A court can require many things in a divorce case. But at least in Kansas, requiring a husband to “cooperate” in taking out an insurance policy on his own life is not one of them.
In that case, a divorce judge ordered the man to cooperate in obtaining life insurance. The idea was to make sure that if he died, his child-support obligations would be taken care of through the policy proceeds.
Even though the wife was to pay the policy premiums, the husband argued that the order violated state insurance law, because it forced him to help obtain insurance without his consent.
The Kansas Supreme Court agreed with him. It said that even though it might still be possible for the wife to obtain the policy, the husband had no legal obligation to “cooperate” in the process.
This is an issue on which courts in different states have made different rulings, because insurance law varies a great deal from state to state.