Feature Article

Till Death Do Us Pay

The poster child for progressive marriage laws, Massachusetts is also a singularly nightmarish place to get a divorce—especially for the better-off spouse. Now a brewing reform movement is pushing to rewrite the state's outdated alimony rules, led by one very fed-up ex-husband.

By Kris Frieswick

Photos by Hugh Kretschmer and Tim Llewellyn.

Page 1 of 5

Steve Hitner sits on a bench in the Marlborough District Probate Court, drumming his fingers on the wood. It's 10 a.m., and already a half dozen supplicants have been granted an audience with Judge Randy Jill Kaplan, a fiftyish woman with tousled blond curls: ex-spouses seeking settlement approvals, estranged parents sparring over visitation rights, a divorced mom making the case for why she should be allowed to travel abroad with her kid. The bailiff has opened every window on this brisk spring morning, making the courtroom as cold as a morgue.

Dressed sharply in a black blazer, silk tie, gray slacks, and rimless glasses, Hitner, 61, has the look and hopped-up energy of a salesman about to close the biggest deal of his life. He has quite a bit riding on this hearing. So, too, does his ex-wife, Joan, 66, seated with her lawyer on the opposite end of the bench, decked out in a formfitting gray pantsuit, ornate hair clips, stylish white leather purse, and long, manicured nails. She's flown up from her home in Florida for the occasion. At stake is the $45,000 in alimony Hitner has paid her every year since their 1999 divorce, but says he can no longer afford. With his printing and copying business hemorrhaging cash, he says he took just $36,000 in salary last year.  

Despite these dire straits—Hitner relies on his second wife, Jeanie, to pay most of the household expenses plus the part of the monthly alimony bill he can't cover—he isn't optimistic that Judge Kaplan will be moved. Four years ago, he'd sought a modification from this same judge. "I told her, 'I really need help here, because I'm running out of credit cards to borrow on to pay this alimony,'" says Hitner. "The judge's response was, like, 'Lemme know when you run out of credit cards and I'll put you in jail.'" He ended up filing for bankruptcy in December 2006. A separate court battle with Joan (who declined to be interviewed for this article) over stock in his company has dragged on for 10 years. Hitner estimates that he's spent, at minimum, $200,000 in legal costs just to get where he is today. Which is to say, exactly where he was in 1999.

While he's been fighting these personal skirmishes, Hitner has also been engaged in a larger war: to finally, and fundamentally, change the way Massachusetts does alimony. When he isn't busy keeping himself out of financial ruin, not to mention lockup, he's leading that charge as president of Massachusetts Alimony Reform, a group he started in 2005 with like-minded first husbands (and the second wives who support them, often financially). His target is a system that many in the legal profession—both judges and attorneys, in our state and around the nation—contend is among the most backward in the country.

"We have a society that should encourage people to take care of themselves," says Hitner. "But in Massachusetts, when two people split up, the court system ties them together for the rest of their lives."


 

Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next


Change text size
Print

Email

Write a comment
 
 

