I always guide clients through a divorce system that, while functional, contains several structural and procedural flaws. These imperfections can prolong conflict, create unpredictable outcomes, and impose unnecessary financial and emotional burdens on families navigating dissolution in the Sunflower State.
1. The "Fault" Grounds Anachronism and Strategic Misuse
Kansas retains fault-based grounds for divorce alongside its no-fault option of "incompatibility". While incompatibility is most common, the continued availability of fault grounds—such as adultery, extreme cruelty, or abandonment—creates a significant procedural flaw. Alleging fault can influence property division and spousal support outcomes, incentivizing parties to engage in invasive discovery, private investigations, and character assassination. This transforms what could be a straightforward dissolution into a morally charged battleground, dramatically increasing legal fees and emotional trauma. The strategic use of fault allegations often serves as leverage for financial advantage rather than any legitimate legal purpose.
2. The "Equitable Distribution" Lottery: Unbridled Judicial Discretion
Kansas is an "equitable distribution" state, meaning marital property is divided fairly—not necessarily equally. The core flaw lies in the extraordinary discretion granted to judges. The statute provides factors for consideration, including the parties' ages, earning capacities, and the length of the marriage, but offers no formula or weighting. This subjectivity creates a "judicial lottery" where outcomes depend heavily on which judge is assigned. One judge may favor a 50/50 split; another may find 60/40 more "equitable" based on the same facts. This unpredictability discourages settlement, as parties cannot accurately assess trial risk, and encourages costly litigation in hopes of a favorable judicial draw.
3. The Complicated Distinction Between Marital and Separate Property
Kansas law requires courts to first identify and set aside each spouse's separate property (assets owned before marriage or acquired by gift/inheritance) before dividing the remaining marital estate. While theoretically clean, this distinction is a practical nightmare. Over long marriages, separate property becomes commingled with marital assets—businesses grow using marital funds, inherited money is deposited into joint accounts, and tracing becomes impossibly complex. The burden of proof falls on the spouse claiming separate property, often necessitating expensive forensic accounting. Those without perfect records simply lose their separate property claims, creating manifestly unfair outcomes.
4. The "Best Interests" Standard: A Vague and Litigation-Prone Framework
In child custody matters, Kansas courts apply the "best interests of the child" standard. The statute lists factors, including the child's relationships with each parent and each parent's ability to meet the child's needs, but provides no hierarchy or weighting. This vagueness invites exhaustive litigation, as parents are incentivized to litigate every factor to prove superiority. Allegations of parental unfitness, moral misconduct, or alienation become common weapons. The system's reliance on expensive custody evaluations in disputed cases adds another layer of cost and delay, often exceeding the financial reach of middle-class families.
5. The Spousal Support Void: Limited Guidance and Inconsistent Outcomes
Kansas law provides minimal statutory guidance on spousal maintenance (alimony). Unlike states with formulas or advisory guidelines, Kansas leaves support determinations almost entirely to judicial discretion based on vague factors like need and ability to pay. This void creates wild inconsistency across counties and courtrooms. A dependent spouse in Johnson County may receive a generous, long-term award, while a similarly situated spouse in rural western Kansas may receive minimal support for a short duration. This unpredictability makes settlement nearly impossible and forces parties to trial on support issues that should be resolvable.
Conclusion: Navigating a System of Discretion and Uncertainty
The flaws in Kansas's divorce process—the strategic misuse of fault grounds, unpredictable property division, complex separate property tracing, vague custody standards, and inconsistent spousal support—create a system where outcomes are often uncertain and litigation is incentivized. For individuals, this reality underscores the critical importance of securing experienced legal counsel capable of navigating judicial discretion, advocating forcefully for favorable interpretations, and prioritizing settlement through mediation to avoid the unpredictable outcomes the current system too frequently produces.
Top comments (0)