Alimony reform group hits new low with derogatory Facebook post

Facepalm_statue-1024x1024
It’s usually not surprising for men’s rights groups to cross the line.

Perhaps it’s not surprising for men’s rights groups to cross the line. It’s seemingly their raison d’être.

But the Florida Family Law Reform PAC more than crossed a line on Monday.

The group used the inspiring story of Haley Moss, the first openly-autistic lawyer admitted to the Florida Bar, as fodder for its ongoing quest to quash permanent alimony.

The Facebook post has an innocuous enough start: “We celebrate this woman’s accomplishment. She set a goal for herself and achieved it despite having to work harder to do it.”

But then it turns on a dime, exhibiting the kind of mordacious mood swing typical of the committee and its ilk: “Lifetime alimony recipients should read this heartwarming story and be inspired to accomplish goals to become self-sufficient and independent after divorce.”

There’s always an angle isn’t there?

The Florida Family Law Reform PAC is one of a handful of groups that’s been pushing to end permanent alimony for years, and every year that effort has failed. A bill striking “forever alimony” from Florida law even got as far as the Governor’s desk only to be met by the veto hammer.

Leave it to the perennial losers to offer up unsolicited advice, amirite?

Still, there’s one more thing to suss out in that brief post.

Their far-from-deft use of an autistic Floridian’s accomplishments to inspire alimony recipients to become self-sufficient is only the surface. Underneath, there’s a striking lack of self-awareness.

Take a 30,000-foot view of the alimony reform battle.

On the one side are the alimony payers — largely men — who say they shouldn’t have to shell out their hard-earned money ad aeternum. On the other side are the recipients — mostly women — who say those payments are needed to keep them afloat as they re-enter the workforce, sometimes after years of homemaking and raising children.

One might say those recipients were key in propping up an illusion for their begrudging exes. An illusion where they were, how to put it … self-sufficient?

Peter Schorsch

Peter Schorsch is the President of Extensive Enterprises Media and is the publisher of FloridaPolitics.com, INFLUENCE Magazine, and Sunburn, the morning read of what’s hot in Florida politics. Peter lives in St. Petersburg with his wife, Michelle, and their daughter, Ella.


47 comments

  • Alan Elkins

    March 5, 2019 at 9:13 am

    I cannot comment on the Facebook post as I have not read it. I can however comment on the part of the divorce industry of which I have been a practitioner, as a family law attorney, for the last 40 years. I have also been paying permanent alimony for 18 years of my 20 year marriage. Your portrail of the typical alimony payer is incorrect. The bill presented does not favor one gender over the other. It is much more common now to see women having to pay. In fact, I believe that there are more women graduating college and law school now then men. In many of the cases I am currently handling, it is the wife who is out earning the husband.

    What’s the bill,that we have proposed, does is bring some balance and sanity to the equation. We are not anti-alimony, we are anti-permanent alimony in most instances. Guidelines bring consistency which is what we are striving for.

    I am of the belief that if you give people free stuff forever until you die, they die or they remarry there is a little or no incentive for them to become self-sufficient.

    If you would like to discuss this matter in greater detail I will be happy to do so.

    • Shelley McKaughan

      March 5, 2019 at 6:35 pm

      My birthday is early this year, yippee!

      So can you please provide data on how many wives outearn husbands? If you are providing antidotal evidence please state it as such.

      How often do florida courts award permanent alimony and under what circumstances? (Say in the past 5 years)

      Would you consider stopping alimony payments, while litigating alimony modification a coercive tactic? Esp in light of the fact that alimony does not allow for savings?

      In light of your personal story, I’ve known a few people who would take lesser paying jobs that provide a value to society simply because they have that oppurtunity while their spouse makes enough to keep the family a float. Is it a factor if that was acceptable during the marriage?

      I think I’ll go read the bill. I would love to have rational, fact based discussions on this issue.

      Well and one more thing, I’m not a lawyer, but I happen to know New grad attorneys in Florida make 40,000 per year, I learned that from the fl bar at a commission on access to civil justice meeting, I don’t see increases in women attorneys changing the whole social order just yet.