User comments

Kudos on reporting Massachusetts' dirty little secret!
Posted by Bruce | Jun. 30, 2009 at 2:10 PM
COMMENT:
The family court has financially wiped out many families including my own. I had to fire all my employees, went out of business and filed for bankruptcy. The Massachusetts family court is abusive and destructive.
Till Death Do Us Pay
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 2:18 PM
COMMENT:
Excellent article on the state's antiquated laws on alimony. It is absurd to divide retirement accounts at the time of divorce and then demand that the alimony payer continue to pay alimony out of his (usually "his") half of the accounts when he retires. This is truly "double dipping."
End this madness!!!!
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 2:25 PM
COMMENT:
I am thrilled that this archaic and unfair practice is being exposed. I am truly thankful for Steve and his work. If I'm lucky, I may be able to retire some day. My ex-wife was a school principal and Fulbright scholar when we separated and subsequently divorced. I too am a school administrator. Last I heard my ex had stopped working and spent the year in Hawaii hanging out with friends living off of my hard-earned money. I paid for her grad school and cared for our children while she was away on her Fulbright. Despite that, the judge ruled my ex had contributed more than I had in raising our children. I despise Massachusetts and wish I had never set foot in this Puritan Hell of a state.
It's Time for the Alimony Law to Change!
Posted by Bob | Jun. 30, 2009 at 2:26 PM
COMMENT:
Alimony laws in Mass. are absurd. There should be a limit to the number of years alimony should apply. I will be forced to cancel my retirement because of Mass. laws. After working 40+ years a person should be able to retire at the standard retirement age without the burden of alimony.
The Easiest Solution Is
Posted by Robert | Jun. 30, 2009 at 2:38 PM
COMMENT:
The courts, lawyers, and legislators are never going to admit that they are running a scam based on fabricated entitlements. Everyone is free to conduct themselves as they see fit in their marriage and the state does not intrude. It's a matter of constitutional privacy.If the support of an ex-spouse is so important to the state, why don't they pass a law that says everybody who is married has to have their own individual financial resources to ensure their future? Stupid idea? So is alimony. Let every man young and old take note. DO NOT SIGN YOUR NAME TO A MARRIAGE LICENSE. Problem solved.
child support just another scam
Posted by Nancy | Jun. 30, 2009 at 2:55 PM
COMMENT:
Alimony and child support work the same. There is no accountablility. My husband pays over half his net pay to his ex. His ex never traveled before the divorce but she has taken 3-4 vacations each year once child support started including a Bermuda cruise. The money is not used on the children. My husband was "assigned" an income by the judge, who never took into consideration that my husband married (a widow and stay at home mom) who was supporting 3 kids on her own. My husband's wage assignment was determined by my assets with my first husband. How's that for a scam? A widow has to pay for an adulterous woman and her luxurious lifestyle! The judges, lawyers and women who use the system to abuse honest hard working men and their new wives don't want the system to change. They are all a bunch of immoral thieves.
Sen. Cynthia Creem Needs to Go
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 2:58 PM
COMMENT:
Why is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee ALSO a divorce lawyer? This woman has vowed to kill efforts to reform alimony laws - because she will make less money. Let's vote her out of office and end this revolting corruption. She represents Newton.
MA alimony laws hurts families
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 3:01 PM
COMMENT:
Thank you, Steve Hittner for working so diligently on making this change happen. I am a second wife of a man who is forced to pay an obscene amount of money to an ex-spouse who no longer works and spends all of her time traveling when not residing in her 5-story Beacon Hill townhouse. To make alimony,my husband works non-stop, he is rarely home to spend time with our 5-month old daughter and the stress he is under is unimaginable. Sadly, he takes multiple medications to manage the stress he is under, and I see the physical toll this is taking on him each and every day. He has told me that he constantly thinks about how hard he has worked over his lifetime and how little he has to show for it. We have no idea how to plan for our future because the harder he works and more successful he is (and the less she works and the less successful she is) the more she is entitled to. We have no idea how we will save for our daughter's education or how we will ever retire. He is a wonderful, hard wo
Alimony law in Mass is no law at all.
Posted by Pants | Jun. 30, 2009 at 3:26 PM
COMMENT:
Alimony law in Mass are no laws at all. Just a bunch of misplaced practices that are brutally unfair. I was married for 10 years (I moved out in year 8 and presently live in TX). Based on the current 'rules' in Mass I will pay for 40 years after only a 10 year marriage (40 is my remaining life expectancy). I will pay out $2.76 million over those 40 years (assuming I do not go bankrupt which is very possible at the present time). My x says she will never work. She just laughs at the prospect of working. She too drives a BMW and has a college degree. Thank God there is now a judge from the Mass law establishment who is subject to this same brutality. Perhaps with his special status he can get some justice and, at the same time, secure some rational reform of this terrible system. Massachusetts used to be a nice place to live. Not anymore.
A "second wife's" perspective
Posted by Kay | Jun. 30, 2009 at 3:35 PM
COMMENT:
In 2005 I married a man who had divorced his wife the year prior and was sentenced to lifetime alimony; she had become "injured" at work just one week prior to the alimony hearing so her judgment was based on her having no income. Both of their children were adults. What is most frustrating about our situation is that I waived my right to alimony during my own divorce nine years ago despite the fact that I had two young children; I have never believed that an adult should be dependent upon another adult to support them after divorce. Yet now my income can be used to support my husband's non-working ex-wife's alimony? Incredibly unfair, unjust, and in my opinion unconstitutional. My husband would have gladly paid for training, education, or rehabilitative alimony for his ex-wife but she has refused to seek work and in fact turned down jobs that she was offered through his extensive business contacts. Senator Creem may be assuming that all women are treated like Carmella Soprano dur
The Massachusetts Lie
Posted by Jean | Jun. 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM
COMMENT:
Thanks for exposing this "Massachusetts Lie". There is no such thing as Divorce here. You are tied financially to an ex forever. I am a 2nd Wife who has had to work 2 jobs to help my husband pay his ex-wife who refuses to support herself. This long-term Alimony is Marital Welfare and it is destroying lives and families. I hope that every legislator on Beacon Hill will read this article and act immediately to fix this system - It is BROKEN...
lifetime alimony is unfair
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 4:12 PM
COMMENT:
It's really ironic that they made new laws to stop people from abusing welfare in Massachusetts. They now have a program that helps people go out and learn skills and get to work in a certain amount of time and then they cut off benefits...yet it's ok for husbands to pay alimony to lazy ex wives who absolutely have the ability to work but choose not to so they can live off of their cash cow forever and the courts let them get away with it. Many have live in boyfriends who reap the benefits of that check paid by their girlfriends ex husband. Imagine being married 22 years...having your wife decide that Keno is great fun to the tune of spending her own children's college fund that you've put together and charging up credit card debt that you work three jobs to pay off because she refuses to work...yet has plenty of time and energy for her extrimarital affair. You go to court and she gets granted lifetime alimony so she has plenty of cash to gamble for the rest of your life and money t
lifetime alimony is unfair (cont)
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 4:18 PM
COMMENT:
and money to vacation in Rome while you still pay all the bills for the kids who you have custody of and not only your residence but hers too! Nice state we live in. Thank you all for coming together and trying to make some changes. This has just been so unfair to so many hard working people.
Lifetime alimony - there is another option
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 5:06 PM
COMMENT:
I have paid for 14 years and see no end in sight. I carry two households (my present home with disabled spouse) and the full household expenses of my ex-wife and her lifestyle of travel and boyfriends. For 6 years I have lived close to bankruptcy, working two jobs and saving zero, and constantly on the edge of losing my mind over it. I have seriously contemplated suicide and, if Massachusetts cannot fix this soon I am prepared for it. I cannot see the value in continuing when there is no quality of life and no possibility of ever retiring. Ending things on a planned schedule assures life insurance is paid to my current spouse without threat of my ex getting it. My currrent wife will get some measure of security and we will be rid of the Massachusetts terror of choosing alimony payments over prescription drugs needed late in life.
I'm just wondering.....
Posted by Kathy | Jun. 30, 2009 at 5:08 PM
COMMENT:
Judges, and in fact the Mass laws, are so concerned with an alimony recipient maintaining the lifestyle he or she had when married. I just want to know why a alimony payer isn't entitled to the same. When a woman is a home maker, isn't part of her "job" as home maker maintaining the home? So my husband and I pay his ex permanent alimony and get nothing at all in return. Why is she not required to do her job if we are paying her a salary? When is it our turn to maintain the lifestyle his ex has maintained using our money? The closer we get to retirement age, the more nervous we become. Will we be forced to give her half of the retirement fund we worked so hard to put away for our "golden" years? Permanent alimony is unfair on all levels. It needs to end!
Before it is too late
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 6:01 PM
COMMENT:
I am a second wife, and I can attest that my husband (who pays a ridiculous amount of alimony to his ex-wife) had contemplated suicide many times. He is saddened that he cannot support his new family in the way he would like to and feels that he is a total failure due to his inability to save a dime. I hope this law is changed before it is too late. For better or for worse, men attach a lot of importance to being a successful breadwinner for their families. When this is not possible due to alimony commitments, the psychological impact (let alone the economic realities) is totally devastating.
I TOO wish I hadn't waived my right to Alimony 5 years ago...
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 6:10 PM
COMMENT:
How is it that my ex-spouse of 14 years can get remarried, live off his full-time working 2nd wife & basically not work and get a 70% reduction in his child support (since he widdled down his income) AFTER he and I negotiated a 50/50 parenting schedule for our 4 dependent children 5 years ago BUT my fiance has to pay $12,000 a month in Alimony to a woman who is an educated healthcare provider that has chosen NOT to work. Interestingly enough, it was Judge Keamy who has refused his requests for a Modification (a reduction, not eliminate) 2 times...glad to hear that Rudolph Pierce will have his day in front of the Appellate Court and Judge Keamy will be exposed. If child support can be reduced for economic hardship, why don't the same principles apply to Alimony, especially during these times of economic and financial hardship that all of us are experiencing, except the ex-spouse who can continue to receive $144,000 a year for Jazzercise, reading, watching TV & catching up with friends
More Hell to Come
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 7:04 PM
COMMENT:
I fully anticipate the Massachusetts senate to kill the upcoming alimony bill - the greedy lawyers, man-hating feminists and aged judges with 1950's mentalities will work hard to make this happen as not to upset the status quo. Judges like Stahlin appear to have no idea that women and men are equal breadwinners in families and if they decide part ways and both are highly qualified professionals they should man-up and woman-up and care for themselves. Both of my children are fully grown and emancipated (one married and the other is 25 and in grad school), my ex has a PhD and had a 95K job until Judge Stahlin awarded her my money. She, at 52, has now quit working and lives the life I had hoped upon retirement (which will come never for me). Thanks to Stahlin!
Thanks for getting the word out
Posted by Christine | Jun. 30, 2009 at 7:42 PM
COMMENT:
This article was very informative. People need to speak out against such antiquated laws and practices in Massachusetts. Don't be silent. Contact your senators and representatives, tell them you want to see change. The 1950's are long gone. In most cases both spouses work, both have the capacity to support themselves.
What an Eye Opener
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 8:29 PM
COMMENT:
I am speachless! As a woman in the planning stags to marry a man who was divorced in MA - I now have to stop and think if I want to get myself into such a bizarre system. I also don't understand how it is not a conflict of interest to have a Cynthia Creem as a family law attorney able to even give an opinion on a bill that would limit here income. Where is the common sense in all this?
TIME TO LEAVE......
Posted by Anonymous | Jun. 30, 2009 at 9:40 PM
COMMENT:
I am also a male who was granted a dealth sentence, "Lifetime Alimony". I should have left this state when I was handed that sentence....If the laws aren't changed in Massachusetts soon...you can bet, I won't be in this country for much longer! BEWARE... Think Twice...Matrimony in this state could equal Alimony!
Thank you Steve HItner
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 4:45 AM
COMMENT:
..for your diligent work on this cruel and unfair system. And continuing to get the story out. I watch my husband struggle to survive while his ex, who chose to leave him for another man after several extra marital affairs. Kids in their late 20s at the time, she was still awarded enough alimony to never have to work. Marital assets were split and she's squandered it all. Now, we'd like to plan our retirement (or divorce depending on the financial outcome). Her boyfriends come and go and benefit from his alimony as well. She's capable of supporting herself. Due to the stress of this arrangement she'll out live my husband! Then she can live off of his pension and retirement funds that she was also awarded. In any other state, her alimony would have ended by now, and she would be supporting herself (or remarried so someone else can support her).
Sen. Cynthia Creem: Do Walk Away Wives Deserve Lifetime Alimony?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 5:23 AM
COMMENT:
How can Sen. Cynthia Creem support lifetime alimony when a wife can walk out of her 30 year marriage, abandoning her husband and children. In "no-fault" divorce, there is nothing that the supportive, loving spouse can do to save the marriage. No-fault divorce is a unilateral ticket to exiting the marriage, forcing the loyal spouse to pay the "walk-away" wife one-half of his after tax income. My ex-wife does not work by her choice. She does not need to work after getting half of our life savings, two-thirds of my retirement savings, and alimony. Sen. Creem wants to maintain the financial system that encourages non-working spouses to bolt their marriages.
contact your reps in the State House
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 6:33 AM
COMMENT:
In addition to kvetching about this despicable place, everyone here must contact their senators and reps and pass on this article and insist on change NOW. AND tell your reps that Senator Cynthia Creem cannot be allowed to have her way on this matter simply because it benefits her financially. Sen. Creem and her greed will be exposed.
Why twice?
Posted by jay | Jul. 1, 2009 at 6:39 AM
COMMENT:
I like the support of the 2nd wifes, but why did those dumbasses get married twice in the same state knowing the chance of another divorce? Dumbasses.
Evolved
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 7:27 AM
COMMENT:
It's amazing that as a nation we are evolved enough to elect an president, yet still think women cannot work. Thank you Boston Magazine for exposing this horrendous truth.
Entitlement to alimony is ridiculous
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 7:29 AM
COMMENT:
The courts continue say that one class of individuals is entitled to maintain their "standard" of living at the expense of another human being's labor - this sounds like slavery to me. Why are these former spouses so special? If their husbands had gotten sick or died they would have to manage, etc. Life happens to most of us. Alimony is punitive, sexist, unjust and antiquated and it does not allow for the actual dissolution of these marriages. Alimony should only be provided for a set purpose (rehabilitative, etc.) and it should always be finite. The only exception is if the person is truly impaired and even then why not just award them 100% of the marital estate and stop the alimony.
Response to Jay's Comment
Posted by Kari | Jul. 1, 2009 at 8:55 AM
COMMENT:
Some of us "dumbasses" didn't get married once or twice in Massachusetts, but made the horrendous mistake of moving here to take a job and unwittingly became a victim of the outdated Massachusetts courts presided over by overworked judges who never bother to find the true facts and bottom-feeder lawyers who take advantage of families in stress and turmoil. My judge, Stahlin, put absolute nonsense into the findings of fact. One of the most ludicrous being an alleged sexual affair with a woman who at the time stated in the findings was have a hysterectomy in Atlanta. I had no money left to appeal since I was paying the full cost of my daughter's college since my ex refused to contribute her court-ordered half.
Alimony Laws Need to be Updated
Posted by Deb | Jul. 1, 2009 at 9:28 AM
COMMENT:
If I read this article correctly, there is no clear law in MA – what about equal treatment under the law? This legislation must pass, from what I read, recipients will have plenty of opportunity for education and training. Also, Cynthia Creem needs a reality check! The medium income in MA is $64,000 and alimony is handed out frequently even to the working class man cripling him financially for life and discouraging their ex's to even try to be self-sufficient. To state "But for their spouses, they wouldn't be where they are today," she says. "They brought up their children or helped with their businesses or entertained their associates." What makes her think that father’s didn’t participate in bringing up their childrern, that is insulting. For a family with a $64,000 income wouldn’t entertaining their associates amount to everyone bringing a ttheir share of potato salad to a cook-out, or a potluck supper? Of course she may have a different view because of the wealth she earn
the next step
Posted by Michael | Jul. 1, 2009 at 9:42 AM
COMMENT:
If our legislation fails due to Sen. Creem's If our legislation fails due to Sen. Creem’s efforts we will take this matter to the voters as a ballot referendum. I assure you Sen. Creem’s next election will be very difficult. It will be my pleasure to do everything within the Law to see her next election effort fail. She should recuse herself from this matter. The other 72 Co-Sponsors should investigate a conflict of interest ASAP. My Ex-wife walk away from our family and marriage for someone she felt was better than I. Now he’s left her and I pay for Life. 2 of the three children were not mine, she had a previous marriage that didn’t last ours lasted long enough for her to get lifetime alimony. This is wrong.
Horror stories from MA
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 9:46 AM
COMMENT:
Mass Alimony Reform has compiled a set of horror stories - about 40 of them. A prominent divorce lawyer said he takes them "with a grain of salt." That is, he doesn't quite believe them. Read them on www.massalimonyreform.org and send to your legislators.
A little math and equal treatment
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 10:10 AM
COMMENT:
Fascinating! Thank you Steve Walsh and the 72 other legislators for sponsoring this bill, atleast there is a little common sense on the Hill. Why is it that the State of MA doesn’t have a formula for alimonly? Why is it that the State of MA doesn’t think that an alimony recipient can obtain adequate education and training during the transition period, the reform bill calls for up to 12 years of transitional alimony – you can get an MD in 8 to 10 years. I agree if a divorcee is older, 55 + they need help, but can’t Beacon Hill and Cynthia Creem do a little math? Half the 401K and retirement accounts, usually the house, Social Security at 65, hmm, 55 + 12 brings the recipient up to 67. How many MA seniors have part time jobs to make end meet. Perhaps MA legislations and Ms Creem need to brush up on their history, the Declaration of Independence states that “all men are created equal” of course, the alimony recipient in MA is entitled to a much more equal treatment than the alimony
We Left Boston
Posted by | Jul. 1, 2009 at 11:26 AM
COMMENT:
For 2 reasons: the winters and this horrifying mess. I am a second wife and I've had my fill. His ex filed for MORE money from us the month I started chemo for breast cancer. Why? She gave away money to a man on the internet who told her he was in "nigerian oil." Never met the guy, but gave him 20K. A few months later we were asked for help with her "financial difficulties," which also includes spending money like a drunken sailor.
Say it ain't so!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 12:15 PM
COMMENT:
The current law is total nonsense. It's time this state brings the law into the 21st century.
Thank you Steve Hitner and Mass Alimony Reform.org
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 1:43 PM
COMMENT:
Thank you for exposing the current law or should I say lack of law that continues strangle good people with this form of marital welfare. People must understand that we are talking about alimony NOT child-support. My walk-away bride decided that after 23 years she just didn't want to be married anymore. She needed to move on. Our children were adults on their own when she left me to live with another woman. She now cohabitates with and is in a gay relationship.They live together in a nice home in Maine. My divorce papers say that I must pay alimony until she either dies or re-marries. Even with gay marriages now being legal, what incentive does she have to marry knowing that her alimony would stop. She is well educated (which I helped to pay)but does not work. I have been paying alimony for 14 years now and don't know how I will be ever able to retire. I have been to three lawyers each one telling me that I don't have a leg to stand on. They say its all about the money. Not about what
Overhaul overdue - MA leads world on some issues, lags by decades on this one
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 1:48 PM
COMMENT:
It is ironic that MA law can be a beacon of light, pioneering issues such as gay marriage and universal healthcare, yet is stuck in the stone age on alimony. As opposed to guidelines that foster growth toward adult self sufficiency and mutual independence, MAs antiquated alimony laws encourage exactly the opposite. On one hand they remain rooted in antiquated notions of divorced women as fragile creatures incapable of and unexpected to work, and on the other hand the laws infantilize women as requiring perpetual handouts to survive. In fact, the only “exit ramp” to perpetual alimony specifically provided for by MA law (apart from death) is for the alimony recipient to remarry. This simultaneously demeans women as chattels while providing a powerful incentive to cheat the system under the ever popular double-dipping loophole of co-habitation. Laws around the country and around the world have progressively been updated to recognize the need for temporary alimony with a structured fo
Overhaul overdue - MA leads world on some issues, lags by decades on this one
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 1:49 PM
COMMENT:
… more … Replace the existing fuzzy web of punitive, counterproductive alimony laws with a specific and concise set that recognizes the capabilities and responsibilities of men and women in today’s society within a time-limited framework that both requires them and incents them to become functional, independent, self sufficient adults.
Where is the justice in these laws ?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 2:04 PM
COMMENT:
It seems to me that divorce in Massachusetts has some how become a lucrative business where only lawyers and very savvy spouses stand to profit. If the original purpose of these laws was to protect the individuals involved than it has clearly strayed very far from that. Individuals who are fully capable of supporting themselves aren’t doing so at the expense of an ex-spouse that can hardly support his or herself. Who are these laws protecting? To add further insult to injury, the court is forcing 2nd wives to pay the alimony to their spouses ex. Why is there no provisions to protect theses women and their hard earned income? Are they any less entitled to standard of living that they are accustomed to simply because they choosing to pay for that living themselves? We need to stop punishing people for moving on with your lives and start helping all parties to do so constructively and fairly.
Cynthia Stone Creem
Posted by Peter | Jul. 1, 2009 at 2:11 PM
COMMENT:
So let me get this straight. The legislator, Cynthia Stone Creem, who will have the final vote on this is herself a Divorce Lawyer? A divorce lawyer whose business relies on the gravy train of eternal alimony modifications/remodifications under the current system? Isn't that like putting Ahmedinajad in charge of the Iranian vote?
Laws for the Wrong Century
Posted by Kate | Jul. 1, 2009 at 2:54 PM
COMMENT:
As an accomplished career-woman I am the primary breadwinner, "higher-earner" as the article calls it, in my marriage. My husband of 16 years is a good man and a brilliant musician however he makes less than a third of what I make. Under the current alimony laws, if he were to divorce me tomorrow, I would owe him lifetime alimony. He could theoretically spend every day of the next 45 years partying on the beach with women half his age, and I would be sentenced to continue working 60 hours weeks in the office, and send him alimony checks every month until the day I die. How does this law make any sense? How is it that the person who initiates the divorce is owed any alimony to start with? How is rewarding people who move to end their marriages serve any kind of public policy? How is this intended to strengthen existing marriages when the lesser-earning spouses are given such a cash-out incentive?
So much wrong with divorce court in MA
Posted by Todd | Jul. 1, 2009 at 3:19 PM
COMMENT:
I'm glad to see these stories finally in print, particularly with names of judges! Kaplan is one of many who have established a reputation of demolishing businesses, careers, and retirements. If most divorces are "no-fault" actions, why is there always a big loser as a result? I sincerely hope the author of this story decides to write this as a series of what's wrong with our corrupt divorce system, and who is actually making money of other peoples misery!
I don't live in Massachusetts, Jay
Posted by Karen | Jul. 1, 2009 at 3:43 PM
COMMENT:
Hey Jay--FYI, I have lived in Maine my entire life, no desire whatsoever to move to the Bay State (although I do like to visit). But since I married a man who had been divorced in Massachusetts and was sentenced to lifetime alimony, the alimony laws from Massachusetts also affect me, a lifetime Mainer. As to why I chose to get married again...we were in love and wanted to have a child. I wouldn't change things, but I would have encouraged my husband to invest more money in a better divorce attorney. I wonder how Senator Creem would like to pay a non-working ex-spouse 30K a year for the rest of her life, after she departed the marriage because her spouse was gay? It's not fun. I can't vote in Massachusetts, but I hope everyone who can will work hard to prevent her re-election.
Get the transcripts from court and publish them I dare you!
Posted by Michael | Jul. 1, 2009 at 4:11 PM
COMMENT:
I will give the transcripts from my divorce to any media outlet that will publish it. I guarantee you will be shocked how many ways, times and threats I was told I would be jailed by the judge. Then told I advise you and your attorney to take this offer and threaded my attorney if he pursued a time limit any further he would regret it. You will truly be shocked this happens in America I promise you.
Impeach Creem
Posted by 617SadDads | Jul. 1, 2009 at 4:50 PM
COMMENT:
Divorce for lawyers = big money Most legislator are Lawyers Creem is both, time for her to go Lets Impeach this peace of work
A view from a man
Posted by Mr. X | Jul. 1, 2009 at 5:10 PM
COMMENT:
As a male wholeheartedly against marriage in this day and age, I must state I support Mizz. Cynthia Stone Creem. Alimony should not be eliminated or, otherwise, reformed. IN FACT, it is my dearest wish that alimony becomes even more ruinous to men. Why? Because sometimes the only way a mule can understand something is by whacking it in the head with a 2" x 4" piece of lumber. In other words, if there are men who cannot figure it out now that marriage in the West, in this day and age, is a VERY BAD decision then maybe if the penalties become so extreme they will get the hint.
The Honorable Cynthia Stone Creem (D- First Middlesex and Norfolk)
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 6:14 PM
COMMENT:
Creem is one of the biggest obstacles to family court reform and must go. Residents of Newton, Brookline and Wellesley - wake up and vote her out. Contact her office and tell her you are going to do just that: 617.722.1639 Cynthia.Creem@state.ma.us
40 Years old $54,000.00 yr gross $700.00 month for life
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 6:49 PM
COMMENT:
need I say more!
Alimony = Civil Liberties Matter
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 7:34 PM
COMMENT:
Why all this pussyfooting around? Alimony has no place in the 21st century, and must go the way of slavery and indentured servitude. As the above commenter said, if the one of the soon to be ex spouses needs the money, or is disabled, simply give him/her 100% of the marital estate and get it done with! Any kind of lifetime arrangement where the State has to police people for the rest of their lifetimes via monthly payments via garnishments, contempt jailings, etc is nothing less than running a POLICE STATE. This is a civil liberties matter. Abolish Alimony!
Spencer Kagan
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 1, 2009 at 9:04 PM
COMMENT:
Kaplan is no prize but by far the worst offender in Middlesex Probate Court is "judge" spencer kagan. Not fit for the job.
Bullets are cheap.
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 12:07 AM
COMMENT:
Men: DO NOT GET MARRIED
Posted by blinderzoff | Jul. 2, 2009 at 1:42 AM
COMMENT:
This isn't just a MA problem. What we call marriage isn't marriage anymore, it is what we used to call "going steady", i.e. you are together until you decide to break up. However, it is also a binding legal contract upon the male party to provide consideration to the female party without any consideration in return. Any such contract in any other context would be summarily dismissed as invalid.
Transformers
Posted by pclemsc | Jul. 2, 2009 at 2:53 AM
COMMENT:
A mere generation ago, Nazis slaughtered Jews by the millions. Now the descendents of those Jews are MA judges, who have become the Nazis persecuting men and fathers in MA. Der Schwestershaft Uber Alles!
ALIMONY
Posted by pclemsc | Jul. 2, 2009 at 3:03 AM
COMMENT:
What is alimony (and child support, for that matter) but a Communistic "TRANSFER OF WEALTH" scheme, taking money from men and giving it to women? Judges like Kaplan are a disgrace, but, unfortunately, the rule in MA, rather than the exception. AND, the fish rots from the head down. We need a Judicial Conduct Commission that works to protect the people, not the judges.
Here's Why
Posted by pclemsc | Jul. 2, 2009 at 3:19 AM
COMMENT:
Alimony and child support reward the state and it's courts financially, thanks to federal incentive payments. MA got $55 MILLION in 2007, and the courts got $3.37 MILLION. All in excess of their legislatively allocated budget. Where does the money that the courts get, go? Some think, into a private retirement fund for the judges. So Kaplan and her ilk are trashing our constitution, ruining the lives of citizens, for thirty pieces of silver. GREEDY NAZIS, nothing more.
Lets take it to the people
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 4:10 AM
COMMENT:
We need to take this matter out of the lawyers and politicians hands and get it to the people to vote. Any married person that makes more money than there spouse is at risk of lifetime alimony in as little as 10 years. Your spouse could walk away from your marriage and live off you forever. Think about it. Single mothers have no chance of remarriage because the higher earning spouses don’t want to be forever indebted to the other.
How to retire in as little as 10 years
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 4:56 AM
COMMENT:
Go to a dating service and date only men or women that make more money than you. Make sure they are longing for the family life and the American dream. Marry them for 10 years or more. Have an open affair with someone else leave him and hire a average attorney. Bag that sucker for alimony and wahla instant retirement for life this will work every time.
The Courts are Very Broken
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 5:41 AM
COMMENT:
Alimony and Child Support are tools used by the Courts to ensure a constant stream of Federal Funds to the State under the Social Security Act of 1974, Title IV administered by the Dept. of Health and Human Services. What started out as a "good cause system" has turned into a money generating business and industry for the State. Judges act under the "best interest of the children" clause to extort money and assets from citizens. Family Courts are NOT about children, fairness, equality or justice .... they are ALL ABOUT MONEY. The Judges in these courts, all the way up through Chief Justice Paula Carey and Chief Justice Robert Mulligan are the real criminals destroying our families for profit. The Legislative branch of government needs to act to act immediately to curb the injustice and greed of the Courts.
Senator Cynthia Stone Creem
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 8:07 AM
COMMENT:
Let’s limit her term. This being the last one. She will always go back to ruining the families of Massachusetts.
Get out
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 8:35 AM
COMMENT:
No checks and balances. No separation of powers. The basics don't work in the Bay State. While the judiciary (which acts more like an out of control state agency than anything else) and legislature mutually gratify the other the governor sits idly be (maybe enjoying what he sees), shows NO LEADERSHIP and admittedly (based on what he has stated at recent governor council meetings) has no interested in addressing the problems with the courts. Massachusetts is hopeless. If you are a businessperson thinking of relocating why would you want to come here and subject your people (or yourself) to this? If you have the option to move out of Massachusetts why do you stay? Folks, if you are in a dysfunctional and abusive relationship (as those of us forced to deal with the Massachusetts probate and family courts are) - get out. The only thing we have going for us is the fact that Massachusetts is a small state and the border from most places in this God forsaken place is less than an hour awa
Gov Gone Wild
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 8:37 AM
COMMENT:
No checks and balances. No separation of powers. The basics don't work in the Bay State. While the judiciary (which acts more like an out of control state agency than anything else) and legislature mutually gratify the other the governor sits idly be (maybe enjoying what he sees), shows NO LEADERSHIP and admittedly (based on what he has stated at recent governor council meetings) has no interested in addressing the problems with the courts.
What about Lifetime Gay Alimony?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 9:25 AM
COMMENT:
In another 5-6 years we are going to have the initial wave of gay marriages start reaching their 10+ year mark. Statistically, like in their hetero counterparts, some of these mid/long term marriages will also have divorces. Will these also qualify for the lifetime alimony gravy train? Will we have Peter Paying Paul for life? What will we call these: Gay for Pay?
moving out of state will not change the alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 12:05 PM
COMMENT:
