On the flip-side of ongoing arguments for the state to get rid of its permanent alimony provisions in divorces, a professor at Rutgers Law School has come out as a critic of a proposed reform that would restrict the amount of discretion judges have in determining alimony payments in New Jersey.

Proponents of the reform say that such a measure is needed in order to eliminate "lifetime" alimony payments. Activists argue that hundreds of New Jersey residents are forced to pay unfair sums in spousal support following divorce, with little chance of successfully having their scheduled payments modified.

However, a family law professor at Rutgers University told reporters that eliminating judges' discretion in alimony cases will not make the results of those cases any more fair, arguing that reform is unnecessary.

While advocates of the reform say current alimony law is an outdated relic of a time where gender roles were less flexible, the professor contends that spousal support laws have changed with the times. She explained that women and individuals in same-sex couples now receive alimony, but that men generally still earn more.

The professor added that women often require additional support because they work less in order to raise children. She argued that eliminating permanent alimony could be harmful for such women. She said that women who take time off to raise children then return to work usually see lower wages for the rest of their lives, making the support that a long-term alimony award provides essential.

The professor also noted that despite being known as "permanent alimony," long-term spousal support orders in New Jersey can always be terminated or modified if a court decides such a move is called for.

Source: NJ.com, "Does judge's discretion make alimony fairer?," Feb. 10, 2012