WANTED FOR UNETHICAL "WALL OF SHAME"

WANTED FOR THE UNETHICAL "WALL OF SHAME"

Information to post on Unethical NH Attorneys, Guardian Ad Litems, Marital Masters, Judges or any other persons involved in "Judicial Child Abuse" or "Judicial Child Neglect." Please email details to nh.unethical.attorney@gmail.com. We will not post your identity or give out your personal information.

Message Board:

We need to keep the pressure on the NH Family Courts by educating the public about the numerous injustices occurring. Please feel free to send us your information for posting. I have not had any recent dealings with the court system so I do not have current information to post. The best way to deal with these unethical judges, guardian ad litems and lawyers is to post as much on them as you can so that people do not want to do business with them. I have personally known judges that have their own practices as most judges are attorneys first. Hit these people where it counts. Their wallets. Starve them out and cut off their funds. When people do not want to use their services, they will have to change their evil ways or be unemployed.

Monday, November 28, 2011

Battle For Alimony Reform Heats Up In FL, CA - From The Fathers And Families Website - Is This A Step Towards Equality For Men?

Battle for Alimony Reform Heats up in FL, CA

November 21st, 2011 by Glenn Sacks, MA, Executive Director

A Florida bill has been introduced to abolish lifetime alimony and clean up other abuses within the system, similar to the alimony reform bill recently passed in Massachusetts. One of Florida’s largest newspapers, the Orlando Sentinel, attacked the bill as a windfall for “wealthy men who cheat on their wives.”

Many Fathers and Families members have experienced the injustices of the current alimony system firsthand–we ask that you write a Letter to the Editor of the Sentinel by clicking here and/or comment on the bill here.


A Low-Rent Attack Sentinel columnist Scott Maxwell employs anti-male stereotypes in his piece In new alimony bill, wealthy, cheating men could pay less, and informs us that the bill is “anti-woman,” ”unconstitutional,” “radical,” “Draconian,” etc. In a state where alimony obligors are often unable to retire at a normal age because they must continue to pay alimony, Maxwell is somehow unable to come up with any family law experts who like the bill.

Ritch Workman, the bill’s sponsor, is working with the group Florida Alimony Reform, and says he’s trying to make alimony fair, explaining, “[a] short-term marriage ending in long-term alimony is a mistake.” Maxwell feels compelled to tell us that Workman recently finalized his own divorce and that “several other local legislators are also divorced or currently going through one.”

Maxwell criticizes HB 549 because it “would allow previous divorce agreements to be reopened and renegotiated.” However, if this weren’t part of the bill, how could one end lifetime alimony for the aging obligors who are chained to it?

Maxwell tells us:

Orlando attorney Amy Goodblatt also expressed concerns about Workman’s proposal to automatically terminate alimony payments when the payer reaches retirement age.

“It’s clear this legislation has an agenda,” she said. “This statute is very, very much aimed at protecting men.”

True or not, Maxwell does not share with us why is a problem.

Fathers and Families’ Current Alimony Legislation

Fathers and Families has been involved in alimony reform in California and Massachusetts, with some success, and we are accustomed to seeing attorneys and misguided women’s groups mischaracterize efforts to balance the spousal support system

Our latest reform bill, California SB 481, will curb the common family court practice of issuing “double dipping” spousal support orders. ”Double dipping” is when the same stream of income is counted twice in a family law action — once for purposes of valuing that income stream as a division of property, then again for spousal/partner support purposes when the spouse/partner receives the income in the future.

NOW Opposes Alimony Reform

The National Organization for Women has come out against SB 481, but we’ve lined up a great deal of support from influential California political organizations who realize that this is not a gender issue, including: the Family Law Section of the California State Bar; the Association of Certified Family Law Specialists; numerous prominent family law and accounting firms; and others.

SB 481 comes on the heels of SB 1482, an alimony reform bill we helped pass last year. SB 1482 allows some alimony obligors to obtain court orders requiring vocational examinations for their exes, and mandates that judges follow the exams’ findings when determining spousal support levels. Both SB 481 and SB 1482 are sponsored by Senator Roderick Wright (D-Inglewood).

4 comments:

  1. It's about time this issue was addressed! My husband's ex-wife took a lump sum from his retirement account (almost $900,000), refuses to annuitize it and expects alimony based on my husband's 1/2 share of his retirement. So yes, it's time this double dipping stopped. Hopefully this law will apply to people already paying "double dip" alimony!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Think about it! People commit murder and don't get a life sentence, yet if you marry the wrong person you get punished for the rest of your life? Where is the justice?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Indefinite/life alimony only serves the family law bar. They get to continue to parasitize the heartbreak and prolong the anger and hatred that never ending alimony creates. Even child molesters are treated more humanely in that they at least do not receive life or indefinite sentences. It is time to stop penalizing the bread winners of the world for those who sit on the a.. and never try to work or make themselves self sufficient. Alimony Reform Now! Any person man or women that collects alimony for over four years is an extortionist.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Here is one for you. How about having to pay your abuser alimony. That is right folks, I received a Domestic Abuse Protection Order acknowledging that I was a victim and there was cause for protection. Then when I went to court for a hearing I the victim am ordered to pay alimony to my abuser! How is that right. Something is very wrong with the New Hampshire Judicial system if this can happen.

    ReplyDelete