Florida Divorce * Child Custody * Domestic Violence Law Lawyer | Boca Raton

Husband and Wife divorce. Husband is ordered to pay child support for Daughter.

Husband stops paying child support in the fall of 2009. Husband alleges that he was unable to work due to illness, but produces no corroboration.

Law enforcement authorities set out to attach some of Husband’s property to auction it off to reduce Husband’s child support arrearages.

And the authorities do in fact seize … four beehives on Husband’s property. Worth less than one fifth of the amount of Husband’s arrearages.

Read more in this Russian News and Information Agency RIA Novosti article: Bees seized.

Out of India …

Wife files for divorce from Husband in twenty year marriage.

Wife asks the Indian divorce court to award her alimony and spousal support.

Wife alleges that she converted to the Hindu religion prior to their marriage, and that she and Husband had a religious wedding ceremony in accordance with the Hindu religion.

Under Indian divorce law governing marriages between spouses of the Hindu faith, a wife may seek alimony – but apparently not so between spouses of other faiths.

Despite the length of this couple’s marriage, however, the Indian high court denies Wife’s request for alimony, finding that Wife has not proved that she did in fact convert to Hindu prior to the marriage and that the marriage may therefore not have been valid from its inception.

The Indian court appears to rationalize, in essence, that too many Indians insincerely convert from one religion to another, not for spiritual motivations, but to manipulate the law to their own legal advantage in family court, or otherwise.

With regard to the particular case before it, the appellate court apparently finds that Wife duplicitously spent twenty years of her life in a sham and/or fraudulent marriage, scheming all along to capitalize on the alimony law available to Indian Hindus, in the event the couple ever divorced.

While this case is from India, spouses should be aware that alimony laws in the United States are being reviewed, challenged and, in some cases, updated to reflect changes in the times.

Read more in this Times of India article: HC refuses alimony to ‘converted’ woman.

Mother and Father are separated, with a thirteen year old Daughter in common.

Duaghter is an accomplished sailor.

Daughter wants to sail around the world … alone.

Father supports her in this.

Mother disapproves of this.

Dutch child welfare agency (Agency) takes Daughter into protective custody, and the court awards the Agency guardianship of her.

Mother later comes around and embraces Daughter’s dream.

After a year or so, the court releases Daughter from protective custody and terminates the guardianship of the Agency over the Agency’s objections.

The court holds that it is up to Daughter’s parents to decide whether she is allowed to sail around the world.

The Agency is considering whether to appeal the court’s termination of its guardianship.

Guardianship dissolved, now fourteen year old Daughter embarks on her planned two year solo voyage around the world.

Read more in this Los Angeles Times piece: Dutch teen Laura Dekker sets sail on solo circumnavigation attempt and this Christian Science Monitor article: Laura Dekker has Dutch court permission to sail around the world

Long Island stay-at-home Wife files for divorce in 2008, after twenty-one years of marriage.

Husband owns a contracting business.

Shortly before trial in their divorce, Husband, acting unilaterally and of his own volition, files amended joint tax returns for 2004 through 2007.

In the amended returns, which do not bear Wife’s signature, Husband confesses (or discloses) $1.6 million in income he previously did not report for his business.

Husband also includes a list of marital assets from which the Internal Revenue Service may collect the back taxes, including the couple’s million dollar home.

At trial, the Husband presents no evidence as to any legitimate reason for suddenly becoming a good citizen and amending the tax returns.

Instead, the divorce court holds that Husband acted solely out of malice, with the intention that Wife bear the brunt of at least half of the tax liability eroding her award of her share of marital property in their divorce.

And the family court does something quite extraordinary. It hoists the Husband on his own petard.

The court allocates the entire tax liability to the Husband and his share of the marital property, in effect, insulating the Wife from liability for the couple’s taxes for those years.

Absent Husband’s malicious, egregrious conduct toward the Wife, Wife would be responsible for half of the couple’s tax liability.

