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


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