Rep. Vose and witnesses spar over proposal to cap term alimony at eight years

Representative Vose introduced House Bill 1036 to the Children and Family Law Committee, saying the bill would cap voluntary term alimony at eight years unless both parties mutually agree to extend the term. "That cap would be uh eight years or at least not to exceed eight years unless the parties agree mutually that it should continue for longer than that period of time," he told members.

Supporters and those with divorce experience told the committee that an eight-year cap would restore what they described as a historical rehabilitative approach. Gary Carlson, who said he was divorced after 32 years of marriage, asked members to "support the eight years," arguing that the 2019 formula that measures term as half the marriage length had extended awards for decades.

But Mary Krueger, an attorney with New Hampshire Legal Assistance, said the proposal would make it harder for people — typically women who deferred careers to raise children — to avoid poverty later in life. "We oppose HB 1036," Krueger said, warning the cap flips the current law and would force many long-term spouses to prove a special circumstance to obtain a longer term.

Committee members repeatedly pressed the sponsor on statutory mechanics and policy trade-offs: several asked whether the court’s current discretion (which often yields maximum durations of 50 percent of the marriage) could address extreme cases, how the bill would affect retirees, and whether the statutory modification standard (RSA 458:19‑a) remained an adequate safeguard.

The bill’s sponsor said parties can negotiate longer terms and that judges retain authority to exceed the cap when justice requires. Testimony and questioning reflected a central tension: whether alimony is primarily rehabilitative or a long-term support that should track the duration of a long marriage. The committee did not take action on HB 1036 during the hearing day.