Last month on our Somerville, New Jersey, family law blog, we discussed the New Jersey Alimony Reform group's proposal that lawmakers make changes to the state's guidelines for determining and awarding alimony payments.
The group argues that the state's current guidelines are too vague, and as a result, judges have no clear rules on how to determine what should happen in situations when an alimony paying ex-spouse retires or when the ex-spouse who is receiving alimony begins living with a new partner. Should payments decrease, or should payments be terminated entirely?
Although alimony reforms certainly may benefit some New Jersey residents, these talks of reforms have also caused many women, especially older women, to worry about how changes in alimony laws could affect their future financial situations.
A financial advisor for women who are in the process of divorcing argues that recent changes in alimony laws in other states have resulted in unfair decisions regarding the financial resources that are available to vulnerable ex-spouses. And if changes take effect in New Jersey, more divorcing women could face financial uncertainty.
The recent reforms include limitations that restrict the number of years a spouse can receive alimony payments. For example, women who were married for five years will receive fewer alimony payments than those who were married for 20 years. This practice is dangerous and unfair to the financially dependent ex-spouse, however. Women may have sacrificed numerous valuable educational and professional opportunities to preserve their marriages and to raise their children, leaving them at a disadvantage in the current job market.
Although some argue that financially rebounding from divorce is becoming increasingly easier for women who are already focused on their careers, it may not be easier for others. Considering the current economy, women without education and job experience face higher unemployment rates and uncertain futures. Without alimony payments, these types of women could experience serious financial problems.
Furthermore, many of the new reform laws do not allow for the "grandfathering" of those receiving alimony payments. That is, alimony that is already being dispersed to vulnerable women could be cut despite previous negotiations.
Source: Forbes, "Alimony Reforms Continue to Create More Uncertainty for Divorcing Women," Jeffrey A. Landers, Jan. 18, 2012

1 Comment
Tom Leustek
February 15, 2012 at 12:35 PM
When you consider that older women will receive half of all marital assets upon divorce, which should be significant in a longer term marriage, it is unconscionable that they also receive alimony after retirement. The reason being that the payer is forced to use their own share of marital assets to make the payments, and this constitutes a "double dip". After retirement both parties are living off of the same marital assets.
Readers of this blog need to understand that the author, whose article is being referenced, is from New York, where a term of alimony longer than half the years of the marriage is uncommon. By contrast, in New Jersey, alimony is usually awarded for the reminder of either the payor's or recipient's life. That is quite a huge difference. One needs to keep this difference in mind. To help stop the inequities of New Jersey's harsh and outdated alimony laws please join http://njalimonyreform.org/
Leave a comment