Alimony Reform Proposal Proves To Be Controversial

, The Connecticut Law Tribune

   | 2 Comments

Former Supreme Court Justice C. Ian McLachlan and prominent family law practitioners are taking on Connecticut's 40-year-old alimony statute.

This article has been archived, and is no longer available on this website.

View this content exclusively through LexisNexis® Here

Not a LexisNexis® Subscriber?

Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via lexis.com® and Nexis®. This includes content from The National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • John Waldorf

    This is the 21st century norms have changed and our alimony laws should reflect the new norms. Both men and women are victims of these antiquated laws. They should also respect some of the old laws like eliminating debtors prisons. This is archaic idea which this country dealt with in the 19th century and Judges are still putting people in debtors prisons because they fall behind in alimony payments because of the loss of a job..
    These changes will benefit the children because of less financial pressure on the parties. New statutes will help each party to become independent contributing people who do not have their hand in the public dole.
    All we want is fairness for all parties. We must realize that when a marriage dissolves that the standards of living will not be the same, how could they be if the financial situations have changed?
    This will heal so many wrongs and help us to move on with our lives intact so that we can be better parents our children.

  • A citizen

    Of course divorce lawyers like Mr. Rutkin oppose any effort to reduce judicial discretion. The absence of any restraint on the judge's power to fashion relief as he or she sees fit is in part what makes divorce lawyers rich. Inviting the divorce bar to participate in the process of amending these absurd laws is not productive.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202595077848

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.