Divorced South Carolinians want end to lifelong alimony payments

[TexasTowelie]

COLUMBIA -- Divorced South Carolinians want a break from a lifetime of alimony payments.

Well, at least the ones writing the checks do.

About two dozen members of S.C. Alimony Reform flocked to an S.C. Senate hearing Thursday to show support for four bills that could lighten their loads.

“The laws are archaic,” said Wyman Oxner, the group’s president, who has paid alimony since 1999. “One side wins the lottery. The other side is in prison the rest of their life.”

The bills, sponsored by state Sen. Greg Gregory, R-Lancaster, take aim at permanent alimony.

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/news/politics-government/article133568174.html#storylink=cpy

[Xipe Totec]

1. Massachusetts changed this archaic law just before my divorce was final

Now I only have to pay alimony until I reach retirement age (67).

Yippie!

[napi21]

2. I would NEVER call limony winning the lottery"! At least in 90% cases anyway! If the couple had

remained married to each other, their collective income would have been "theirs". The law hasn't dramatically changed in many, many years, so everybody knows going into the marriage that this law exists, so perhaps some longer & more erious thought should be done before tying the knot. The other option of course is trying to convince your EX to marry again!

[TexasTowelie]

3. I can see merits to both sides of the argument about alimony.

If someone has been married for a number of years and passed on opportunities to pursue employment or promotions at work, then it is certainly reasonable to expect a reasonable amount of alimony.

However, if someone in their 20s or 30s is married for a couple of years and there was minimal interference in the ability of the spouse to work or at least obtain an education, then winning a lifelong reward for alimony does seem excessive. I've seen enough examples where one partner delays their education, works and pays for the spouse to further their education (such as return to school to obtain a masters degree), then become divorced--particularly when there was an agreement that the other spouse that made the sacrifices was supposed to return to gain additional skills. It certainly does not seem fair or just for the person that already sacrificed initially to be compelled to pay alimony when the former spouse has an advanced degree and better prospects of earning a larger income yet has no inclination to work.

[mopinko]

4. in illinois, you have to be married 20 years to get

long term alimony. they dont even call it permanent any more. and it is always based on available monies, so nobody is gonna have to pay money they dont have.

earning potential is also key. i have been out of the workforce for 30 years. 62. some skills, but just not fit to work full time. and nobody is gonna hire me, anyway. so, pretty low potential. some millennial w good prospects is not gonna get a long term award.

[TexasTowelie]

5. You are definitely in a situation where substantial alimony should be granted.

It is virtually impossible to quantify the influence of one partner over the other partner's earning ability over that length of time. Although marital status shouldn't influence things such as promotions in reality it does as married employees are viewed as being more stable and committed to long term employment than single person. If there are children involved, the married employees has the availability of the partner to help provide childcare that the single person does not have so it also benefits the employer. Then there are the contributions that the employee makes towards to the retirement system that should be divided between the spouses. It appears that Illinois is reasonable about considering the income potential of both spouses as to determining the amount paid for alimony, but other states may only look at what is codified into law without giving consideration to the living circumstances of both partners.

At the same time, I could see that in the situation described in the OP it might be that it is a group of men that don't want their former wives to get anything which is definitely not fair. I would have to know more about the situation in South Carolina to comment any further though.

[mopinko]

6. my nephew is in the middle of a divorce in wis

he was mr mom. he was making good money until his wife insisted on moving for a job. he did a lot of freelance work, but hasnt had a regular job in over 10 years.
he supported her through 3 post grad degrees. when he was working family came first.

but he is getting screwed by their determination of how much he ought to be worth. sure, he should be worth at least what he was makin in his last job, but that was over 10 years ago.

and yeah, the ex climbed the corporate ladder to the high rungs. he never credited the image of the hubby w the good wife and 4 kids in the least.

but in the end the judge was a lot more generous than he was or ever would be. we built a lot together and my frugalness meant as much as his income.