      • Factual and Rational

        March 6, 2019 at 2:53 pm

        According to the US Census Bureau, 25% of married couples have a wife who earns more than the husband.

        According to Florida Vital Statistics, approximately 20,000 Floridians per year qualify for permanent alimony. Close to a million since 1970.

        Your third question is not germane to the topic at hand, except for the fact that clarification of the law if this bill is passed would substantially reduce alimony disputes and likely the situation you mention. Of course that is why the Florida Bar doesn’t want this fixed, because it is better to keep the ambiguity and animosity in order to further litigation and fees.

        Alimony does not allow for savings on either side. It also binds both parties to a dissolved marriage and penalizes both sides for improvement post divorce. Both parties should be encouraged to thrive not be disincentivized.

        Distribution of assets and debts, combined with rehabilitative and/or durational alimony addresses the concern of a spouse who was underemployed during the marriage by mutual choice.

        The bill does not end alimony. It sets real guidelines and addresses some glaring problems in the current system.

        • Mary Jones

          March 8, 2019 at 11:48 pm

          Alimony does not penalize the payor for savings; it penalizes the recipient harshly. Durational does not address the concerns of reduced income earning power for the SAHS. If you think that lawyers won’t find ways to keep their fees high you are fooling yourself. A fixed fee is the only answer. If you can solve these things while protecting the SAHS from poverty, you might be able to resolve this mess. The current bills do not accomplish this.

          • Tammy

            March 12, 2019 at 7:47 am

            Mary Jones,

            It doesn’t penalize a payer for saving? I beg to differ. If the payer does manage to save then he/she is deemed as being able to well afford the alimony. If that money is paid into a retirement vehicle then they are deemed to have income that can sustain the alimony. So YES, the payer is penalized, GREATLY. But the biggest penalty of all is having NOTHING left over to save.

        • Shelley McKaughan

          March 10, 2019 at 8:00 pm

          The third question in not germane, as that was a component of the last bill, which was vetoed.

          Please elaborate on what statistic you are citing specifically, that says 20,000 Floridians qualify per year for permanent alimony? What makes them qualified?

          Because I would hate the public to be misled on the facts of permanent alimony.

          According to Florida vital stats for 2017 there were 75k divorces, only 8k occurred at 15-19 years of marriage, and 5k occurred at 20-24 years of marriage, (most occurred at 5-9 years which would be very rare to qualify for permanent alimony); these statistics do not say any of them got alimony as they are not measuring that. If you are correct that 25 percent of wives out earned husbands its likely significantly fewer than 20,0000 of these divorces resulted in a permanent alimony award.

          Now, Ive read this long and verbose bill, section 11 outlines extensive guidelines for the person being paid, and imputation of income if unemployed. Why are there no such guidelines listed for the person paying (who has a much higher motivation to be voluntarily underemployed)?

          Why is the supportive relationship of the person being paid relevant, yet the supportive relationship of the one paying is not relevant? I mean imagine the paying person just transfers and keeps all assets in the name of the supportive relationship, to shelter them from being accounted for in support determinations? (yes I do recall the last version of the bill attempted to block any discovery on the supportive relationship of the person paying, yet wanted it wide open on the supportive relationship of the person receiving alimony). This version is certainly worded more cleverly, but the intent is the same.

          What is the motivation to make this bill retroactive, when past awards where awarded under different circumstances, and different legal guidelines, and different social structures? (it was already vetoed for being retroactive once before)

          What is the motivation to allow this amendment to constitute a “significant change” in order to allow modification proceedings. I really do not get that logic other than a sneaky way to open ALL past alimony awards (talk about a boom for family lawyers).

          And lastly are you aware of how many parents will be applying for food stamps and public assistance if both parents have the children 50% of the time? Depending on the source, Florida has 2 to 3 million people living in poverty (we rank #34 or 35), it sounds to me like your bill will create a whole lot more poverty and strain on Florida by means of dividing scarce resources.

          Are you aware that after 50/50 is instituted in other countries it tends to revert back to one parent having the primary household after about 2 years for the sake of practicality? More child support battles could be expected at that point I guess, or the children can just be expected to do without the available resources.

