Question: I have read in your column and elsewhere about every state having child support guidelines. My question is why there is not more done to create guidelines for alimony so that spouses in similar situations would be treated consistently, and not at the whim of a judge who might have had a fight with his or her spouse that morning.

Answer: Child support is based on the obligations of both parents to contribute to the expenses of their children based upon their ability to pay -- including imputing income to an unemployed or underemployed parent. Under federal law, each state has developed its own guidelines with permutations too numerous to mention here. Un-emancipated children are dependent upon their parents, and if they are disabled, child support can continue despite a child’s age. And judges have very little discretion to vary from the amount established under the formula that, for the most part, is computer-generated.

On the other hand, alimony (or spousal maintenance) is what one spouse may agree or be required to pay to the other at the time of separation or divorce. The common law maxim that a wife was entitled to support from her husband was declared unconstitutional in 1979 by the United States Supreme Court which made spousal support obligations equally applicable to husbands and wives. Over the years, state legislatures have developed various types of alimony – some time limited -- including lump sum, permanent periodic, rehabilitative, and reimbursement, each with its own set of “guidelines” for judges to consider.

While there are no exact figures, it has been estimated that alimony is awarded in less than ten percent of the divorces granted in the United States.

By and large, the decision of whether to grant alimony is a two step process: First, there must be a finding as to whether or not a spouse is entitled to support, and, if so, there must be a determination of the amount and length of the award. Each state has statutory factors that judges are required to consider in setting – or denying – alimony, but, in the final analysis, alimony is a discretionary award – meaning that the judge, based on the facts before him or her, does what he or she believes to be fair and equitable. Because “discretion” allows wide latitude, alimony awards may seem to be inconsistent.

A number of states have tried to develop formulae to guide judges in making decisions about alimony. Some have been premised on the length of the marriage. Some judges candidly admit that they use their own “unofficial formula” to decide spousal support awards in attempts to be more consistent.

Because of the many variables, few state legislatures have adopted an exact formula for judges to use. The Supreme Courts of Nevada and Georgia have recommended the implementation of alimony guidelines. A software developer has created an alimony computer program in Michigan and is working on software for other states, but, if used, is on a county-by-county basis.

The state of Pennsylvania has incorporated the alimony factors into mandated monetary support guidelines that are used for setting temporary alimony so that, like child support, deviations are fewer and the results are more consistent. Using net income and earning capacity with deviations where there are special circumstances, Pennsylvania rules are based on the premise that alimony, like child support, should be based on income, not standard of living.

A California formula embraces the length of the marriage as a factor to be considered, providing that alimony should be awarded for half the number of months of the marriage if the marriage terminates in less than ten years.

Bottom Line: If you think that the awards of alimony are inconsistent, just take a look at the inconsistent efforts to “formulize” the decision-making process. Sometimes, good old-fashioned common sense may just be the better solution.