"I, Lawrence Roach, take you, Julia, to be my wife."
Eighteen years after the two took their wedding vows, they divorced; but what makes this seemingly typical story unique, is that Roach now refuses to continue to pay his ex-wife the agreed upon alimony — being that Julia is now Julio, a man.
Roach's former bride now goes by the name Julio Roberto Silverwolf, after a sex-change operation. Silverwolf is claiming that the operation doesn't alter the $1,250 a month spousal support, and his lawyer says the divorce decree stands unless Silverwolf remarries or dies. READ MORE
Do you think Roach should continue paying Silverwolf the agreed upon alimony? E-mail us at firstname.lastname@example.org and let us know what you think!
Here's What FOX Fans Are Saying:
"I don't think he should have to pay her alimony … period. She entered into the marriage under a falsehood — obviously this was a person that knew how she felt about herself, and only married because of society's beliefs. The marriage was a lie from the beginning … maybe she should reimburse him for fraud." — Rachel
"As a matter of fact, I believe that Julia/Julio broke the wedding vows — however you may want to look at it, she's the one that should be paying restitution for breaking that contract. She's no longer his ex-wife." — Jim
"I don't think he/she should still get support. Alimony is put into place so a wife (or husband) can live in the manner that they are used to. The woman in this argument was not used to living life as a man. If she can afford the surgery (I can't imagine her insurance paid for it), then she can afford to live without her ex-husbands money." — Karen
"Actually, I don't believe in alimony at all. If you want a person to pay your way, then you better work hard at keeping that person very happy in the marriage. This law is old and outdated. When a marriage ends, it ends — only children should be considered." — Monique
"Mr. Roach agreed to pay alimony to his ex-wife. 'He' is no longer an ex-wife, but a man. To force Mr. Roach, a heterosexual, to pay alimony to a man, is a perversion. I say NO alimony!" — Beverly
"The ex-wife legally changed her gender and her name, which means the name would no longer match the name on the divorce decree. So, the ex-husband should not have to pay her!" — Dono
"No, I do NOT think that he should have to continue paying alimony. I believe when the operation took place, the contract should be considered 'null and void.'" — Bev
"Heck no! I think the marriage should be annulled, and the ex-wife should be made to pay back all collected alimony payments." — Stu
"NO ... if Silverwolf wants to be a man, he needs to get a job and not expect another man to support him." — Melinda
"I believe that he married a 'woman' — his wife. Since she is no longer a woman, Roach should not have to pay." — Ebony
"He absolutely should NOT have to pay another penny! This is so absurd, that anyone with just a small amount of common sense would agree!" — Bob
"NO! Alimony was agreed upon until the ex-wife died or remarried. The ex-wife ceases to exist altogether at this point. Julia is now a male named Julio — I'm sure all other legal documents, including driver's license, state that. The document naming Julia as the recipient of any alimony is void, because Julia is no longer a person!" — Angie
"I believe the alimony contract clearly states Julia, not Julio will receive payment. Changing her name clearly negates the contract that he had with Julia. Since this person no longer exists, there is no right to expect payments to be made to a different person." — Robert
"I do not think that Mr. Roach should have to pay his ex-wife alimony. She is now a man, and he can certainly take care of himself." — Donna
"Alimony is not a lifetime grant. It is intended by law to be used as a part of a recovery phase for the secondary spouse, until he or she starts a new life for themselves. The ex-wife has, by free will, chosen to move on in life, as a new transsexual person — just as much as if she had chosen to re-marry. Therefore, she has negated/waived the criteria conditions necessary for continued receipt of alimony from her prior spouse." — Alan
"They should of then or now divide whatever property or money they had together and go their separate ways!. I mean, isn't it possible that the irreconcilable differences or growing apart was due to Mr. Silverwolf wanting to become a man all along? And, if that's true, wouldn't that mean Ms. Silverwolf entered into a marriage with Roach under false pretenses?" — Lisa
"I feel, as a woman, that he should not have to pay alimony any longer. Its almost as if she remarried, but to herself. Roach divorced a woman, not a man. He should no longer be accountable for her/him." — Busa
"A $1,250 per month hand-out to an able-bodied adult is wrong. Alimony to another adult male or female is wrong. We do not live in the Jamestown colony. The year is not 1610. We should not have one adult indentured to another adult." — Gary
"Morally, Lawrence Roach should not have to pay any spousal support to his ex-wife. Legally, there is nothing that will null and void, or remove Lawrence's obligation to his ex-wife. The courts can legally only decide based on the laws at hand unless they feel the laws that are on the books now are unconstitutional. This is the world we live in ... unfortunately." — D.K.
"Absolutely not! There is the presumption of 'lifestyle-maintained' in awarding alimony. However, in this case, the lifestyle has been dramatically altered by the claimant, that is the ex-wife. The original suit to be altered or abolished." — Roger
"No — she is no longer the woman he married and promised to support. If he/she should remarry would he have to support both of them?" — James
"He, by law, has to pay alimony until she/he either dies or remarries. Well, now it's set until she dies because by law if she got married it would not be recognized by the state, since the law states you are the sex that you were born. Therefore, he could not legally marry a woman, because he is a woman by birth … is that correct? That would leave Mr. Roach with no options, and his ex just taking all his money." — Robyn
"Mr. Roach married and divorced JULIA, not Julio. Therefore if JULIA does not exist on any legal document, the alimony to JULIA should cease as well." — Deanne
"Let's see ... Mr. Roach agreed to pay alimony to his ex-wife Julia. She does not exist anymore. He should not pay." — Barbara
"Lawrence Roach absolutely should NOT have to pay alimony to a man. Yes, the law states that he should pay until his ex-wife dies; however to be a "wife" you MUST be a WOMAN!" — Nanny V.