Read more in this New York Law Journal article: N.Y. Judge Calls Husband’s Pre-Divorce Filing of Back Taxes ‘Despicable’.

A new study concludes that husbands without incomes, or with incomes significantly lower than their wives, are substantially more likely to cheat on their wives than husbands married to women with similar incomes.

And it may seem counterintuitive but, according to the study, husbands without incomes of their own, are a whopping five times more likely to be unfaithful to their wives than husbands with incomes similar to their wives.

Such husbands may be straying to compensate for their insecurities.

Yet, on the other side of the coin, husbands who earn a lot more than their wives are also more likely to commit adultery than earners at similar levels as their wives.

The sweetest spot for marital fidelity appears to be when the wife earns twenty-five percent less than her husband.

To put things into perspective though, the study finds that only seven percent of men have affairs, compared to three percent of wives.

The study followed married and cohabiting couples established for at least a year over a six year period. Note that the researchers are quick to point out that income is not the only determinant of whether a spouse will have an affair.

Read more in this MSNBC article: Guys more likely to cheat on high-earning women.

There is a popular belief that when parents divorce, children may be adversely impacted in a significant way.

There are some studies that reveal correlations … but they do not really prove causation.

Now, unrelated studies, having nothing to do with divorce, are revealing that very young children, perhaps even as young as two or three years old … may experience depression, and exhibit signs of depression. Even children from happy, intact homes.

It could be in the genes … or in the nurturing by similarly afflicted parents … or a combination of both … as well as other factors.

For numerous reasons, such depression may not be officially diagnosed or classified, or may be diluted down to a so-called “risk factor” or predisposition, or other similar terms.

Regardless, something to be reckoned with.

Imparting a new dimension to consideration of the potential impact of divorce on children.

And of the potential impact on children of living in unhappy home environments for extended periods of time.

Read more in this New York Times article: Can Preschoolers Be Depressed?

People contemplating divorce often ask at their initial divorce consultation how long it will take. Unfortunately, the answer generally is: It depends.

Every case is different. It is – rarely – possible to complete a divorce in about a month. Some cases take years. Most cases fall somewhere in between.

A California billionaire-Husband and Wife have been going through their divorce for … eight years. No, that’s not a typo.

That’s on the long side. But there are special circumstances.

In this particular case, Wife’s allegations against Husband range from death threats to illegal drug stashes accessible to their children in the marital home to cheating near the marital home.

Husband has also previously been on the receiving end of serious allegations by US attorneys pursuing criminal prosecutions.

So, the divorce has not been the most amicable. And some of the issues are sensitive. And the parties have three minor children.

In California – and Florida – divorce proceedings are not confidential. Although many participants in the process wish they were.

So Husband and Wife have actually agreed to keep certain things in their case quiet. And, to a degree, the court has approved. Along the way, numerous orders sealing particular documents or categories of documents were entered.

And, eventually, no less than the Los Angeles Times intervened in the case, in the hope of gaining greater access to sealed records in this “juicy” divorce case. And different judges rotated in and out of the case.

Sealing orders were variously entered, amended, and superseded, etc., etc. And Husband appealed.

But Husband’s appeal was unsuccessful. And more of the eight years’ worth of this divorce court case file is now accessible to the public, including the media.

Read more in this Forbes piece:Billionaire or Not: No Special Treatment.

A study by Mary Kay Cosmetics of domestic violence victims reaching out to shelters for assistance reports that there is a high correlation between incidents of domestic violence and financial stresses on the family, such as recurring job loss.

Further, economic distress can hamper victims in leaving abusive relationships. Most victims request economic assistance of various types.

The Gulf oil spill is also thought to have contributed to the already heightened stresses that spark domestic violence.

The study reports a 117% escalation in domestic violence from 2008 to 2009.

Read more in this Monroe [LA] News Star article: Study: Economy affects abuse.