  • Natalie Willis

    March 5, 2019 at 10:45 am

    As a female lifetime alimony payer who was worked very hard throughout my life, I take exception to this inflammatory and biased article, which gives the term ” fake news” new meaning.
    The supposed ” new low” post shows that people with disabilities seen become educated and independent members of society. The post also points out that many able bodied alimony recipients refuse to work at all. And this is a true statement. Since when is writing about successful women, ” a new low”?
    More and more women are paying alimony. The majority of medical and law students, are now female. Lifetime Alimony was created when women were discouraged from having careers. Today, women can achieve whatever they want. Hence alimony is now being paid by women. The implication that alimony reform is a men vs women issue, is just not true.
    Alimony Reform does NOT seek to abolish alimony. Reform efforts instead seek to make alimony fair for both sides.
    Why Peter Schorsch has chosen to take sides in this topic, instead of reporting the unbiased news , is beyond reason. I have an undergraduate degree in journalism. This article would have taken the weekly salami prize for the most unprofessional writing for a journalist.

    • Your worst nightmare

      March 5, 2019 at 10:25 pm

      Peter, if you want literally thousands of screenshots of what all of these reformers have said about women, men and yes, even children, just pull my email address from this comment. Or check out my twitter. I follow you.

  • Tammy Bickford

    March 5, 2019 at 1:56 pm

    Geeez Peter could you be anymore transparent with your views??? You lacked any real “trying” to stay unbiased for this article and EVERY article you have written about alimony reform. Do you also think that welfare recipients should also get it for life? Because lifetime alimony is nothing short of privatized welfare

    No one is against alimony but lifetime is ridiculous. Especially when the recipient is in her/his early 40’s.

    Could it be that Peter’s wife out earns him and he could potentially be a recipient if he should get divorced??

  • Andre

    March 5, 2019 at 2:10 pm

    Do you pay alimony? What if someone cheated on you and now you have to afford this persons adult life, while you and struggle to pay rent and buy food? How about kids? Would you be happy to
    Lose your drivers license and go to jail, and not be able to afford education to your kids because your partner decided to divorce and live on your dollar? Drink a big cup of coffee and wake up!! You don’t know what you are talking about.

    • Factual and rational

      March 6, 2019 at 3:02 pm

      No fault divorce and permanent alimony should not co-exist. For the victim of adultery, abuse or domestic violence to be required at the threat of prison to pay the perpetrator is unconscionable.

  • Nevada Bedwell

    March 5, 2019 at 2:44 pm

    This article is ridiculous and obviously done by a politically motivated pawn of the Florida family bar. I was married for only 14 years when I got hit with life time alimony just a few months ago ( Nov 2018). So my x wife must be disabled your think ? Nope. Must not be educated , nope she has a BSN and currently makes 80k a year. I make 145k a year. So the state of Florida thinks it’s ok I just pay her for he rest of my life ? ! Please. Oh and she gets 1000 month from my military retirement pay for life on top of the 1500 in alimony and 1500 in child support. Yes add that up. She makes more than me now and works 4 days a week. She actually testified that she does not want to work any Friday, Sat or Sunday’s. This was ok with the judge here in Lee county. Many counties in Florida are controlled by the big law firms in there respective counties. That is what happened to me. 20 years of active duty device , 2 wars later and my reward from the state of Florida ? Bankruptcy but hey my x is living well and gets a 3 day weekend every week.

    • Wife of Military Veteran

      March 6, 2019 at 6:32 pm

      I’m so sorry to hear your story. My husband is a 25 year disabled veteran, strapped to lifetime alimony in NJ. He’s been paying 17 years on a 15 year marriage. She fakes a disability and says she’s “depressed”. My husband has severe disabilities, yet he has to pay her with his disability retirement. These unfair laws affect WOMEN, if you care to count the man paying has a new wife, who cannot work, because she has to take care of her disabled husband, and has no way to save for her future. His ex has contributed to his PTSD,dragging him into court for close to 2 decades. I applaud FL for their accomplishment!