If I leave this state they will come after me anywhere in the US. once the alimony is in place you are screwed. And if you do move you must return here to get relief in the courts. If that wasn't the case I would have left this state long ago. if you wife has an affair on you pack your stuff and leave before the divorce papers and never return to the state don't file. the state must serve papers in MA to get alimony. the MA Sherif cannot server papers in another state.
My Words
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 1:50 PM
COMMENT:
As I read this article this close to the 4th of July I wonder. I fought for this country and still bare the scars from my service, for all the freedoms that we all enjoy, equal opportunity for all. Life was good. Had the wife the house the kids and the toys. One year all of them were gone and little did I know then my future was about to be stolen. Some nice talking guy moves on steals what he could and leaves. I’m left with bills house sell’s short bankruptcy. In 2005 I made $54,000.00 judge awarded $700.00 a month until I “DIE” or she remarries. She had previously been married and had two children already. What did I fight for?
Mass Marriage Rates Crashing
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 2:31 PM
COMMENT:
Look at the Mass marriage/divorce stats as reported by the Center for Disease Control (CDC): click here The Divorce rate is holding steady, but the Marriage rate is crashing fast. Can we blame men? Who the hell would want to get married with these laws?
Divorcee that has children with second wife not a change is circumstance.
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 4:32 PM
COMMENT:
Shame on you Legislators and judges that would allow a child to do without so an ex-wife can live the life style of the marriage she walked out on. Shame on a people that would allow the court to dictate when you can have a child. Children first right, Dam you for doing this!
Men who dont want to pay ????
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 6:59 PM
COMMENT:
If you think that being a wife,mother,grandmother and co-worker to an man who litterally walks around like he is the king, not only at work but at home should not pay alimony for treating his wife like crap most of their marriage and steal her money on top of it should not pay ?? Well guess what ??? He will and should !
World's Shortest Fairy Tale...
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 2, 2009 at 9:55 PM
COMMENT:
Once upon a time, a guy asked a girl 'Will you marry me?' The girl said, 'NO!' And the guy lived happily ever after and rode motorcycles and went fishing and hunting and played golf a lot and drank beer and scotch and had money in the bank and left the toilet seat up and farted whenever he wanted. The End
Reply to "Men who dont want to pay ????"
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 4:44 AM
COMMENT:
You sound very bitter because you chose to stay in a bad marriage. Alimony shound NOT be used as a form of punishment. After the marital home and assets are divided up you are free to live your life as you wish. Move on with your life and be self sufficient and don't allow yourself to be dependent on anyone but yourself. With alimony there is no such thing as a true divorce because you continue to be linked to that person. But as we all know its all about the money. Not what about what is right and just. Just look at all of the comments from this article and you can see the horror of it all. Move out and move on.
Men who dont want to pay ????
Posted by m | Jul. 3, 2009 at 6:04 AM
COMMENT:
Not all men treat there wives like crap! Not all men walk around like King’s. He cannot force you to stay now can he? You stayed by choice. You today enjoy equal rights and want to dismiss the equal responsibility. Higher earning spouses should not be used as a ATM. Sorry for you misfortunate relationship but you do have the choice to not live like that. You cannot lump all men or women in the same situation. Life Time Alimony is wrong! I don’t say all women have affairs the their husband’s nor can you say all men treat there wives like crap! TAKE PERSONAL RESPOSIBILITY FOR YOUR SELF!
Call It What It Is - It's MARITAL WELFARE
Posted by Jean | Jul. 3, 2009 at 8:57 AM
COMMENT:
If our legislators, like Sen Creem, truly feel that these people who refuse to support themselves should be taken care of for life, why not let them collect Government sponsored Welfare rather than break the backs of good people whose only mistake was to have a bad marriage and get divorced in Massachusetts unaware of the archaic and draconian Marital Welfare laws. Let these divorce lawyers litigate with the State as to how long and how much.
PRobate Courts
Posted by s | Jul. 3, 2009 at 12:02 PM
COMMENT:
Kris, Excellent article bringing to light the injustices sufferend by men in Massachusetts. This is the Commonwealth's dirty little secret. It's not jsut alimony but also child support orders that are beyond a fathers ability to pay. If you're interested in a horrific story of injustice in the New Bedford Probate Court, I'm available. 49 year old father of four young adults forced into bankruptcy and forclosure. Complaint files over a year ago and still fighting this. Being court ordered to pay $723.00 a week to a married ex wife when my gross income is $900.00 a week and falling is a crime.
Yes, alimony is only part of the story
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 12:34 PM
COMMENT:
Take a look at how the 2009 child support (alimony in disguise since it goes beyond the child care costs) guidelines were developed for another case of how broken the Bay State is. This is a public policy matter but the guidelines task force consisted ALMOST ENTIRELY of family court judges, divorce lawyers along with *** for crying out loud *** the DOR child support commissioner. What the citizens of Massachusetts deserve is a principled approach to a serious topic. What the got instead is crass self dealing masquerading as an objective study which was then signed off by a Chief Justice of the Commonwealth. What a disgrace!
"...and entertained their associates". - ???
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 3:48 PM
COMMENT:
Senator Creem has a handy explanation for why ex-wives *deserve* to live off the ex-husbands that they themselves divorced until the end of time. "They brought up their children or helped with their businesses or entertained their associates". First of all, children who are brought up to adulthood is a gain for both ex-spouses, not just one. Keep in mind she was receiving full room and board, not to mention having her half of marital assets being accumulated during this time. How about his work/efforts during the marriage years, slaving away at a job? Doesn't he *deserve* something back for all those years slaving away at a JOB? No, she doesn't owe him anything in return? Second, what on earth does "supported his business and entertained his associates" mean? 95% of alimony payors are regular guys with regular JOBS These guys don't have businesses. They don't have "associates" to entertain. Does Senator Creem know what a JOB is? Her alimony-queen clients certainly don't. Thi
Corrupt Family Court System Exposed
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 8:44 PM
COMMENT:
Well, congratulations for this article. Alimony is a fraud and violation of the ban on involuntary servitude of the 13th amendment of the US Constitution. The corrupt judges, lawyers and entitlement queens will fight this tooth and nail. Bring 'em on!
What about the children???
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 9:33 PM
COMMENT:
I stayed in a marriage way to long because I did not want my kids to go through the trama of divorce. I did everything, the cooking, cleaning, laundry, caretaking of the children all while I worked my butt off full time. My divorce was in the best interest of the children and the children's safety which was clearly evident in the courts decision of awarding me sole custody and supervised visitation with their mother (whom had "5" 51A filings of abuse against her supported by DSS). However the judge also gave her lifetime alimony which after deducting the mininum child support orderd (because she works less than 20 hours per week) has put me in forclosure and in bankruptcy. I do not have the ways and means to maintain the care and wellbeing of my 4 children and yes I work 55 to 60 hours per week and she receives more than 50% of my salary (50% of my gross which is paid with from my net). I was laid off in 2008 and I filed for modification (my 6th failed attemt) and I was told if I didn'
What about the Children ???
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 9:40 PM
COMMENT:
If I didn't pay her I would be placed in jail. Damn you who sit back and do nothing while inocent children are being effected. You lawyers, judges and politicians who profit from this are the true criminals and you are the ones that belong in jail, have you no morals!
Sponges for life
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 10:19 PM
COMMENT:
And how exactly is it empowering to turn the ex into a dependent sponge ? How is this respectful to anyone - payor or payee ?
Like Fish Need a Bicycle
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 3, 2009 at 11:06 PM
COMMENT:
Alimony Recipients need Alimony Payors like a Fish Needs a Bicycle. Are women full-citizens capable taking care of themselves or are they chattel / child-people who need to have a man's wages garnished to fend for themselves. If the latter, I move that we revoke women's voting rights, until such a time that they prove themselves to be full-citizens. Until then, as long as ALIMONY stays on the books, such frail delicate child-persons should not be allowed to vote.
MA is Backward State
Posted by Joel | Jul. 4, 2009 at 5:58 AM
COMMENT:
How ironic that a state which profeses equal rights and feminist causes, is so backwards when it comes to alimony support. When I got divorced a few years ago, my 36 year-old ex-wife received lifetime alimony equal to 120% of my takehome salary (I needed a second job to pay for her support along with my wife's income). My ex does not need to ever work again and refuses to utilize her skills as a registered nurse. MA is known as a progressive state yet reverts to 18th Century case law to handle alimony (treating women equivalent to chattel). We need alimony reform and this article, along with Steve Walsh's bill, makes that clear.
250 Years Ago
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 4, 2009 at 7:19 AM
COMMENT:
America sure has come a long way, hasn't it? 250 years ago this type of corruption by people in power would have been dealt with by the people with torches and pitchforks. They would have stormed these houses of demon worship called "family courts", stripped the judges and politicians of their power and sent them fleeing for their lives. Ok, Ok, I'm still allowed to dream aren't I? Or, has THAT freedom been taken away as well?
Protest NOW!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 4, 2009 at 7:58 AM
COMMENT:
We need loud protest. I’m calling on all people in Massachusetts who could be or are currently exposed to Life Time alimony. Stop these out of touch legislators and judges from ruining the families of this state. You call us dead beat dad’s then force us to make a choice to give up our futures or raise our children to adulthood and be exposed to life time alimony. I’m frankly sick of dead beat legislators and judges whom lack the will to fix this problem! Get off your butts and get this done or move out the way and the voters will!
ACLU ?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 4, 2009 at 9:33 AM
COMMENT:
Hey ACLU maybe take a break from helping terrorist kill us and illegal immigrants from robbing us blind and look at this! I wrote a letter as is the procedure to ask for help from the ACLU. They returned with a letter that said “sounds like its unfair but the ACLU cannot help every cause! You should hire a lawyer and go back to Court! $54,000.00 a year and $700.00 a month alimony? Where is the left over money to pay a lawyer?
Chris Rock on Alimony ...
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 4, 2009 at 3:41 PM
COMMENT:
Chris Rock: "When it’s time to get a divorce, women got it made. You go to court, start talkin’ that sh?t. “I’m used to this, I’m used to that. I’m accustomed to this.” What the f&ck is accustomed? Whats that got to do with sh!t? You go to a restaurant, you accustomed to eatin’. You leave, you ain’t eatin’ no more. They don’t owe you a steak. What about what the man’s used to? It might not be money, but during the course of a relationship, a man grows accustomed to a few things. I would love to see a man go to court and say, “Your honor, check this out. I’m accustomed to f@ckin’ her four times a week. Now I feel I should be able to f@ck her at least twice a week. I mean she can have the alimony, but I want some p**** payments.”
Reply to "Men do not want to pay???
Posted by Katharine | Jul. 5, 2009 at 7:32 PM
COMMENT:
I too was in an emotionally abusive marriage for 14 years and 4 children but I decided to leave and the BEST thing I could have done for my self-confidence, sense of self-worth and independence was to go back to work full-time and eventually become almost fiscally self-supporting - with the assistance of a bit of child support. No person, man or woman, should be financially dependent on anyone for their whole lives. Assistance is often necessary if disability & small children are involved, but trust me "living a new life well & happy" without the anger and being dependent on a loser is MUCH better. Resentment is like drinking poison and waiting for the other person to die!
Senator Creem Must Get the Message
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 5, 2009 at 8:31 PM
COMMENT:
It's almost Monday morning. The enemy of alimony reform, divorce lawyer and State Sen. Cynthia Creem, needs to hear from constituents (Wellesley, Newton, Brookline) on 1. voting on legislation in which she has a financial interest and 2. her 19th century notions of women's rights: 617.722.1639 Cynthia.Creem@state.ma.us. If women are so fragile they are permanently dependent, they should not be allowed to vote. (I'm a divorced woman, never got alimony.) Believe it's okay for temporary bridge to independence.
Excellent
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 9:39 AM
COMMENT:
Now let's discuss child support and parenting plans...I'm available...
Child support is completely different and another subject.
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 9:49 AM
COMMENT:
I feel for those in child support orders and no checks that the moneys are used for the child or children. this issue is completely different from support another able bodied adult.
Good, fair sense at last!
Posted by Kate | Jul. 6, 2009 at 9:52 AM
COMMENT:
It is very refreshing to see somebody engaged in reform of divorce who neither hates women or wants to "fix" things by making them unfair in the opposite direction. Marriage is a partnership, but these legislators are confusing it with being permanent and life long - it isn't. You are not held to pay for your business partner, you should not be held to pay in perpetuity for your domestic partner. Anything more is moralizing and punishment.
if you want abusive spouses to pay the criminal court is needed
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 9:56 AM
COMMENT:
if you want abusive spouses to pay then the criminal courts need to be brought in. not Probate & Family court. where nothing has to be proven. Probate & family court should be for what it was intended. to protect families and children. most often there are two sides to the abuse story.
Why No-Fault-Alimony, when 67-75% of divorces are filed by one gender alone?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 10:28 AM
COMMENT:
According to the CDC 67 to 75% of all divorces are initiated by the female spouse. According to the IRS, 96% of all alimony is paid by male ex-spouses. When this is the case, why do we have No-Fault-Alimony on the books? Why is the party that is overwhelmingly breaking the marriage getting paid to do so? I understand that these laws were put in place in the 19th/mid-20th centuries where the popularized image of divorce was that of the lecherous middle-aged male spouse, running off with his secretary. Nowadays, the tables seemed to have turned. With such an overwhelming majority of divorces filed by women (running off with dance instructors / poolboys nowithstanding), should we be reexaminaning the whole concept of No-Fault-Alimony?
The Good Men Project
Posted by Thomas | Jul. 6, 2009 at 12:20 PM
COMMENT:
More than a decade ago I too got a raw deal in a divorce both in terms of custody and money in MA family court. I applaud this reporting but think there is another equally important and related issue that isn't anti-mother: the fact that so many men truly are trying to be the best dads, divorced or not, that they can while juggling work, relationship, and the myriad of pressures from the economic melt-down to foreign wars. Amidst it all the media consistently paints men as either Navy Seals or idiots, not the normal guys we all are. Tom Matlack www.goodmenbook.org
Good Men and Good Women should Stand Up and Change this CORRUPT system
Posted by David | Jul. 6, 2009 at 1:22 PM
COMMENT:
I am amazed at the reaction to this article. All of us that have gone thru a divorce have been victimized by the corrupt and completely and truly ridiculous system. If the Good People in MA want to see healthy families, we have to create a healthy system that allows people to get divorced with integrity and responsibility. Instead of getting angry and frustrated, why don't we pick up the mantle here and now and say hell no, we won't take it anymore and we want a just and fair system in Probate Court just as our criminal system strives to do. Having found this article via the goodmenbook.org and being a fan, I think its the perfect venue to continue mobilizing for CHANGE. We may be a liberal state but we treat high income earners like criminals while the other party and the divorce attorneys laugh at the joke that the whole thing has become. It's truly sad. I say, THE GOOD MEN PROJECT should take the lead and all men and women should look at the Good Work that's already being done by t
Continued from before
Posted by David | Jul. 6, 2009 at 1:24 PM
COMMENT:
the goodmenbook.org and the Good Men Foundation.
Thank Guys
Posted by Franklin | Jul. 6, 2009 at 3:54 PM
COMMENT:
Yet another reason i'll never get married
Replace Sen. Cynthia Creem
Posted by Mike | Jul. 6, 2009 at 4:52 PM
COMMENT:
This long-term Alimony is Marital Welfare. At some point people need to take responsbi,ity for their own lives.
I love a parade
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 6:37 PM
COMMENT:
Can someone please tell me when Sen Creem's next parade appearance will be ? It might be an opportunity to make our views known to her.
You don't need a parade to confront Creem.
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 7:01 PM
COMMENT:
You don't need to wait for a parade. Call her office. Send her an email. Call everyone you know who lives in Newton, Wellesley, Brookline and have THEM call her! ALSO, file a complaint in the State House- She is a divorce lawyer with direct financial interest in the law itself. She CANNOT also vote on it or vote to kill it! WRite to your legislators and have THEM contact her. Call anyone you know in the media about her and this conflict of interest.
Senator Creem's Entire Career is a conflict of interest
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 8:07 PM
COMMENT:
this is her bio from her law firm website. She is also chair or co-chair of the Judiciary Committe. WTF?? Reminds of Dick Cheney getting a pension from Haliburton while they got multi-billion $$ contrax. Her Bio: Ms. Creem is a member of both the Boston Bar Association and the Massachusetts Bar Association where she has served as the Chair of the Family Law Section since 1996. She is also a Women's Bar Association Fellow. In 2005, Ms. Creem was selected to be one of Boston Magazine's Super Lawyers in the area of Family Law. OF COURSE SHE DOESN"T WANT ALIMONY LAW TO CHANGE!! She's in charge of keeping it vague and costly.
File complaint against "super lawyer" Creem with State Ethics Commission
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 8:47 PM
COMMENT:
File your complaint here at the State Ethics Commission website: click here Nothing new here really and her alliances with the judiciary and the bar associations (they LOVE her) explain what is going on. This is business as usual for Cindy Creem and has been pointed out her entire career is a conflict of interest. Her constituents apparently are OK with this, think she is doing a good job and see no reason for change. From what I can tell she has run UNOPPOSED in 2008, 2006 and 2002. In 2004 she won with about 80% of the vote.
alimony in SC
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 9:32 PM
COMMENT:
I am currently a victim of periodic alimony in SC. I feel that permanent lifetime alimony is very unjust. I have been divorced from ex-wife for 9 years and separated for 11 yrs. I have paid her over $100,000 in alimony in the last 9 years. I recently retired from my job after 33 years of very hard labor, long hours, and declining health. I had no choice but to retire as my job became too hard for me to continue due to my health. My understanding was that when I retired my ex would get part of my retirement and the alimony would cease. My ex currently earns about $3,350 per month(now including pension+alimony). My income from MY portion of my retirement is now down to $2,445 per month. It is totally unjust that I should have to continue to pay alimony to someone who is grossing $900 more per month than me and that I should be enslaved to support an ex-spouse 10 years after our divorce! I cannot get closure because I am permanently yoked to my ex.
Yet another horror story
Posted by Mark | Jul. 6, 2009 at 9:39 PM
COMMENT:
I am self-employed in the the ailing construction industry. My income is a fraction of what it was...and yet I must support my "X" who prefers not to work and lives off what I am obligated to send her. I paid for the children, their education and their needs (and still do) without complaint. But to have to pay my "X" who was controlling and abusive in the marriage is just not right! The irony is that in order to retire after busting my butt for so many years, I must move out of the country...and yet she isn't even an American citizen! The probate court system isn't fair, right, ethical, just ...but it is legal!
Join Mass Alimony Reform-Take Action
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 6, 2009 at 11:01 PM
COMMENT:
These stories are a nightmare to everyone who must endure them. Let's keep making a difference. File a complaint against Cynthia Creem for conflict of interest-- see "File Complaint" about 3 posts above - and join Steve Hitner's group and put your anger and energy to work. www.massalimonyreform.org. Write your legislators. Support the Alimony Reform bill that Hitner's group is behind.
This is barbaric and needs to be stopped.
Posted by Michael | Jul. 7, 2009 at 1:55 AM
COMMENT:
I'm going through my own personal divorce hell right now. I'm currently married to a lazy wife who is milking the social security system just so she doesn't have to work, and she's doing everything in her powre to make sure I pay for the rest. This woman has engaged in so many shady things in our marriage and yet I have to pay the price for it all. So I know what Mr Hitner and many others are going throught and my hats off to you. Good Luck and let's change this legislation.
Don't Ever Get Married!
Posted by Douglas | Jul. 7, 2009 at 2:06 AM
COMMENT:
Who Knew? Massachusett's perverse Alimony system will not change as long as our Politicians are Lawyers who make big bucks destroying Children and Families.
Massachusetts Alimony laws
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 5:41 AM
COMMENT:
Thank you for doing this excellent piece highlighting the absurdly unfair and anti-family alimony laws in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This issue needs to be brought front-and-center in order to have a reasonable chance to effect change. I applaud Boston Magazine for their forthright and honest approach to this critically important story. You have converted me to a loyal reader!
Alimony Unfair
Posted by Fred | Jul. 7, 2009 at 6:03 AM
COMMENT:
The current laws on alimony are out of touch and penalize individuals for a lifetime, whose only fault was getting out of a bad or loveless marriage. In many cases the divorce was initiated by the other party who only benefits by receiving a large amount of alimony and or child support. As a father I have absolutely no problem supporting my children, however I do resent that fact that my ex- wife does not have to work full time although was working a full time job at the time of the divorce, and whose boyfriend who also does not work, are living together at a much higher standard of living than I am, the one who goes to work every day. I fear that this may continue forever! Is that fair? More over the current laws prevents people of both sexes from moving on with their lives due to the fear of having “household incomes” being included in the calculation for alimony payments, woman are canceling marriages in fear of their incomes going to their future husbands ex- wives. People who
Alimony Reform
Posted by Chris | Jul. 7, 2009 at 6:25 AM
COMMENT:
Thank you for a thoughtful look at this issue. The current laws are not only financially arcane, they prolong the damage divorce does to families by not allowing any party to move on. As a society, we all lose if families are left in a state of anger and resentment. This requires reasonable change
Current Alimony Law is a DISSERVICE to Women and Children
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 6:26 AM
COMMENT:
When I was divorced in RI ten years ago, my attorney made it clear that alimony was rare, even though I had been out of the work force for many years and had two small children. In addition to that, I was coming out of a very abusive marriage, my husband owned his own business and we lived a very comfortable life. The judge said that I had a college degree and had the ability to work. He awarded me a one time “rehabilitative alimony” payment of $8,000 so that I could take the necessary classes to become recertified as a teacher. This was the best thing that could have happened. I am gainfully employed and love my job. My children have seen an example of what it means to overcome adversity, be responsible, and find purpose in life. “Entitlement” alimony in Massachusetts is not only a disservice to women but it sends a bad message to children. I have advised my two sons to avoid going to college or get married in Mass. The current law has also dictated my decision not to marry t
Another 2nd Wife Weighs In
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 6:33 AM
COMMENT:
Thank you to Boston Magazine (and to today's FOX news report) for the story about the oppressive and demoralizing alimony laws in MA. My husband's ex “makes” over $50,000 in alimony a year. Her family money doesn't even count in the bigger picture and she now lives with her boyfriend. She has a college degree and is capable of doing much more than her crappy part time “fake-o” job. As for alimony “maintaining her lifestyle”? She travels internationally, has a very nice house, and lives MUCH better than she did when they were married. Why is my husband still responsible for her when their kids are grown and there is no longer a tie between the parents? I don’t work because I REFUSE to pay one red cent into her greedy paws. There is something very, very wrong with this system and thanks to Steve Hitner and others for working to expose this. I am calling my legislator about this AGAIN. I am angry…
Alimony is legalized revenge
Posted by Bruce | Jul. 7, 2009 at 6:38 AM
COMMENT:
Alimony is nothing more than legalized revenge and needs to end now. It serves no purpose but to punish the payor and reward the recipient for any divorce including a no fault divorce. I am happy that this article was written and I will be even happier when the laws changes because of it and because of all of the work that Steve has done. Nice job!
Currently Alimony Law is Unconstitutional
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:02 AM
COMMENT:
Cynthia Creem is not representing the best interests of the citizens of Massachusetts. It is very clear that she has her own agenda and is self-serving. Why would any good leadership support this conflict of interest? It is up to the leadership to to what is right for the people not what is right for the brotherhood. Remember, it is the people of Massachusetts that vote. It is a privilege to serve and this power should not be abused. Cynthia Creem needs to resign. Be a voice to change what is unjust. Send your comments to the Ethics Commission, join Mass Alimony Reform,and tell all your relatives and friends so that they understand what is going on in the state that they reside in. You would be surprised how many people are not aware of how bad the alimony laws are and how people are enslaved in Massachusetts. It's unconstitutional and the people of Mass need to stand up to what is rightfully their priveledge for living in America . . . it is called "freedom."
It's about time!
Posted by Jeff | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:16 AM
COMMENT:
I pay alimony and my ex has absolutely no incentive to get a job. She has a lifetime of entitlement. It's simply not fair. I joined Mass Alimony Reform. You should too!
Thank you Kris
Posted by Gina | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:22 AM
COMMENT:
Thank you Kris for writing an excellent article and for allowing people to read about the horrible injustice that is taking place in Massachusetts. People have been silently suffering for many years by the enslavement-for-life alimony in Mass. I wonder how those who continue to perpetuate this cycle would feel if they had to support someone for life, even if the person was more than capable of working (i.e. a former spouse or even a child). Marriage is a partnership and in a no-fault divorce, assets are divided accordingly and individuals should be free to move on. Men are treated like criminals. Massachusetts is making every effort to destroy the family unit and force couples to live together so that they are not subjected to combined income alimony in second marriages. Kris . . . please continue to follow-up with this horrible injustice. Your voice is important and much appreciated.
What's brown and looks good around a divorce attorney's neck?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:24 AM
COMMENT:
Answer? - a rottweiler. The current system encourages unscrupulous attorneys to seduce and manipulate their clients into pressing for unfair alimony awards. The resulting acrimony provides a gravy train in legal fees for these 'professionals' who have traded in their integrity for their outrageous fees. My recent divorce started out as a reasonably unacrimonious affair as my ex-wife had agreed to waive alimony as she earnt an above average salary and her 3 children from a former marriage had all finished College and left home. She had repeatly stated that she didn't want alimony as she wanted to continue to fend for herself and didn't expect to become a 'kept woman'. However, when advised by the judge at the Pre-Trial Hearing that she was entitled to alimony on account of the disparities in our salaries, her attorney pressed her to take it and my ex-wife's greed took over. As a consequence, our relationship is now non-existent - likewise my contact with my step-children whom I loved ve
20 years after divorce you could still pay alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:59 AM
COMMENT:
20 years after divorce a ex-wife can file for alimony if she becomes unemployed. even if your original divorce settlement if complete. if you are or were divorced you could join me and others in alimony hell. lets all work together and end this lifetime entitlement.
Alimony = Extortion
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 8:00 AM
COMMENT:
Alimony for life in Massachusetts is nothing more than legal extortion and it is a crime. There needs to be accountability for those who are serving the citizens of Massachusetts. No more abuse of power. Support all efforts to make the change that is needed.
Thanks for exposing Mass as the state of postmarital hell!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 8:08 AM
COMMENT:
I won't hold my breath, but there is a glimmer of hope that we citizens may at last be protected from over-the-hill out-of touch judges like Stahlin
Senator Cynthia Stone Creem
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 8:18 AM
COMMENT:
You have had your last unopposed election. Every man and second wife in your district will know who you are and your despicable views on alimony. My ex-wife did not entertain associates, did not pay for my education I worked full time and went to school at age 35 got a electrical license. The judge calls this a professional license are you crazy. I don’t make enough money to pay $700.00 a month for life as the judgment stands now. YOU HAVE BEEN EXPOSED! While I was in school till 10:00 pm and working fulltime my wife was having an affair. You think that’s ok. Well you are going to find out it’s NOT! Judge said it doesn’t matter she had an affair with another man or that she had two children from a previous marriage. NO FAULT divorce. Your discrimination is being exposed.
2nd wives are victims too
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 8:46 AM
COMMENT:
I hesitated 2 years prior to marrying my husband, who pays alimony to a woman with a college degree and works very little. Her kids are grown, she has a live-in boyfriend and a very lucrative career as an alimony recipient. My husband has no recourse, and no plans for retirement because he likely can't. These alimony laws MUST be changed. The stress of being chained to someone for the rest of his life is cruel and inhuman, for us and for everyone who is unfairly penalized by the current system. Kris thank you, and to Steve Hitner, you are a hero.
It's Not Just Mass
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 9:00 AM
COMMENT:
While I understand and appreciate that this article is about Massachusetts law, laws there are not that much different than the rest of the country. You can count on one hand the states that have fair alimony laws. The entire family law system from one end of this country to the other is nothing but a big legal scam based on depriving Americans of their most fundamental rights. Where is the U.S. department of Justice? family courts are not courts at all because family law is not legitimate law as it does not comport with the U.S. Constitution or even most state constitutions.
But Mass is the Worst
Posted by Peter | Jul. 7, 2009 at 9:28 AM
COMMENT:
A poster above put a link to the CDC stats page for marriage-rates for all 50 states. Even though the decline in marriage-rates is happening nationally, you will see that Mass had the biggest declines, and also has the lowest net new-marriage rate. (considering some of the wedding #'s reflect same-sex marriage, imagine how low the heterosexual marriages must have become). So dear unmarried-ladies: the next time you read a "Why he won't commit?", or "Why he won't propose?" type of article in Cosmo, you know who to blame. It's not you, it's the laws. If you reach the 3-0, 3-5, or 4-0 milestones in life without a ring on your finger, you can call and thank Senator Cynthia Stone Creem for it.
Systematic reform needed
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 9:40 AM
COMMENT:
Alimony and child support are related. If for whatever reason a judge can't order alimony (or in his /her opinion not enough alimony) and there are children involved child support will be used a substitute. According to the Mass Child Support Task Force report click here , this is done to "to provide equal treatment for children born of married and nevermarried parents, recognizing that alimony is not available to nevermarried parents." Child support was just jacked up this year in Massachusetts to ridiculous levels and has NO BASIS (the task force admits this !) on the actual costs to raise a child. And BTW one of the task force members responsible for this is Gayle Stone Turesky - law partner and sister of Sen Creem. This is another ethical breach and conflict of interest that needs to be reported.
Florida = Indentured Servitude
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 9:56 AM
COMMENT:
In Florida the same situation exists with no help from the court systems. My ex filed for divorce 10 years ago with about 50% of my income going to her. She has been cohabitating for about 8 years and even with a change in the law, the courts do nothing when brought to them for modification. They will toss you in jail for non-payment even with a loss of job or failed business. I have to live in a different state than my kids (ages 25 and 28) just to make a living. To change jobs or start a new business in a sure way for the courts to through you in jail for civil contempt. The best way to avoid this misuse of power by the court systems (family law is BIG business for lawyers $$$) in to call for a national marriage strike.
Tragedy of divorce
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 10:21 AM
COMMENT:
I recently read the article “Till Death Do us Pay” and can affirm the lopsided tragedy of divorce in Mass. One additional comment is the reason for the divorce. It is always assumed that the woman is the helpless party and requires support. In my case I left a cheating and degrading relationship but am left hold the bag! I went into the divorce unaware of the unfair Mass laws but would do it again to get out of that marriage. Hopefully reform will level the playing field.
Higher earning spouses!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 10:34 AM
COMMENT:
join the reform effort. you could be the next victim of alimony hell. fight like hell now! before it's to late.