In a word, no. Although spouses often view themselves as “pet parents” of their pets, divorce law does not (currently) equate pets with children in any way, shape or form.

Quite the contrary, the law casts pets as property. A fair market value is assigned to the pet.

Like any other asset or debt, the pet is assigned to one spouse and some other similarly valued asset is assigned to the other spouse.

The choice of “assignee” (recipient) may be enlightened by consideration of the pet’s needs and which spouse has already demonstrated that they are better equipped to meet them. Or the ruling may be fairly arbitrary.

So what’s a pet lover to do?

The Law is what controls in divorce court, and the matter is before the divorce court because the spouses can’t agree upon a resolution.

But The Law may not produce a result that is in the pet’s best interests, if the spouses care about that.

Alternatively, the spouses can reach their own agreement as to which spouse keeps the pet full-time, they can agree to some sort of timesharing or visitation schedule, the spouses can agree to rotate physical custody, or the parties can agree to designate someone else (like a mediator or arbitrator, a trusted mutual friend or relative or, for that matter, the pet’s veterinarian or groomer) to choose the superior pet caregiver.

In general, animals are less adaptable than people (or children) and crave routine, structure and a stable territory they can make home.

Read more in this CNN American Morning AM Fix piece: Gut Check: Should pets be considered like a child in divorce court?

British law allows admission into evidence of assets a spouse’s private documents obtained by the other spouse peacefully but by stealth.

Until now. The British Court of Appeal, an intermediate appellate court, just struck down that vast body of law.

In the case before the appellate court, office mates of the Husband copied files from office computers for Wife’s use in their divorce court case.

The holding will make it more difficult and expensive for spouses ignorant of the other spouse’s financial affairs to prove their spouse’s income and assets for purposes of determining child support, alimony and property division.

The Court’s justifications? Concerns about violating privilege and encouraging illegal and / or unethical conduct.

The appellate court has denied leave to appeal to Britain’s highest court.

Read more in this Forbes article: Private documents no longer allowed in divorce and this UK Guardian article: Covertly found assets no longer valid in divorce.

Ohio Husband and Wife have Children. Husband and Wife divorce.

Wife and Children move to another state. Wife withholds timesharing and visitation from Husband starting in late 2006.

In Fall of 2009, there is a trial regarding Wife’s alleged noncompliance with visitation and timesharing ordered in Husband and Wife’s divorce.

Husband prevails at trial, and Wife is ordered to allow Husband makeup timesharing and visitation.

But Husband’s victory is hollow. In the intervening months and years, Wife has successfully alienated Children from Husband.

Husband is bitter.

Husband suggests that a presumption of rotating equal timesharing between the parents and expedited enforcement proceedings would have prevented his plight.

But is Husband’s perception correct? Or did Husband himself miss opportunities to avoid or promptly remedy the situation?

Nothing is known of Husband’s specific case beyond what was published in the attributed letter below. Rather, the remarks below are based on a composite of countless Husbands (and Wives) who have had similar experiences.

Husband indicates that timesharing was first denied after Wife and Children relocated.

Huh? How is it that Children relocated? Did Wife’s relocation with Children comply with Ohio law?

Did Husband timely challenge it legally? Had he done so, successfully, that might have solved the problem before it started.

And whatever one’s opinion about rotating equal timesharing may be, it simply is not practicable long distance. So such a presumption would not have helped Husband here.

Wife’s first alleged violation was in 2006. Trial was late in 2009.

While justice in family court is, admittedly, not especially swift, by the same token, three years seems like an excessive delay.

Was there really a three year wait for a trial date? Or did Husband delay pursuing enforcement through the courts, instead waiting and hoping that things would somehow just improve on their own?

An astonishing number of parties wait an astonishingly long time before taking enforcement action through the courts. And then chafe when resolution isn’t instantaneous when they finally do take legal action.

Read more in this Cleveland Plain Dealer letter to the editor: Adopt laws to prevent parental alienation.