    • Mary Jones

      March 8, 2019 at 11:39 pm

      You should appeal, unless there is more to the story than you are presenting, what you describe is against FL statute.

      • Nevada Bedwell

        March 12, 2019 at 10:08 am

        Appeal – it does matter if it is against the statutes. Family Law Judges in Florida do what ever they want. There are zero rules basically for them to go by. Abuse of judicial power in this state is insane when it comes to family law. Big law firms pedal influence and it’s a way for judges to “ pay “ them back for contributions. People generally don’t care and it’s not watched like criminal cases. It’s the case cow of law in Florida. I did appeal but the odds of a successful appeal are slim at best. Even when a appeal results in a reversal it is sent back to same judge and they just issue more bizzarw judgements. They try to find away around what the appeals court say. The only way this gets fixed is by changing the laws and NO MORE discretion for judges period.

  • Robert

    March 5, 2019 at 4:29 pm

    The author of this piece is so completely clueless. In the paragraph ”

    On the one side are the alimony payers — largely men — who say they shouldn’t have to shell out their hard-earned money ad aeternum. On the other side are the recipients — mostly women — who say those payments are needed to keep them afloat as they re-enter the workforce, sometimes after years of homemaking and raising children.”

    With permanent alimony there is absolutely no incentive for a former spouse to re-enter the workforce since they can sit back and do nothing and get paid the rest of their lives. Most of these permanent alimony leeches are perfectly capable and have the skills to work they just choose not to because they do not have to.

  • Deborah Leff-Kelapire

    March 5, 2019 at 4:42 pm

    If an autistic woman can become an attorney, why can’t a divorced person achieve something? Not sure why this is such an offensive post. No one is trying to eliminate alimony, only permanent alimony. Only a few states in the US still have permanent alimony. It is kind of like having a VCR – it’s antiquated and doesn’t make sense anymore. This is not journalism by any definition. This is a biased opinion piece. Any journalist worth their salt knows you show both sides of the story. Since the author neglected to show the other side of the story, here it is. This is worth your time to watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aFVzfMoM1M.

    • Shelley McKaughan

      March 5, 2019 at 6:54 pm

      Ummmm new attorney in fl make 40,000 a year. Not seeing how your recommendation makes any sense what so ever. In fact one attorny I had in the very start out and out told me I made more money than she did…. sure all ex wives go to law school…..btw there are some things people with autism can be exceptional at….it does not mean everyone can do it, or all people with autism can do it… this is what makes your groups post in poor taste.

    • Debbie

      March 5, 2019 at 7:44 pm

      So if you start out making 40k per year while receiving alimony, by the time your alimony is over (as it is in most states), you could be earning much more even six figures if you work hard. Being a perpetual victim is so unhealthy and unattractive.

      • Debbie

        March 5, 2019 at 8:19 pm

        I neglected to mention we have members (both male and female) of our PAC who earn 40k per year yet are paying lifetime alimony. Lifetime alimony is paid at all income levels.

        • Shelley McKaughan

          March 12, 2019 at 6:39 am

          unfortunately or fortunately, I am fairly analytical and like to make decisions based on facts and data….we can all tell many sad stories, and apparently that is very effective is persuading people…However, let’s look at the facts! Women (even women with careers) peak in their earnings in their 50’s. Men do not. It is unlikely a woman going back to school in their 40″s or 50’s will ever payoff their student loan debt, let alone recover their lost earning potential. That is the reality. I in fact know women personally, who did get some education in a trade and entered the workforce at 50, they still make a poverty level income.

          I personally know attorneys with 23 years experience who make much less that 6 figures.

          lastly, considering how you choose to behave, and who you choose to associate with, makes your opinion on what is HEALTHY or ATTRACTIVE totally irrelevant. But I guess if you must keep a man to survive, it must be what YOU need to concern yourself with. you have a good day now ya here.

          • Tammy

            March 12, 2019 at 7:44 am

            Shelley McKaughan,

            “But I guess if you must keep a man to survive, it must be what YOU need to concern yourself with.”

