone is still dragged to court over twenty bucks a week? Yeah that’s fair. Lol. How about if u make more than him then he can take u back to court? Oh that’s right we shouldn’t be equal!!

          • #CraCra

            April 8, 2016 at 5:42 pm

            Oh Diana, I know this bill better than you my dear. Don’t patronize me or anyone else who truly understands.

            This bill is just making it easier for you whiny people to modify aka retroactive. Just as modification currently is law, there is no need for this legislation. However, modification is necessary regardless and will end up clogging the already clogged family courts. It will also take lots of time and money to modify…most likely not worth the end results.

            So, yes I know all of this and more considering I’m a pro being taken back for frivolous modifications…yes that is plural.

  • Howard Goldman

    April 7, 2016 at 1:43 am

    Feminism 101: We don’t need men. Unless they’re handing out cash.

    • Karen librizzi

      April 7, 2016 at 9:39 am

      I feel for u. However there is no judge in the world who would not cut permanent alimony in your situation if there aren’t any assets. Instead of spending 2100.00 a month go to court. Unless there assets u don’t mention here for u all to live on in comfort. U can’t speak about everyone’s situation regarding alimony. Have u thought about that shoe could be on the other foot? The ex being disabled.

      • Stephen Yurs

        April 7, 2016 at 5:58 pm

        http://www.cyclejustice.com/News/Featured-Case-Results.aspx

        Million Dollar Verdicts & Settlements – Motor Vehicles – Punitive Damages – Wrongful Death – Motorcycle Accident – Alcohol Provided to Minors at Party

        RESULT: $ 3,029,875.56 for Plaintiffs. (verdict)

        ($ 11,875.56 — loss of property damage; $ 18,000 — punitive damages; $ 1,500,000 for Jeanine: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering; $ 1,500,000 for Jeffrey: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering).

        Cause Of Injury: Defendants Karen and Robert Librizzi hosted a sleep over on August 12, 2006, at their residence in Bradenton for their daughter, Defendant Lauren, who was eighteen years old, and some of her girlfriends, to celebrate Lauren going off to college. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants Karen and Robert provided alcohol to minors, including decedent and Defendant Ricky Rowell, who was twenty years old. Decedent and Defendant Ricky met at the Librizzi house; after consuming some drinks, Defendant Ricky offered to take decedent for a ride on his motorcycle, which was owned by himself and his father, Defendant Grover. Defendant Ricky then crashed the motorcycle at a high rate of speed at or near Rye Road at the intersection of Upper Manatee River Road. Decedent died from injuries sustained in the crash. Decedent’s blood-alcohol content was .88 percent at the time of her death.

        Nature Of Injury: Death. Decedent was survived by her parents, Jeanine Gregory and Jeffrey Bien, and a sister, Johnna Brennan.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 8:21 pm

          ^^The Real #CraCra aka Fake Stephen.

          Repeater Repeater Repeater

        • Karen Librizzi

          April 8, 2016 at 8:14 am

          Stephen yuhrs. I don’t care what u post about what u think u know about me. This article has nothing to do with your posting yet u continue to try and use it against me. Sorry to tell u pal nobody’s listening!!

          • Stephen Yurs

            April 8, 2016 at 12:50 pm

            This article has to do with equal timesharing bill which you and your buddies say is “dangerous” for kids, you killed a teenager. You say you are a good parent? Hmmmmm so why were you found guilty? Btw to your buddies one who has had children die on her watch and to the three time baker acted, I am real, I have proven it to Facebook 2 times with my id so too bad if you don’t like the truth.

            http://www.cyclejustice.com/News/Featured-Case-Results.aspx

            Million Dollar Verdicts & Settlements – Motor Vehicles – Punitive Damages – Wrongful Death – Motorcycle Accident – Alcohol Provided to Minors at Party

            RESULT: $ 3,029,875.56 for Plaintiffs. (verdict)

            ($ 11,875.56 — loss of property damage; $ 18,000 — punitive damages; $ 1,500,000 for Jeanine: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering; $ 1,500,000 for Jeffrey: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering).

            Cause Of Injury: Defendants Karen and Robert Librizzi hosted a sleep over on August 12, 2006, at their residence in Bradenton for their daughter, Defendant Lauren, who was eighteen years old, and some of her girlfriends, to celebrate Lauren going off to college. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants Karen and Robert provided alcohol to minors, including decedent and Defendant Ricky Rowell, who was twenty years old. Decedent and Defendant Ricky met at the Librizzi house; after consuming some drinks, Defendant Ricky offered to take decedent for a ride on his motorcycle, which was owned by himself and his father, Defendant Grover. Defendant Ricky then crashed the motorcycle at a high rate of speed at or near Rye Road at the intersection of Upper Manatee River Road. Decedent died from injuries sustained in the crash. Decedent’s blood-alcohol content was .88 percent at the time of her death.

