Girls will be boys and boys will be girls (Wizbang)

Almost every day advances in technology challenge existing laws and strictures. This is especially true in medical matters, where the "rules" change faster than lawmakers can even hope to keep up.

For example, in Florida, a couple got divorced a while ago. The husband agreed to pay alimony until the wife either remarried or died. Neither has happened, but the guy wants off the hook anyway -- because his ex-wife isn't quite the woman she used to be.

In fact, she's not a woman at all any more.

Lawrence didn't mind too much cutting the monthly check to Julia, but now he's not willing to do the same for Julio.

I have to admit I have absolutely no idea where I stand on the issue. Julio is still, legally, the same person as Julia, who is entitled to the checks. But practically speaking, the shedding of the female identity and assumption of the masculine one should involve cutting all such ties -- and a monthly check reminding Julio of Julia's marriage to a man should be something that Julio should make a forceful point of rejecting. (Damn, avoiding gender-specific pronouns can be a bear at times.)

It's been said that tough cases make for bad laws, but they make for GREAT entertainment.

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

DCMA Compliance Notice

Comments (27)

It's obvious that Lawrence'... (Below threshold)

1. Posted by dalleceneri | March 28, 2007 11:09 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

dalleceneri:

It's obvious that Lawrence's real problem is that he's a homophobe.

Posted on March 28, 2007 11:09

Legally, it matters not whe... (Below threshold)

2. Posted by langtry | March 28, 2007 11:22 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

langtry:

Legally, it matters not whether Lawrence Roach, as asserted by dalleceneri, is "a homophobe". The issue is worth considering simply because, in changing her sex from female to male, "Julia" no longer exists: changing her/his name from "Julia Roach" to Julio Roberto Silverwolf serves to further eliminate the existence of Lawrence Roach's ex-wife. I agree with Jay Tea that ethics and principle would require Julio to end the alimony agreement.

The key thing is that, legally, Julia Roach doesn't exist. Should Lawrence Roach have to pay Alimony to someone who, for all effect and purpose, no longer exists in a legal sense? As Transgendered people become more (for lack of a better -- and less ironic -- expression) "mainstream", the issue is worth the court's consideration.

Posted on March 28, 2007 11:22

I agree with langtry.... (Below threshold)

3. Posted by DaveD | March 28, 2007 11:33 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

DaveD:

I agree with langtry.

Posted on March 28, 2007 11:33

A question for a lawyer, or... (Below threshold)

4. Posted by Dave A. | March 28, 2007 11:39 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Dave A.:

A question for a lawyer, or better yet, a banker: If Lawrence Roach continues to write alimony checks payable to Julia Roach, can Julio Silverwolf cash them?

Posted on March 28, 2007 11:39

Dave A. -- That's exactly w... (Below threshold)

5. Posted by ijosha | March 28, 2007 11:57 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

ijosha:

Dave A. -- That's exactly where I was going to go. I was going to suggest that Larry make the payments to a "Ms. Julia Roach" (note the "Ms."). and see where that ends up...

Posted on March 28, 2007 11:57

HOMOPHOBE! HOMOPHOBE! HOMOP... (Below threshold)

6. Posted by piledriver | March 28, 2007 11:58 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

piledriver:

HOMOPHOBE! HOMOPHOBE! HOMOPHOBE!

(another message brought to you from the tolerant left)

Posted on March 28, 2007 11:58

Meanwhile, some lawyer some... (Below threshold)

7. Posted by Mikey60 | March 28, 2007 12:06 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Mikey60:

Meanwhile, some lawyer somewhere will be getting rich off of all of them. Ain't the legal system wonderful (for attornies)? John Edwards will be in need of clients soon.....

Posted on March 28, 2007 12:06

Good points, DaveA & ijosha... (Below threshold)

8. Posted by langtry | March 28, 2007 12:07 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Good points, DaveA & ijosha. As someone who worked as a Teller while in college, I can be pretty certain that Julio Roberto Silverwolf would not be allowed to cash checks in the name of "Julia Roach".

Also, another thing came to mind after I posted: is Julio Roberto a fan of Julia Roberts or what? IMO, choosing the surname "Silverwolf" is clue #2 that Julio is a flake.

Posted on March 28, 2007 12:07

In a similar vein. . . ... (Below threshold)

9. Posted by engineer | March 28, 2007 12:16 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

engineer:

In a similar vein. . .

In a heterosexual marriage, when there is a divorce, the wife gets alimony (except in rare instances). Who in a Massachusetts gay marriage gets alimony after a divorce?

Posted on March 28, 2007 12:16

I don't think this really m... (Below threshold)

10. Posted by blackcat77 | March 28, 2007 12:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

blackcat77:

I don't think this really matters. This PERSON was awarded alimony on the basis of the legal relationship between the two people, not on their relative genatalia. If Julia became Julio, this is still the same person. Otherwise, you'd have situations where someone could enter into all sorts of contracts and then be able to declare them all void just because he or she had a sex-change operation.

Posted on March 28, 2007 12:25

Julio is still, legally,... (Below threshold)

11. Posted by ryan the filthy centrist | March 28, 2007 12:37 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

ryan the filthy centrist:

Julio is still, legally, the same person as Julia, who is entitled to the checks.

There is your answer, Jay. It's actually not all that compicated. It's the same person, with the same right to alimony.

Now, I can understand your point about this person wanting to cut all ties from the marriage, but that's more of a personal choice than it is a legal matter.

Posted on March 28, 2007 12:37

Ah ryan, I see you... (Below threshold)

12. Posted by Heralder | March 28, 2007 1:26 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)

Heralder:

Ah ryan,

I see you adopted my title. Glad to know I didn't have to shoot you in the face after all ;P

Jay,

I find that when referring to people like Julio, it's best to use the term (S)he.