Florida Husband and Wife divorce in 2008, after more than twenty years of marriage.

Husband and Wife have four Children together.

Husband, a cancer doctor with an annual income close to $1 million, is ordered to pay Wife $35,000 per month in alimony and child support.

Husband is also ordered to pay Wife $1 million as part of property division on their $5 million marital property estate.

But Husband apparently doesn’t want to pay … anything.

And, thanks to a complex, layered network of small business operations, garnishment is frustrated. Each business is in a position to be able to claim that another entity writes the check.

And so Husband has reportedly paid only $60,000 and is running a support arrearage of close to $700,000.

If Husband persists in nonpayment of support, the state may suspend his medical license and his driver’s license.

But that won’t get support into the hands of Wife and Children.

Read more in this Lakeland Ledger article: Doctor’s Medical License in Jeopardy.

Husband * controls the pursestrings. Tightly.

* The gender of abusers varies, but “Husband” is used here for illustrative purposes.

Wife must account for every penny given to her.

Wife has no access to funds, except what Husband doles out to her. Not even her own paycheck.

Husband uses Wife’s credit card as his own, running up debt without Wife’s knowledge.

Husband puts obligations in Wife’s name. And doesn’t take care of them.

Husband tries to sabotage Wife’s employment.

Rutgers University is conducting a study of the relationship between domestic violence and economic abuse.

Domestic abuse is all about control and finances are just another means with which to exert control.

The study offers participants instruction to overcome economic abuse.

Read more in this [Central New Jersey] Home News Tribune article: Rutgers professor studies ‘economic abuse’ as tactic to control women in relationship.

Recently I posted regarding Swiss Court to Rule on What May Be Record-Breaking Property Division of at Least 6 Billion UK Pounds Between Ultra-Rich Russian Couple Living in Switzerland.

Perhaps it’s something in the air. Now, just a short time later, yet another ex-patriate Russian oligarch billionaire Husband is divorcing this summer too. With another stratospheric marital estate expected to culminate in a record-setting property division award to his Wife.

This time, the Soviet couple’s divorce filing is in London, after nearly twenty years of marriage – in which they mostly lived apart from one another. Husband has reportedly co-habited with a different “significant other” for the last fifteen of those years.

Speculation is that the property division settlement is the largest ever in the UK, and twice the largest ever in Australia.

Husband’s career has run the gamut from running an automobile dealership to teaching math at the college level. Although he reportedly made the big bucks selling state-run assets in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union government.

Regardless of the magnitude of any settlement or judgment on paper though, a foreign attorney, who handles similar high end divorces involving globally-dispersed wealth, notes that, depending how the marital assets are titled and held and where in the world they are located, Wife may face obstacles to enforcement.

But, even in humbler marital estates, exes seeking enforcement of property (and, for that matter, support) awards can expend more time, ingenuity, energy and financial resources collecting on their divorce final judgment than in obtaining their divorce final judgment.

Read more in this Sydney Morning Herald article: Russian oligarch Berezovsky gets divorce.

Many people think filing for divorce in Florida is expensive.

They might want to re-think that.

The York County area in Virginia has come up with a creative solution to rising public costs and shrinking public budgets for contentious family court litigation of contested divorce cases and contested child custody cases.

Namely, shift the costs to the litigating spouses and parents.

The York County area courts have no full-time professional judges on salary to hear divorce court cases involving disputes over property division! None. At all.

Instead, this part of Virginia taps practicing local attorneys to hear family court cases on an independent contractor basis, over the course of their day juggling cases in their law practices.

With the spouses and parents picking up the tab to have a hearing officer for their contested divorce cases and contested child custody cases, at a cost of about $250 per hour in court.

Payable in advance, in the form of a $2,000 “retainer” from each party, held in an escrow account for the hearing officer.

Just another expense of divorce and child custody battles? An omen of the future here in Florida and other jurisdictions?