            You’re kidding right??? You are on an article about permanent alimony, advocating for the continuance of it, to the detriment of ALL of the payers and you have the nerve to say WE have to have a man to survive??? You truly are hilarious. Taking out your bitterness you have for your own failed relationship on a whole segment of the population isn’t HEALTHY or ATTRACTIVE. Especially when it’s a spiteful vengeance and actually serves to undermine women and their equality in the world.
            BTW, none of us NEED a man to survive. Or a woman to survive. If anything it is the payer who needs us because they have been bankrupted and reduced to poverty level take home pay. Nope….for us, it’s not what we can take from a relationship, it’s what we give and what we get. We enjoy healthy fulfilling relationships. You should try it sometime if you are capable.

  • Alan Frisher

    March 5, 2019 at 4:51 pm

    Peter, I agree with you that the leaders of Florida Family Reform Pac took an amazing accomplishment from an otherwise ‘disabled?’ individual and turned it around to justify their own agenda. That was a poor decision made by some emotionally charged individuals who should not be in a leadership role. That said, it is still critical that currrent divorce law be reformed, especially where permanent alimony is concerned. AS the former leader of Florida Alimony Reform and Family Law Reform, I was instruemental in working with the Family Section of the Florida Bar, as well as key Legislators in moving two alimony reform bills through numerous House and Sentate committees and ultimately on to the desk of Governor Scott for his signature. It was a shame that one man had the power to veto an entire bill that passed by super majority votes in both the House and Senate instead of just line item vetoing the specific area of the bill he objected to. It gives one pause to think that maybe our former Governor Scott put his own (political) agenda above the needs of the people of the great State of Florida. Maybe, in that regard, the Florida Family Law Reform PAC is fighting fire with fire and doing the same thing? I do not condone or support their use of this Autistic Attorney to further their agenda for reform, and certainly will never condone or support a Govenor (now Senator) who avoids signing controversial bills to further his own political carreer.
    Peter, please look at the facts as to why alimony reform is so controversial, but necessary. Your job is to report the news. If you want to give an opinion and use your column to do so, you should first understand the facts of the issue. I would be happy to help educate you as to why alimony reform is absolutely necessary in todays society.–Alan Frisher, Former President of Family Law Reform.

  • Ray Blacklidge

    March 5, 2019 at 4:57 pm

    Peter, please educate yourself more on this important issue. The group you lambasted agrees that sometimes payments are needed to keep divorced women afloat as they re-enter the workforce. What they are objecting to is long term and lifetime alimony that is basically making them indentured servants.

  • tim shepard

    March 5, 2019 at 5:19 pm

    This article is hot bigoted garbage. There is no reason or legal basis for Alimony to EVER be awarded in a no fault divorce.
    You cannot keep punishing innocent parties without a fair hearing. That goes against every principle of law and US Liberty.
    Feminist supremacists like the author keep trying to mislead the public about the facts. Read http://www.RealWorldDivorce.com for a scholarly, well researched treatment of the Alimony racket and ignore the propagandists like Peter Schorsh

  • Bill. Ull

    March 5, 2019 at 5:32 pm

    Churchill defined success as continued failure with no loss of enthusiasm. Alimony reform will succeed this time in Florida. The misery level is now deafening.

    The enemy in Florida (as in all states with permanent alimony) is the State Bar. The Family Bar has more to lose then those of us who are/were saddled with the death sentence known as permanent alimony.

    Bill Null
    Former permanent alimony payor.
    New Jersey

  • Stephan

    March 5, 2019 at 6:46 pm

    Alan Frisher,
    You need to stay out of any comments, you ate and got fat off a lot of donations and failed terribly, you were and are a terrible face for family law reform. Please don’t put your nose into our business.

    Stay away!

    Family law reform part 1 will pass this year god willing

  • Your worst nightmare HAGs

    March 5, 2019 at 10:32 pm

    Peter, I don’t know if you will see this or not, but just email me. I will give you enough material to write a book, including evidence that the pac is tied to the now ‘unpublished’ First Husbands Advocacy Group. We lovingly call them HAGs. All of material ranges from a lawyer who supports their agenda engaging in sever defamation, to one of those men’s right activists telling a 14 year old child to just kill herself, to shaming the lgbtq community and more.

