Comments about ‘Lawmakers support idea of finding fault when determining alimony’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Feb. 28 2013 4:15 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Utah_1
Salt Lake City, UT

The article doesn't point out that current law allows fault in determining alimony, but based on the court of appeals decisions, judges will not use it anymore as they are waiting for the Utah Legislature to define it. The bill does exactly that.

My2Cents
Taylorsville, UT

It would take a trial of peers to set this up as a fault based distribution. To declare fault means passing judgment on real or false information and is not feasible to enforce or define.

Personally, I think Alimony and child support are both archaic and be abolished as criminal discrimination violating the rights of both parents and any children. It breeds injustice and lures falsified accusation and information. Declaring it a benefits from non custodial parents stricken of any rights to childs care and security is punishment.

Child support encourages divorce knowing that one will have a lifetime of committed servitude from a former spouse. Laws should benefit, not punish parents and children in the name of an archaic law. Accountability and care of children are dual and equal in support where one is not put into perpetual servitude of a situation not of their creation or desire.

One parent willing to take custody of children and give sole support has merit of value. Mandated child support is illegal servitude and oppression. No one parent should be forced to be sole support in this day and age when men and women work should equally share costs.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

"Committee member Rep. Brian King, D-Salt Lake City, however, opposes the bill and said the language "opens the door to too much finger-pointing based on personal and intimate behavior during the parties' marriage."

typical dem response - no one should ever be responsible for their misdeeds.

As noted, the bill is in response from the judiciary for clarification. We forget sometimes that the checks and balances built into our system of government allows allows for the three branches to work together.

Lee Kallett
,

I urge your support of Utah's proposed HB 338.
I am a St. Pete Beach, FL resident caught up in the injustice of the current lifetime alimony laws. I was betrayed by my wife after 20 years of marriage when she came out of the closet, declared her lesbianism and became active in the gay community. Divorce followed and the no fault State of Florida sentenced me to a lifetime of alimony payments. There was no opportunity to present the reason for the divorce in court and the judge rewarded my ex-wife with permanent spousal support. She was in her 40s, a summa cum laude college graduate and quite capable of providing for herself had she the incentive to do so. Awarding her lifetime alimony removed any such incentive.
Though she had worked previously, she chose to abandon her career, opting instead to live off the $4,000 monthly alimony. She has been able to pursue a life of fun-filled hobbies, freelancing here and there, and taking worldwide vacations -- all courtesy of the alimony! Divorce shouldn't carry a lifetime penalty to one party for the benefit of the other.

Elvina Bergmann Kallett
,

In this Land of Liberty, where we have engaged in wars to preserve Freedom, the State of Florida, through the use of lifetime alimony laws, has condemned divorced men to slavery! These men have committed no crime! They have made a mistake, and should pay for it, but they are not felons or murderers, and certainly do not deserve a life sentence.
My husband married at a young age. In time, the marriage deteriorated, but there were children involved, and he continued in the relationship. After a number of years, his wife "came out of the closet" in her 40’s. She freely admitted that she was - and always had been a lesbian - and admitted she had pursued lesbian relationships throughout the marriage and intended to continue to do so. My husband divorced her in 2005 but with a $4000/month lifetime alimony granted to her! He willingly supplied child support, and the children are now adults. Why in the world should he be required to continue to pay this woman, who admits she no longer wants marriage, who lied even as she recited her vows, and who is healthy and quite capable of supporting herself.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments