General legal information furnished as a service of Fort Lauderdale / West Palm Beach family law attorney Janet Langjahr
Divorce doesn’t hurt children.
Post-divorce conflict between parents does.
A recent study concludes that children of amicable divorces are significantly better adjusted than children of high conflict divorces.
Insults, anger and disparagement in front of the children is all harmful to them.
Children feel under attack themselves when one of their parents attacks the other.
Children often feel responsible for their parents’ divorce, especially if their parents argue about them.
If parents must argue, they should do it privately.
Read more post divorce parenting tips in this Bradenton Herald article: Helping your child cope with divorce.
A Michigan senator believes divorce runs roughshod, without any consideration - over pets.
Under the current law of most states, pets are relegated to personal property status.
“You want Rover? … I’ll take the silverware then. Deal.”
The senator has sponsored legislation to remedy that, requiring divorcing spouses to list all of their pets and when they were adopted.
Further, it would require the spouses to file a custody plan for the pet with the court - or take the matter up before the judge presiding over their case.
The Michigan senator was reportedly inspired by Wisconsin legislation that he read about.
But most Michigan commentators have criticized the proposed legislation as adding to the problem of too much family court litigation rather than helping solve the problem.
Oddly enough, the senator does not have a pet. He must think he has a lot of pet lovers among his constituency …
Read more in this Grand Rapids Press article: Bill dictates pet custody in divorce cases.
An Ohio divorce recently turned ugly.
One popular tactic engaged in by couples is “ratting the other spouse out”.
That’s what happened in this case.
The Husband allegedly reported the Wife to … the Health Department.
For keeping some chickens in their home (he still lives there), specifically, the couple’s child’s room.
The Wife is a vet.
And the boy reportedly hasn’t been staying in the room since the chickens have been there.
The chickens are healthy and are being kept in a clean and appropriate manner.
Interesting to note, the Health Department reports that approximately half of the complaints it receives each year arise in divorces.
Read more in this Cleveland WKYC article: Chickens at the center of Willoughby Hills divorce dispute.
UK Mother is incarcerated for four plus years for murdering her babies, based on subsequently discredited medical testimony. In actuality, the babies died of crib death.
Since Mother’s arrest, Father has had sole custody of surviving minor child, Daughter.
Now released, Mother wants a divorce - and modification of custody to her.
Of course, Mother and Daughter’s relationship deteriorated during and immediately prior to Mother’s unjust incarceration.
Father opposes modification of custody, based on Daughter’s alleged desires - and because Daughter has always lived with him and because it would “break his heart” to lose custody of her.
One may speculate that it broke Mother’s heart to be wrongly tried, convicted and incarcerated for murder and wrongly separated from Daughter for years.
The Canadian Supreme Court recently ruled that a premarital agreement is a binding contract and that the Court has the power and obligation to enforce it - even where it has religious implications.
In the case at hand, a premarital agreement provided that, in the event the couple’s marriage broke down, the husband was to seek a “get” for the wife. A get is a divorce under Jewish religious law.
Without the get, under religious law, the spouses are still considered married to each other.
The husband refused to pursue a get for fifteen years, until after the wife was beyond her child-bearing years.
The wife sued the husband for breach of contract, seeking damages because she was unable to remarry and have kids within her faith.
But, of course, under Canadian law, she had the legal right to remarry and have children.
Read more in this Montreal Gazette editorial: Court erred badly in divorce ruling.
Ten years ago a young Australian man wrote a book setting out all the questions and issues to consider before deciding to marry someone.
Using his own book as the determinant of whether to marry a young Utah woman, the young man opted to marry her.
The book garnered the young man significant media attention and launched his career as a marriage advisor.
Only a few years later, the couple divorced.
So then the young man wrote another book setting out all the questions and issues to consider before deciding to divorce your spouse.
Now I suppose he can say he has re-launched his career as divorce advisor.
Good save?!
One thing is certain. The decision whether to divorce is a complex one, which typically must take many issues and circumstances into account.
Read more in this Salt Lake Tribune article: Marriage guru’s own wedded bliss amiss, so he writes book on divorce.
A Washington state mother lost primary residential custody of her children to her husband in their divorce.
He had an attorney. She didn’t - because she couldn’t afford one.
On appeal, the mother argued that the state should have provided her with a lawyer, just as it provides lawyers to indigent criminal defendants. Her rationale was that the state requires people to go through complex public court proceedings to obtain a divorce, and ordinary people cannot be expected to participate in them effectively without counsel.
The Washington Supreme Court affirmed, finding no obligation by the state to furnish counsel in a divorce. The court contrasted couples’ divorces with cases initiated by the state which threaten fundamental constitutional rights, such as termination of parental rights cases.
Interestingly, the Court noted that the legislature may wish to consider enacting enabling legislation for the state to make counsel available to divorcing indigents.
Both the dissenting opinion and the Washington state bar association echoed the mother’s sentiments.
Read more in this KOMO TV article: State Supreme Court: No right to lawyers in divorce cases.
Every divorce is different. But few participants escape unscathed emotionally.
An English professor and poet has published a prize-winning collection of poems including “What to Wear for Divorce”.
The author felt that the grim reality of divorce should be depicted through “nonsense” and emotion-charged imagery.
Writing about her divorce was cathartic for the poet.
Perhaps reading it would be cathartic to other people going through divorce.
Read more in this South Mississippi Sun Herald article: A poet walks us through her divorce.
A multimillionaire and his wife are going through a hotly contested, expensive divorce in which the parties are disputing property division and support issues. Hardly surprising or unusual.
The couple currently live in the UK, although they reportedly manage, quite legally, not to pay any taxes on their wealth. Much of the Husband’s wealth is tied up in trusts.
The couple have two children who have financial interests and needs. But how to protect them from their parents battle?
The British court awarded the children UK 30,000 pounds to retain legal counsel to protect their interests - at taxpayer expense.
A British judge commented that it is “exquisitely ironical”. Those probably aren’t the words British taxpayers would use.
Except for the attorney for the children, which is not so common in conventional family cases, the case is not that different from many cases where the parties have far more modest means.
For example, one spouse is paying a fortune to its lawyers to avoid paying anything to the other spouse - and succeeding too well so far.
Read more in this UK Guardian article: Children of multimillionaire given legal aid in divorce battle.
A divorced psychologist determined that something important was missing from her legal divorce, making it feel incomplete and unfinished in her mind.
Yearning for something more to help her achieve closure and move on, she researched an ancient divorce ritual in her religion.
The formal, funeral-like ceremony she participated in was both life-altering and empowering for the psychologist. It transformed her and her perception of her former husband, and revealed to her his new role in her life.
Drawing upon her own roots and experience, the psychologist has generalized and expanded the concept of the divorce ritual and now adapts it to fit any couple’s religion, ethnicity and personal experiences.
Friends, relatives and spiritual advisors may witness or even participate in the ceremony.
The psychologist feels it is a critical step to divorced people finding peace and moving on with their own lives without animosity toward their former spouse.
The psychologist is now on a kind of mission to bring the divorce ritual to those who can benefit from it.
She will even be teaching her concepts at Harvard Law School next summer.
For those who may be struggling in their efforts to start over after divorce, it may be another option for them to consider.
| Listen to Janet |
See if the nonprofit Association against Hidden Family Abuse, Inc. can help you or someone you care about.