David Hassellhoff has paid over 2.5 million in alimony. He has paid since 2006. Recently he filed to have the spousal maintenance eliminated stating that his ex-wife, Pamela, has failed to improve her job skills and is not seeking employment.
Why has this argument failed for so many parents in family court in the past? For a multitude of reasons, one is the courts claim the statute entitles the other spouse to it, and if the court says they get that as a reward to the divorce then they get it. But then that would be discrimination based on their marital status wouldn’t it, and that is not allowed is it? Courts may also claim that it is part of the divorce settlement. If that is the case then where is the date that the payments end?
HISTORY OF ALIMONY
If you research alimony or spousal maintenance you can find its roots in the days when women could not work and therefore could not support themselves. So alimony even pre-dates welfare. Alimony is based off an outdated and no longer applicable standard. You’ll hear us talk and write about antiquated and outdated stuff a lot more in the coming days.
IS ALIMONY AKIN TO SLAVERY?
Bottomline, Hassellhoff is right, he should not have to keep paying his ex-wife, he should not be made to bear the responsibility to support his ex-wife forever after their marriage. If the alimony was a part of an equitable split from the divorce then call it that and put a set dollar limit on it. Otherwise, it is nothing but punishment for getting divorced. Was it the value they placed on his assets and estate that the court determined she had claim to, is he making payments to her to pay off his split? If that is the case then why did the court lower his payments from $20,000 to $10,000 and then why isn’t there an end date to these payments? How can this be an equitable split if there is no end date and the value goes up or down based on how long he lives?
So essentially, the court is saying that she owns a part of him for as long as he lives. That would be akin to slavery wouldn’t it?
Sounds like Hassellhoff needs to challenge the spousal maintenance statute as unconstitutional. Question is, why didn’t he do this from the beginning?
You can read more about this story on Hassellhoff at TMZ here.
*I have not personally looked at Hassellhoff’s orders or settlement and I am not an attorney and do not practice law. This is just my personal opinion.
**The picture is credited to TMZ’s story.
Beginner's Guide to Family Law
A Simplified Path to Parental Rights
For a loving parent, a child custody suit can be a time of terror. The most important thing in your life is at stake and it doesn't take long to figure out that the system is rigged against you. This book provides simple straight forward and easy to understand ways to help ensure that your rights get protected. This is the starter guide for you to protect your rights.