There is some backlash among local attorneys practicing in the area, who view this requirement as shutting some litigants out of divorce court (or family court) … in violation of constitutional equal protection principles … and in just one county of the state. Among other concerns.

On another level, funding and operation of the legal justice system is generally perceived as a uniquely governmental function.

Raising the question: where should privatization end?

Read more in this Newport News Virginia Daily Press article: Pay-for-judge requirement for disputed divorces

Washington State Husband and Wife have Son together.

Wife is allegedly threatened and abused by Husband. Husband denies such allegations.

Wife flees with Son to live in Senegal and Thailand.

After Son reaches the age of eighteen, Wife and Son return to Washington.

And Wife is arrested on charges of custodial interference.

Wife enters plea bargain under which prosecutors recommend a sentence of thirty days’ incarceration.

The trial court, however, repudiates the prosecution’s sentence recommendation and instead sentences Wife to one hundred eighty days’ confinement, with credit for time served. Leaving almost three months to go on Wife’s sentence.

Neither Senegal nor Thailand are parties to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

Read more in this Seattle Times news article: Chehalis woman sentenced in child custody case.

Texas Husband, a firefighter, has Children from his first marriage, to Mother.

Husband remarries Wife.

Husband dies fighting a fire.

Husband’s legal beneficiaries can expect to receive death benefits and insurance proceeds in an amount close to $600,000. Wife has already collected $60,000.

The issue: who should Husband’s legal beneficiaries be deemed to be under Texas law?

It turns out that Wife was born a man, and subsequently had a sex change operation.

Texas law does not recognize same sex marriages.

Husband’s mother has filed suit to have Husband’s marriage to Wife annulled as void, as though Husband and Wife had never been legally married. That would leave Children as Husband’s sole heirs.

Husband’s family asserts that Husband only found out about Wife’s sex change operation a few months before his death and, because of it, wanted a divorce from Wife.

Prior to Husband’s death, Mother tried to modify custody of Children to strip Husband of joint custody, to keep Children away from Wife. In those proceedings, both Husband and Wife testified that Husband did not know that Wife was transgender.

E-mails support Wife’s assertion that Husband knew her genetic history from the get-go, and that they were still together at the time of Husband’s death.

Regardless of when Husband learned that Wife was transgender, Husband hadn’t filed for divorce … or taken steps to disinherit Wife before his death.

But, legally, under Texas law, what is the gender of a born male who undergoes a sex change operation? And can such a person legally marry a male under Texas law?

A Texas trial court has temporarily frozen Husband’s estate’s assets (except for needed support for Children) pending ruling on Husband’s mother’s action for annulment.

Read more in

• this Houston KRIV Fox 26 TV news article: Wharton Firefighter’s Assets Frozen

• this Houston KRIV Fox 26 TV news article: Nikki Araguz Bares Soul on FOX 26 Morning News

• this Fox News Network article: Transgender Widow in Texas Says E-mail Proves Husband Knew About Sex Change and

• this Houston Chronicle news article: Deposition: Firefighter unaware wife born a man

UK Husband makes a fortune with the internet, about 14 million pounds UK. Husband and Wife of twenty-three years maintain a lavish lifestyle, running through more than six million pounds UK over the last ten years.

In their divorce, the trial court finds that Husband tenaciously hid, or tried to hide, assets from Wife … and the court.

The court awards Wife one-half of what it determines the marital estate to be worth, payable on September 1, 2010.

The recession and the divorce may have combined to reverse Husband’s fortunes. But Husband’s conduct in the case garners him no support from an intermediate appellate court.

The trial court’s award of 200,000 UK pounds in alimony per year until Husband makes good on the property division award stands. And Wife is allowed to market one piece of real estate and retain the net proceeds as a deposit toward her share of the marital estate.

Husband maintains that the award is in error because it is based on a lifestyle that has slipped out of reach of the couple due to the recession and years of living way beyond their means.

But the intermediate appellate court denies Husband the right to appeal further.

