A bill passed by the Florida Legislature and heading for the governor’s signature would make major changes to the state’s child support laws and co-custody arrangements, and worry family law advocates that women and children could be hurt.
If signed by Gov. Rick Scott, the law would end permanent child support in Florida.
Support reform advocates say changes are long overdue to correct an antiquated system that was better suited to the housewives of decades past than it is to today’s families. Four other states have already abolished permanent alimony.
The law would also set new standards for what constitutes a short- or long-term marriage and allow payments to be modified or terminated when the alimony payer retires.
The bill, passed by the Senate this month and by the House of Representatives on Thursday by an 85-31 vote, could change countless cases already decided. It is intended to be retrospective and would go into effect on July 1, when Scott signs the law.
But it also includes new language about “time sharing,” stating that with some exceptions, equal time with each parent is assumed to be in the child’s best interest.
Much about the reform looks good on paper, said Cynthia Hawkins DeBose, a family law expert and law professor at Stetson University College of Law. With these changes, Florida will be among the few states to embark on sweeping changes in child support payments, she said.
“In that regard, for better or for worse, this would be something that would be seen as a front runner. A game-changing change,” said DeBose.
In practice, however, she is concerned about the constitutionality of retrospectively amended child support agreements, language that seems to end child support payments when the payee is in a “supportive relationship” but not remarried, and changing the definition of a short-term marriage that now would be under 11 years – longer than half of marriages last. A medium-term marriage lasts 11-19 years.
Scott’s spokeswoman Jackie Schutz said the governor is reviewing the legislation.
Alan Frisher, a certified financial analyst on divorce and president of Family Law Reform, said the changes would help families by removing ongoing bitterness between ex-spouses caused by money and custody battles. The family law reform, formerly known as the Florida Alimony Reform, led the way in enforcing the changes that went to the vote but failed last year.
“It would bring consistency and predictability to this law, and right now the completely random decisions are creating chaos,” Frisher said. “This is for the children, future generations. My children will never have to experience what I and so many others have experienced, and that’s probably the most important thing.”
Frisher said he paid his ex-wife alimony until it was cleared through mediation. He said the provisions in the bill still give judges the flexibility to go beyond the guidelines when granting short-term or longer-term child support payments based on a set formula, as long as they put their reasoning in writing.
But the Florida Bar’s family law department opposes the reforms because there is no evidence the reforms are in the children’s best interests, said Carin Porras, chair of the department.
“It is our concern that we put parents in a position where we make it very difficult to make a decision to stay at home and take care of children,” Porras said.
Spouses, who often sacrifice professional education and work experience, might not be able to count on support later when the marriage ends, she said.
“A lot of women are going to be in their 60s, and because of those limitations, they’re kind of left out in the cold.”
The new law will assume that spouses in “short-term” marriages under the age of 11 should not receive support, and will favor “bridge” rehabilitation payments. For “long-term” marriages of 20 years and over, payments for a set duration are no longer permanent.
Jacksonville’s Leslie Jones received permanent alimony when her marriage ended after 28 years. That was 10 years ago and since then she has become a real estate agent and says she can support herself. But Jones said it couldn’t compare to the money generated by a business she and her husband started together, made possible when she supported him through school and stayed home for the art of her marriage.
Her ex took over the business, she said, and she received permanent child support as her share of her success.
“I get it from the man’s point of view, and I don’t really know what the answer is,” Jones said. “But when I got divorced, I’d been married half my life. I worked hard for what we had. Why would he walk away and enjoy the benefits and I have to start all over at 50?”
But for Glenn Pohlman, a 77-year-old retired doctor who has been disabled for more than 20 years, paying child support means painting windows and climbing rooftops to support his income.
He said lawyers kept telling him a change was unlikely because he still had savings. He hopes for reforms.
“The problem is the judge’s hands are tied,” Pohlman said. “If that’s what the law says about life support, you have to pay it.”
Incorporating child care provisions into the law is one of the top concerns of Ashley Myers, a Jacksonville certified marriage and family law attorney.
Because the time children spend with each parent is part of the child support calculation, a 50-50 split could reduce or eliminate child support payments even if the visitation schedule that promises split time never actually materializes, Myers said . Even the $50 filing fee to reopen a case could deter some parents from seeking help from the courts, Myers said.
Statistically, women will be more affected, she said, and the power imbalance is probably another reason why more women haven’t spoken out against this law — many of whom don’t want to upset their ex-spouse or speak publicly about fears about future divorce.
“At the end of the day, you have to protect your own interests,” Myers said.
Kate Howard Perry: (904) 359-4697
Comments are closed.