| This is an archived forum, so it is here for read-only purposes only. We are not accepting new members and members cannot post any longer. Members can, however, access their old private messages. Strawberry Fields was open from 2006 until 2011. There is a Strawberry Fields Beatles Forum on Facebook. If you are registered with Facebook, join us at the group there! |
| Judge: Sex change doesn't end alimony | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 29 2007, 03:53 AM (166 Views) | |
| Deleted User | Mar 29 2007, 03:53 AM Post #1 |
|
Deleted User
|
Judge: Sex change doesn't end alimony Wed Mar 28, 7:26 PM ET A woman's sex change operation does not free her ex-husband from his alimony obligation, a judge said Wednesday. Attorneys for Lawrence Roach, 48, had argued his 55-year-old ex-wife's decision to switch genders and change her name from Julia to Julio Roberto Silverwolf voided their 2004 divorce agreement. "It's illegal for a man to marry a man and it should likewise be illegal for a man to pay alimony to a man," said John McGuire, one of Roach's attorneys. Circuit Judge Jack R. St. Arnold, however, ruled that in the eyes of the law, nothing changed significantly enough to free Roach from his $1,250-a-month obligation. The judge said since Florida courts have ruled sex-change surgery cannot legally change a person's birth gender, Roach technically is not paying alimony to a man. Gender definitions are "a question that raises issues of public policy that should be addressed by the Legislature, not the Florida courts," St. Arnold wrote. Silverwolf's lawyer, Gregory Nevins, said the language of the divorce decree is clear — Roach agreed to pay alimony until his ex-wife dies or remarries. Nevins said he and his client were pleased with the ruling although they disagree with Florida's refusal to legally recognize gender reassignment surgery. Roach, a utility worker who has since remarried, said he will press his fight to end the payments. "We're going to try everything we can," he said. "I can't rest until I get satisfaction." The case is the second transsexual rights showdown in Pinellas County in less than a week. On Friday, city commissioners voted 5-2 to fire Largo's city manager, Steve Stanton, after he announced he was a transsexual. An Ohio appeals court ruled in September 2004 that a Montgomery County man must continue to pay alimony to his transsexual ex-wife because her sex change wasn't reason enough to violate the agreement. Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten |
|
|
| Deleted User | Mar 29 2007, 04:01 AM Post #2 |
|
Deleted User
|
I would have to disagree with the Judge. First, once you had a sex change I do believe you should be considered the new sex, in this case a man. Therefor since gay marriage is illegal the contract for alimony is void. However if gay marriage was legal I would argue that the marriage was fraud in its original form and therefor alimony should be stopped as well. |
|
|
| mozart8mytoe | Mar 29 2007, 04:28 AM Post #3 |
|
Did the man who does not want to pay alimony marry and divorce a woman or a man? Gay marriage is illegal in Florida, but nowhere does this story say that anyone involved is or was gay. If he was ordered to pay alimony, we can assume that their marriage was legal. I am wondering how $1,250 a month pays for this kind of operation. |
| Nurse, I spy gypsies. Run. | |
![]() |
|
| Dorfliedot | Mar 29 2007, 04:30 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Beatlelicious
|
Agree, with the judge. |
![]() Add Glitter to your Photos | |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Mar 29 2007, 06:05 AM Post #5 |
|
Deleted User
|
Well let's see if "he" was a "she" before and during the marriage to him and then "she" became a "he" after the divorce, since there is nothing in the books such as if the party recieving alimony remarries which often leads to alimony being disolved, he should continue. Something that I think needs to be brought up in litigation, I can see the [real] mans point. |
|
|
| Deleted User | Mar 29 2007, 01:16 PM Post #6 |
|
Deleted User
|
But this (once) woman is still the exact same person with the exact same needs as always. The sex change took place after the divorce (you might not be able to be married to a man legally but on principle you should be) and as alimony exists to aid the needs of the remaining spouse, what needs have actually changed? I don't understand why people think the woman/man's needs have gone with his breasts. I think it's a silly excuse from the ex to get out of alimony. |
|
|
| BlueMolly2009 | Mar 29 2007, 06:08 PM Post #7 |
|
LOLcat Freak
|
I agree with you Fiona. Just because he used to be a she her husband should be forced to continue paying the alimony. |
|
Molly Myspace My Twitter My FriendFeed My Facebook ![]() Boston Chihuahuas (I took this while at a Starbucks) | |
![]() |
|
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up Now |
|
| « Previous Topic · Things We Said Today · Next Topic » |










8:10 AM Jul 11