Read more in this UK Telegraph article: Polo playing dotcom tycoon forced to pay wife £7 million in divorce settlement and this UK Mail article: Polo-playing tycoon must hand his wife £7m in divorce deal
after couple spent £6.5m in ten years of high living.

As children of divorce blossom into their teens, visitation and timesharing becomes more of a challenge for parent and child, especially if the parent lives a significant distance from the child.

Unlike younger children, teens have active, semi-independent lives filled with friends, school, extracurricular activities, other interests, etc.

It can be more difficult for parents to impose their will on their children – and the price of doing so may be too high.

In some cases, extended summertime visitation bears the brunt of sustaining and nurturing the parent-child relationship.

During extended summer timesharing, children should not engage excessively with the parent left behind. This is supposed to be the child’s time with their other parent.

Read more in this Atlanta Journal Constitution article: Summer fun helps kids, divorced parents strengthen bond.

Wife reportedly calls police on four different occasions this year due to Husband.

According to Wife, Husband variously prohibits Wife from taking the kids out of the home, changes the locks on the doors, harasses Wife and so on.

Wife files for divorce. Her papers allege verbal abuse, including a death threat, and disparagement in front of their children. Never actual physical violence.

But, close to a divorce settlement, Husband shoots and kills Wife and Stepson, before taking his own life.

The couple’s three young children are in the home at the time.

Read more in this Johnston County [NC] Herald article: Clayton couple were on verge of separating

Immigrant Man and Woman have two month old Baby.

Florida Wife allegedly tells undocumented Man and Woman that she is an agent with the office of Immigration Services and that they will be deported.

Wife says she must take Baby into custody, and Man and Woman give her Baby.

Man and Woman realize that something is not right and report incident to authorities.

Wife pleads guilty to charges of kidnapping and impersonating a public officer, and could get sentenced to life in prison.

Wife is married to a professional baseball player.

Wife previously served time for arson, grand theft and forgery.

Read more in

• this FanHouse news article: Wife of Pirates Outfielder Could Face Life in Prison for Kidnapping
• this Tampa Tribune article: Woman pleads guilty in kidnapping of migrant workers’ baby and
• this Tampa Tribune article: Woman could get life for taking infant

There are various available measures for enforcement of support obligations, some more effective than others.

One of the harshest, suspension of a deadbeat’s driver’s license, is a double-edged sword.

Driving with a suspended license is illegal, so suspension may impede efforts to work. And reinstating a driver’s license is somewhat involved.

A recent Michigan law opens the door to a new enforcement mechanism that should be just as effective, but less of a double-edged sword.

An automobile “boot”: a device that prevents a car from being driven anywhere until authorities disengage it.

Read more in this Holland [MI] Sentinel news article: Giving deadbeats the boot.

Divorce is complicated.

When the spouses have a special needs child, it gets a a lot more complicated.

Parents of special needs children have to plan together for their child’s future … even if they won’t be together themselves.

In the specific context of the parents’ divorce or separation, the parents should know that child support obligations for a dependent child may continue beyond the age for children who don’t have special needs. Possibly indefinitely.

And that support may include significant health-related expenses that don’t apply to children without special needs.

Additionally, timesharing with a special needs child may involve significant expenses that don’t apply to a child without special needs.

Both support and access expenses should be addressed by the parents’ divorce or custody case.

Especially if a special needs child receives or will be eligible to receive benefits or government services related to their special needs, it may be advisable to establish a special needs trust to protect the child’s right to those benefits and to ensure compliance with the applicable law so that benefits and/or services are not inadvertently forfeited.

Additional matters to cover in such a trust are future housing, medical insurance and potential inheritances for the child.

Beyond the financial aspects, caregiving for a special needs child is more complex and demanding than for a child without special needs.

If responsibilities are going to be allocated, there should be a clear and comprehensive allocation of responsibilities.

