Just because a couple has divorced doesn’t mean the acrimony or hostilities have ended – or paying monthly alimony or child support payments are any more agreeable. South Florida divorce and family law attorneys see it all the time: The ink is dried on the settlement, but the ex-spouse left to pay alimony or child support decides to flout the agreement or court order and decides not to pay. Bad idea.

Child support and post-dissolution obligations are requirements under the law. Not making these payments can affect the non-paying spouse – legally and financially. Non-payment can be reported to the courts, resulting in criminal legal action. It can be reported to the state, resulting on garnishing of wages or other means to compel payment.

Credit reporting agencies may be contacted. This could lower the debtor’s credit score, which then may negatively impact the ability to obtain credit or find a job.

In Florida, attorneys who withhold child support obligations can be disciplined.

This is a serious issue. But it still happens. What should you do if your spouse withholds alimony or child support payments?

First, discuss it with the ex-spouse. Make sure it wasn’t an oversight.

If it’s obvious the payments were willfully withheld, next, contact the divorce attorney who handled your case. The lawyer can ask the court to intervene. Courts can go so far as incarceration of the ex-spouse if willful non-payment and ability to pay is proven.

Finally, aggrieved parties also can contact the Florida Department of Revenue. Florida takes seriously non-payment of child support. The DOR can demand tax returns to ensure the spouse has the means to pay, and can enforce the order for child support through such remedies as suspension of the driver’s license or passport.

Non-payment of child support is a serious issue. It leaves children in limbo or without vital support – and can permanently harm the financial, legal and personal reputation and status of the non-paying parent. Parents in need of that money should seek remedies quickly should the situation arise.

Permanent alimony is long-term alimony payments that have no defined end date, except for remarriage of the recipient or the death of the ex-spouse receiving the payments. That definition is evolving, said Barry Finkel, a Fort Lauderdale family law attorney. In many cases, divorced spouses assume they will be awarded permanent alimony.

The move is designed to encourage an ex-spouse receiving alimony after a divorce to re-enter the workforce or find gainful, supportive employment, so the paying spouse is not obligated to indefinitely continue paying alimony. This will change how generations have come to view alimony.

The trend encourages what some call “individual responsibility.” In 2010, the Florida Legislature clarified its statutes to provide additional guidance to the Court. Supporters reasoned that while several factors are considered when making awards of alimony, the responsibility regarding minor children should be shared between the parties. Therefore, although a spouse may forego a career to keep the household and raise the children, the dissolution of that marriage, especially before a certain timeframe, does not remove that spouse’s financial responsibility to help support children.

The intent of the alimony changes seems to be to increase individual responsibility and reduce the presumption of permanent alimony.

To assist the court, Florida codified three types of marriages: Short term of less than seven years; Durational of between seven and 17 years; and Long Term, which lasts more than 17 years.

Guidance regarding alimony options for each type of marriage was also provided. The state now recognizes specific types of alimony, such as “bridge the gap,” or payments that last up to two years after the divorce; rehabilitative alimony- designed to assist an ex-spouse in entering the workforce; and durational alimony not to exceed the number of years (between seven and 17) that a marriage lasted. As a result, permanent alimony is now generally only considered for ex-spouses of long-term marriages.

The debate over permanent alimony is a reflection of changes in the workplace. Some 40 years ago, it was more difficult for women to find employment in the upper levels of the workforce. Alimony laws were designed to protect women who relied upon the husband as the union’s sole provider.

Some argue that limiting permanent alimony unreasonably requires a spouse to return to the workforce. Those divorcing from “durational” marriages generally are younger, probably better career-prepared, and better able to find a suitable career. The spouse is required to present to the courts or magistrate a plan to return to the workforce. In that case, the courts might offer durational or rehabilitative alimony to cover costs of living while the spouse seeks the degree or certifications needed to obtain employment.

Those coming off long-term marriages may be at an age when returning to the workforce is not realistic. Permanent alimony still may be possible, but the legislature and courts might expect more effort from the ex-spouse to provide for herself and the children.

No matter how permanent alimony changes for couples facing divorce, those entering marriage – especially for the second or third time – should consider the importance of the pre-nuptial agreement. Regardless of changes made by state leaders, pre-nuptials can limit the potential long-term impact of what otherwise could be court-ordered permanent alimony.

Year-end tax time requires special attention. When handled by an experienced family law attorney and a tax professional, returns can meet both the letter and spirit of federal or state filing guidelines. Since state law governs how divorce is handled, it’s important for Florida residents to hire a local divorce attorney.