  • Jason G.

    March 6, 2019 at 12:36 am

    You said it all, Peter, when you stated “as they re-enter the workforce”.

    How many people re-enter the workforce for 15..16…or 20 years?

    I don’t think anyone is arguing AGAINST alimony when and where it is needed. But for life? Come on, sir. You make it sound as if those receiving payments aren’t capable of ever supporting themselves.

    That’s just ridiculous. And as you state that women more often receive payments, I think you may be more sexist than those you are accusing of it.

  • Jeff binnig

    March 6, 2019 at 2:46 am

    Garbage article written by garbage humans.

  • Robert Sell

    March 6, 2019 at 6:33 am

    Rest assured, there is no low permanent alimony supporters won’t go to in order to keep their unconstitutional law. Lies, misrepresentation, feigned victim-hood, feigned helplessness,innuendo, and shaming of their opposition such as shown here.
    There is no shame in wanting to be free and to have your civil and human rights protected. The state has never put forth a reasoned justification for intruding into and rummaging around in and ultimately destroying people’s private lives and relationships. The state is where the shaming should begin and end. The state operates this system designed to deny people their pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.

    It’s never easy to get evil out of your life and in the case of a state marriage license nearly impossible after the fact when in the beginning all that’s needed is to just say no. It’s past time for the state to reform family laws and stop keeping humans in captivity to be tormented until death.

    • Your worst nightmare

      March 6, 2019 at 12:55 pm

      Yes Shelley and the cost of that new degree is not even discussed. Depending upon the former education level, whether the credits taken are even good still, and many otger factors, no discussion is made by them as to how much the former spouse will be in debt for an education that will bring them to a 40k a year career. And add to that going up against other new lawyers in their late 20’s with another 35 years to give to a law firm versus a possible decade that the former spouse will have?

  • Robert Rosenthal

    March 6, 2019 at 7:52 am

    Peter,
    If married 17 years in Fl you get lifetime alimony….the day after my 17th anniversary I was told to get out. I went back 3 time and told to get out again and again. At 45 years old I was told I had to pay lifetime alimony to a healthy able bodied 45 year old who received all the assets while I took all the debt. By the time I am 65 I will have paid in MORE years then I was married! WE ARE NOT AGAINST ALIMONY! WE ARE AGAINST LIFETIME ALIMONY! Life changes. If still married and I lost a job the lifestyle changes….if a partner dies lifestyle changes so at the end of a marriage why wouldn’t you expect lifestyle to change. No one was bring down the accomplishment of the young lady that became a lawyer. We commend her and she should be seen as an inspiration for all those that wine my life requires someone else to provide for me!

  • Manny P

    March 6, 2019 at 9:35 am

    Seems like he contradicts himself. He writes “On the other side are the recipients — mostly women — who say those payments are needed to keep them afloat as they re-enter the workforce, sometimes after years of homemaking and raising children.” That sounds like limited rehabilitative alimony. And it also sounds like the argument against permanent alimony which is punitive.

  • Lmc

    March 6, 2019 at 12:10 pm

    “A Float” ridiculous why should any woman or man collect from another when they want out???? Not good enough to stay married to but good enough to sponge off of! These parasites will eventually eat their own self. Our ex lives the good life, with her around the corner full time boyfriend, again not good enough to marry but good enough for booty calls, disgusting set of morales. To that moron that keeps the hostility fed in their family “worse nightmare” sets the women’s right 100 years #bittertillyourend…..

  • TJB

    March 6, 2019 at 12:48 pm

    Peter,
    After re-reading your article I now realize that it is spot on…for rehabilitative alimony.
    You speak quite eloquently about the receivers of alimony needing it while they prepare to re-enter the work force. Thank you for pointing out that the expectation is for divorced people to be self sufficient after a time. It’s a great argument against Permanent Alimony, which we are totally against that as well, and a valid argument for rehabilitative alimony for a set time with an end date. We are all for fair laws that include rehabilitative alimony and TOTALLY against lifetime alimony. I’m so glad you are on our side. 🙂

    Oh and BTW…if a young woman with autism can overcome her challenges it only stands to reason that a healthy person can overcome far fewer challenges. Although overcoming the mindset could be the biggest challenge of all.