            Nature Of Injury: Death. Decedent was survived by her parents, Jeanine Gregory and Jeffrey Bien, and a sister, Johnna Brennan.

          • #CraCra

            April 8, 2016 at 7:27 pm

            Stephen, ROBIN ACTUALLY KILLED SOMEONE.

            Spread those facts.

            The more you post that article, the more everyone realizes that Karen had nothing to do with killing anyone. The motorcyclist killed someone which was an accident.

            You must live a very pathetic and hatful life if you must project your ills onto so many other people. What are you hiding…must be YUGEEEEE if you’d go to such great lengths to hurt others.

        • Lies

          April 8, 2016 at 9:43 am

          I dug some online and you are giving misleading information Mr. Yurs. This is what I found regarding Karen Librizzi. http://www.manateeclerk.com/DesktopModules/Chips/OfficialRecords/documentviewer.aspx?rsn=3019393

          This shows that the case was dismissed against Librizzi. I also found this link: http://www.manateeclerk.com/DesktopModules/Chips/OfficialRecords/documentviewer.aspx?rsn=3127842

          That link shows the full judgment was against the young man who was riding the motorcycle with the young lady as a passenger.

          You shouldn’t be slamming Ms. Librizzi because she was not found liable for anything in the court case, and posting the above is misleading to the general public.

  • Nick

    April 7, 2016 at 3:26 am

    You aren’t owed a lifestyle because your relationship or marriage ended. You are responsible for yourself. If you fail to be such, it is on you and no one else.

    • Karen librizzi

      April 7, 2016 at 9:40 am

      Nick I wonder how old u r? How many life experiences u have had? One size doesn’t fit all in a divorce.

      • Stephen Yurs

        April 7, 2016 at 5:57 pm

        http://www.cyclejustice.com/News/Featured-Case-Results.aspx

        Million Dollar Verdicts & Settlements – Motor Vehicles – Punitive Damages – Wrongful Death – Motorcycle Accident – Alcohol Provided to Minors at Party

        RESULT: $ 3,029,875.56 for Plaintiffs. (verdict)

        ($ 11,875.56 — loss of property damage; $ 18,000 — punitive damages; $ 1,500,000 for Jeanine: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering; $ 1,500,000 for Jeffrey: $ 750,000 — past pain and suffering; $ 750,000 — future pain and suffering).

        Cause Of Injury: Defendants Karen and Robert Librizzi hosted a sleep over on August 12, 2006, at their residence in Bradenton for their daughter, Defendant Lauren, who was eighteen years old, and some of her girlfriends, to celebrate Lauren going off to college. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants Karen and Robert provided alcohol to minors, including decedent and Defendant Ricky Rowell, who was twenty years old. Decedent and Defendant Ricky met at the Librizzi house; after consuming some drinks, Defendant Ricky offered to take decedent for a ride on his motorcycle, which was owned by himself and his father, Defendant Grover. Defendant Ricky then crashed the motorcycle at a high rate of speed at or near Rye Road at the intersection of Upper Manatee River Road. Decedent died from injuries sustained in the crash. Decedent’s blood-alcohol content was .88 percent at the time of her death.

        Nature Of Injury: Death. Decedent was survived by her parents, Jeanine Gregory and Jeffrey Bien, and a sister, Johnna Brennan.

        • #CraCra

          April 7, 2016 at 8:19 pm

          ^^ The Real #CraCra aka Fake Stephen

        • Karen librizzi.

          April 8, 2016 at 4:54 pm

          Yuhrs u r so funny. Did u find that I’m guilty there too. Guess what? My husband may not like u posting that one. U see HE lied to police two weeks after papers were filed that he was divorced and living in OUR condo with his girlfriend. Didn’t want me to have evidence so he lied to get me arrested. U r such a lowlife that there r no words for u. U and he could be best friends. U r one sick cockroach.

          • Stephen Yurs

            April 8, 2016 at 8:34 pm

            Nothing funny about being arrested. How does that feel? I was never arrested can you explain what happens when you get arrested?

    • Jamie Karl

      April 8, 2016 at 12:26 am

      Succinctly put. You are responsible for yourself. You own your shit, your choices, your outcomes, and the responsibility for those outcomes. It’s that simple.

  • Robert Sell

    April 7, 2016 at 11:26 am

    It’s obvious from the comments from those who support the current government system of marriage to grave ownership of people’s private lives and the multi-billion dollar milking of their livelihoods and assets, that true reform will never happen from within the system. Our children must be educated to the ramifications of signing their name to a state marriage license and what that truly means. I.e. that they are marrying the state and it’s corrupt family law institutions. The very evil that they will experience at the hands of those running it and who benefit from it.
    Once they know the truth and avoid that slave contract with the state, the system will fall apart on it’s own.

