By Kathleen McGrory | Miami Herald
TALLAHASSEE — Connie Bacher was awarded $1,400 in monthly alimony payments when her 23-year marriage ended in 2009.
At the time, she was living paycheck to paycheck and caring for her two daughters in Key West. But she considers the lifelong payments even more important now, she said.
“If I lose my alimony, I’ll have to cut my health insurance or quit buying my medications,” said Bacher, a bank loan officer who suffers from osteoarthritis in both knees and will likely need surgery later this year. “I don’t know what I’ll do.”
A proposal on its way to the Senate floor could force her to find an additional source of income.
Lawmakers are considering a bill that would put an end to permanent alimony payments, and allow the courts to modify existing arrangements between former spouses. The bill would also require judges to give divorced parents equal custody of their children, unless one parent could make a convincing case otherwise.
Proponents of the proposal say it would not end alimony altogether but make it more fair.
Statement by Kaine Fisher, head of RLG’s Family Law Dept.: There is a significant distinction in Arizona between a lifetime award and a non-modifiable award.
“In Arizona, the Supreme Court has permitted spouses to enter into non-modifiable spousal maintenance awards. However, the court cannot issue a non-modifiable award if the parties do not agree. Such a non-modifiable award, absent an agreement, would be against public policy. Think about it – circumstances can change for an obligor or an obligee (health problems, loss of job, winning the lottery) so the law is very careful to afford an opportunity for a particular award to be changed to prevent an injustice.
“A court can, however, enter a lifetime award. This can be accomplished by the court specifically indicating the award is for the life of the obligee or by simply not ordering a specific duration. But, remember, any award (absent a non-modifiable agreement between the parties) can be modified or terminated based on a substantial and continuing change of circumstances. Perhaps the law is different in Florida, but legislation similar to the legislation proposed in Florida just does not seem necessary here in Arizona.”
Florida’s legislation regarding parenting time is not surprising. There is a strong movement throughout the country, including in Arizona, to create an initial presumption of equal time for parents in a divorce proceeding. I think you will begin to see more and more of these pieces of legislation in other states in the months to come.
If you’d like to discuss family law, contact with Kaine Fisher, head of RLG’s Family Law Department, kfisher@roselawgroup.com.