  • Free The Slaves

    March 6, 2019 at 3:14 pm

    For the record, Alan Frisher was ousted from all Florida family law reform efforts. He paid himself a monthly salary out of the donations of alimony payors. Later, he aligned himself with the National Parents Organization and once he was ousted, refused to relinquish control of social media pages until complaints were made and they were removed by Facebook. From his comment above, he still sounds bitter and seems like he’s trying to get back into reform? No thanks Alan. Stay away and stay out of reform. You failed.

    Lifetime / permanent alimony is financial enslavement. It’s time for alimony reform in Florida to free all of us slaves. This will be the third time the family law bill goes to the Governor’s desk (first with a new Governor) and as the saying goes…third time’s a charm.

  • Mary Jones

    March 8, 2019 at 11:27 pm

    Since Florida’s alimony laws already support the wealthy payor, it would be interesting to see an alimony bill that is actually supportive and protective of the stay at home spouse – this one is neither and is still punitive to the SAHS. Nice job, Scott!

    • Tammy

      March 12, 2019 at 10:33 am

      Mary Jones, What planet are you on that you think permanent alimony is actually a favor to the payer? There is nothing about current law that is punitive to SAHS’s. Actually quite the opposite. Where else can you be supported in a lifestyle that is clearly above your station? What other circumstance can you stay at home and “raise the kids” even after they are in school and sometimes after they have reached adulthood just for sticking with a marriage (which as I mentioned was far above your station) for 15+ years? Yeah, permanent alimony such an egregious act against SAHS. It’s just terrible. OMW…some people

  • Nevada Bedwell

    March 9, 2019 at 8:11 am

    14 year marriage. X wife is a RN with a BSN. She works Monday-Thur only. She said in court she needed her 3 day weekends to have more time share with kids. Of course we have 50-50 time share so how the judge thinks that is ok is beyond me. She makes on her own with no support from me 68k year. I have to pay her 1500 a month for life time alimony. She also gets 1000 month for life time from my military pension. Add that up – really for life for being
    Married 14 years. Add in the child support and she makes over 130k year for working part time. The judge wanted to equal incomes for life and that is what she did. My x wife will never do anything to support herself and give up that kind of money. I am giving it 2 more years for alimony reform than I am leaving the state just like many others have done and I’m NOT paying her for life regardless of what the crazy laws are in Florida. Plan B if we don’t get this fixed.

  • Nevada Bedwell

    March 11, 2019 at 8:03 pm

    4 year marriage. X wife is a RN with a BSN. She works Monday-Thur only. She said in court she needed her 3 day weekends to have more time share with kids. Of course we have 50-50 time share so how the judge thinks that is ok is beyond me. She makes on her own with no support from me 68k year. I have to pay her 1500 a month for life time alimony. She also gets 1000 month for life time from my military pension. Add that up – really for life for being
    Married 14 years. Add in the child support and she makes over 130k year for working part time. The judge wanted to equal incomes for life and that is what she did. My x wife will never do anything to support herself and give up that kind of money. I am giving it 2 more years for alimony reform than I am leaving the state just like many others have done and I’m NOT paying her for life regardless of what the crazy laws are in Florida. Plan B if we don’t get this fixed.

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, Renzo Downey, Daniel Figueroa, Rick Flagg, A.G. Gancarski, Anne Geggis, Kelly Hayes, Joe Henderson, Janelle Irwin, Ryan Nicol, Jacob Ogles, Scott Powers, Jesse Scheckner, Andrew Wilson, and Tristan Wood.

Email: [email protected]
Twitter: @PeterSchorschFL
Phone: (727) 642-3162
Address: 204 37th Avenue North #182
St. Petersburg, Florida 33704




Sign up for Sunburn


Categories