781.708.4445

info@levinedisputeresolution.com

Divorce Mediation Blog

Post- Divorce Health Insurance: A Recent Decision and the Need for Reform

Wednesday, April 02, 2014

Previously, we wondered why the legislature tied a trial judge's mandatory inquiry into available health insurance at a reasonable cost to the provision of alimony in M.G.L., chapter 208, section 34. Particularly in view of the individual mandates of MA and now federal law, this seems anachronistic, at best, and begging for reform.

In the recent case of Young v. Young (12-P-1573), a Memorandum and Order Pursuant to Rule 1:28 (a so-called "unreported" decision) the Appeals Court, upheld a Probate Court judgment in which one appellate issue was the husband's complaint that the court had ordered him to provide health insurance for the wife when he was not ordered to pay alimony.

The case did not specify why no alimony issued, but we surmise from the facts reported that this was a forty year marriage and that wife was not yet retired, that either the Husband had passed the statutory retirement age and/or that neither party had "need" for spousal support. The judge did conclude, however, that the health insurance order was justified by the wife's expectation of losing work coverage at retirement and the fact that eventually, both parties will receive low cost health benefits attendant to the onset of the husband's military retirement pay.

Putting aside that these reasons seem to be a non-sequitor (What does the wife's anticipated loss of coverage have to do with coverage now? If she has coverage now, why does she need the husband's? What does post-retirement military health benefits have to do with either?), clearly this trial judge did not feel inhibited from awarding health insurance coverage to a non-alimony recipient.

Under the right circumstances, of course, this is a perfectly sensible result, which raises this question: is it time to look at post-divorce health insurance coverage anew? Since Massachusetts stepped out in front of all other states with its spousal continuation laws, and then with health exchanges and individual mandate, should it not be the first to look at this incredibly important subject comprehensively?

At a minimum, we think that the legislature ought to look at the discrepancies between M.G.L., chapter 208, section 34 and the Alimony Reform Act (can a payor's cost reduce alimony or not?), close the self-insurance loophole for employer-provided coverage (why should large companies with the capacity to absorb employee medical cost risks be exempt from covering ex-spouses where insurance companies are not), clarify portability of post-divorce spousal coverage (discretionary for subsequent employers now) and provide guidance as to what level of coverage and cost can or should be mandated. Importantly, this topic should be covered in one, comprehensive chapter or section of its own. The stakes are way too critical to the security of MA residents to be left to grasping at disparate authorities and guessing at outcomes.

As divorce mediators and family law arbitrators, we feel the need for clarity, consistency and a reflection of broad societal change in this vitally important area.



Get e-mail notifications of new blog posts! Enter email address below.:



Delivered by FeedBurner

other articles


recent posts


tags

mediation Same Sex Marriage arbitrator Massachusetts divorce lawyers Uniform Arbitration Act Self-adjusting alimony orders mediator pre-ARA alimony divorce mediator Major League Baseball Arbitration alimony divorce arbitration Baseball Players health coverage divorce litigation disputes divorce judgment family law arbitrators fraud alimony reform legislation family law mediation special master alimony law Boston resolve disputes General term alimony Chouteau Levine divorce lawyers private dispute resolution Baseball Levine Dispute Resolution Center child support arbitrators Levine Dispute Resolutions divorce process traditional negotiations alimony statute divorce mediation Alimony Reform Act separation Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly Cohabitation facilitated negotiations Divorce divorce mediators divorce and family law mediators SJC Defense of Marriage Act med/arb Massachusetts alimony and child support divorced divorce agreement COLA divorce and family law family law arbitrator how baseball arbitration works The Seven Sins of Alimony lawyer-attended mediation Massachusetts divorce mediators family law DOMA Levine Dispute Resolution Center LLC divorce arbitrator rehabilitative alimony family mediation family and probate law disputes Child Support Guidelines medical benefits med-arb health insurance family support Family Law Arbitration Twinkies arbitration Levine Dispute Resolution dispute resolution lawyers Massachusetts alimony conciliation Massachusetts support orders high-risk methodology mediations MLB labor agreement Obamacare litigation alimony orders annulment Massachusetts Alimony Reform Act IRC §2704 divorce mediations mediators self-adjusting alimony lawyer LDRC Baseball Arbitration Massachusetts lawyers divorce arbitrators Divorce Agreements Matrimonial Arbitration