When you're the one paying alimony

What the ex-wife divorce discourse misses completely

If you’re of a certain age—and I am—you might’ve first become familiar with the concept of alimony by sneakily staying up late and watching The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson. Carson was married four times, divorced three. He had a whole lot of jokes to crack about alimony for a man who had to pay a whole lot of it. What can you say about a rich man who’s been married twice, is already paying alimony, and goes into his third marriage without a prenup? I don’t know what it says about him but regarding his third wife I say, Lord I’ve seen what you’ve done for others.

As the ex-wife discourse only continues to gain momentum, I’ve noticed that not only do the stories feel oddly similar, but I find it difficult to relate to most of them too. At least financially. There’s the wife-mother-artist who wonders when she will ever be able to focus on her art. The wife-mother-writer who doesn’t have economic power in her relationship, resulting in the wife-mother-writer feeling trapped in her marriage and without a financially feasible way to leave it. But with the exception of perhaps Rachel Cusk, I haven’t come across stories of wives-mothers-artists-writers who have financial power, who are earning most (if not all) of the money that supports their families.

This is where I would say something like “and naturally that brings us to alimony.” But alimony never even crossed my mind while I was married. It didn’t cross my mind when my then-husband and I separated. It didn’t even cross my mind when I was writing a whole-ass book about all of those things, including our impending divorce. I thought alimony was men’s business. And since I knew I wasn’t going to be getting any, why worry about it?

Oh, I should’ve worried.

I’m far from the only woman who is uneducated about alimony (or spousal support or maintenance, these are all the same things). On top of that, divorce law and how alimony is awarded varies wildly from state-to-state, meaning whatever experiences you might’ve heard or read about may not apply to you given where you live. Some states have permanent (lifetime) alimony¹ whereas most states determine the length of alimony based on the length of the marriage. Many states allow alimony payments to cease upon the remarriage of a former spouse and other states allow payments to cease just upon the cohabitation of a former spouse with their new partner.

I only learned all of this once I—get this—started reading about it and doing my research. Unfortunately, I only started doing that once we formally began the divorce process and that, my friends, is way too late.

When I had my first consultation with a local lawyer, she ran the whole alimony picture down for me, given the rough outline I had provided including how long we had been married and my income versus his. You will not be surprised to hear that I did not like what I heard! I thought my head was going to blow apart into a thousand deadly shards while snakes, tarantulas, fire, hornets, and witches poured forth from my empty skull to completely darken the skies.

Not to be dramatic.

I couldn’t believe, after all the money I had earned and paid out over more than 25 years together, after everything I had done to not just hold everything together in general but had also subsidized during our marriage and separation, that I was also going to have to pay him cold hard cash. For years. Unfortunately, my lack of knowledge isn’t all that unique. Alimony was legally gendered for so long, and still exists in the cultural imagination as something that only men do, that when it comes to paying alimony it makes sense that a lot of breadwinning women are like:

In its most basic form, alimony is calculated based on the length of the marriage and the disparity of income between the two partners. Transparently, my divorce didn’t go through the court system other than our agreement (negotiated collaboratively and using attorneys) being approved by a judge. But let’s dig into a brief history of alimony in general. Some of us keep feeling surprised (🙋🏻‍♀️) by the unfairness of institutions and laws as if they’ve always been with us since time immemorial. Lest we forget, these are institutions and laws created by men, to—wait for it—benefit men.

The origins of alimony date back to 1800s England and were rooted in the profound inequality within marriage. When a woman entered a marriage at that time, her legal identity was merged with her husband’s. Any property she owned was now his, and she also transferred her ability to keep any earnings, enter into contracts, or own property to him. It became his obligation to “protect” and financially support his wife. But note: “Alimony, then and now, wasn’t really about the woman’s well-being so much as protecting the state from the undue ‘burden’ of taking care of her when her husband didn’t want to provide for her anymore.” So how else can I say it except:

“Spousal Support Disorder: An Overview of Problems in Current Alimony Law” by Jennifer L. McCoy in the Florida State University Law Review

The premise of the American system of alimony, built upon that English system and brought over by settlers, was to support divorced women who now had no other means of supporting themselves [italics mine]. But in 1852, states began enacting the Married Women’s Property Acts, which at least allowed divorced women to gain back control of property they had entered their marriages with (thanks?)

Still, alimony was a fully male-coded feature of American divorce until the 1979 Supreme Court ruling (Orr v. Orr) that rendered the payment of alimony gender neutral. Keep in mind this law changed because a man didn’t feel like paying alimony and of course he won. Also, I wonder if Alabama and red states in general need to be reminded of this from that ruling:

But gender-based destinies aside, what stands out to me is that we keep accepting the premise of the question (which partner should pay alimony?) instead of interrogating the core concept of alimony itself. As in:

Oop.