NCFM Advisor GORDON E. FINLEY Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Emeritus — Governor waging war on men vetoed alimony reform
Editor: Yet again Florida’s Medicare Fraudster lies to the citizens of Florida and continues his war on men (“Scott vetoes bill to end permanent alimony,” 5/2/13). His veto letter implicitly lies by suggesting that a half-century of Family Law and Family Court Practice has been a level playing field where both men and women have been treated equally, fairly, and that when men signed permanent alimony agreements they did so of their own free will and free of any duress. Anyone familiar with Family Court Practice knows that this lie is as bald faced as Scott himself.
Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D.
Governor waging war on men - By GORDON E. FINLEY Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Emeritus - Florida International University, Miami
Scott also wrote “Current Florida law already provides for the adjustment of alimony under the proper circumstances.” Were one to fact-check this direct quote from his veto letter, one would obtain a score of zero out of one hundred. Permanent alimony — which Scott favors — really is permanent and ends only with the death of one spouse. It is virtually impossible to modify permanent alimony no matter if you have Alzheimer’s disease or your income drops substantially or to zero. Pay or Gov. Scott will send a man (but never a woman) to debtor’s prison.
Gov. Scott is so desperate to get the “woman’s vote” that he is willing to wage a war on men and prey on men who already have been preyed upon by an unjust Family Court System.
I hope that his wife divorces him and takes him for every penny he’s got.
Perhaps then, and only then, will he understand that Family Law — which he so fervently embraces — really is a war On men.
Scott vetoes bill to end permanent alimony
TALLAHASSEE (AP) — Gov. Rick Scott vetoed a bill late Wednesday that would have ended permanent alimony in Florida.
Scott vetoed the measure (SB 718) just four hours before the midnight deadline to approve or veto it. The bill automatically would have become law if Scott had done nothing by then.
In a letter to Senate President Don Gaetz, Scott commended bill sponsors Ritch Workman in the House and Kelli Stargel in the Senate — both Republicans — and said there are “several forward looking elements of this bill.”
But alimony “represents an important remedy for our judiciary to use in providing support to families as they adjust to changes in life circumstances,” Scott wrote. “As a husband, father and grandfather, I understand the vital importance of family.”
Scott could not “support this legislation because it applies retroactively and thus tampers with the settled economic expectations of many Floridians who have experienced divorce,” he wrote. “The retroactive adjustment of alimony could result in unfair, unanticipated results.”
Florida law “already provides for the adjustment of alimony under the proper circumstances,” Scott wrote. “The law also ensures that spouses who have sacrificed their careers to raise a family do not suffer financial catastrophe upon divorce, and that the lower-earning spouse and stay-at-home parent will not be financially punished. Floridians have relied on this system post-divorce and planned their lives accordingly.”
The proposed law also would have set limits on the amount of alimony and how long one would receive financial support from an ex-spouse.
The bill would have made it harder to get alimony in short-term marriages. And it would have prevented alimony payments from lasting longer than one-half of the length of the marriage.
It also would have required judges to give divorced parents equal custody of their children absent extraordinary circumstances.
“I’m actually surprised,” said Jason Marks, a divorce attorney in Miami, about the veto. The bill had passed the House 85-31, with members of both parties crossing over. The Senate approved it 29-11.
“My assumption is, you haven’t heard the last of it,” Marks said. “Most family law practitioners will agree that uniformity in determination of alimony is a good thing.”
The bill said that in a short-term marriage, defined as less than 11 years, the assumption is that alimony would not be awarded. If alimony were granted, it would not be more than 25 percent of the ex-spouse’s gross income.
For marriages that last between 11 and 20 years, there’s no assumption either way in the bill, but alimony would not have amounted to more than 35 percent of the ex-spouse’s gross income.
And in marriages longer than 20 years, there was an assumption in favor of alimony, though not more than 38 percent of an ex-spouse’s gross income.
Moreover, the bill did not automatically end alimony when the paying ex-spouse retired, but that person could have asked a judge to reduce the payment or even end it. The judge could have considered age at retirement, ability to pay alimony and the financial situation of the person receiving alimony.
Alimony reforms are needed yesterday.
Lifetime alimony is a lucky lottery draw that pays forever for doing nothing.
PRESS DAY IN
MONMOUTH COUNTY FAMILY COURT
June 7th, 2013 at 8:00 a.m.
Witness a Protected Mobster, Blatant Corruption, Abused Children, and a
Disrespected, Exploited Mother All In One Spot
One, Come All and
See What Family Court Is Really Like
TEN DOLLARS THE COURT RESCHEDULES THE COURT HEARING TO KEEP THE PRESS OUT SINCE
1500 REPORTERS ARE ON THIS EMAIL BLAST)
Patricia Pisciotti's motion seeking the return of custody of her three children will be heard on Friday, June 7th before Judge Justus in Monmouth County NJ. Disgraced Judge Escandon granted Mobster Nicholas Pisciotti custody despite just being released from prison and his refusal to continue in the Federal Witness Protection Program. Pisciotti confessed to killing one man, brutally beating another and a slew of other crimes while a member of organized crime. He testified against the head of an organized crime family and several others to avoid serving 40 years in prison. In Federal Court he admitted that there were known hits on his life, yet he cares so little about his children that he puts them in danger daily. Come see Monmouth County Family Court in all it's glory. This will be the first time the courtroom is open.
Families Civil Liberties Union - www.fclu.org - Copyright © 2013 FCLU, All rights reserved. - Our mailing address is: - FCLU - PO BOX 1011 New York, NY 10036
We only support organizations who show an understanding that children need both parents, and that either parent is equally capable of the choice to perpetrate hate or declare peace.
- Rewrite of the Florida Family Law Rules almost complete.
- Should Families Going Through Divorce Have Family Court-Ordered Psychiatrists?
- Tell Chief Judge Soto and Family Court Judge Manno-Schurr that Contact Denial is Child Abuse.- #StandupforZoraya
- Joe Rawlinson: The Many Hats of Fatherhood
- The Role of Father Involvement in Children's Lives
- Dad is expected to be more involved.
- Today's Fathers
- The Male Identity Crisis And The Decline of Fatherhood
- Do you know why kids without Dads are at a BIG DISADVANTAGE ?
- The connection between religion and childism.
An attack against your human rights, your rights as a parent and your ability to parent a child. Hello Male Parents!
Comment posted on our Google+ Community:
Hello Male Parents,
I wish you well and hope you know that your not at all alone.
Life can give us skills whether we want them or not. In time, every father facing custody and court cases involving family law will develop a 'thicker skin' as we all know that nothing is more personal then an attack against your human rights, your rights as a parent and your ability to parent a child.
This is extremely bold and progressive. I believe their is no 'movements' in the world today to change the opinion of culture in the way that will actually build up momentum.
I would like to give you an example*, Equality for homosexual relationships in the USA have become popular.*The example is not aimed to defame or harm homosexual couples in any way, simply a random example.
Single Male parents seeking Equality in Custody and Family law is NOT.
Who do you believe will be the first to win Public approval in the equality of raising children?
A large portion of Society will back gay rights to have two males or two females raise a child... Will Society recognize the human rights of a Male parent to have ABSOLUTE EQUALITY in custody decisions or family court?
The reason behind this is because Gay rights do not threaten the power of women as much as the concept of ' MAN VS WOMAN '
Means we use must be as pure as the ends we seek.