Posted on March 28, 2007 13:26

Julio is still the same per... (Below threshold)

13. Posted by Adrian Browne | March 28, 2007 1:44 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)

Adrian Browne:

Julio is still the same person and is entitled to his checks -- a "sex change" operation doesn't really change your sex. Your birth certificate does not get amended.

If you don't side with Julio in this case he could legally get married to a woman and then you would be allowing the dreaded SAME SEX MARRIAGE!!! (and that would be the end of civilization as we know it).

Posted on March 28, 2007 13:44

Since Florida law does not ... (Below threshold)

14. Posted by Cloudfish | March 28, 2007 1:59 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Cloudfish:

Since Florida law does not recognize a sex change when it comes to marriage, (the new) Mr(s). Silverwolf has guaranteed him(her)self payments until death.

Mr. Roach agreed to pay alimony until his ex-wife dies or remarries. At least there was a chance to remarry--but no more.

Posted on March 28, 2007 13:59

Another unthought of proble... (Below threshold)

15. Posted by WildWillie | March 28, 2007 4:07 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

WildWillie:

Another unthought of problem from the sexual deviancy crowd. Give her the money. I don't care. ww

Posted on March 28, 2007 16:07

who cares?... (Below threshold)

16. Posted by pretzel_logic | March 28, 2007 4:23 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

pretzel_logic:

who cares?

Posted on March 28, 2007 16:23

wrong thread-sorry... (Below threshold)

17. Posted by pretzel_logic | March 28, 2007 4:24 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

wrong thread-sorry

Posted on March 28, 2007 16:24

I've never understood the n... (Below threshold)

18. Posted by Taltos | March 28, 2007 5:31 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Taltos:

I've never understood the notion of "You have to pay your ex wife forever because she's too lazy to get a job" it's not like when you marry you somehow lose the ability earn your own money.

Posted on March 28, 2007 17:31

No problem. Here's... (Below threshold)

19. Posted by RightWingDuck | March 28, 2007 5:56 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

RightWingDuck:

No problem.

Here's the plan for Lawrence:

1. Move to New York.

2. Declare yourself female. You don't even need an operation to do this. Your new name could be Lawrencia.

3. HAve your lawyer go to court

4. Tell the judge that Julio should stop getting alimony from this "woman"

5. Have judge terminate alimony.

6. Have your lawyer ask the judge to order Julio to pay alimony to Lawrencia. He's a man. It's time for him to live up to his responsibility.

Posted on March 28, 2007 17:56

I would want to know why sh... (Below threshold)

20. Posted by SCSIwuzzy | March 28, 2007 6:07 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

SCSIwuzzy:

I would want to know why she/he was awarded alimony in the first place.
Was she unable to go out and support herself, and was that because of the marriage (as opposed to having been helpless before the wedding)? Were their kids she was in charge of? Or was it simply a case of the woman getting the award due to social inertia? I know 2 guys that make less than their ex-wives, but a judge still said they must pay alimony.
Anyway, depending on why the guy was paying the alimony, it may be relevent that his ex is now sporting after market parts.

Posted on March 28, 2007 18:07

heralder,hahaha. ... (Below threshold)

21. Posted by ryan the filthy centrist | March 28, 2007 7:01 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

heralder,

hahaha. that was the funniest thing ive read in a while, so i had to co-opt the title. hope you dont mind; i like it.

and thanks again for keeping the shotgun under wraps, at least until i fly off into another one of my middle of the road, fence sitting, undecided, wishy-washy, relativist, cant-we-all-just-get-along, centrist tirades.

Posted on March 28, 2007 19:01

Historically alimony made s... (Below threshold)

22. Posted by Synova | March 28, 2007 7:03 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Synova:

Historically alimony made sense and it *might* still make sense in some cases. Did she quit college to be married? Pass up developing her career to be married? Child support is essential. Former-wife support, not so much.

But, as SCSIwuzzy mentions in passing, men pay alimony to women, they don't get *paid* alimony. As a man, Julio would probably not have ever received any sort of alimony award even if he was making far less money than his former spouse.

Posted on March 28, 2007 19:03

There have been cases of me... (Below threshold)

23. Posted by Taltos | March 28, 2007 7:44 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

There have been cases of men receiving alimony from their ex wives, they're extremely rare though.

And apparently there was a similar case in ohio where the judge and the appelate court found that a sex-change doesn't constitute a big enough change in circumstances to break the alimony agreement.

Posted on March 28, 2007 19:44

I've always thought we shou... (Below threshold)

24. Posted by starboardhelm | March 28, 2007 9:29 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)

starboardhelm:

I've always thought we should use "she-he-it" for gender blenders. Say it real fast. Contraction: shi't.

Posted on March 28, 2007 21:29

You're looking for great en... (Below threshold)

25. Posted by Anon Y. Mous | March 28, 2007 10:12 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Anon Y. Mous:

You're looking for great entertainment? Has anyone checked with Ann Coulter? This could be a lot of fun.

Posted on March 28, 2007 22:12

Does this mean if you had a... (Below threshold)

26. Posted by Rodney Dill | March 29, 2007 4:15 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Rodney Dill:

Does this mean if you had a sex change operation you could cancel your debt, because the person that owed it no longer actually existed?

Sounds like quite a legal conundrum.

Pay the dude.

Posted on March 29, 2007 16:15

You're looking for great... (Below threshold)

27. Posted by Rodney Dill | March 29, 2007 4:16 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)

Check with her to see if she's gonna call someone a f----- again? or because she looks somewhat man-ish?

Posted on March 29, 2007 16:16

Comment Preview

Posted by: