Editor’s Note: Steve Hitner is President and Founder of Mass Alimony Reform and President of Metrowest Printing Co. He is a divorce counselor and mediator.
Story Highlights
Steve Hitner worked to reform the state child support law after going bankrupt trying to pay
He remarried and part of his second wife’s income went to Hitner’s alimony payments
Hitner: The new law contains guidelines and sets appropriate payment deadlines
He says many states are considering new laws that won’t financially ruin the payer
CNN
—
My marriage ended in 1995 after 23 years. My two daughters were grown. I knew I had to pay alimony, share property, and get health insurance for a reasonable period of time. But a marriage that had been difficult for many years was finally over, or so I thought. Little did I know I was about to enter the twilight zone of never-ending child support in Massachusetts.
The trial lasted three days, and a verdict took 10 months. My legal fees totaled nearly $150,000. I was ordered to pay $865 a week forever. After 9/11 my business suffered, as did many others, and I couldn’t afford the payments. I’ve racked up credit card debt that scared me. I had to file for bankruptcy.
When I went to court to change the alimony payment, the judge backed out of the case and said her husband had played cards with the bankruptcy trustee once and I would have to start over. Something was wrong and I had to fix it.
I started a website, MassAlimonyReform.org, and started the alimony reform movement with my now wife Jeanie and several couples in similar situations.
Little did I know at the time that it was common for ex-wives to go back to court when an ex-spouse remarried and receive an increase in alimony if the new wife added additional income to the marriage.
I also discovered that by the standard of the marital way of life, the lower-income spouse needed to be supported—and that judges could not lap alimony, even in short-term marriages. All alimony payments were for life. The payers had no right to pension.
Jeanie, who got divorced in New York after 23 years of marriage, was told she would only get three years of alimony. When she was married to me in Massachusetts, she was forced to contribute income to supplement my payments to my ex-wife or I would go to jail. She took a second job.
Despite little media attention, our organization began to grow.
Horror stories like mine poured in daily, and people from across the country began to join MAR. A major turning point came when The Boston Globe published an article describing Massachusetts’ child support law. On that day, many women who wanted to marry men who paid alimony called to say they were canceling their weddings. The Second Wives Club, led by Deb Scanlan, was born.
Massachusetts Rep. Steven Walsh pointed out to me that lawmakers acted only during “trouble in their village.” We spent many months teaching villagers suffering under the law how to persuade lawmakers to support the cause.
In 2009, after several attempts at reform, the Massachusetts judiciary leaders formed the Alimony Reform Task Force. Members included the Mass Bar, the Boston Bar, the Women’s Bar, the American Association of Matrimonial Lawyers, the chief probate judge, and myself, the only non-attorney.
I described the problems and the lawyers provided the solutions. Task Force Chairs Sen. Gail Candaras and Rep. John Fernandes approved the bill, and it passed unanimously in the House and Senate. It was signed by Governor Deval Patrick on September 26, 2011 and came into effect on March 1.
Click here for the opposite view: Why the new law is bad for women
The new law provides guidance and structure, coherence and predictability. It provides reasonable maintenance conditions to help lower-income spouses adjust and return to the labor market or live on their alimony, marital property, Social Security and spousal pensions. It suspends, reduces or terminates maintenance if a receiving spouse lives in a cohabitation.
The maintenance obligation of the payer ends upon reaching full retirement age as defined in the Social Security Act. This allows a payer and a payee to plan for retirement, knowing in advance that it will end. There are guidelines for how long alimony must be paid based on the length of the marriage.
Since the law was signed, I’ve received calls about the marriage of the payers’ ex-spouses. Longtime alimony payers are finally free. The recipient spouses go back to work. What used to be an entitlement is now based on need and ability to pay.
The judges have guidance that they have asked for and welcome. Lawyers can solve cases that go on forever, and Massachusetts residents are no longer afraid to marry for fear of endless litigation if the marriage fails. No matter where you live in Massachusetts, the result will be the same.
The mission I started is now spreading to many states across the country. I consulted with divorce reform activists in Florida, Colorado, Oregon, Connecticut, New Jersey, Virginia and South Carolina. People need to be self-supporting after having alimony and not relying on an ex-spouse. Alimony payments from a solvent spouse to a needy spouse for a reasonable period of time. That must be the rule, not the exception.
In Massachusetts it’s the law. Now it’s the duty of legislators in other states to listen to the victims of cutthroat child support laws and do the same.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion.
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion.
Comments are closed.