  • Robert Sell

    April 7, 2016 at 11:28 am

    It’s obvious from the comments from those who support the current government system of marriage to grave ownership of people’s private lives and the multi-billion dollar milking of their livelihoods and assets, that true reform will never happen from within the system. Our children must be educated to the ramifications of signing their name to a state marriage license and what that truly means. I.e. that they are marrying the state and it’s corrupt family law institutions. The very evil that they will experience at the hands of those running it and who benefit from it.
    Once they know the truth and avoid that slave contract with the state, the system will fall apart on it’s own.

  • Roger F. Gay

    April 7, 2016 at 2:34 pm

    Oooo …. somebody obviously doesn’t care about the children. Just wants an unwilling sugar daddy for herself.

  • Jim Hays

    April 7, 2016 at 6:51 pm

    The 2 biological MARRIED family in America is disintegrating because it is government regulated by family courts, destroyed by bar associations, which foster policies like sole custody and no fault divorce which provide income transfers to (mostly) women to divorce their partners generally for convenience. That doesn’t mean that either a man or woman doesn’t lvoe and cre for their children and are in need of government interfering in their family. Gee, the author “Delegal” is part of “Delegal Law Offices”! Perhaps it is income protection by the Bar Association which fosters this opinion. I support SB668.

  • Lee Kallett

    April 7, 2016 at 7:17 pm

    I received a private message to post my alimony horror story posted here. This was recorded and posted by Family Law Reform. This is why I advocate for reform. https://youtu.be/l523XAgv_vc

    • #CraCra

      April 8, 2016 at 12:38 am

      Yippee Ki Ya…Comedy Sketch Gold!

  • Kumud

    April 7, 2016 at 10:05 pm

    I am women and worked whole my life. All women can work. Please sign the SB 668, we do not want lazy people on earth

  • Jamie Karl

    April 7, 2016 at 11:59 pm

    Disagree.

    It’s anti-misandrist, and pro-family. It will encourage people to think of the kids, and their partners, and not just themselves and their entitlement to do whatever they damned please bugger the consequences for others, the child, or society. It will create families more likely to stay together, and every piece of science on the matter shows beyond question, that two parents are better than one, for societies outcomes, and the childrens outcomes.

    Anything less is selfish.

    There couldn’t be anything more equality providing, than a better deal for dads in the wildly sexist current family law environment – and something that by empowering men as fathers, is likely to keep families together, unlike feminism which has undoubtedly by placing the solo mum above all other stakeholders, broken the family.

    I can’t believe someone espousing the very notions that have destroyed the family, is claiming the reversal of their irresponsbly nonsense is anti-family. It’s very rich, tbh.

    This is the future. You are the past, and the future will see you as such.

  • Jamie Karl

    April 8, 2016 at 12:11 am

    This reform should be happening everywhere in the world.

  • Robert Cohen

    April 8, 2016 at 9:02 am

    Only an elite few make enough money to support a non-working spouse. Most families need two incomes to get by. Mine did. But after divorce, I was ordered to pay half my income in permanent alimony so my ex-wife could retire young. Sign the bill and end permanent alimony.

  • David Feder

    April 8, 2016 at 9:36 am

    I agree with the need for case-by-case discernments, but this should apply to all aspects, including alimony. Alimony is the only job on Earth that you can get fired from or quit — or even sabotage the “store” and completely destroy the business, THEN quit — and the law forces your former “employer” to keep paying you a salary.
    I personally believe all divorce/custody cases should be handled in such a manner as to shield the judge from the gender of the petitioner and respondent. Individual testimony can be recorded, deposition-style, by the clerk then de-gendered to merely “P” and “R” and submitted to the judge.

  • Tammy Bickford

    April 10, 2016 at 9:34 pm

    SB 668 is a fair and balanced bill. The opposers don’t like it because right now the law is slanted on their side. This is 2016 USA. It’s time for the pendulum to land in the fair and balance middle.

  • Stephanie Grenole

    April 11, 2016 at 10:18 pm

    It’s impressive to see all these men’s rights people from all over the United States descending on this article simultaneously to bolster and shake their pom-poms for their own ignorance, bigotry, and crudeness.

    So a little summary: we are discussing a bill here, SB 668.

    Opposing this bill is a confederation of groups: women’s groups, family court judges (some active, some retired), the Family Law Section, child welfare advocates, domestic violence activists, social workers (shedding light on the strain 668 will put on the DCF and social services system), and other people who have carefully studied the provisions and realize the hitches, contradictions, and unjustices innate to the bill and recognize the unintended consequences that will follow.