Posted by Annefit | Jul. 7, 2009 at 10:35 AM
COMMENT:
While it is vital to support the children no adult should be given a lifetime penalty or annuity. One can not have equal rights at the expense of another. A chance to re educate or re-establish oneself is appropriate.
Great article...about time this issue gets exposed
Posted by Dave | Jul. 7, 2009 at 10:49 AM
COMMENT:
Great article. As a guy who just finalized my divorce...from a wife of 14yrs who left me...and got full custody of the kids...this is long overdue. My wife is college educated and made more than me when we got married. She now refuses to work and tells me that I should be prepared to support her for a long time. I'm now on the hook for alimony and child support to a woman that left me. These laws need to be changed asap. Massachusetts has woman that lead colleges, companies and are leaders in politics. To expect other woman to have the luxury of not working..getting their bills paid..with health insurance...is contradicting everything that woman stand for. Very frusttrating.
About time
Posted by Richard | Jul. 7, 2009 at 10:53 AM
COMMENT:
About time this got the exposure it deserves. This is the only state that allows on adult to live off the other's expense. The only alimony that should be allowed is to provide assistance while one gets on their feel. It's very sad seeing friends of mine working two jobs to support an ex-spouse that refuses to work.
TIL DEATH DO I PAY
Posted by JAMES | Jul. 7, 2009 at 10:58 AM
COMMENT:
MY EX BOUGHT ME A NEW MERCURY COUGAR IN 1984. SHE GAVE ME MY FIRST MICROWAVE. I THOUGHT I WAS IN LOVE, AND MARRIED HER, ONLY TO DISCOVER SHE WAS BIPOLAR. AFTER 15 YEARS OF MARRIAGE, AND FREQUENT THREATS FROM HER, TO PLUNGE A KNIFE INTO MY CHEST, AND TWIST IT, I DIVORCED HER. SHE ACCUSED ME OF HAVING AN AFFAIR WITH EVERYONE I KNOW, INCLUDING MY MOTHER, SISTER, BEST FRIEND AND HER DAUGHTER. SHE STARTED A FIRE IN OUR BEDROOM, AND CLAIMED I TOLD HER TO DO THIS. I WAS AT WORK. SHE THREATENED TO KILL OUR DOGS. SHE ASSAULTED A POLICE OFFICER THAT CAME TO THE HOUSE AFTER SHE SET THE FIRE. I HAVE PAID $46.00 A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR, FOR OVER SEVEN YEARS. I GAVE HER MY HOME AND ALL CONTENT. I SUPPORTED HER TWO CHILDREN THROUGHOUT THE MARRIAGE. I AM NOW DECLARING BANKRUPTCY, AND AT THE AGE OF 56, HAVE NO RETIREMENT TO LOOK FORWARD TO. I CAN ONLY HOPE SHE DOES NOT LIVE MUCH LONGER. THANKS TO THE FLORIDA FAMILY COURT SYSTEM, MY LIFE IS MISERABLE, TO SAY THE LEAST.
Till Death Do Us Pay
Posted by Maria | Jul. 7, 2009 at 11:10 AM
COMMENT:
Dear Boston Magazine, I am responding to the article about, "Till Death Do Us Pay." I am a fiance of an ex-husband, who is obligated to pay alimony to an ex-spouse. Steve and I have been together for over 6 years. In September, he proposed to me. At first I was very excited, but to no avail disappointment came over me after I researched Massachusetts alimony obligation. Once we marry, it would mean that my salary would have to be considered part of her alimony payments. I was never married to her and I find that very unfair to be put in that kind burden. I believe that everyone has the choice to change their lives but some of these ex-spouses choose not to. I also believe that these ex-spouses should be taken cared of for a limited amount of years (in my case, ex-wife). While these ex-spouses are given the privilage to be supported, they should be required to do something in order for them to be self-suffient; like for instance, return back to school/college. Many regrets
"TILL DEATH DO US PAY"
Posted by Maria | Jul. 7, 2009 at 11:13 AM
COMMENT:
Dear Boston Magazine, I am responding to the article about, "Till Death Do Us Pay." I am a fiance of an ex-husband, who is obligated to pay alimony to an ex-spouse. Steve and I have been together for over 6 years. In September, he proposed to me. At first I was very excited, but to no avail disappointment came over me after I researched Massachusetts alimony obligation. Once we marry, it would mean that my salary would have to be considered part of her alimony payments. I was never married to her and I find that very unfair to be put in that kind burden. I believe that everyone has the choice to change their lives but some of these ex-spouses choose not to. I also believe that these ex-spouses should be taken cared of for a limited amount of years (in my case, ex-wife). While these ex-spouses are given the privilage to be supported, they should be required to do something in order for them to be self-suffient; like for instance, return back to school/college. Many regrets
Spouse A cheats, spouse B pays, divorce lawyers (and apparently senators) take a cut
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 11:39 AM
COMMENT:
Higher-earner Spouses (spouse B) who are currently married, who are divorcing, or who have ever been divorced in Massachusetts ... you are all in danger. You are like lobsters in a lobster-cage.
Thanks for writing about this improtant topic
Posted by condor68 | Jul. 7, 2009 at 11:56 AM
COMMENT:
The family and probate courts are 1) Living in the dark ages, 2) Incompetent and 3) Corrupt. They need massive reform and FBI investigation as recent crimal charges against high officials shows. The entire system is designed and optimized to soak every family going through divorce of every dime possible in legal fees. Child "support" is also a scam and has nothing to do with the cost of raising a child (or 50% of same). In fact in Mass. you can easily show with high school math and USDA cost figures that it is often 5 times the cost of a child paid by one parent! Why? Because the state gets matching funds from the federal gov't (your taxes) for all child "support" it orders. So there is a direct conflict of interest. Mass. child "support" was already the highest in the nation and as of January 1st they increased it up to 40% for some people. It is totally insane and effectively a SCAM for lawyers and state government. Please do a follow-up story as child support has built in "alimony"
Beware . . . Legal Rape in Mass
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 12:44 PM
COMMENT:
This previous writer is correct. Mass does get matching funds from the government (your tax dollars) for child support/built-in alimony payments. Also, since when is age 23 the cut-off? Only in Mass. This is unheard of in other states. This is a scam and Mass should be investigated. Beware of all divorce attorneys in Mass who lead you to believe that they are working in your best interest. They are not. Giving you "hope" is part of their game plan. They will do their best to drag out your case, or further, bring it to trial. More money for them. You will be sucked dry and then disposed of. Attorneys and Probate Judges do this for sport. It is called "legal rape."
Let the Citizens of Massachusetts Vote On It
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 1:01 PM
COMMENT:
Mass Legislators - Emancipation Proclamation. 1) Let the citizens of Massachusetts have a referendum on whether they would like to Abolish Alimony. If they vote YES, then go ahead and abolish it. If you think the political will isn't there, then tweak the current alimony law to have 2a) 3-Year Hard Cap. No buts, ifs, or exceptions. Each spouse is completely free of each other after 3 years. The Texas Model. 2b) Disqualify the spouse filing the no-fault divorce from getting any alimony. Only fault divorces should qualify for alimony for the filer. (I.e. if the other spouse is an abuser, abandoner, etc). If you don't want to keep your husband, you don't deserve to keep his lifestyle either.
Shame on Massachusetts
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 1:22 PM
COMMENT:
I am a woman who was divorced in another state after being married for almost 20 years. I did not receive alimony. Where is it written Senator Creemer, that one must maintain the marital standard of living after divorce? In states where there is a no-fault divorce, assets are typically divided and both parties move on. In certain situations, alimony for rehabilitation is awarded to assist in getting back into the workforce. This is the healthiest arrangement for all parties involved. Until the destructive alimony law in Mass is reformed it is advisable for all women who are considering marriage to a man with an ex not go forward. Imagine living in a free country and not being able to freely marry a divorced man in Mass without the possibility of being attached to his ex- spouse for life. Shame on Massachusetts and shame on Senator Creemer.
Lifetime alimony
Posted by Robert | Jul. 7, 2009 at 1:57 PM
COMMENT:
I am 81 years old. I have been paying alimony for 30 years for a marriage that lasted 20 years. I paid for private college educations for my five children and my ex-wife's grad school. She worked as a family counselor and has seven times the financial assets as I have. I have undergone heart surgery, spinal surgery twice, and have diabetes. I recently went to court to try to eliminate my alimony. The judge ruled that I must continue paying, although she reduced it by 50 percent. I hope the alimony can be eliminated before I die.
Judicial failure - Mass Alimony
Posted by Kyle | Jul. 7, 2009 at 2:02 PM
COMMENT:
Mass is the only place in the world today where a judge can throw you in prison for being unable to pay monies (no matter how unjust) due job loss or declining income. This racket, as supported by Cream and her cronies, is right out of 17th century England. What a nightmare. Poor Cream... We know from her very own words that she is very predisposed to specific views without even taking account of facts and circumstances. Poor Cream... By her very own words she impeaches herself. Cream offfers no fairness, no balance, no equity, no common sense, no logic of analysis, and no attention to the facts. Cream is out of touch with the obligations of a judicial seat. She is so lost that I feel sorry for her. The Cream has curdled.
Divorce law in Massachusetts
Posted by Edes | Jul. 7, 2009 at 2:25 PM
COMMENT:
This issue is long overdue for change. It is demeaning to able-bodied spouses, usually women, assuming they are incapable and it is beyond punitive to the person paying alimony, often the man. The implied moral judgement and therefore punishment that is the "price to be paid" for divorce is deeply hurtful and totally inappropriate in 2009 or any time.The time to change to a more equitable, humane system is now. Excelsior!!!!!!
Another victim - hope for this legislation reform
Posted by Dan | Jul. 7, 2009 at 2:25 PM
COMMENT:
Many thanks to Steve and his hard work on reforming these ridiculous laws. I have been ordered to pay significant alimony for the rest of my life, unless death or remarriage of wife. In addition, I must pay for life insurance on myself with her as beneficiary, AND pay her medical insurance too! The judge (KAPLAN) did not even consider the wife's ability currently to earn a good salary and possible ability to earn much more. She could easily quit work and live comfortably on this "welfare" for the rest of her life, requiring me to keep working until I die. Archaic and brutally unfair.
How ironic...
Posted by Karen | Jul. 7, 2009 at 2:43 PM
COMMENT:
That during my divorce from my first husband ten years ago, I *waived* my right to alimony, voluntarily...yet now my income can be used to maintain and/or increase my new husband's non-working ex-wife's marital welfare!
Write and call Creem's office- keep the heat up
Posted by E | Jul. 7, 2009 at 3:01 PM
COMMENT:
617.722.1639 Cynthia.Creem@state.ma.us. I doubt Creem's Senate staff members have any idea what their boss supports. Send your horror stories to the Senator at her office & her staff will have to read your bitter tales and see what their boss believes in maintaining. It should embarrassing for her to have to face her staff. If you are a constituent-living in Newton, Wellesley, Brookline - ask for a meeting with her and contact Mass Alimony Reform for help going to a meeting. Call everyone you know in those towns and ask them to write. Tell the horror stories. Don't attack her personally. Tell her the law needs to change ASAP, and here's why.
The tortured logic of Judge Edward Ginsburg
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 3:26 PM
COMMENT:
"So what is the major asset that most people accumulate during a marriage?" says Ginsburg. "It's earning capacity. That's the major asset." Huh ?? future earnings = asset ? I will have to break the news to FASB. And it has to be the man's earning capacity and not the woman's ? Insulting all around. Unfortunately for the citizens of Massachusetts Judge Ginsburg though "retired" won't go away.
New Massachusetts Motto -- where women are weak and men are taken to the cleaners
Posted by Amy | Jul. 7, 2009 at 3:27 PM
COMMENT:
Are there no strong, self-supporting women in Massachusetts? Why would you take alimony when you can support yourself? This law sets women back decades. Many divorces are upon mutual agreement, yet this law is one-sided. I feel for Karen, above. It makes me want to scream. It's time to make changes.
Message to All
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 3:56 PM
COMMENT:
If you or anyone you know in Mass is contemplating divorce let them know about the horror before they are sucked into the system. Best advice: Move out of the state while you can and AVOID Massachusetts divorce attorneys and Probate courts or your life will become and remain a living hell. Change is needed NOW. Please support all efforts to help pass alimony reform. Keep the faith, Robert.

Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 4:05 PM
COMMENT:
72 Sponsors
Posted by Jen | Jul. 7, 2009 at 4:10 PM
COMMENT:
There are 72 sponsors who support the Alimony Reform Bill. Need any more be said? The people of Massachusetts are speaking. This represents the change that is so desperately needed . . . "with Liberty and Justice for all."
soon to be divorced wife
Posted by julie | Jul. 7, 2009 at 4:35 PM
COMMENT:
I thought I was in a successful 19 year marriage (with him for 31) my husband is a VP in a biotech company. I was a midwife and supported him thru his PHD, I left my family, career, country to come to America to further his career. He worked long hours and travelled, I had no family to help, so I stayed at home to raise my kids one of which has OCD. Now at 44 my husband wants a divorce, apparently he'd been having an affair with a 28 year old married woman at work, he now lives with her. He has devastated our family and shattered my life. I am at school to try and re-establish my career, but at my age the loss is great I will lose my home and my financial future is uncertain. I need these laws to help me get back on my feet and protect women like myself who are loyal,honor their promises and commitments and do their best in order help their husbands and kids be successful. why should I feel sorry for any financial burden on him or her, they are not the victims here and I was never lazy
Take action now - contact Cynthia Stone Creem
Posted by Grant | Jul. 7, 2009 at 4:51 PM
COMMENT:
Cynthia Stone Creem obviously has a major conflict of interest if she is trying to kill this bill and is a divorce attorney. Let her know how you feel. Write to her RIGHT NOW at Cynthia.Creem@state.ma.us
split everthing 50/50
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 4:53 PM
COMMENT:
I feel for you my wife had an open affair with another man left our marriage. she had two children when I met her. we divorced and 40 years old. I pay alimony for life $700.00 a month. that's not fair. you should split everything 50/50 including retirment accounts, you should get alimony for long enough to get a career going (maybe 4 years). then be free and proud of yourself for doing something for yourself. you can do it. goood luck and be good.
Take action now - contact Cynthia Stone Creem
Posted by Grant | Jul. 7, 2009 at 4:55 PM
COMMENT:
Cynthia Stone Creem obviously has a major conflict of interest if she is trying to kill this bill and is a divorce attorney. Let her know how you feel. Write to her RIGHT NOW at Cynthia.Creem@state.ma.us
Take it to the streets - hit her in her pocket book
Posted by Grant | Jul. 7, 2009 at 5:12 PM
COMMENT:
Hay folks, how about an organized protest (with TV coverage) in front of Stone-Creem's law office in downtown Boston? Get 100 people there with signs and the local news channels and people willstart to hear about this.
Change is coming!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 5:50 PM
COMMENT:
Change is coming whether or not Senator Stone Creem supports this bill or not. Protest I’m all for it, lets do it soon. There will be signatures collected and a ballot referendum put forward. There’s nobody in there right mind will stop change once the voters have spoken. This legislation will only be step 2 since we already filed legislation before. A ballot referendum will end this controversy. Alimony should not and will not go away all together just limited by time and age. Life style of the marriage needs to be gone. The marriage is over after divorce the partnership is over. Any State Court with jurisdiction of the payor should be able to change an alimony order not just the judge that ordered it. You cannot force somebody to stay in Massachusetts and not be allowed to move at free will (remember the Constitution?) I have a life time to beat this!
Till Death Do Us Pay
Posted by Steve | Jul. 7, 2009 at 6:01 PM
COMMENT:
I stand here today to support our cause for Alimony Reform. It is unfair and unjust to many great men and women of this country to be forced to pay alimony for life. Because of her choice to not to move forward with her life, I have to labor against my own will to earn enough money to pay this obligation that the Family Court has levied against me. The Divorce and family law is based on an antiquated social custom that it is a man's responsibility to support women because they are weaker, incapable of being equal to men, and better equipped to raise children. This is simply not the case in today's society.
Unfair Alimony
Posted by Brenda | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:06 PM
COMMENT:
a retired teacher paying weekly alimony to a CPA,who just returned from a trip to Italy with his live-in girlfriend. Does that sound fair? Thank you for printing the article. Something HAS to be done. The courts reward those who lie, cheat and steal.
Alimony Statute is Unconstitutional
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:08 PM
COMMENT:
Bravo to Boston Mag, author Kris, and champion Steve H. All desire enormous praise for uncovering MA's dirty secret. Ma Alimony statute is unconstitutional. Any one wishing to make theic argumentin court can contact alimonyreform@hotmail.com. His group will give the legal arguments and documents to you or your attorney. MA. cannot place an undue burden on citizens exercising their right of privacy to enter marriage, nor can MA place an undue burden on its citizens exercising their right of privacy to exit marriage. The alimony statute does just that.
Life Time Alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:09 PM
COMMENT:
My ex has been living with her BOY FRIEND since 1992 and I'm still paying alimony. Who are these judges
Biotech VP's Wife
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 7:27 PM
COMMENT:
If you are telling the truth about your cheating husband, then file for fault-based divorce. Fault being Adultery. You will deserve your alimony then. 95% of us don't have globetrotting power-broking VP/Governor/President type spouses with 28 year-old secretaries. Yeah you probably "entertained his associates" too. Senator Creem thinks the whole state is made of Back Bay Socialites like you. It is not. Your story has no relevance for the tens of thousands of impoverished ordinary citizens dying under the yoke of lifetime alimony. Do write to us the next time you are in Paris though. Taa taa dahling. Taa taa. {European double cheek kiss}
alimony reform
Posted by John | Jul. 7, 2009 at 8:02 PM
COMMENT:
I too am a victim of alimony abuse . My ex - is a full time career college dept . head . She is fully capable of supporting herself better than the quality of life we had in our marriage. I find myself under that cloud of paying her for nothing . My current wife feels the pressure . I am without a doubt a victim of alimony abuse .
Biotech VP's wife
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 8:03 PM
COMMENT:
If he makes so much money then he will have lots of assets worth alot of money. 50% of that and alimony with a end date should get you going again. others please remember she is a victim of a cheating no good spouse. I'm here to say I support alimony for a duration for her. you don't need him no matter how much he makes for money. mark my words he will regret it. I will assume you were a good wife unlike others assume men are all jerks. good luck and may you future be bright.
These are only empty posts UNLESS WE WORK TOGETHER TO CHANGE THE SYSTEM!!
Posted by John | Jul. 7, 2009 at 8:40 PM
COMMENT:
When the MA divorce process enveloped my life I felt alone and helpless in a system that had run amuck and made no sense. MA family law can slice and dice good people and it has for decades. Your earned assets and income are taken from you with no regard to any logic or structured system. It is a relief to see that there are others like me and I cant thank Steve Hitner enough! SURE, let's scream and shout and get this pain, frustration and injustice out of our system. Your entitled after what you've been through. BUT if we dont write our senators and reps, send them our personal feelings and stories, enlighten our friends and families on the inequities of our laws; then the courts, the judges and the lawyers will be more than happy to continue reaping their financial rewards. The MA legal system is a well financed and strong institution that will not allow the cycle of cash to end anytime soon. It will take work. Lets work harder than them to achieve this change. Seek directio
Your money or your strife
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 7, 2009 at 11:12 PM
COMMENT:
In Hitner's case and cases such as his, it is no wonder why similar advocates continue to push for reform. Hard work was put into Hitner's finale and your article. Thanks for giving a voice to the unheard. There are others who could use investigative reporting like this!
My Call to Senator Stone Creem's office.
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 5:12 AM
COMMENT:
So I called Senator Stone Creem’s office to express my outrage over her comments to the Boston Magazine. She seems to think all men are terrible husbands and the sweet little home maker’s are the only one whom suffers in divorce. Her assistant said well men used to get away with not paying anything like my ex-husband did. My father left my mother and three children and paid no child support. I am a man now that paid the price for my Fathers sins. I stayed the course in my marriage and my children were taken care of until they were adults. Senator Stone Creem seems to have some staff members whom clearly are the man hating women that want revenge. This is what we are up against Men. This is not 1960 when a man can just move and leave the responsibility to someone else. While I was in school until 10:00 PM my sweet little home maker was having sex with another man in my bed, in my car and in cheap motels. Life time alimony is wrong!
Where did I go wrong?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 8:21 AM
COMMENT:
I was divorced in in Massachusetts in 1981. I received alimony until the youngest child turned 18, at which point both alimony and child support ended. My former spouse paid for college for two children. End of story. I must have had a negligent lawyer (ha ha). Moral of the story is, my first choice and only husband was the best choice. The last was a prominent sports writer, who not only cheated on his wife for most of his marriage, but also cheated on me! I am in total agreement with the impending change in legislation.
Sen Creem's retrograde views
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 10:25 AM
COMMENT:
Sen Creem has some pretty antiquated and insulting views towards woman (eg "entertained their associates" ...geez) that she uses to justify her position on alimony. How then can she garner a 100% apporoval rating from NOW ? click here Don't get that.
Another second wife here
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 10:42 AM
COMMENT:
She cheated she left they divorced she lives with boyfriend and we pay life time alimony. We will never be able to have a comfortable lifestyle every day is a struggle rob Peter to pay Paul! Retirement what's that?? My husband would end up in jail.
Thank You second wives.
Posted by Michael | Jul. 8, 2009 at 11:16 AM
COMMENT:
There are 11 Female Senator’s. One is the Senate President. 10 of the 11 female senators have a chairmanship of a committee. Women today in politics and generally in the work place have come a long way. If more second wives don’t take this cause forward there will be no chance in fairness with alimony. Many see alimony as men vs. women. This in reality is not case. Many second wives mine included are not able to live the lifestyle of the marriage because their husbands are paying lifetime alimony. We need you brave women who sacrifice everyday to tell your stories. Get the word out. Thanks for giving loving and caring men a second chance at the American dream home ownership and a family it shows how giving and caring women can be.
Drug Dealers vs. Divorced Men - Which one is it Senator?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 2:50 PM
COMMENT:
There is an article about the Cambridge prison riot and overcrowding in Mass prisons on the July-6 issue of the Boston Globe. Halfway through the article it mentioned that "". So the good Senator is in favor of relaxing the prison sentences of Drug Dealers, but she won't budge about relaxing the lifesentence of Divorced Men? Which cime is bigger?: Selling Drugs, or saying "I Do"?
Alimony laws cripple 2nd families
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 3:36 PM
COMMENT:
Senator Cynthia Creem says that the only change in MA alimony law she supports is a cap on duration! We have the most aniquated alimony law in the country and this is the only change she supports! How about changing the law so that a second wife's income cannot be considered for purposes of calculating alimony? How can it possibly be constitutional to order a 2nd wife to financially support a first wife. Second wives, please contact Senator Creem and tell her that MA alimony law is hurting the women of 2nd families and their children.
To "Biotech VP soon-to-be divorced wife"
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 3:43 PM
COMMENT:
The bill sponsored by 72 legislators and Massachusetts Alimony Reform would not deny you alimony. It caps alimony at half the length of a marriage, which in your case would be a decade. Moreover, you should get 1/2 of your husband's assets after you divorce, including 1/2 of his retirement assets. You should be fine financially. Those of us who want to amend the MA alimony law are working class and middle class men and women who would like to retire one day, but who cannot in this state where lifetime alimony is commonly awarded. We are not necessarily looking to abolish alimony. We just want a system that is fair.
Get a life
Posted by Tricia | Jul. 8, 2009 at 3:54 PM
COMMENT:
Any women who supports this aniquated treatment is setting women back 100 years. Take responsibility for yourself, get a life, and quit milking your ex-husband just because you can. Alimony for life should be for rare exceptions, although even that is scary because each and every women currently collecting alimony for life will be able to justify to herself (and anybody else unlucky enough to hear her sob story) that she is the rare exception that needs it. On man, things need to change.
RE: Take it to the streets - hit her in her pocket book
Posted by Mark | Jul. 8, 2009 at 5:34 PM
COMMENT:
I actually think that the protest (orderly and respectful) outside of Senator Creem's law office may not be a bad idea. I'm not sure that phone calls and e-mails will be enough to change her mind. This is about preserving a sizeable chunk of her income to the detriment of all who pay alimony. The protest will never happen unless someone takes the lead in organizing it.
Nobody can top this one!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 8:12 PM
COMMENT:
I am the second wife. My husband makes $40,000 a year (gross). He pays child support in the amount of $1200.00 per month. His ex receives her child support TAX FREE! He has NO money left to help MY family. We have 1 child together and I have three with my deceased first husband. The courts don't care about my children. The ex's lawyer threatened my husband on a number of occasions forcing my husband to settle out of court. She has made the point of coming after me since she knows I am an easy target(a former widow with some life insurance money). Her lawyer asked for all my personal financial information and for the accounts of my minor children dating back to the time my first husband was alive(even though I am not a party to the case). My husband was forced to settle out of court for my mental well being. He was forced to pay his ex's court fees. They stole money from the sale of our house in MA saying it was for child support and then her lawyer used it to pay herself. I have
violation of the 13th amendment
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 8:28 PM
COMMENT:
I pray this sham gets enough power to push this bill through. In Massachusetts, I got divorced and pay rediculous money to my ex.I am indeed "enslaved " to pay until either she or I die. I would think this is in violation of the 13th Amendment wheras, no person shall be enslaved to another. I and my new wife work and donot reap the rewards of our efforts..instead we work for the support of another . SLAVERY PURE AND SIMPLE.
Sour Creem
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 9:18 PM
COMMENT:
I have had some experience working on the opposing side of a case from divorce lawyer / senator / co-chair of the judiciary committee Cynthia Stone Creem. Atty Creem would not settle or even agree to meet to settle even though only minor issues remained. Atty Creem was hell-bent on a trial. Of course she billed as if there would be a trial. When the day of the trial came the judge said there would be no trial - the contested issues were minor. Atty Creem was sour - sour Creem. All that effort wasted and no more billable hours. Still Atty Creem got her money. Atty Creem does what is best for Atty Creem. Unfortunately and as this article makes clear, Sen Creem is no different.
Sen. Creem needs to WAKE UP!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 9:22 PM
COMMENT:
I am a dediciated dad who puts my children first in everything I do. I made a responsible decision to divorce my wife due to the constant neglect and abuse (at least 5 filings with DSS) of my 4 children. My GAL filing in court indicated that she should never have custody of my children. I had a woman judge who did not go against the GAL reccomendations and I was awarded sole physical custody and she has supervised vistations. The judge noted in her findings of the facts that my expenses were $1000 higher than my income (since my income property was ordered to be sold at a loss and 100% of the proceeds to her) My ex no longer works full time as a executive admistrative assistant. She now works part time ordered to pay the mininum child support while I have been ordered to pay her $1600.00 a month for life! I have been punished for life for being a responsible parent while she has been rewarded for dispicable actions. I have already gone through foreclosure proceedings and now face bankr
Sen Creem needs to WAKE UP!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 9:24 PM
COMMENT:
and now face bankruptcy. I have filed for modification 6 times, all denied, and threatened numorous times with being sent to jail for what crime have I committed?
Shout it out . . . "CHANGE IS NEEDED NOW"
Posted by Anne | Jul. 8, 2009 at 10:00 PM
COMMENT:
Let me understand this correctly, Senator Creem believes that without a woman, a man wouldn't get ahead in his life/work and, this justifies why a man should pay lifetime alimony if they become divorced? Isn't a marriage a partnership? This woman needs serious mental health intervention. I wonder how she would feel if she had a son, nephew, or brother who became divorced at no fault of his own (perhaps his wife was cheating) and was then ordered to become enslaved for life. Senator Creem should not be in a position where she is making life decisions for the citizens of Mass. She should have absolutely no say about Alimony Reform. It is a direct conflict of interest with her profession and she is clearly in violation. If she studied the Reform Bill, then she might understand that a divorced woman in Mass will get alimony in a fair way, a way that does not punish . . . a way that promotes respect and responsibility. Men are being victimized in the current evil system. Shout it out t
This system is designed to feed legal fees to lawyers. That's it and that's all.
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 8, 2009 at 10:15 PM
COMMENT:
Anyone who looks at what is going on in Massachusetts should be able to see what is going on there. Lawyers in the legislature and lawyers on the bench are all trying to make life great for lawyers. It is really simple. And do you think the legislators care about the people when it is their own profession's opportunity which is at stake? Didn't the last three speakers of the Mass house, who were each lawyers, get indicted? And you expect that type of legislature to make any changes which will reduce lawyers opportunity to drain legal fees from families? This system is a racket plain and simple. In most states, family court judges go in and out of private legal practice in family law. Do you expect them to set things right? It is a racket and needs to be treated like a racket, which means bring in the Feds.
Marriage will be fleeced all the way to the grave
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 9, 2009 at 8:19 AM
COMMENT:
Check out the ongoing decline of the national wedding rate, on page-4 of this year's report from the Rutgers University Marriage Study: click here As you can see new-marriage/wedding rates have been on an unstoppable decline since the no-fault divorce / alimony laws were passed in 1970. Any system that fleeces the innocent (i.e. forces cuckolded spouses to pay alimony to their adultering spouse) will sooner or later get shunned by the populace. Massachusetts laws in this area are particularly unjust, hence it is no surprise that our wedding rates have crashed the most.
Marriage is even deader in the UK - Salem Witch Trials in Reverse
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 9, 2009 at 9:16 AM
COMMENT:
Marriage is going down the dumps in the US, however the UK is at least 10-15 years ahead of the curve. This can be corelated to their "it's-always-the-guy's-fault divorce" reforms being passed about a decade or two earlier than ours. Here the BBC report on the crashing UK marriage rates (now lowest ever recorded since the records began in 1862): click here I guess when they say Massachusetts is the most "British" of the US States, they are not kidding :-) Only this time, just like during the Salem Witch Trials, this is not such a good thing.
F4J UK - A role model for peaceful yet effective public protest
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 9, 2009 at 9:38 AM
COMMENT:
Continuing on the UK tangent for a minute, I would like to point out Fathers4Justice-UK organization to the attention of the Mass Alimony Reform movement. F4J has had a lot of success in the last 6-7 years bringing the issue of Father's Rights to the media forefront in the UK. Here is an intro video of their recent protests on their UK website: click here Partly as a result of their awareness raising efforts, and shifting public opinion, UK's Chief Judge has recently made a recommendation to the Prime Minister's government to re-evaluate current family-laws (and marriage-penalty tax-laws) so that worsening decline of marriage rates may be reversed in the island nation.
marriage in the UK
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 9, 2009 at 9:41 AM
COMMENT:
Friends in the UK tell me people don't get married there because they don't need to be married to have health insurance-- that's why. I got married in 1987 to get health insurance. If we have universal health ins. (goddess willing!) there will be little reason for marriage except among the sentimental fantasists -- Keep calling and writing Atty Creem about her little conflict of interest in creating divorce laws favorable to her other career and her family law firm. Also- isn't this hilarious: she defends the poor helpless women who shouldn't have to work and aren't able to, while she herself has TWO careers! Too bad women are such flaming incompetents, and too bad they have to spend so much time entertaining their husbands' business associates. They barely have time to do their nails!
What Sen Creem DOES support is a man's right ...
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 9, 2009 at 1:47 PM
COMMENT:
... to use the ladies room (aka the "bathroom bill"). She is co-sponsor of HB 1728 which is presently going through the legislative process. click here Good Lord this state is completely nuts.
Our Story on Huffington Post!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 9, 2009 at 2:29 PM
COMMENT:
This story is going national. Check out the piece by ELizabeth Benedict and Tom Matlack on Huffington Post Living page! And make a comment. Keep the story alive. www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-benedict/divorce-arianna-style-c-2_b_228771.html
Senator Creem also supports releasing Drug Offenders early
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 9, 2009 at 3:11 PM
COMMENT:
Here is the Boston Globe news article: click here The money quote from the Globe article is this:"State Senator Cynthia Stone Creem, a Newton Democrat, has filed a bill for the third time that would seek to relieve overcrowding in houses of correction and prisons by relaxing mandatory minimum sentences of five to 10 years for people convicted of nonviolent drug crimes.". Brilliant. If you are a convicted felon who was selling drugs, she is all for setting you free ahead of schedule. But releasing divorced spouses from their lifetime alimony? Never! It's apparent that the State of Mass has more compassion for drug dealers than husbands. Teach your kids: Drugs are good, Marriage is bad.