Whether paying or receiving alimony, child support or mortgage costs, or settling real estate investments, the tax implications can be significant. Filing and reporting can be as simple as a line on a tax return, or as complicated as federal forms to be filed. Read this article by family law attorney Barry Finkel to learn more about how to be best prepared for tax time.

Actor Kelsey Grammer

Many family law or divorce attorneys strongly suggest a pre-nup for wealthy clients – especially those who wed later in life or to those much younger than themselves, or who have a history of failed marriages. Pre-nups protect the assets of both parties as they enter the marriage, and help ensure that property and support issues will be predetermined should the parties split, helping to avoid an expense and an acrimonious divorce.

Mr. Grammer, an actor who also owns a production company with wife, Camille, offered her $30 million. The offer was to be inclusive of alimony and child support for the couple’s children, ages 6 and 9. She rebuffed his offer and countered with at $50 million. Meanwhile, the divorce has grown acrimonious and very public.

Is Mr. Grammer, who was married to Camille for 14 years, setting himself up for a similar outcome? He reportedly has said it would be an “insult” to request a pre-nup from Ms. Walsh. Time will tell.

Typically, in a divorce action, the firms fund expenses associated with one side’s discovery and research needed to ensure that party – often the wife – gets her fair share of the couple’s holdings. If she prevails in court, the lender may take 20% of the judgment, depending on the agreement.

In our last blog, veteran family law attorney by Barry I. Finkel wrote a viewpoint supporting the practice. Today, Angela R. Neave, an associated in The Law Firm of Barry I. Finkel, P.A., presents an opposing perspective.

In theory, “lawsuit lending” is a great opportunity for clients, most often women, who lack funds to litigate complex financial issues. On the other hand, in most states, the spouse with money is required to pay for litigation costs. So, it baffles me that these women’s attorneys are incapable of obtaining fees for litigation – including costs of a forensic accountant – at a simple fee hearing.

If you have an attorney worth his salt, he’ll already have scheduled the hearing in hopes of convincing the judge that his client needs money to underwrite discovery and research. Since it’s unlawful in Florida for a family law firm to work on contingency or fund costs associated with a case, the resources needed to ensure a fair fight must come from somewhere.

Generally, that “somewhere” has been the fee hearing, where the court will award partial fees. This money then is spent on determining assets and properties held – and often hidden – by the other side. The role of the court is to ensure the wife gets sufficient money to conduct a fair case. In my experience, few are the cases where the wife is actually cut out of the family’s estate or proceeds.

My concern is the “slippery slope” effect these “lawsuit lenders” may be walking. To me, this smacks of corporate greed – of companies swooping in on the first whiff of blood and offering to pay now, in order to earn a sizeable sum later.

Other questions emerge. What if the wife is awarded alimony, child support, or money owed in arrears? Are those funds – which may go directly to supporting the family’s living expenses – likely to take the 20% fee hit? Bringing in a third party to finance a case – and walk away with a fifth or more of the judgment – could cause irreparable, long-term harm to the wife and children. Frankly, we’re not sure how that may play out.

If a lawsuit lender is brought in, who is the lawyer serving? The wife or the firm? The lines become even more blurry.

Then there are the ethical concerns. What if the firm, in its pursuit of higher awards, manufactures evidence? What if the firm encourages the wife to lie? The attorney may be left doubting his client’s honesty. The potential for fraud and abuse is a big issue.

Family law is not about “winning and losing.” That’s why we do not collect contingency fees. Our role is to zealously present the best case to achieve an equitable and fair settlement. No one wins; in fact, both sides should lose a little. That’s what “negotiations” often are all about.

Typically, in the case of divorce litigation, they’re underwriting expenses associated with one side’s discovery and research needed to ensure that party – often the wife – gets her fair share of the couple’s holdings. If their side prevails in court, the lender may take 20% of the gross proceeds or more, depending on the agreement.

“With some in the financial world willing to bet on almost anything, it should be no surprise that a few would see the potential to profit from the often contentious and emotional process of ending a marriage,” the Times wrote.

Over the next few days, we will present two sides to this trend. We’ll start with an argument supporting the practice, written by Barry I. Finkel, a veteran family law attorney.

Legal lending is a great idea. In some divorce cases among high net worth individuals, discovering the business holdings can be challenging – if not impossible. The couple, or just one spouse, may have numerous business entities, whose ownership, corporate structure, bank accounts or financing are convoluted at best, or deliberately muddled at worst. Such confusion often is conjured in an effort to throw off research – by business partners, the authorities, or a spouse.