    On the other side, the pro-668 team, we have alimony payors. Yes, just them: just they and their egotistical shadows. Also, to add a fescennine element to their selfishness, we also have the “men’s rights” people that they’ve recruited (and perhaps hired) from outside of Florida to call and email the governor’s office and fill these comment sections with their unhinged, uneducated drivel about “feminism.”

    But let’s talk a little sense about the bill, and why decent-thinking people are opposed to it:

    First off, it’s retroactive, meaning that it will apply to settlements that have already been agreed to. This might not sound too bad to those against lifetime alimony, until you learn that in many divorce agreements, lifetime alimony was agreed to by the payor because the recipient ceded a claim to a large marital asset (like the house). So now you are going to re-open already settled agreements, and tell the recipient, “Remember when you gave up your half of the house for alimony. Surprise! Now you don’t get either!” Who would defend that as fair?

    Secondly, the bill’s guidelines for alimony length are deceitful and intentionally misleading. As first blush, it sounds fair that alimony should end after a number of years sufficient to allow the recipient to re-train, re-marry, or re-fashion their lives however they see fit. The two ex-partners should be able to go their separate ways at some point. So why did the pro-668 people include the 10% trigger, which is a trigger that comes into effect whenever the recipient has a 10% increase in income. Understand, not a 10% increase in wages or salary; a 10% increase in income, which can be loads of things: anything from an emergency withdrawal from a 401k for a medical emergency to a COLA increase from a job, which is just inflation and not a real increase in wages. So, for instance, a woman who has an alimony reward for 7 years, and is working hard to re-train and then be employed so that by year 7, she’s self-sufficient, could see her alimony terminated in year 3 (depending on inflation). Is it fair, is it aboveboard, that the bill’s stated guidelines of alimony rewards would be undercut by an innocuous-sounding 10% trigger? The pro-668 people like to laugh this one off.

    This is getting long, so I’ll just quickly mention that the third major objection is to allowing the payor to suspend payments during modification, which will obviously encourage frivolous motions. (In other states, those payments must be put into an escrow, to be dispersed at judgment. Here in Florida, they’re allowed to go up in smoke, in reality, not on paper. Enforcement being a major problem that pro-668 people don’t worry their heads about.)

    And the fourth major problem is the 50/50. Posters below are bleating about “equality,” without seeing past this abstraction. What 50/50 means in reality, in the Florida family court system, is that abusers, rapists, and other miscreants will automatically get an “equal” chance with children they’ve sired, and that the mothers will be required to spend money and time they mayn’t have litigating to protect their children.

    Now, not every man is a rapist or an abuser, certainly, but this exposes another flaw in 668: laws apply to everyone, good guy and bad. So when one proposes a bill like 668, you have to consult experts to make sure the bad guys aren’t given an unforeseen advantage in the court system.

    In other states (Mass, NY, VT), the legislatures have done just this by forming a neutral task force of experts: judges, women’s groups, et al. In fact, every group that is expressly against 668. And the task force makes recommendations to change the law, based on REALITY, based on experience, based on facts. And that’s all the opponents of 668 want: fair laws for everyone.

    Thanks

    PS. To the guy from New Zealand, yes, you all have alimony (aka spousal support) there, too.

    • John Waldorf

      April 12, 2016 at 7:19 am

      Stephanie, If you don’t see a conflict of interest here in Ms Delegal comments, maybe pick up a Blacks Law dictionary. Laws with more judiciary discretion and vagueness just open up a divorcing couples pocket for the transfer of martial assets to the Family Law Attorney pockets. Take your blinders off and see what the opposition is really all about. It’s about Lawyers and Bar Associations protecting their income. They do not really care about what is in the best interest of their clients, they care about the best interest of their bank accounts.

    • Diana H

      April 12, 2016 at 8:10 am

      About 90% of that post of yours is wrong, lies, false information. I don’t even know where to start to correct you!
      It is scary how far the opponents of SB668
      go. Lies. Threats. Faul language.
      SB668 is a step in the right direction! It’s a step towards more equality!
      I support SB668 (and I am not personally effected by the bill!)

Comments are closed.


#FlaPol

Florida Politics is a statewide, new media platform covering campaigns, elections, government, policy, and lobbying in Florida. This platform and all of its content are owned by Extensive Enterprises Media.

Publisher: Peter Schorsch

Contributors & reporters: Phil Ammann, Jason Delgado, Drew Dixon, Renzo Downey, Rick Flagg, A.G. Gancarski, Joe Henderson, Janelle Irwin, Ryan Nicol, Jacob Ogles, Scott Powers, Andrew Wilson, and Kelly Hayes.

Email: Peter@FloridaPolitics.com
Phone: (727) 642-3162
Address: 204 37th Avenue North #182
St. Petersburg, Florida 33704