Lawrence Roach is fighting to stop alimony payments to his ex-wife, because the woman is now a man:
Lawrence Roach says his ex-wife has had a sex change and is now living as a man with a new identity. Roach says he should be allowed discontinue $1,200 in monthly alimony payments.
"This isn't right. It's humiliating to me and degrading," Roach said. "You know, I'm a man and I don't want to be paying alimony to a man. If you can't be married to a man legally, how can you legally pay alimony to a man?"
So should he continue to pay alimony? Link - via Arbroath
Alimony does refer to the "spouse," and the ex's gender is irrelevant. Alimony is granted on the basis of the dependency of one spouse on another and the standard of living that the dependent spouse has become accustomed to throughout the course of the marriage. Though the variables differ from state to state, generally the amount of alimony granted is based on the needs (including standard of living) of the payee spouse, the ability of the payor spouse to pay, and the payee spouse's earning capacity (e.g. education, job history, etc.). If the wife was a doctor and the husband was a janitor and they were married for 17 years, she would certainly have to pay him alimony.
Roach's argument has no legal merit and is likely a composite of his parsimony and his attorney's interest in free publicity.
I don't know... If they let him off the hook, that's pretty sexist. Now that his wife is a man, s/he doesn't need the money? Alimony should refer to "spouse", I think, not just "wife". S/he's still an ex-spouse. So, yeah... If the guy had to pay her as a woman, he should still have to pay him now that he's a man.
Roach's argument has no legal merit and is likely a composite of his parsimony and his attorney's interest in free publicity.