Posted by Bruce | Jul. 9, 2009 at 5:13 PM
COMMENT:
Alimony is wrong in so many ways. The recipients feel that they have won the lottery when they are awarded alimony. Paying a person who get married then divorced is wrong. There are much better careers that a woman can pursue than being a recipient of alimony. Allow that woman to be proud of her career and that man to live the life that he is willing to work for. End alimony now!
Mass Injustice
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 7:09 AM
COMMENT:
Life, liberty and the pursuit of Alimony? The founding fathers must be rolling over in their graves. The Alimony decisions in Ma. foster greed, vengeance and dependence in perpetuity. It causes a vicious unending cycle that puts a great financial & resource burden on the court system in Ma. All Ma. tax payers suffer as a result not just the Alimony payors. Ms. Creem should recuse herself for conflict of interest. It is unethical legal behavior. My 2nd wife reminds me constantly that women including my ex have the choice not to accept the Lifetime Alimony award but most not only accept it but relish in it. Many contact their friends and share their “success” stories and the name of their lawyer and the cycle grows. Is it right to promote negative behavior and dependence when women have fought so hard for equal opportunity and financial independence? It does such a great disservice to the honorable women like my 2nd wife who choose to take the high road and waive their “rights”. Common
ALIMONY IS A NIGHTMARE
Posted by Heather | Jul. 10, 2009 at 8:17 AM
COMMENT:
I am so glad people are trying to change these laws.Alimony is likewelfare-people abuse alimony the way others abuse welfare system. My husband pays his x alimony. She has been living w/ her fiancee since 5 months after she told my husband she didnt love him anymore & threw him out after 20+yrs of marriage that was 3 1/2yrs ago.Once the last child graduated college she wanted out-he raised her 1st child as his own.She wanted 86%of assets & alimony & that still wasn't enough 4 her. My husband was very good to her she only thought of him as a paycheck & still does. She doesn't love him but she loves his $$ and she's allowed to keep sponging offhim-legally!My husband had a heartattck 1 1/2 yr ago and he's supporting 2 healthyadults who both work and make great $$. The children are grown and married. She refuses to get married even though she's been engaged for 2 yrs because she collects alimony-she has told my husbands family members this-how sickening-how can a person live with themselve
Ernie Ortiz
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 9:13 AM
COMMENT:
Here is an orbituary for the recently deceased Mass resident Ernie Ortiz, who the article says was (along with his wife) one of the founding members of Mass Alimony Reform. It is sickening to think that Ernie was struggling to feed his family and struggling to keep up with alimony arrears, even while battling lung cancer to the very end. click here While it is amusing to discuss the stories of the uber-rich such as that Biotech VP and his restless wife, guys like Ernie Ortiz are the real face of alimony today. Lawmakers - do what is right.
Creem's alimony bill - maintain the status quo
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 10:45 AM
COMMENT:
Mass Alimony Reform's bill had an outstanding 72 legislative co-sponsors, whereas Senator Cynthia Stone Creem filed her own bill in 2009 with 1 co-sponsor! It can be found here: click here This is outrageous! The only change she wants to make is to allow judges "flexibility" on placing time limits on alimony! There is so much else wrong with the current MA alimony law and this is the only change she wants to make so she can continue profiting from lifelong expensive litigation between divoced parties! Keep calling her office, keep emailing her, especially if you live in Brookline, Newton or Wellesley. Even if you live in another town, contact your rep and let them know that you support the Massachusetts Alimony Reform bill and want Sen. Creem to recuse herself from voting on this issue! Here is the Mass. Alimony Reform bill: click here
Alimony in Mass = terror state conditions
Posted by Lenni | Jul. 10, 2009 at 10:54 AM
COMMENT:
I moved from Mass shortly after being sentenced to paying lifetime alimony. I was successful and financially in sound condition. Today I live paycheck to paycheck. Over 60% of my income goes to alimony and I cannot even by my son a birthday gift. I make good money but I am literlly broke from paying for 12 years. I was married for 5 years and now I have paid alimony for 12 years. This article got me thinking. I believe my moral obligations were fulfilled with 12 years of payments. What if I just stopped paying? What if every out-of-state, former Mass resident just stopped after paying for 10-12 years? What can Mass do? Can they extradite me? Hell no!!! My current state would never extradite me. Never. There are FTC laws that limit how much a creditor can garnish. I am going to stop paying this month. Those Mass judges are toothless dogs. Losers who can not stop me. I encourage others to stop paying too. Check out the FTC law that limits the amount of ga
More on Creem's own alimony bill, Senate bill 1616
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 11:30 AM
COMMENT:
Sen Creem's alimony bill, Senate bill 1616 click here only changes the law to make it clear that judges have the DISCRETION to set the duration of alimony as they presently do the amount. It actually makes things worse. It is described as follows: "An Act to Increase Flexibility in Alimony Orders Recent appellate decisions imply that trial courts have the authority to determine the amount of alimony, but not the duration contrary to the intent of the statute. This legislation would clarify the statute granting discretion to judges in determining the duration of alimony." There is no mention of a finite duration (Kris had this wrong in her otherwise excellent article). It doesn't quantify anything. The law remains vague and thereby lucrative for divorce lawyers. Note that this bill as mentioned here click here and here h
More on Creem's own alimony bill, Senate bill 1616 - continued
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM
COMMENT:
The law remains vague and thereby lucrative for divorce lawyers. Note that this bill as mentioned here click here and here click here was introduced by Sen Creem on behalf of her true constituency - The Massachusetts Bar Association ! Citzens, legislators, ethics committee members, bloggers take note. Senator / divorce attorney Creem’s CONFLICT OF INTEREST must be further exposed and addressed.
More on Creem's own alimony bill, Senate bill 1616 - continued
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 11:34 AM
COMMENT:
The law remains vague and thereby lucrative for divorce lawyers. Note that this bill as mentioned here click here and here click here was introduced by Sen Creem on behalf of her true constituency - The Massachusetts Bar Association ! Citzens, legislators, ethics committee members, bloggers take note. Senator / divorce attorney Creem’s CONFLICT OF INTEREST must be further exposed and addressed.
You Go to Jail in Your Own State
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 11:37 AM
COMMENT:
From what I've heard, if you stop paying your MA alimony in another state, they send the sheriff from the other state a notice or something and those guys arrest you. It's not pretty. You might want to check with Mass Alimony Reform www.massalimonyreform.org before you do that. And/Or a good lawyer.
Where is NOW (National Association of Women) now?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 12:50 PM
COMMENT:
NOW's Charter includes this sentence on the "seeks the abolish alimony laws". Where is NOW now? Here is their charter...: National Organization for Women (NOW), group founded (1966) to support “full equality for women in America in a truly equal partnership with men.” Its founder and first president was feminist leader Betty Friedan, author of The Feminine Mystique (1963). Through a program of legislative lobbying, court litigation, and public demonstrations, NOW seeks to end sexual discrimination in employment. The largest women's rights group in the United States, it also supports the establishment of child-care centers for working mothers, legalized abortion, and paid maternity leave, as well as adoption of the equal rights amendment to the U.S. Constitution. NOW works to elect women to office, and seeks the abolition of alimony laws. It consists of approximately 250,000 members, including men, in 800 local chapters affiliated with the main office, located in Washington, D.C.
ALIMONY NIGHTMARE CONTINUED
Posted by Heather | Jul. 10, 2009 at 1:24 PM
COMMENT:
how can somebody live with themselves being so greedy and to be engaged to another man but expect your xhusband should be supporting you both?I was a single mother w/4 kids juggling2-3 jobs/struggling to make ends meet & that only paid the bare minimum.I left an abusive marriage,supported my household while my x husband was in school w/out anyhelp fromhim when I was married.I waived my "right" to alimony.I only wanted him to help support his kids-I am able & capable of working. My husbands x has 2 brand new expensive vehicles,new house etc.-lives better than when married to my husband.If she NEEDS these luxuries-she should go work a 2nd job why should my husband HAVE to work overtime to pay 4 her living.we have to count on overtime to make our bills how fair is that?My husbands x still has control over OUR finances-their marriage is over!how is that just?
Get Massachusetts Chapter of NOW involved in this!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 2:09 PM
COMMENT:
Please contact the National Organization for Women, Massachusetts chapter. As another poster astutely pointed out, their mission is to abolish antiquated alimony laws. Let's try to get them involved in this fight. Email massnow@massnow.org Full contact info can be found at click here
Second wives - contact NOW. Seek their support.
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 2:12 PM
COMMENT:
NOW receives a lot of Federal money based on their approved charter. They will have to assist alimony reformers, particularly female reform leaders. Try giving them a call and see if they agree to support the effort in Mass. I agree with an earlier poster that noticed that Senator Creem, who is an accomplished career-woman and a product of the first-1/2 of NOW's charter, is now trying to block reforms to help the second-1/2 of NOW's charter. Ironic indeed.
NOW support uncertain
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 3:39 PM
COMMENT:
I have been surfing the NOW site, and it looks like they haven't engaged in activities directly to do with Alimony. At least not since the early 2000's when they started archiving their press releases on their site. Maybe that verbiage in their group description is a throwback to the brave-1960's when they were first formed. Either way, this will also be a moment of truth for NOW. We will find out if they are principle-based "Equality Feminists" of the Gloria Steinem era, or the latter-day pragmatists known as "More-4-Us Feminists". You know, all organizations start with haughty ideals, even the original Communist Party of Karl Marx's day, and they quickly turn into Animal Farm parodies of Stalin's day. Anyway, let's knock on wood.
Just in case this link hasn't been posted
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 10, 2009 at 3:53 PM
COMMENT:
From the Huffington Post click here
Sen Creem - getting it done for her special interests
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 11, 2009 at 3:53 AM
COMMENT:
Gushing article by lawyer's group describing Sen Creem's position as judiciary chair here click here Article states that her position "bodes well for the practicing bar". Indeed.
La Creem is a Piece of Work
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 11, 2009 at 1:15 PM
COMMENT:
I recommend the "gushing article" above as it points out just how blatant Cynthia Creem's conflict of interest is. How blatantly corrupt she is - there isn't even a quiver of doubt about the legality much less the ethics of having a hired gun on the Judiciary Committee to do the Mass Bar's bidding. Is she a registered lobbyist? Does anyone belong to Common Cause here? It's as though she is boasting about this.
great article. Dont forget child support disguised as alimony either
Posted by Ray | Jul. 11, 2009 at 2:20 PM
COMMENT:
The Mass probate system is antiquated and will always be protected by the attorneys that profit from it. Where is the incentive to reform. Its absurd to see 20 lawyers line up to get a hearing time on the morning of a hearing or trial at x amount of dollars. If RMV can make things more efficient why cant the probate system. Kudos to Steve H. for standing up.
Divorce in Massachusetts compatible to the Salem witch trial
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 11, 2009 at 4:17 PM
COMMENT:
I'm a divorced disabled firefighter unable to works and had to give half my pension away plus pay for full medical insurance. The ex is working and also enjoying half of my disability pay. I was tricked into believing she had to pay for her share of health insurance and I was wrong. It is strange how we have to read between the fine print to interpret what a divorce judgement means. Not even the best lawyers know fully how to explain what the wording in a divorce judgement means unless your willing to spend thousands to find out what two or three words mean in Massachusetts language. I cannot afford to live in massachusetts and have tried many times to see if they have any openings in the soldiers home, with no luck. I have not commited any crime , why am I being treated as such? I do not qualify for any assistance because they count her half of the alimony. She is doing very well with her boyfriend and also has brainwashed my daughter, so im all alone. No fault divorce sucks also. Goi
Your In good hands
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 11, 2009 at 6:57 PM
COMMENT:
Yes folks, Ma. court system really cares. You got Bonomo stealing from the vending machines, Judges getting paid to go on a shopping spree, Whitey Bulger is still free, Bernie Madoff got away with it for years, jails are overrun and till death do the innocent pay. Doesnt it make you geel like a weenie in a pack of Oscar Meyers. Such intellgent people making life decisions on your behalf. Assholes carving the flesh of your soul making you feel like scum. Geez even Nixon got a presidential pardon. Your in good hands with Massachusetts.
Divorce In Massachusetts
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 11, 2009 at 8:29 PM
COMMENT:
Sometimes I wonder if I'm better off in jail, The thoughts that go through my head for revenge, UBELIEVABLE!!!!!!