In the case of a divorce case where one party – most often, the wife – must discover hidden assets, a family law attorney’s role is not to play Sherlock Holmes. His or her job is to make the best use of the available information to present the client’s strongest case.

Frankly, investigative firms can do a much better job uncovering hidden assets. Those findings then can be used by the attorney in the courtroom to support the client’s case.

Those firms and experts are expensive to retain. The process of investigation can take hundreds, even thousands of hours. Few law firms are prepared to invest that level of cost or man hours. Moreover, is many states, it’s illegal for a family law firm to finance a case or underwrite the costs of discovery in hopes of taking a percentage at the end.

Simply put, without these “lawsuit lenders,” the wife in the divorce case may never get her fair share.

Imagine an estate is worth $10 million, and because of the research, the wife is awarded half, or $5 million. I say she’s better off financially having paid $1 million to the lender, than possibly having never known what the estate truly was worth.

In essence, the lawyer gets paid, the lender gets paid, and the wife gets zealous, appropriate representation and what probably amounts to a more fair settlement or award than if she went into the negotiations or case blind or underfinanced.

It’s only fair.

A recent Wall Street Journal article on the place of prenuptial agreements among Baby Boomers — and others looking to protect existing assets — raises important questions.

As the article stated, “Baby boomers looking to protect their assets are increasingly turning to prenuptial agreements — legal contracts drawn up before a marriage that dictate what happens to assets in the event a couple should part ways, either by divorce or death.”

An interesting point about Baby Boomers who lost significant assets accumulated throughout a long career is that second marriages tend to bring up the subject, especially if one party has significant assets and adult children to whom they intend to leave their estate.

Pre-Nups are hopefully not the first time a couple talks about money and finances and how they plan to handle these items during the marriage, but it will certainly get the ball rolling. Discussing everyone’s assets, debts and what will stay with whom will allow for everyone to formulate realistic expectations about finances during the marriage.

In fact, money problems are one of the leading causes of divorce. In fact, Mexico, cleverly requires couples to declare separate or community property on their marriage license. This forces the couple to discuss at the time of applying for the license how they plan to handle finances of the marriage. If one party insists on separate property and the other does not agree, he or she then can determine whether they intend to apply for marriage or not.

The U.S. could learn from this practice.

Pre-nups generally are drafted for people with money. Because of their usefulness in starting the discussion about marital finances, pre-nuptial agreements should almost be required by states issuing marriage licenses.

Another point about pre-nuptial agreements: if the law changes after the fact, a carefully crafted pre-nup may not protect certain provisions because of the change in law. A pre-nup will not shield an asset after a change in the law.

If you have any questions about how a pre-nup can protect your assets or your family’s inheritance, contact a family law or divorce attorney before you say, “I do.”

Yet, experts continue to offer advice and counsel. The Diane Rehm Show on National Public Radio yesterday devoted an hour to the topic. The segment, entitled “Starting Over After Late-Life Divorce,” included interviews with Andrew Cherlin, a Professor of Sociology and Public Policy at Johns Hopkins University and author of “The Marriage-Go-Round: The State of Marriage and the Family Today”; Janice Green, a family law practitioner in Austin, Texas, and author of the book, “Divorce After 50: Your Guide to the Unique Legal and Financial Challenges”; and Abigail Trafford, a journalist, columnist, and former health editor at “The Washington Post” and author of “Crazy Time” and “My Time.”

The piece focused on how “many long-term married couples are making the decision to go their separate ways — possibly for another two or three decades.” The hour explored “the unique challenges and opportunities of late-life divorce.”

The lesson: As people live longer, late-stage divorce should not be such a surprise — and often comes with less acrimony. But planning remains important to ensuring everyone’s rights are protected.

Watch and listen as family law attorney Barry Finkel discusses divorce and taxes with a local television news host.

Below are four articles on the topic of finances, homes and divorce.

Fifteen Critical Financial Mistakes in Divorce. This article outlines key issues to be aware of.

What No One Wants to Keep in Divorce. Falling house prices make the castle one no party in divorce wants to call his or her own.

Post-Divorce Finances. Getting your finances in order after the divorce is vital to recovery and long-term success.

Social Security and Divorce. If you were married for at least 10 years to someone who has earned benefits, you may be eligible to collect payments as well.