If not, one parent should be designated as primary custodian and caregiver and be awarded sufficient parental responsibility and authority to provide appropriate care unfettered.

Designation of an alternate legal guardian should be made in the event that the primary caregiver dies or becomes unable to care for the special needs child. In appropriate cases, a legal guardian may be appointed for a special needs child who is an adult based on chronological age but nonetheless in need of a legal guardian.

A primary caregiver should maintain a care journal that captures the daily caregiving routine, to aid any successor guardian. It should include information about the child’s preferences and behaviors.

Read more in this Lexington [Kentucky] Herald-Leader article: Divorce planning for children with special needs.

Ex-Wife has injunction for protection against domestic violence against Ex-Husband.

Ex-Husband moves from upstate New York to Oklahoma four years ago.

But that hasn’t stopped Ex-Husband from reportedly repeatedly violating Ex-Wife’s domestic violence restraining order.

Ex-Husband admits making repeated phone calls and sending multiple e-mails and regular mailings to Ex-Wife over the last four years.

The magnitude of Ex-Husband’s order of protection violations prompted the prosecutor to charge Ex-Husband with more than twenty counts of criminal contempt, stalking and aggravated harassment, and to have Ex-Husband returned to New York state to face the charges.

Under the plea deal, Ex-Husband pleads guilty to just one count of criminal contempt, and avoids incarceration. And a new order of protection goes into effect against Ex-Husband for the next eight years.

If Ex-Husband violates the plea agreement and terms of his probation, though, Ex-Husband could face as much as four years in jail for his violations of the domestic violence restraining order against him.

Ex-Wife just wants Ex-Husband to leave her in peace.

Read more in this Syracuse Post-Standard article: Oklahoma man admits guilt in long-distance stalking.

British Columbia, Canada, following in the footsteps of Australia, Florida, other US states and other countries, is the latest to trumpet their impending revolutionary changes in family law.

In British Columbia, the revolution will be accomplished by swapping the words “guardianship” and “parental responsibility” for the word “custody”.

In Florida, our revolution was accomplished by swapping the word timesharing for the words visitation and ” (physical) custody”, and the words “parental responsibility” for ” (legal) custody”.

Anticipation of the revolution inspires lofty goals and high hopes about a kinder, gentler divorce and separation process.

But the reality of the post-revolution world proves that the more things change, the more they stay the same…

Except for the terminology, of course.

Read more in this Vancouver Sun article: Eliminating child ‘custody’ tries to ease pain of separation.

I previously posted in Minnesota Pleased with Early Results in Pilot Program to Resolve Custody Issues Amicably Outside Court about a pilot program in Minnesota using Early Neutral Evaluation.

The program is still going strong, and has expanded to other counties in Minnesota and to divorce cases with disputes over more varied issues, including financial disputes.

In this variation on mediation, both parties meet with two different evaluators, who each offer their own opinion as to the outcome on that issue if taken to court.

The program still boasts a settlement rate of between seventy and even eighty percent. After an investment of just six to fourteen hours of time.

The program’s proponents concede that early neutral evaluation is not suitable in cases where there is a history of domestic violence or other abuse.

The statistics on early neutral evaluation are certainly promising.

Some other metrics of the program’s success are whether participants feel satisfied with the outcome afterwards.

Unfortunately, a significant number of participants in ordinary pro se (without lawyers) mediation don’t totally understand that they aren’t required to reach agreement or to “give in” to the proposal that the mediator (here, evaluator) seems to be directing them toward.

This can lead to “settlements” that are, in essence, coerced and don’t keep the peace for long.

Read more in this press release: Early Neutral Evaluation Pilot Showing Great Promise in Minnesota.

Israel appears to be behind the US in regards to its child support enforcement infrastructure … but poised to overtake us before long.

Behind the US in that they are just now establishing governmental child support collection specialists who focus on support enforcement to assist custodial parents with enforcement. The specialists will have access to tax, inheritance and other financial transactions records of deadbeat parents.