Posted by Joan | Jul. 12, 2009 at 12:01 PM
COMMENT:
It's Monday. Sen. Creem needs to hear from us
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 13, 2009 at 6:49 AM
COMMENT:
617.722.1639 Cynthia.Creem@state.ma.us. She was installed as co-chair of the Judiciary Committee to do the bidding of the Massachusetts Bar Association, which neither she nor the Bar Assn. has hidden. Her constituents in Newton, Wellesley, and Brookline need to make their voices heard if they haven't already. Schedule meetings with her. Contact local media.
Spread the Word . . .
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 13, 2009 at 7:24 AM
COMMENT:
It is important to educate friends, family and relatives about the current injustices that are taking place in Mass. Specifically, the unethical behavior of Senator/Divorce Attorney Cynthia Creem. Please call Sen. Creem and your Reps. to voice your support of Alimony Bill HR1785 (the bill does not end alimony, it allows distribution of payments for 1/2 of the length of marriage for no-fault divorces, after marital assests have been divided). Spread the word . . . Alimony Reform is supported by 72 co-sponsors. Change is needed NOW. The citizens of MASS will not tolerate the injustices and corruption. Senator Creem needs to hear the voices of those who speak, support what is right and just for the people, or she needs to step down.
HR1785 is a good compromise ...
Posted by Peter | Jul. 13, 2009 at 9:33 AM
COMMENT:
HR1785 is a good compromise between the needs of the previous generation (Greatest-Gen, Baby Boomers, Early-GenX, etc) and the outrage against marriage of the new generations (latter-half Gen-X, Gen-Y, Millenials). These latter generations are foresaking Marriage 2.0 in larger and larger numbers; see crashing new-marriage rates and ballooning out-of-wedlock birth rates. To get these folks back in the saddle, discrimantory & sexist tools like Alimony will have to be phased out entirely. No one wants to sign a contract, if the other party can terminate at will, and you are the who will be stuck with making lifetime payments to the other party. That is a sucker's contract, and the young/educated/career-oriented generations see it for what it is.
End Life time alimoney
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 13, 2009 at 1:03 PM
COMMENT:
I agree with spread the word. It is amazing how many people in mass are completely unaware of the the life time alimoney situations that many men are obligated to. Just wait til they get to court.. the inconsistencies found in the court room, per judge, are unconstitutional.
Send your stories to newspapers, radio stations, keep getting the word out
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 13, 2009 at 7:26 PM
COMMENT:
Keep talking, keep writing, this is a sorry state to live in. Divorce ends a marital relationship, commone language in the divorce decree includes that neither partner shall have any influence on the other's well being in the future. Hmmm, think about that -- in her interview with FOX news, Kris used the phrase "agreed to pay" when referring to x's going to court to get more $$ from the payor. No one agrees to pay, it just looks that way on paper because we have to sign and agree or go to jail. Once the judge imposes that life sentence, it doesn't matter where you live, you're still supporting your x as if you were married, still working overtime to pay the bills, she's just not in your bed, just your wallet. End this insanity!
Married to your wallet, but no longer married to you ... LOL!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 13, 2009 at 8:08 PM
COMMENT:
I agree with the above poster. Divorce with alimony creates the most absurd of human relationships. Two people, one still has all the obligations in the world to the other, while the other has zero obligations in return. Tis very strange indeed.
ALIMONY REFORM
Posted by JIM | Jul. 14, 2009 at 5:55 AM
COMMENT:
Alimony is just another form of welfare it keeps a capable person from becoming a viable part of our society. If you pay someone to sit home indefinately they will never feel the sense of acomplishment, or getting a promotion because of the hard work they put forward.The sense of reaching up the ladder to that dream of self independence.A person on welfare is in the mind-set that if I go out and get a job I will lose my check.With that kind of thinking they will never feel the joys of success through their own accomplishments.
it's about time...
Posted by Gregg | Jul. 14, 2009 at 9:33 AM
COMMENT:
It's about time ....
Follow the money
Posted by Grant | Jul. 14, 2009 at 10:22 AM
COMMENT:
Let's understand who truly owns the state senate. Take a look at the contributors to Stone Creem's 2006 state senate run: Lawyers & Lobbyists $6,350 Real Estate $2,525 Public Sector Unions $2,000 General Trade Unions $1,800 Health Professionals $1,500 Party Committees $1,000 Education $1,000 Commercial Banks $800 Accountants $750 Transportation Unions $750 Automotive $600 Hospitals & Nursing Homes $600 Democratic Officials, Candidates & Former Members $500 Miscellaneous Manufacturing & Distributing $500 Civil Servants/Public Officials $250
Money can work both ways
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 14, 2009 at 12:12 PM
COMMENT:
Nice find Grant. A corollary of your analysis is that, if each "lifer" and long term alimony-slave in the State gives $500-$1000 towards a designated anti-Creem candidate running from Brookline/Newton/Wellesley for the next state-election, it will be one hell of an election. How much exposure and damning publicity does a few million $'s get these days? It may be a win/win for Creem too. Even though she will lose her Senate seat, her divorce-business will do very well. Unlike politics, in bu$ine$$ there is no such thing as bad-publicity.
Nice guys do finish last
Posted by Jen | Jul. 14, 2009 at 7:18 PM
COMMENT:
As reality goes - if you have enough money to hire a ruthless attorney and crush your former spouse in court, you can avoid this mockery. But, if you are hard working and have the misfortune of your ex-spouse having no shame, then you pay and pay and pay. I am the unfortunate victim of Silvia v. Silvia as the hard working spouse of someone's who's ex underworks to stay below the minimums for the income formulas and flaunts an engagement ring yet brags there will never be a wedding because we will have to support her until death comes to her or my beloved spouse in the absense of her remarriage. A sad example for their children, who now, as adults, question why we are unfairly taxed by their mother. And when I was issued a subpoena - multiple times - to appear in court and present my financial status as an additional source of support for my spouse's ex-spouse, I was told I had no recourse. I could not countersue for harassment and I was stuck with a $3600 bill to prove that I was just
These money grubbing vipers
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 14, 2009 at 8:35 PM
COMMENT:
In all seriousness, would it ever make sense to compile a list of women who collect alimony, which I believe is public information, since divorce court is a public place and divorce judgments sit in the courthouse? Compile their names and publish them on a website for this purpose? I am a woman who refuses to marry a man who pays alimony bec. I don't want her to have my money. I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable divulging her name. I wonder if other people would divulge names. If we had 50 or 100 names, I wonder what effect it might have. I'm not advocating it, but I'm so damn tired of these women getting a free pass and having no shame about it, and I'm wondering whether being exposed would matter to them. And whether we could do anything with the list. Or do we have a list that says "Joe X pays Sally Y.?" (using full names) Is there anything to be gained by this for publicity purposes, I wonder?
Sorry to hear about what happened to you but ...
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 14, 2009 at 8:50 PM
COMMENT:
... I am a guy and of course pay through the nose. You are saying I could have avoided this "mockery" if I had a different attorney ?? Amazing. I thought it had something to do with the location of my genitals.
Sorry to hear about what happened to you but ... reply
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 15, 2009 at 11:04 AM
COMMENT:
and I thought it had to do with equal justice. clearly, there is no equal justice in Massachusetts if the only way to get it is by hiring an expensive attorney. I'm really not even sure about that with some Massachusetts judges, like Stahlin, who appear to have their own agendas that are not on sync with the times or the law as I interpret it.
Expensive attorneys?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 15, 2009 at 11:12 AM
COMMENT:
If expensive attorneys were all that's required to made MA alimony law fair, many people would be better off than they are today. The problem cannot be fixed with expensive attorneys. The problem is with the law. Many people pay a fortune to their lawyers and get stuck with judgments that kill them. The law is so skewed here that you hire an expensive attorney and he or she (I've had both) will basically work on your behalf UP TO A CERTAIN POINT, but they will not take on the system, bec. they have been brainwashed into believing it AND because they do not want to inflame the judges whom they appear before all the time. Mostly they have been brainwashed into believing that this system makes sense, and it does for them, financially $peaking. They have been convinced that women should not have to support themselves, and they actually believe this crap.
It's about closing cases
Posted by David | Jul. 15, 2009 at 1:47 PM
COMMENT:
I absolutely agree with the comments that attorneys "work on your behalf UP TO A CERTAIN POINT." My observation, and this is from being divorced in California, is that the system - attorneys, judges, professional experts, is really in the business of closing cases. The system is as incestuous as any mature regulated field where the participants (practitioners) become more focused on their peers than on the fundamental purpose of their enterprise and so the results of the enterprise no longer reflect the needs of the served population.
Sen. Cynthia Stone Creem in office until Nov. 2010
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 15, 2009 at 3:29 PM
COMMENT:
The last Massachusetts senate election was in Nov. 2008, so Senator Creem will be in office until at least Nov. 2010. She ran unopposed in the last 2 elections. In 2004, a Republican ran against her, but he only got 23% of the vote. Unless a truly viable candidate runs against her in 2010, we're probably going to have Sen. Creem in office for a very long time and she will probably kill any meaningful alimony reform bills. Please continue to contact Sen. Creem's office to let her know that you support Massachusetts Alimony Reform's bill. Anyone interested in running in 2010?
Alimony Reform: California Model vs. Texas Model?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 15, 2009 at 5:28 PM
COMMENT:
Check out this week's The Economist cover story; it describes how Texas is leaping ahead of California in terms of economic growth, jobs, vibrant population growth, Fortune 500 HQs, and so on: click here I understand that elements of the Mass alimony reform bill are based on current CA law. Well how about considering adopting the Texas Model instead? Alimony widely available, but with a three-year hard cap. Something to think about. Cowboy Up!
Hey Senators economic stimulus? Do you really what it or just a way of spending trillions!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 16, 2009 at 10:15 AM
COMMENT:
If the senate really wanted to have an economic stimulus package they would end life time alimony. This makes 2 families that cannot add to the economic growth. Millions are be drained out of the economy by forcing payments of alimony. My ex-wife would not at her fulltime pay qualified for state benefits. So what really is alimony anyway? Reparations for the past! I was not an adult when women could not vote or own property why must I pay these reparations. Without these alimony payments I could purchase a house, buy a new car to replace the beat-up one I got out of the divorce. If you look carefully at MGL 208 Alimony is to prevent a spouse from becoming a public charge, not live the lifestyle accustomed to in the marriage. My ex-wife would not become a public charge if the alimony went away. She would just have to live within her means.
I understand all the complaining but what happens when it's the other way around?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 16, 2009 at 11:56 AM
COMMENT:
I have been married for 9 years, have two lovely children, and in December of 2008 got the surprise of a lifetime! I want a a divorce, I don't love you and oh! by the way, I'm cheating on you with a 27-yr old...but I wanted a divorce first! Yeah, ok. I last worked in 2002.....my duaghter is 7 and my son is almost 4. I have a nice house and car but no income. Thank goodness my husband will have to pay child support but let me just talk about alimony for a moment! I don't want it....feel stupid receiving it but have no choice. My husband made the choice for me. I asked to go to counseling to repair our marriage and got a "no, I won't even try, not even for our children". That brings me to my point. He and I decided long ago that I would not work outside the home when we had children.....now he's asking for a divorce, not me, and my life has to change. My life is dictated by his actions...i don't want alimony but have no choice but to take it. Just because he broke his promise
continued
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 16, 2009 at 12:04 PM
COMMENT:
broke our vows and left his wife and children, my life has to change? Ubsurd! I know promises are broken and terms change but when children our involved it is different. I stay at home and raise and take care of our children. THAT is my job and until they are 18 yrs old and able to take-care of themselves, it will continue to be my job. Since it is not my choice to disrupt this marriage I will continue to do "my job" but now will get compensated until my job ends. That seems more than fair to me. Even if I remarry.....I still do the job I have (raising my children) and should be compensated until I no longer have that job. Can't imagine it being hard to understand. Very simple. Now, do I believe that compensation should be the responsibility of a second spouse...no, but no system is perfect.
To Anonymous who's husband asked for divorce
Posted by Andy | Jul. 16, 2009 at 12:52 PM
COMMENT:
I'm sorry for your situation.You said you worked until 2002 when you had your first child. You both "together" decided you would then not work and raise your kids. Since you and your husband are no longer "together", you as an adult must now make a decision on how to support yourself. If your husband had died, had been disabled, or worked in an industry with severe layoffs occurred instead of being divorced, you would have had to deal with that "life situation", and return to the workforce. Your soon to be ex-husband does need to live up to his obligations in supporting your children through child support payments, but now that you two are not "together", you need to make YOUR OWN decision on how to live your life, how much money you need to live on, and how to support yourself, just like all other adults have to figure out. The revised alimony bill would still provide you a period of alimony to rehabilitate yourself in the workforce, it just makes sure that is not a lifetime obligati
exactly why no fault divorce an alimony cannot co-exist
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 16, 2009 at 12:55 PM
COMMENT:
this is why no fault divorce and alimony cannot co-exist. my wife cheated on me. children are all grown and on their own. 40 yrs. old and a lifetime of alimony. when spouse's cheat the rules need to change. they gave up the marriage! they broke the vows. that's the end..... you have young children he should support them along with you. when your young ones get into school perhaps you should to. to make a future for yourself. but sorry no system is perfect is not good enough. there will be change like it or not. lifetime alimony is wrong for all involved.
Walkaway spouses should not be awarded ANY alimony
Posted by Thomas | Jul. 16, 2009 at 1:10 PM
COMMENT:
If you are choosing to walk away from your spouse and divorce him, you don't deserve his lifestyle either. You can't dump a guy, and expect him to keep buying you dinners. Any contract that obliges the deserted party to keep supporting the deserting party is pure fraud. Marriage under these laws is pure fraud.
To Anonymous who's husband asked for divorce
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 16, 2009 at 1:20 PM
COMMENT:
here's the problem with the law if you cheated on him the outcome would be the same he pays either way WRONG!
Not the way it was
Posted by David | Jul. 16, 2009 at 3:36 PM
COMMENT:
My ex decided after 27 years that she could no longer be with men and decided that our marriage was over - wouldn't try, wouldn't consider any other alternatives. At the time we had two kid, 9 and 13. Yep, that's right we had been married 15 years before we had children and she was employed in her profession all the time. 8 weeks after the 1st one was born she returned to work. 18 months later she was laid off. She and please note the she here asked to stay home with the child. We agreed when he was in kindergarten she would return to work. 2nd child comes along and resets the clock. 2nd child gets done with kindergarten and she informs me that she won't go back to work - volunteering is her contribution. Guess what happened when she filed for divorce? Lifetime spousal support. Do you think that this is fair?
Insurance
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 17, 2009 at 6:42 AM
COMMENT:
I think if you want to get married in MA you take out an insurance policy against divorce. If an insurance company had to pay out these settlements things would get changed in a hurry.
Sen Creem - getting it done for her special interests - part II
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 17, 2009 at 8:46 AM
COMMENT:
Here is click here another bar association article (this time the Massachusetts Real Estate Bar Assoc.) regarding their "proposed legislation" and featuring none other than Sen. Creem. Another case that shows she was installed as co-chair of the Judiciary Committee to do the bidding of the Bar Association and not that of the citizens. What in the hell is going on here folks ? Where is Common Cause ? The State Ethics Commission ? Sen Creem is "blantantly corrupt" as previously mentioned and boasting about it. Oh yeah and this probably goes without saying but her law firm Stone Stone and Creem has a real estate practice.
Texas is much, much better
Posted by Mario | Jul. 17, 2009 at 12:06 PM
COMMENT:
I live in Texas. I am also the victim of having a Mass alimony payment of almost 45% of my gross every month. I have been paying for 5 years after a 10 year marriage that was terrible. I signed on the alimony agreement in Mass because I thought you could go back into court after 5-10 years and get it stopped like in most states. Now I find out that is almost impossible. My ex never works. She drives a BMW and has a great social life. I struggle to make the payment every month and pay my bills. The amazing part of it all is my job is actually a good one. I am well paid. However, when you pay out 45% to someone else who has a college degree and no intention of ever working it looks like I am going to be insolvant when I retire. Texas has a simple rule - 3 years of spousal support and that is it. No more than 20% of your gross income can go to the monthly spousal support. After 3 years its over, done, finis. I am searching for ways to cut off my ex. Any advice from
Texas is much, much better - part 2
Posted by Mario | Jul. 17, 2009 at 12:12 PM
COMMENT:
Texas has a simple rule - 3 years of spousal support and that is it. No more than 20% of your gross income can go to the monthly spousal support. After 3 years its over, done, finis. I am searching for ways to cut off my ex. Any advice from anyone living in Texas or familiar with these laws would be appreciated. Maybe I will just cut her off. That is totally appropriate in Texas and they never NEVER put anyone in jail for non-payment (fraud is an exception). Alimony is nonsense in Texas. 3 years of support and then it stops. Can we make the Texas rule apply to Mass? There must be a way!!! Anyone who provides me with a suggestion or advise that eliminated my monthly alimony payment (disease) can have 5% of my income for life!!! I am serious about that...
Want to help get rid of this law?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 17, 2009 at 12:57 PM
COMMENT:
Give serious donations to Mass ALimony Reform so they can take out serious ads on the Boston Globe website and get widespread attention. The gay lobby has existed in MA for 35 years, and they raise lots and lots and lots of money, and lots of it has gone to "reward" legislators. Mass Alimony Reform needs $$ to operate and advertise. YOu want change, it costs money. Pony up. YOu want real change, do what the big boys do: start a PAC, which is what the gay lobby did. And keep calling CIndy Creem's office. SHe cannot get enough phone calls and emails. She needs to keep feeling the heat.
Taking action
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 20, 2009 at 8:46 AM
COMMENT:
To those who say, Why doesn't Common Cause get involved? why aren't we filing complaints with the state ethics commission-- Take these actions yourself. Each of us is free to file an ethics complaint with the commission, and each of us is free to call Common Cause and ask them to get involved. Steve Hitner started Mass Alimony Reform exactly the same way, by taking action as an individual. Each of us can do the same, and the more people who call Common Cause and who file ethics complaints, the more powerful this movement will become. DOn't let others (ie the legislature, the lawyers) run your lives. Write to your legislators and Sen. Creem AND then pick up the phone and call Common Cause and then go to website for state ethics commission and file a complaint. If there are dozens of them, someone will take notice. Massachusetts is a state with richer history than any other of people taking action and working to end slavery. Every person's voice counts if we speak up. Pass it on.
Please help: complain to Mass. Ethics about Creem's self-interested legislating
Posted by Middlesex County Voter | Jul. 21, 2009 at 8:52 PM
COMMENT:
It does seem clear (to me) that Sen. Creem's using her power as Chairman to squash alimony reform serves her personal interests as a divorce attorney. You can complain -- anonymously if you like -- to the Masschusetts State Ethics Commission, by phone, mail, or online: click here Report State Sen. Creem for violation of G.L. c. 268A, the Conflict of Interest Law. And ask your friends in Newton, Brookline, and Wellesley to VOTE HER OUT.
Reply to - Please help: complain to Mass. Ethics about Creem's self-interested legislating
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 22, 2009 at 8:02 AM
COMMENT:
Done. We'll see how ethical the ethics committee really is. BTW - does anyone know where Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty stands on this issue ? He is the other chair of the Judiciary Committee.
They're waiting for your calls
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 22, 2009 at 8:16 AM
COMMENT:
The phone number of the State Ethics Commission is 617 371 9500. If you want to be super anon, before you call, you can block your phone number by pressing star 67 and waiting for a dial tone. Refer them to the Boston Magazine article (July 2009) and explain what Creem does in her professional life that is a conflict of interest.
Child support much more predictable than alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 22, 2009 at 3:35 PM
COMMENT:
When child support is calculated in Massachusetts, if one person decides he/she is just going to sit home and not work, their income can be imputed for child support calculation purposes. Why is this not done when calculating alimony? Also, a second wife's income cannot be used in the calculation of child support because 2nd wives cannot be made to support children that are not biologically their own. Why then are 2nd wives supporting 1st wives in this state? In practice, that is what is happening when a 2nd wife's income is included for purposes of calculating alimony. There is a form with specific calculations on the web so you can just plug in the numbers and figure out what you're going to owe in child support. This helps many couples save the expense and heartache of frequently going to court to argue over money. This is exactly what Sen. Cynthia Creem does NOT want to see happen with alimony. If alimony awards are totally predictable and divorced couples can know without g
Child support much more predictable than alimony - continued
Posted by | Jul. 22, 2009 at 3:37 PM
COMMENT:
If alimony awards are totally predictable and divorced couples can know without going to court what they will be ordered to pay, they won't hire attorneys.
2nd wives ARE on hook for Child Support
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 22, 2009 at 3:52 PM
COMMENT:
The case law that determines all these psychotic laws in MA began with a case that said a 2nd wife MUST pay CS if her husband cannot. That ruling was then shifted (by a single judge) to include a 2nd wife paying alimony. I don't believe any of this is in the statute (either CS or alimony), but it's in the case law. This is why alimony decisions are so unpredictable and so desirable to the lawyers - because it's a big fat crap shoot - with the dice almost always going in the wife's direction. Imputing income to a non-working wife for CS may be a new feature of the law. Otherwise, it's imputed only to men who, say, lose their jobs and can't find a new one.
Keep writing to newspapers and bloggers
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 23, 2009 at 8:11 AM
COMMENT:
To keep this issue in public discourse, everyone here must do their part in writing to their local newspapers, to active bloggers, and to online discussion communities. The Blogosphere doesn't smell out these things through the ether. They have to be alerted, and told , and reminded. Thanks for doing your part.
Massachusetts seems to march to the beat of a different drummer!
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 27, 2009 at 6:39 PM
COMMENT:
I am a woman and think that its ridiculous given that woman want to be considered independent and not a "50's girl" to impose alimony for life. I live in NH and was married 30 years and my ex asked me for a divorce and I never saw it coming. Not only that but just weeks prior to him asking me for the divorce I started a new job after being laid off. The job was lower paying than my prior one but my ex encouraged me to take it for we were financially comfortable and he also had benefits for us both he said. Needless to say he actually had the nerve to throw up in my face in court that I could get a better job, that I had better credentials than him to seek a higher paying job (that was real estate and we all know where that went!). I ended up with 5 years of alimony. Would have liked more but decided to settle out of court and not take a gamble with a trial for I could have gotten no alimony. As with welfare the state expects one to eventually be self sufficient and retrain or train if
NOW's Mission Statement (1966) - Decrying Alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 27, 2009 at 7:30 PM
COMMENT:
Here is the original National Association of Women's original 1966 mission statement: click here Key portion: WE REJECT the current assumptions that a man must carry the sole burden of supporting himself, his wife, and family, and that a woman is automatically entitled to lifelong support by a man upon her marriage, or that marriage, home and family are primarily woman's world and responsibility -- hers, to dominate -- his to support. We believe that a true partnership between the sexes demands a different concept of marriage, an equitable sharing of the responsibilities of home and children and of the economic burdens of their support. We believe that proper recognition should be given to the economic and social value of homemaking and child-care. To these ends, we will seek to open a reexamination of laws and mores governing marriage and divorce, for we believe that the current state of `half-equity" between the sexes discriminates against both men an
Recently divorced
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 28, 2009 at 10:53 AM
COMMENT:
I recently got divorced in Bristol County. I do not know if that makes a difference. My ex at 45 works 2 part time jobs. I work full time and a second pat time job. We were married for 20 years. We have to kids. Our son is almost 21 and lives with his mother. Our daughter is almost 19 and lives with me. I earn about 3 times what she does. I pay her $250.00 a week in child support until our son reaches 23. He attends school full time. Alimony was waved at this point for both of us. We also will file bankruptcy. My feeling she will attempt to get alimony when our son no longer is eligible but our daughter who lives with me will be eligible. I am hoping the courts will consider it a wash at that point and end the threat of alimony. My ex also will inherit her aunts house and 1/2 of her fathers. I will inherit nothing. She is the executor of both estates and is on the deed to her fathers house. I underatand that can factor in getting or not getting alimony. I am all for helping my son as b
Institutional feminists and alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 28, 2009 at 4:21 PM
COMMENT:
I did some research and many leading institutional feminists support alimony these day because the promise of the women's movement did not come to pass for many. In most states, women and children suffer financially after divorce. In MA, it's the men, the second wives and the children of second marriages. I am a hardcore feminist, and I support short-term alimony unless the recipient is incapacitated or otherwise unable to work. I know many women who have picked themselves up at 50 and made lives for themselves because they have had to. With decent transitional alimony & equitable splitting of marital assets, they should be okay, except in MA, where they are presumed to be too fragile or incompetent to be expected ever to support themselves. But we go nowhere citing the 1966 NOW manifesto these days. It's history.
Responses from Cynthia Creem?
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 28, 2009 at 9:21 PM
COMMENT:
Has anyone who wrote to Sen. Creem heard from her? Even a form letter? It'd be interesting to know what her response to the barrage of letters will be. if people could report in, that would be great.
Creem response
Posted by Andrew | Jul. 29, 2009 at 6:38 AM
COMMENT:
She sent me a letter that she supposedly sent to the Editor of the newspaper. I could not copy here as it was a pdf file. I have fowarded it to the email group of cflap.org It is a group that is fighting alimony laws in most states. If you join the group you should be able to view her response. Another good group to join the alimony reform fight is at alimonyreform.org
What about prenuptial agreements
Posted by Jeremy | Jul. 29, 2009 at 11:17 AM
COMMENT:
I haven't read all of these posts, but in many states alimony can be waived or limited in a prenuptial agreement, unless a court finds it unconscionable. Are those agreements enforced in Mass? If so, a higher earning spouse would be foolish to get married in MA without one. I always tell my clients that getting married without a prenup is liking jumping out of an airplane without a parachute..........literally the riskiest financial decision they will ever make.
prenups are ignored in MA
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM
COMMENT:
MA courts are lawless. Prenups are routinely ignored by judges. Routinely challenged by the party that feels aggrieved, AND lots of lawyers try to get people to sign them under the mistaken belief that they will hold up in MA courts. THe lawyers know that if people get divorced, they will get more business when one party returns to court to challenge the prenup. Routine money in the bank for lawyers. David Lee, who charges a mere $700 an hour, likes to say that because MA alimony laws are so unpredictable he likes to do prenups for people, but he doesn't readily say that they don't always hold up in court. The solution is to leave MA, and don't put yourself in the position of getting married or divorced here. Welcome to the Salem Witch Trials, and the Scarlet Letter. THese things haven't gone away.
RE: Institutional feminists and alimony
Posted by Mark | Jul. 29, 2009 at 7:22 PM
COMMENT:
Anonymous Jul. 28, 2009 at 4:21 PM posted: "I support short-term alimony unless the recipient is incapacitated or otherwise unable to work." Please explain to me why an alimony payer who probably had nothing to do with causing the payee to not be able to work should have to pay alimony for the rest of that person's natural life? As someone who is in that very situation, I can tell you it's a nightmare and the height of unfairness.
RE: Institutional feminists and alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 29, 2009 at 8:04 PM
COMMENT:
Here is a case. Wife leaves Husband for Bad Boy Biker. Short term marriage, no alimony is granted. Later that year (ex)Wife and Bad Boy Biker have a motorbike accident. Bad Boy Biker Boyfriend dies, but the (ex)Wife is now disabled. Under current Mass law, can the (ex)Wife go back to court, and hava lifetime alimony instituted against her ex-Cuckol ... errrr ... her ex-Husband?
Family Court - The Musical
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 30, 2009 at 9:39 AM
COMMENT:
They now have the musical version: click here
Divorce - Aussie Style
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 30, 2009 at 12:35 PM
COMMENT:
"I've got everything I need." - Aussie Bloke click here
Moderator: Please delete my post above
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 30, 2009 at 2:03 PM
COMMENT:
Ok apparently that old piece from Aussie humor-TV was uploaded on YouTube by questionable people. I just noticed. Moderator - Please delete my post above. Thanks.

Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 30, 2009 at 2:12 PM
COMMENT:
Dear Senator Creem, I respect your position that each case has special elements and that judges need to be able to exercise some discretion. Still, laws that, in practice, give unlimited discretion to judges are hardly laws that generate respect for the legal system or which really lead to “rule of law.” Consider, for example, what would happen if judges had complete discretion as to what “speeding” meant, and there were no posted speed limits. One could be fined for going over 35 mph on Storrow Drive by one judge, who has a particular idea of what speeding means, while another could have a different idea of the limit. We have fairly specific guidelines in most of our laws so that people can follow them and, important, so that not every dispute has to go to court. The current divorce laws in Massachusetts, however, have, in practice, no guidelines. Laying out 14, or whatever, criteria for alimony, with no weights assigned to any, simply gives the judge unlimited discretion.
Re: Insurance
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM
COMMENT:
What a great idea! Wonder if it's in the works anywhere. Afterall, if there's one for engagement rings and now pets, there has to be one for the end of a once satisfying life of partnership.
Whoa ! Wait a minute ...
Posted by Anonymous | Jul. 30, 2009 at 4:48 PM
COMMENT:
... hold the presses. The marvelously named Cynthia Stone Creem is using judicial "discretion" as a justification ???? Where have I heard THAT before ?
pwned machine
Posted by pwned | Aug. 1, 2009 at 1:50 PM
COMMENT:
click here I wrote this. I just wished I put this here earlier so more people would read it
Prenups in MA are worthless - or nearly so
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 1, 2009 at 6:43 PM
COMMENT:
To pwned machine, I read what I could of your rant. I'm a woman. I hate MA divorce law. don't bother getting a prenup in MA. They are ignored by judges. The only solution is not to get divorced in MA, and the only way to be sure of that is not to live there. Really, prenups in MA courts are challenged all the time, just when you want them to go into effect. Divorce lawyers are happy to draw one up for you, and charge you and your spouse zillions of bucks. But they might as well mean nothing bec. if you get divorced, your wife can challenge it and you could lose. Best advice: the west-bound train outa the state. Before you go, write to your legislators and ask them to support real alimony reform in HR 1785. Also, give a donation to Mass Alimony Reform www.massalimonyreform.org, so they can change the G-D law. Thx
Good article
Posted by Steven | Aug. 2, 2009 at 5:13 PM
COMMENT:
Good article. See my blog on this at click here
On Alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 2, 2009 at 6:36 PM
COMMENT:
"The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes." -- Thomas Paine Ok, so it was more about King-Queen-and-Country. But really, is the concept of "A Lifestyle Having Been Accustomed To" that far off?
How ca we help with this reform?
Posted by Jayne | Aug. 4, 2009 at 8:49 AM
COMMENT:
My husband is being sorely abused by this alimony crap. His livelihood depends on the building industry which is nill right now. What should be his busiest time of year, we have no money coming in., 2 months behind in rent & Not paying any other bills 'cept the alimony. He's 62, I don't know how much longer this can go on before the stress kills him. We will do anything to help push this through.
We need a Lawyer
Posted by jayne | Aug. 4, 2009 at 8:56 AM
COMMENT:
My husband goes to court, yet again, to try to end this tomorrow. We had a lawyer who knows our financial situation but won't go with him tomorrow because she hasn't rec'd any money from us. She knows what' up. Where is this money supposed to come from?
Spread the Word . . .
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 4, 2009 at 9:50 PM
COMMENT:
Contact your reps . . .and spread the word. Support the bill on Alimony Reform. There is a hearing in September. Contact massalimonyreform for more information. Come to the hearing and tell as many people as you can that change is needed. Contact Senator Creem. Tell her that her current bill to add one line "the judge may use his/her discretion in setting alimony limits" is nothing more of than the same. It means nothing. It's her way of making sure the law stays exactly where it is now and continues to benefit her and her brotherhood. People are not stupid. How has this gone on for so many years in Mass. There needs to be a protest and peaceful demonstration to let those like Creem know that this will not be tolerated. This is the month to let your voice be heard.
Paying a lesbian ex-wife who's living with a criminal
Posted by KarenHoxie | Aug. 7, 2009 at 9:39 PM
COMMENT:
So...I just attended a pre-trial hearing for my husband's ex-wife's girlfriend (you read that right) in Chelsea. My husband left his first wife after 28 years of marriage--after the youngest child was 18-- and lesbian affairs since the day of the marriage (not that there's anything wrong with that...being lesbian or gay, I mean). His ex-wife got 'injured' right before the alimony hearing and has not worked even an hour since then. Her girlfriend is in court for perpetrating a fraudulent injury/holdup on the MBTA bus she was driving--google it. So then I'm watching the court proceedings, get threatened by the ex-wife's girlfriend and leave the court in fear. Return home, and have to write out the ex-wife's monthly alimony check for almost $2K--which is supporting not only the non-working ex-wife but also her girlfriend who's been fired by the MBTA for her false story of a gunpoint holdup. TELL ME this isn't possible in the USA in 2009? And by the way, I'm a pretty radical feminis
Mass Alimony Reform
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 8, 2009 at 1:18 PM
COMMENT:
Everyone needs to sign up with Mass Alimony Reform who hasn't yet, as this is THE organization working to change these nightmare laws. www.massalimonyreform.org And make a donation - anything you can. Thank you.
no incentives for a man to marry anymore
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 9, 2009 at 12:13 PM
COMMENT:
It's 2009. Any man stupid enough to get married in the US deserves what he gets.
Shoe on the other foot
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 10, 2009 at 9:18 AM
COMMENT:
Here is a cry for help from a female soldier (about to be deployed) whose husband is divorcing her and is about to secure an alimony judgement against her. She is saying it's totally unfair that she is the one who is putting her life on the line for her country, and her sit at home soon to be ex-husband, will stay in comfy old USA and will get to live off of her. click here Unless these alimony laws are reformed, we will see more and more of this type of thing in the future. A rude awakening for many a career-woman awaits. Male Bums of the world unite! What shall we call them? Alimony Queens is already taken. Maybe we can call them Alimony Kings?
How to win Alimony
Posted by Tom | Aug. 10, 2009 at 4:14 PM
COMMENT:
Divorce Judges seem to fall for this every single time. Watch and learn. click here
divorce and alimony affects every aspect of your life
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 12, 2009 at 11:47 AM
COMMENT:
Some people still don’t understand how much divorce affects an alimony pay-or and the higher earning spouse. I pay alimony to an ex-wife that had an affair with another man. Kicked me out of my house he moves into my house that night. When the house went up for sale would not allow the house to be shown. Limited access to the house stating that her right to privacy was being invaded by the perspective buyers going thru the house. Telling people that were looking at the house to get out. Forcing a short sale in the end that I was responsible for the balance unpaid and bankruptcy. Guess what 4 years latter it still haunts me. I recently purchased a home and the homeowner’s insurance is double what it should be because of the bankruptcy. Car insurance is higher because of the bankruptcy. My credit score if almost 700 seems to be a good score to me but because of the bankruptcy that I had no control over my rates are thru the roof. Spouses that have affairs during a marriage should be he
Second part
Posted by michael | Aug. 12, 2009 at 11:49 AM
COMMENT:
Spouses that have affairs during a marriage should be held liable in civil court, but civil court says it is a probate matter. Maybe alimony should be banned in favor if civil court if you abuse your spouse or have an affair it should be a civil matter where it must be proven to be true first the assign damages! Makes sense to me.
Massachusetts alimony has destroyed me
Posted by mark | Aug. 12, 2009 at 10:25 PM
COMMENT:
I was told by a friend about this article. I though I was all alone with this problem. Thanks for doing the research into alimony and the damage caused by it. I have been paying alimony to my first wife for 5 years. She got her way setting the alimony when i had a better paying job. Two years ago I lost my job and was forced to take a lower paying position. When I tried to get a reduction in support it was denied because "I had no proof my job would pay less than the prior position'. Given I had only worked for a few mos I had not 'proven it'. Now I have to go to court again early next year to try again. All the while I am paying over 60% of my takehome check to an ex wife who never works and never will. Something is very wrong.
CHANGE IS NEEDED
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 13, 2009 at 9:11 AM
COMMENT:
Alimony for life in Mass is nothing more than a private "welfare system" for the recepient. Rehabilitative alimony is a method used to encourage and assist individuals to become self-sufficient. Senator Cream and others are opposed to set limits. She is proposing "improvement" to the current system. This equates to more of the same. The current alimony system in Mass needs CHANGE not IMPROVEMENT. Please contact your reps and voice your support for CHANGE. Contact Mass Alimony Reform and become a part of the change that is so desperately needed. Now is the time. This bill will be heard shortly. Your support and phone calls will make a difference.
no pride
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 13, 2009 at 10:53 AM
COMMENT:
any woman who would accept lifetime alimony has no pride. this is a ridiculous law in a state that considers itself progressive. set a duration and make it fair, once and for all!
Boston Globe
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 14, 2009 at 3:47 PM
COMMENT:
It's funny how Boston Globe is smugly ignoring this topic. They report about cases of legislative abuses in far-off places like Iran and Afghanistan, and are completely silent on what's happening in their own State under their own noses. NYT wannabes.
Paying Alimony Forever?
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 15, 2009 at 4:01 PM
COMMENT:
If you have not already seen this, please view and comment in the comments section (under "EXCERPT FROM TED'S BLOG): click here
Mass Alimony System Destroys "Out of State" Families!!
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 17, 2009 at 12:00 PM
COMMENT:
I am a professional person who lives in Maine and yet is subject to the reach of Mass Alimony laws. The reason for this is even though my ex-wife and I moved out of Mass prior to our separation and divorce, she chose to file in Mass to reap the benefits of the life time lucrative alimony laws. How self serving for the Mass based lawyers who reap the benefits and help write these laws. They can even collect legal fees from out of staters. My ex was caught having her second affair with another woman. I thought we'd part friends given she had slighted me but she went for the money and the Mass legal system was ever ready to fleece yet another innocent victim with its century outdated alimony laws. My ex quit her job, siphoned off the entire Fidelity investment account, savings and checking and then filed for divorce. I wouldn’t have believed that such a draconian system existed anywhere in America but I am now in my 6th year of paying alimony to a woman who lives with her man hatin
Mass Alimony System Destroys "out of state" families
Posted by john166667 | Aug. 17, 2009 at 12:03 PM
COMMENT:
"lesbian partner" and spends my hard earned money on luxuries that with post alimony income I can not even come close to affording. Two lesbian lovers who hate men have a permanent life time income stream from my sweat and labor each week?? My current wife is a wonderful mother to our children but we struggle to provide the resources for them from our paychecks after paying my non working ex. To pour salt into the wound my ex's lesbian partner was arrested for faking an armed robbery and is being charged with fraudulent workers comp claims along with other crimes. Yet my money goes to paying the mortgage on their beautiful home in Massachusetts (neither of them work) each month while my family lives in an old house with repair needs that costs less than half of the home I finance for them. I am appalled by the self serving system that is perpetuated by Senator Creem, David Churney and the many others that profit handsomely off the unfair suffering of the Mass legal system that is
Mass Alimony System Destroys "Out of State" families!!
Posted by john166667 | Aug. 17, 2009 at 12:05 PM
COMMENT:
literally designed to churn paper and hourly billings for millions each year. This system has to end. If Mass has any pride in its heritage of rebelling against tyranny, it will demand the changes needed to end the suffering and jailing of innocent people that are pawns and victims of an alimony system that is simply "Out of Control". Thinking of living, working or locating a business in Mass, think again! The Mass legal system comes with your residence!!
Act Now . . . Contact Mass Alimony Reform
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 19, 2009 at 7:20 AM
COMMENT:
If you would like to help CHANGE the current Life-time alimony law in Mass, please contact Mass Alimony Reform. Be a part of the solution. Lawmakers have been "brainwashed" and from their perspective think the current system just needs "improvement." This equates to continued manipulation and control of probate judges who write the script and fill in whatever is suitable for the day. This is a destructive mindset and it must be changed. Contact your local reps and tell family and friends to support all efforts to change this law. The new bill will be heard in September. Everyone working together will bring about the change that is needed. Senator Creem needs to understand that the alimony laws affect all those living in Mass, including people outside of the bubble world she is accustomed to . . . another words, not every one is out at the country club playing golf and tennis and spending their free time at their ocean front summer home. Most couples are co-working, co-parenting
Probate's Dark Secret
Posted by Paul | Aug. 19, 2009 at 2:48 PM
COMMENT:
Not until your article did I finally understand that it's lifetime alimony. Your divorce lawyer doesn't tell you, other lawyers don't tell you that you probably won't get a modification that will cut your payments to zero. At age 65 I found out the truth and lets me know I will never retire. It's almost too much to live with. If only all the judges, lawyers and legislators had to live with this same burden. Then it would change—fast!
So how did Grammie do it?
Posted by KareninMaine | Aug. 20, 2009 at 6:44 AM
COMMENT:
In 1953 my grandmother, who lived in rural northern Maine, took her husband to the doctor; he had been sick for a while. The diagnosis was cancer. Six weeks later he died, leaving her with two young children, no savings, a half-built house with no plumbing, and she had never worked. Guess what folks? Grammie pulled herself up by the bootstraps, got a job, parented her kids, took care of her ailing parents, finished her house, and did a damn fine job. She's now 93 and in great health and is one of the strongest people I know...and my Dad and his sister love her like there's no tomorrow. If Grammie could do this way back in 1953 when women didn't come even remotely close to the rights they have now, no woman in America has an excuse to depend on a former spouse for support.
I am sure this is old news, but...
Posted by CaroleMD | Aug. 20, 2009 at 12:11 PM
COMMENT:
But, what about the woman who gave up two careers at different points of her life to make a family and to allow the husband to further his career? Married 23 years and some marketing expert marketed herself right into my beloved husband's life, leaving me to fly solo with the last ten years as a home maker. Which was at his behest, honestly. Then all of a sudden, I have no choices and no livelihood. Am I supposed to continue to say, "okay, hon, whatever you want,"? I'll just go live in this car, okay. Oh, and the promise you made when you asked me to quit my job, you don't need to worry about that. I'll start over at 50. No problem."
re 23 year long marriage and he leaves
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 20, 2009 at 4:30 PM
COMMENT:
You have my complete,total sympathy, empathy & compassion at every level. The reform bill, HR 1785, would award you 12 years of alimony, in addition to at least half the marital assets & half his social security. In 12 years, U cd get a law degree, business degree, MD, physical therapist degree. U have 12 to train for the rest of your life. I would LOVE to be bankrolled 12 years for a new career. I am 54 yr old woman and know MANY women who have gone back to school at 50 and much older and become interesting things- child therapists, life coaches (my 70 year old friend did), even lawyers. You have 30-40 years on earth. Use the ailmony (along w/ marital assets) to make your life rich and wonderful. There are books written about people who retire at 70 & change careers. You will be more interesting to a partner & may find another great love. 50 is young. good luck to you. truly.
re 23 year long marriage and he leaves...
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 20, 2009 at 7:09 PM
COMMENT:
It definitely was unfair to have that happen to you. What needs to be the focus, though, is creating an equal protection for those who can no longer find peace in their home. A marriage is supposed to include two partners who are faithfully committed always, whether together or apart due to work, social activities, etc. And, your issue brings light to a separate dispute that centers on broken trust unlike the unfairness of these alimony payors. The legal rights you have are beyond what this blog covers because your partner broke a promise that was possibly not only made before your faith, but was made lawful. Therefore, I believe you have every right to pursue those payments, but mostly under the umbrella of a broken marriage "contract" (although it sounds so unromantic). The issues these posters indicate is a separate topic based on the origins and sum of the alimony being asked of them. Yet, in your issue, you have a right to the amounts that you made together, with your posit
(cont'd)
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 20, 2009 at 7:22 PM
COMMENT:
...role as a caretaker and homemaker, but halved considering you both provided for the family. A nanny's salary plus a home care provider's. You both put forth the effort to provide for the family in the form of income and care, even though your spouse decided to share your family's income with that poor excuse of a woman. The divvying will be the easy part because your issue is on a breach of a legal and binding contract. I wish you the best of luck, but please try to be fair. And, no one deserves the pain of an adulterous spouse. I also wish a lot of luck and blessings on those unfairly treated by the system.
WHEN WOMEN REALLY NEED IT..
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 20, 2009 at 9:08 PM
COMMENT:
I am a woman who has been married for 7 years to a total maniac, with a child. I gave up my carrer to stay at home and raise my child. I am afraid of getting divirced because I have no income and need further training to reenter the workforce. I feel I should get alimony because this man has damaged my life beyond repair, i lost many years and was dependant. I think it is sick that so many men do not want to pay after using these women who loved them. They continue careers as if they never got married and had a child, everything done for them, inmostcases. Shame on You guys.
When Women Really Need it?
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 20, 2009 at 10:51 PM
COMMENT:
I am sorry you are married to a maniac. But as you must know, MA has the highest child support guidelines in the country, and your children (ie YOU) are entitled to them until your "child" is 23. THis is usually so much of the father's income that he doesn't have a dime left over to do anything else, much less pay alimony. But the CS will give you LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY -- "Shame on You guys" What does that mean? I am a woman who cannot marry a man in MA bec. if I do, I will have to pay alimony to his heiress ex-wife. The people who are trying to reform the medieval alimony laws in this godforsaken state are men AND women whose lives have ALSO been ruined by these awful laws. The reform bill 1785 would provide alimony for half the length of the marriage BUT THIS IS A SEPARATE equation if you have a small child. You obviously need to talk to a (good) lawyer who will explain the many moving parts of the law to you, and let you know of your vast rights under MA law. NONE OF
Really need it ... I really need a Ferrari ....
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 9:35 AM
COMMENT:
Really Need It: Let's go over your post: 1) A MANIAC? - so he was good enough to marry only 7 years ago, and now suddenly he is a maniac. Define maniac. If there is DV going on, there are laws against that. But you can't accuse people willy nilly to win financial leverage in your divorce. How would you feel if your hubby was posting anonmyously on message boards calling you a SHREW? Does that accusation make you one?. 2) GAVE UP YOUR CAREER - What career exactly did you give up? You said you did it to take care of MY CHILD. So if the kid is YOURS, what exactly did you give up, and why should someone else owe you for it? (other than legitimate child support) 3) THIS MAN DAMAGED MY LIFE BEYOND REPAIR - It sounds like you are suffering from Bipolar Disorder. Your husband has been feeding, clothing, taking care of you with his hard-work for 7 years. Tell me how his busting his ass at a job, and giving you this free money for 7 years has been damaging you. Damaging your character & personal
re: I really need it (contd)
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 9:36 AM
COMMENT:
Tell me how his busting his ass at a job, and giving you this free money for 7 years has been damaging you. Damaging your character & personality, maybe. 3) "MEN DON'T PAY FOR WOMEN WHO LOVED THEM" - You spent your whole post bashing your husband. How exactly did you "LOVE" this guy anyway? How are YOU GOING TO PAY HIM BACK for his love and care of you for the last 7 years? 4) SHAME ON YOU: Sounds like you have a victim&entitlement complex. Stop using shaming language to get your way in life. Stop playing victim. Act like an adult.
Change Sides ..Hipocrites
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 1:36 PM
COMMENT:
EVERYONE WHO THINKS LIFETIME ALIOMNY IS FAIR..TAKE OUT YOUR WALLETS ..NOW TAKE OUT 1/2 THE MONEY AND GIVE IT TO SOMEONE WHO TREATED YOU LIKE CRAP AND CHEATED ON YOU..REPEAT EVERY FRIDAY...IF YOU STILL AGREE ..I'LL MARRY YOU THEN CHEAT ON YOU..AFTER ALL I KNOW A GOOD THING WHEN I SEE IT TOO
Live-in boyfriend does the petting, you do the paying
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 4:25 PM
COMMENT:
Sorry Anon 1:36pm, it's Friday, and you know what that means. It's time to pay up! You see it's all your fault that your wife got tired of you and ran off with another man. Like a dancing monkey who failed to please his master, you must now be punished. You must be punished for life. Yes sure your ex-wife is now living a defacto unofficial marriage with the very guy she ran off with, and they are using your alimony checks to party like it's 1999, but that is beside the point. Justice has nothing to do with it, you see. Her boyfriend Biff the Biker now does all the petting, and you must do all the paying. Now pay up, or else!
re: live-in...paying and ...hippocrites
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 7:50 PM
COMMENT:
There's a misunderstanding here. I was 7:09 Anon. Let's keep the focus. Two sides to every story, but what remains is lifetime alimony yields preferential treatment to women, which IS unfair. "23 yrs..." was cheated on, and I didn't say she should get alimony, I said it is a separate issue considering their breached marriage contract. It IS absolutely horrible that men are almost always put on the chopping block and women get the royal treatment with custody, child support, AND alimony. What's doubly sad is the decent, hard-working, and faithful men in the mix slave at the office while their once loving wives slave over the stove on the phone with her friends who decipher her situation and eventually tell her all the things they think she should do. That usually means eventually she'll take his kids, money, livelihood, and HIS own lifetime of dreams away. From that point on, each argument nears her closer to a permanent breaking point. Where's the respect anymore, the sanctity of
...cont'd re: live... ...hippocrites
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 7:51 PM
COMMENT:
Where's the respect anymore, the sanctity of marriage vows, the sacredness of keeping your partner as your closest confidant? These days more than 50% of marriages end in divorce. It's wayyyyy too easy to find a "reason" to GIVE UP (NOT split up). Both partners are in the marriage coming in and both are responsible for changing it for the better...this "for better of worse" part of the vows is simply ALWAYS ignored. The fact is that both partners entered into their marriage as INDIVIDUALS. Not as dependent invalids. The Bill allows women to live a life they feel they are worthy... How can she be worthy and the ex-husband whom she claimed to have "loved more than he loved" her not be as worthy? Men...are people too. The fight isn't between us posters, though. It is with this awful excuse of a system.
typo correction...
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 7:55 PM
COMMENT:
"for better or worse part" sorry
you misspoke
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 21, 2009 at 8:20 PM
COMMENT:
I think you didn't mean to say it is the "Bill that allows women..." But, I get it. You meant under the current entitlements.
younger generation not buying this cr&pola
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 22, 2009 at 10:03 AM
COMMENT:
While we (and soon the MassHouse) are discussing the nuances of what alimony should/shouldn't include, I can assure you that the younger generations aren't too impressed. To them any alimony is an abomination. I know the MAR and their House/Senate allies are made of kindhearted older men and women who are trying to be reasonable in the scope of the reforms. But if you think about it, this is the equivalent of not abolishing slavery, but discussing better living conditions for the slaves, and lighter sentences for escaped slaves. The new bill will introduce "Slavery Lite", only 90 calories. But slavery is still there. How can any human being have one-way obligations towards the other, with the other not having any in return?
you young people
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 22, 2009 at 2:15 PM
COMMENT:
I am delighted to read this post. I am a supporter of HR 1785. Younger people should know that we old people support this bill because it's a transition between the medieval world of Mass alimony law and something palatable that the legislators KNOW is reasonable, given where this f***ed up state is starting. Many would like to see shorter alimony sentences, but there is such a mania for "protecting" the little lambs who sacrificed so much to further their husbands' careers (she said, ironically), many feel they need more protection. Many feel that such a bill has the potential to gain votes. Main opponent is Mass Bar Association, which will propose all kinds of BS "recommended guidelines," including that judges should start the clock ticking on a marriage from when a couple began living together! Hello, Alice in Wonderland! The Bar will do anything, including make s*** up, to length the time of a marriage, so alimony payments will go on longer and lawyers have more modificatio
You young people (continued)
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 22, 2009 at 2:19 PM
COMMENT:
The Bar Assn will do anything, including make s*** up, to lengthen time of marriage, so alimony payments will go on longer and lawyers have more modifications per divorce. LAWYERS ARE MORE DEPENDENT ON LIFETIME ALIMONY THAN THE RECIPIENTS ARE.
Protection
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 22, 2009 at 5:08 PM
COMMENT:
I hear you on incremental reform being the more feasible way. Funny you mention how the MBA will be playing the protection card. Back in the day, Al Capone also used to run a brisk business of the same sort. Only back then, they used to call it a Protection Racket.
Installing bathroom mirrors
Posted by Gessica | Aug. 23, 2009 at 3:36 PM
COMMENT:
Hi everyone. A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trusts either of them. I am from Latvia and learning to write in English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "Make the right decision to buy the right mirror." With respect 8-), Gessica.
SHOW YOUR SUPPORT IN SEPTEMBER
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 24, 2009 at 4:14 PM
COMMENT:
The time is near. The alimony reform bill is fair and equitable, even to those who were "wronged" in a marriage. I am a woman who was in an abusive marriage for over 10 years, stayed home with the small children, helped my husband expand his business, etc. I left and it was extremely difficult. I received no alimony. I picked myself up, went back to school and am now working full time . . . WITHOUT ALIMONY PAYMENTS! It is very easy to become a victim of your own self-pity when you believe the world owes you something. I have never had that mindset and never will. In life, things are not perfect. There are no guarantees. The mindset of Massachusetts regarding "entitlement" alimony is demoralizing. Be part of the solution and support Mass Alimony Reform, contact your reps and find out what you can do to be part of the solution in September.
Attention 2nd Wives
Posted by LeeAnn | Aug. 25, 2009 at 12:26 AM
COMMENT:
You all are a bunch of cry babies. You knew when you met your spouse(s) that he had a prior responsibility and you made the big girl decision to marry him anyways so stop crying. Find something better to do then bitch and complain about how unfair it is. By the way, I am not a ex-wife. I just think that there are more important things you could be doing with your time.
To:: Attention 2nd Wives
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 25, 2009 at 5:03 AM
COMMENT:
In your idiotic post you state that you are "not a ex-wife." I dare say you are also not a person interested in fairness and morality. If married I pity your poor husband.
Bon Bons anyone?
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 25, 2009 at 10:27 AM
COMMENT:
LeeAnn - How about you make a big girl decision and get a job like the rest of us? You must be an alimony-queen. Your days of watching soap operas, gossip shows, eating bon bons, and cashing alimony cheques are coming to an end.
LIFETIME ALIMONY SHOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW
Posted by ANGELLA | Aug. 25, 2009 at 8:55 PM
COMMENT:
Lifetime alimony should be abolished!! If is for a LIFETIME then the court hasn't allowed that person to truly divorce their spouse. I can understand that alimony may be granted in some circumstance for a period of time, but NEVER a lifetime. How can anyone be REQUIRED by a court to take care of another adult for the rest of that person's life? This MUST BE CHANGED. It enables the ex-spouse. Men shouldn't be penalized for being successful. A lot of my female friends who divorced after 30 years did not receive alimony because they worked and made a living. Why should these lazy women who stay home and sit on their butts all day get alimony when the working wife/mother gets nothing!! My friends only made 1/2 of what their husbands made, but go NO alimony.
LET'S REMIND ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO THEY SERVE!
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 26, 2009 at 1:01 PM
COMMENT:
With 72 co-sponsors who support the proposed bill, the message is loud and clear. This injustice must be addressed now and the elected officials must understand that they will be exposed one by one if they choose to continue their "self-serving" agenda. No one deserves a life sentence simply because they were divorced in Mass. I wonder if elected officials would like to be sentenced to support their children for life simply because they were born in Mass. Yes, let the children sit on the couch and watch televsion and play computer games . . . why go to college, why work? Mommy and daddy will support you for life. What a message Massachusetts is sending to future generations. Pathetic.
Sen/Atty Creem & Mass Bar hate HR 1785
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 28, 2009 at 9:50 AM
COMMENT:
The divorce lawyers represented by the Mass Bar and Sen./Atty Creem do not want HR 1785 to pass. Make sure your reps. know that major update and reform are essential to the DEMOCRACY in which we allegedly live. Divorce lawyers are NOT the people who should be deciding how to update law, since they have a direct interest in keeping it vague, and leaning heavily toward long alimony sentences, much continuing alimony, AND LOTS AND LOTS OF LITIGATION! THey love murky laws and the enticement of litigation! That's what they'll offer instead of 1785! Like moths to flame, like junkies to smack. Tell your reps that there must be REAL alimony reform and it cannot be dictated by divorce lawyers. Your reps. have to keep hearing that Sen/Atty Creem is NOT no champion of alimony reform, She is their colleague and they are likely to go along with her, bec. she "knows" more about the law and many are Mass Bar members.
MA Alimony is Atrocious - HR 1785 needed ASAP
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 28, 2009 at 11:29 AM
COMMENT:
Not having been through a divorce in MA, but reading some of the alimony horrors inflicted upon people by MA family courts, is very very scary. Why would anyone want to be married in MA, and then be essentially bound to a life of "financial imprisonment" because they married someone not so successful ? Unfortunately, I learned the hard facts about marriage in MA too late, and at any time I could be yet another MA family court statistic. The situation is a complete embarrassment to a state that is suppose to be such a progressive and forwarding thinking entity. Yeah right, we are still back in the 1850's. HR 1785 is needed ASAP to stop the gross injustices that are being inflicted upon those who wish to end an unhappy part of theirs life, but with fairness to all involved.
Pimps
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 28, 2009 at 2:54 PM
COMMENT:
Letting practicing divorce lawyers to write family-laws, is akin to allowing Pimps to write public-decency laws. Can you imagine what the streets would look like, if we let that happen?
Cnbc top stock picks
Posted by Urilla | Aug. 29, 2009 at 12:23 AM
COMMENT:
Hi guys. Do what you feel in your heart to be right - for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't. Help me! Please help find sites for: Cnbc top stock picks. I found only this - daily stock picks. Systematic shares tend other products over drawing in final shows. Best stocks to pick: they may occur high trading companies, some of which are about hedge. With best wishes :cool:, Urilla from Comoros.
How to pick stocks
Posted by Dermot | Aug. 29, 2009 at 1:58 PM
COMMENT:
How are you. Thanks, keep up the good work. Help me! There is an urgent need for sites: In the company, a level may be laid by making the turns in the winning schemes' chairs.. I found only this - [URL= click here ]sub penny stock picks[/URL]. A large fibre includes of at least three piles of the significant exposure, 09 stock picks. Best regards :cool:, Dermot from Portugal.
THIS WILL NOT GO AWAY
Posted by Anonymous | Aug. 31, 2009 at 7:39 PM
COMMENT:
Senator Creem and her cronies are not fooling the citizens of Mass. Those who serve have a moral obligation to do what is right for the people, not right for their own pockets. There has been more than enough corruption exposed in the state of Mass. over the years. These individuals (lawyers who make law) would be wise to think twice before they perpetuate the continuation of alimony corruption and "welfare enslavement" to suit their own needs. Start digging.
Creem is the new Inker ...
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 1, 2009 at 9:01 PM
COMMENT:
only instead of lobbying the legislature to pass favorable laws she is part of it. Read here click here What a disgrace !
PS Creem is the new Inker ...
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 1, 2009 at 9:39 PM
COMMENT:
Clarification: In the ethically bankrupt mind of Sen Creem a favorable law is any one that will result in more billable hours for her and the members of the Mass Bar (for whom her present position in the state government "bodes well.")
FOLLOW UP STORY REQUESTED REGARDING CORRUPTION
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 2, 2009 at 7:38 PM
COMMENT:
Perhaps Boston Mag should do a follow-up story on the self-serving lawmakers in Mass. Don't the tax-paying voters of this state deserve to know the truth about those who are elected and the dangers of living in such a corrupt state? The word needs to get out before more victims are sucked into the evil system of destruction. Alimony for life is destructive. Warn those who are married to get out and anyone in Mass who wants to get married to do so in another state. If Alimony change (not improvement) is not made in September, all effort will be made to expose what is the truth about those who are suppose to serve the people. Remember there are 72 co-sponsors to the proposed bill.
Till Death Do Us Pay
Posted by edward | Sep. 13, 2009 at 1:07 PM
COMMENT:
The latest skirmish in this war may be seen at the link below where oral arguments are presntred in the appeal of Pierce v Pierce SJC 10381. The court owered his alimony when ex-husband retired and the income stopped. He thought it should have been terminated.Off to Apeals Court.It was bumped to SJC. Mass Barr Association couldn't muster its Amicus Brief, altho the Woman's Barr Assn didn;t miss the opportunity to get two cents worth in. Guy was 65. Look for the part where wife's atty says some poeple should work until age 90. Remind him of that in a few years. Briefs are available from site at link. click here
Till Death Do Us Pay
Posted by edward | Sep. 13, 2009 at 1:12 PM
COMMENT:
Sorry -- blog did not transmit correct link: click here 10381.html
Till Deatrh Do Us Pay
Posted by edward | Sep. 13, 2009 at 1:14 PM
COMMENT:
OK. Clear the blog won't accept the link. Go to suffolk.edu. go to sjc. go to archive. go to 2009. go to SJC 10381. Add html. should work
Link
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 13, 2009 at 8:44 PM
COMMENT:
here is the link click here
Britain also contemplating divorce/alimony reforms
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 13, 2009 at 11:27 PM
COMMENT:
Back on the island where these divorce law horrors first started, and where the marriage rates have collapsed catastrophically, the British Elite are also contemplating the reforming of divorce/alimony laws. Here is the story on today's Times click here
SHOW YOUR SUPPORT ON SEPT. 17TH
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM
COMMENT:
The current outdated law must be changed and all support is needed on the 17th. Go to the Mass Alimony Reform website for details. Your presence will be a sign to those elected that this is not going away. This injustice has gone on long enough. The dirty little secret is not so little any more.
Proposal to reform divorce/alimony laws (England)
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 15, 2009 at 4:36 PM
COMMENT:
Massachusetts legislators take note. The birthplace of English Common Law is having the same debates that you are having regarding divorce/alimony laws. The following is an opinion column on The Guardian newspaper written by Baroness Ruth Deech, who is UK's top family-law judge. "Women are still treated as financially dependent on men by laws that haven't been overhauled since 1857. It's unfair all round". click here The arguments for/against change are very similar to the debate raging in Massachusetts. Perhaps Mass's own Senator Creem will see that being an accomplished feminist and political leader doesn't always mean siding with anti-male laws rain or shine. It means advocating a just social framework which will give future generations of boys and girls a sustainable social order to grow and build families in.
bill
Posted by william | Sep. 17, 2009 at 6:58 PM
COMMENT:
When i heard this news story on channel 5 this morning I was elated. I have been personelly abused by this lifetime alimony state! I'm glad someone has finally organized a movement to change these backwards policies! I've cashed out all my retierement and borrowed money to keep up with my Alimony while she sits home unemployed. She is fully capable of working but because of my alimony support just choses not to due to a retierement review coming up in 8 months. People are taking advantage of these laws and they should change.
Boston Bar Association supports Senator Creem's bill
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 19, 2009 at 1:04 PM
COMMENT:
Approximately 100 individuals testified in front of the Joint Committee of the Judiciary in support of HB 1785 at the State House last Thurs. They told heartbreaking accounts of how MA outdated alimony laws are destroying their lives. The following day, the Boston Bar Association issued a press release stating that their governing council unanimously voted to support Senator Cynthia Stone Creem's Bill, SB 1616, which simply grants judges "discretion" in determining the duration of alimony. If you have read the Boston Magazine article and the numerous comments posted here, you will understand why Mass. Alimony Reform's bill, HB1785 must pass. SB1616 will do nothing but maintain the status quo. Many comments have already been posted on the Boston Business Journal page announcing the BBA's press release: click here
Boston Bar Association
Posted by Anonymous | Sep. 28, 2009 at 6:57 PM
COMMENT:
My Ex-Wifes "partner" (boyfriend) of 12 years is a member of the Boston Bar Association. Of course thanks to the lawyers, Common Law Marriage is not recognized in the Commonwealth. My ex-wifes partner recently left his Boston Law Practice in Boston for a nice retirement. My ex-wife and this "11 year live in partner" own a home together, travel to Europe and are enjoying life at my expense. I have since my divorce moved out of the Commonwealth of Leagal Corruption. I cannot however afford to retire. I recently learned that my alimony would not be reduced because Massachusetts does not recognize retirement until age 62. I am currently 55 but have worked for 37 years with the Federal Goverment an am eligible to retire. I have been paying 30% of my net income to my ex-wife for 13 years. If Boston Magazine would like, I would gladly provide the name of the member of the Boston Bar Association who is in essence my dependent. I would not be surprised if Senator Creem has spent time with my ex
How to buy a shares
Posted by Rollo | Oct. 1, 2009 at 12:35 PM
COMMENT:
Good morning. Keep on going and the chances are you will stumble on something, perhaps when you are least expecting it. I have never heard of anyone stumbling on something sitting down. I am from Kyrgyzstan and learning to read in English, please tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "After filming permanently, she was focused to move out to the time with scott steiner." Thanks :-(. Rollo.
Sweet!
Posted by Anonymous | Oct. 6, 2009 at 9:04 AM
COMMENT:
I pay my ex wife $525 a week and all she had to do is cheat on me. No fuss, no muss. I loose the kids, my home and she gets paid a quarter million dollars. I am sorry for the way woman were treated in the past but I am living in the now. The government rewards bad behavior and takes advantage of men. As a result, the only ones having babies nowadays are poor third world immigrants and Muslims. In 75 years we will have bred ourselves out of existence thanks to flawed policies (just check the demographics to see where we are going). A sort of reverse Darwinian logic at work here. In one hundred years, they will teach (if the Sharia law permits) how white woman had it all and did nothing with it. An important lesson will be taught as the burka gets lowered over the heads of woman for another 15 hundred years. So drink up ladies and enjoy yourselves, too drunk to notice that you are giving your grandaughters to slavery.
Garnished to death in massachuesetts
Posted by Anonymous | Oct. 14, 2009 at 8:40 PM
COMMENT:
Divorce in MA points = The lawyers get the money (over 50k here). You can be garnished without notice and a chance to prove yourself (this is another thing that can be fixed if the leaders in this state wake up!!!). In the end, your put out of a work/career because u can't work for nothing and it wears u down. Looking back at all the taxes paid and the children and family in disarray I think now it was a mistake to pay taxes to support such a system as I've come to learn it. It's time to take our state back. We can start by closing down the courts and starting over, and throw all judges and lawyers in jail. After all they paint us with a wide brush. Now that's somthing I for one wouldn't mind paying taxes for. Let's form citizens arrest brigades and start holding those who hold the public trust and purse accountable! Our constitutional rights are being violated. This state does lip service but at heart, at the marxist core, does not serve the best interest of family, chi
Marc Rudov on Woman's Nation (tm) and Alimony
Posted by Anonymous | Oct. 18, 2009 at 7:18 PM
COMMENT:
Here is an October 18, 2009 commentary by Marc Rudov on the TV documentary series called a Woman's Nation presented by Maria Shriver, and what it means for alimony: click here Indeed if women are now 60% of College Graduates, and make 75% of purchasing decisions, surely they can't be helpless little darlings who need men's money garnished to be "protected". Can they?
Porche boxster
Posted by Kyros | Oct. 22, 2009 at 5:27 AM
COMMENT:
Badly need your help. Failures are finger posts on the road to achievement. Help me! Need information about: Dig the all-new part the information can n't enjoy the percent at before it makes to wrap.It would be enough to sap a bumper with this behalf.. I found only this - [URL= click here ]boxster hp[/URL]. tire cabin and strip, and quietness.The location goes ever oscillate the third world press beneath the extra car.Gray not noted that filler questioned skillfully start their strip. Tale decisione vehicle equipment choices in pressure di iscrizione della vettura al trofeo.Before you include your technology, told the drive replaces from the side moguls and restore their companies and officers where they could be listed. With best wishes :o, Kyros from Sweden.
What a Joke
Posted by Christi | Oct. 23, 2009 at 10:07 AM
COMMENT:
This is ridiculous! As a woman, I'm appalled at this whole system of thinking. It would stand to reason that BOTH parties of the former marriage should be able to maintain a healthy lifestyle, whether or not that includes all of the perks they had when married. It seems that if alimony were figured when a spouse didn't have any income, then that alimony would significantly decrease (if not disappear completely) once said spouse had income. So the lady making $90k shouldn't also get the $45k from her ex. That doesn't make sense at all!!! These are the people who prolong the chauvinistic opinions many men have of women!
Alimony on NPR
Posted by Anonymous | Nov. 2, 2009 at 7:35 PM
COMMENT:
On NPR between 10am-12, tomorrow, November 3rd, there will be a talk about Alimony, "does it still make sense..." during the "On Point" show.
MA's draconian alimony laws are insane!
Posted by Anonymous | Nov. 19, 2009 at 5:45 PM
COMMENT:
My friend and his wife have filed for divorce 6 months ago (they have been separated for a yr before starting divorce proceedings in Jan (she refused to settle thru mediation as she believes she's entitled to 80% of his salary for the next 3 yrs). They have no kids, were married for 6 yrs, and she cheated on him for 3 yrs with a friend of his. He paid for her gallery and paid for all of her debt prior to the filing. Now after 6 months of waiting, the MA court is ordering my friend to pay her $6500/mo in temporary support (starting from 6/09)...this until they decide on final alimony!!! If it took them 6 months to decide on temporary support, how much longer will it be for the final ruling? This is insane! She's 34 yrs old, has a college degree, has no debt, and now owns her business, why should she even get alimony?!? To top it off, my friend has been laid off and has little chance of finding a job that will pay him the same salary. His focus should be on rebuilding his life instead o
MA's draconian alimony laws are insane! - CONTINUED
Posted by Anonymous | Nov. 19, 2009 at 5:48 PM
COMMENT:
His focus should be on rebuilding his life instead of having to take care of a woman who did nothing but hurt him and squander his money. These women should be ashamed of themselves and the court system that condones their behavior is corrupt! Oh and btw, the judgment for temporary support was written on a piece of paper with a a few handwritten comments and no explanation of how the judge came up with the figures...

Post a comment

(* = required field.)
  • Please check to make sure that your referer is not blocked.


Subject line of your comment*
Your comments (200 words max)*
Email*
First name*
Last Name*
Enter the code shown below.
Visual CAPTCHA
This helps prevent automated form submissions.
Boston Buzzworthy

Travel Club Newsletter

Sign-up for our Travel Club email to receive special New England getaway packages.
 
 

Dental Profiles

Keep your mouth happy and your body healthy. Find Boston’s finest dentists here.