prosecution thereof;”) with 19 M.R.S.A. § 721 (West Pamph.1996) ("The court shall consider the following factors when determining an award of alimony: ... B. The ability of each party to pay.”) (emphasis added). 11 . The paraphrase of § 523(a)(15)’s elements set forth in Dressier is an attempt at providing a "straightforward, plausible reading of the section's substance, eliminatfing] the statute’s troublesome triple negative construction.” In re Dressier, 194 B.R. at 300 n. 26 (citing In re Butler, 186 B.R. at 373). The statute's awkward construction has resulted in not a little confusion with respect to burden of proof issues, discussed infra, and, unhappily, with regard to its very substance. Compare Zimmerman v. Soderlund (In re Soderlund), 197 B.R. 742, 747-48 (Bankr.D.Mass.1996) (<HOLDING>) with Woloshin, Tenenbaum & Natalie, P.A. v.
holding that a debtors right to strip off a wholly unsecured lien is conditioned on the debtors obtaining confirmation of and performing under a chapter 13 plan that meets all of the statutory requirements rather than on a debtors discharge holding that a cause of action exists under  523a15 by which a debtors own former divorce attorneys might except from discharge the debtors contractual obligation to them holding that debtors liability for payment of the balance owing on three joint credit card accounts assumed by the debtor under a marital dissolution agreement with his former spouse were nondischargeable under  523a15 holding nondischargeable a debtors obligation to his former spouse under a divorce decree to assume liability for two joint debts to a third party and stating that  523a15 is intended to cover divorcerelated debts such as those in property settlement agreements holding that where an action is brought by the debtors at the initial proceeding the appeal of that action is not a continuing proceeding against the debtors