Poised to overtake, with some proposed new measures with teeth, including:

1. denial of government benefits to parents behind in paying child support
2. exclusion of deadbeat parents from public office
3. prohibition of ownership of cellular phones by parents who don’t pay their child support and
4. barring of deadbeat parents from government employment

Read more in this Israel Haaretz news article: New bill may keep deadbeat dads from cell phones, state jobs.

California Husband and Wife, who is originally from Greece, have a Son together.

When Son is an infant, Wife takes Son to Greece to visit extended family.

And decides not to return to US. And to keep Son in Greece.

Husband promptly obtains a divorce in California. The California family court awards Husband sole custody of Son.

But the Greek family court, even though Greece is a party to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, does nothing to enforce the US court order.

After a couple of years of that, Husband goes to Greece and simply takes Son back to the US. Husband advises California family court of his actions.

Then Wife, as Husband had done in Greece, files an application under the Hague Convention for Son’s return to Greece.

Inexplicably, the US federal court judge presiding over the Hague Convention case in the US disregards the California family court custody order!

Instead the judge rules that Son return to Wife in Greece at that time, but establishes a rotating timesharing schedule in which Son alternates between Husband and Wife every three months.

Husband appeals the federal trial court’s ruling disregarding the California family court’s custody award.

Eventually, Husband wins his appeal. Son is to return home to California.

But now the US federal court judge rules that Wife should have a final visit with Son in Greece.

Needless to say, Wife once again retains Son in Greece. And cuts off all contact with Husband.

And, despite multiple US court orders requiring Son to be returned to Husband in the US, Son remains in Greece.

The California State Attorney’s office and the US Attorney’s office are both investigating Husband’s case.

Son likely will soon begin kindergarten in Greece.

Even if Wife would permit it, Husband cannot return to Greece to visit Son for fear of being arrested there.

Read more in this Santa Cruz Sentinel article: Watsonville native, Greek citizen embroiled in international custody dispute to get his son back.

Husband and Wife divorce.

Wife allegedly hires her ex-husband and her boyfriend to murder Husband.

Husband is shot three times, but survives.

Wife serves eight months in jail awaiting trial.

Then Wife and her accomplices all plead guilty to criminal conspiracy to commit Husband’s homicide.

Wife is sentenced to between six and twelve years in prison.

And while serving her sentence, Wife files divorce court papers:

1. seeking alimony for the time period between her arrest and her guilty plea
2. seeking distribution of marital personal property she claims Husband withheld from her
3. seeking part of Husband’s pension

The family court rules against Wife on her alimony and personal property claims, but rules in Wife’s favor on her pension claim.

The criminal court ordered Wife and her accomplices to pay Husband $2,300 in restitution. So far, Husband has been able to collect a total of $80.

Husband suffers from permanent nerve damage, shotgun “pellets” embedded in his head, anxiety and nightmares .. and, from his perspective, legal abuse.

Read more in this Wilkes-Barre [PA] Times Leader article: Murder in her heart, law on her side.

Sign of the times.

Arizona Husband and Wife’ s marriage has broken down.

Husband and Wife have three Children.

Husband and Wife can’t sell their home in the current economy.

So Husband and Wife – and Children – are all still living together … going on nine months into their “divorce”.

Along the way, Husband and Wife attend mediations – and family counseling.

And it’s all being filmed for public airing on primetime television.

Still living together. Nine months. Dirty laundry on TV.

And yet another three months of “living together” after Husband and Wife reach a settlement.

It would appear to be somewhat subjective whether so-called amicable resolution via mediation is always better than not-so-amicable resolution via litigation (which can also place people in mediation and result in settlement – and separation … faster).

Husband, Wife and Children’s psychologist doesn’t recommend the “living together” approach to divorce that Husband and Wife have adopted.

But different strokes …

Read more in this ABC News Primetime article: House of Hurt: ‘Separated’ Couple Stuck Living Together Through Divorce.