General legal information furnished as a service of Fort Lauderdale / West Palm Beach family law attorney Janet Langjahr
Baby disappeared during religious riots in India in 2002, which left approximately 1,000 people dead.
Baby’s Muslim family eventually gave him up for dead.
Recently, Baby’s family discovered that he was still alive.
A Hindu police officer had allegedly found Baby and more or less gave him to relatives to raise as their own child.
The police reportedly did not investigate Baby’s family’s missing person reports very thoroughly, or Baby would have been found in 2002.
Now, Baby no longer remembers his biological parents, and is attached to his “foster” mother.
Six years after Baby’s disappearance, Baby’s biological parents go to court in India to secure Baby’s return to their family.
But the Indian Court rules in favor of the so-called “foster” mother and denies Baby’s biological parents’ appeal.
The biological parents have not given up on getting their son back legally, now that they know he is alive.
In India, most commentators appear to side with the “foster” mother.
Are they guided by family law or religious law - or the law of politics?
Read more in this Washington Times article: Child custody case stirs Hindus, Muslims.
Work your fingers to the bone supporting the family while your spouse goes to school to eventually bring more bacon home to the family.
… Then get dumped when your spouse finally receives his or her sheepskin.
It’s a classic drama that plays out over and over again.
The exploited spouse views that degree as a commodity that he or she in essence bought for their spouse.
But is the degree itself property that has an intrinsic value that can be divvied up on the marital balance sheet?
Most states say no, Utah and Florida among them.
What about the understanding of the expected quid pro quo between the spouses?
Well, this varies from state to state, but it’s best not to expect too much based on an implied understanding or even a verbal agreement.
As in other areas of life, there is just no substitute for a solid written contract reflecting the expectations of both parties.
In Utah, a divorcing wife recently went outside of her husband’s divorce case to file a separate civil lawsuit for breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
While some have criticized taking this dispute outside the family court, the Utah Court of Appeals held that the wife could press her civil suit but that she would have to prove a written contract.
Not surprisingly, the couple never hired attorneys to draw up a formal legal contract. But there reportedly were a series of e-mails back and forth that may be deemed to constitute a contract.
Of course, even where there is no written contract and the degree per se may not be divisible, there may be more than one way for the exploited spouse to skin the cat. For example, the professional practice founded upon the degree may have a value that can be divided. Or the degreed spouse’s income may be split up, with a portion going to alimony. Or the exploited spouse may at least be reimbursed for the money spent on tuition to obtain that degree.
Read more in this Salt Lake City Deseret News article: Little redress available for ’support’ spouses.
They probably had to commit perjury to get their divorce.
Their marriage isn’t irretrievably broken. They don’t have irreconcilable differences.
But they probably had to swear that one or the other applies. Because they desperately need a divorce.
The Husband has cancer and doesn’t have private medical insurance coverage.
They couldn’t afford it at $900 per month. Now they couldn’t get it at any price.
They tried for Medicaid insurance coverage, furnished to the indigent at government expense.
But, although they were too poor for private medical insurance, they were too rich for publicly subsidized medical insurance.
He had to move out of their family home. He had to stop working, except a few hours per week to cover the barest of necessities.
He wasted (technically, spent down, as required) his meager assets.
And only then, as an indigent single man, could he finally qualify for Medicaid insurance coverage in Indiana - and obtain the treatment for cancer that he needed to live.
To qualify for Medicaid in Indiana, a couple must live on less than $1,000 per month after medical expenses.
By the time Husband qualified, he had already incurred about $40,000 in medical debt. So he’ll probably have to file for bankruptcy anyway when he gets well.
Strategic divorce serves two critical purposes:
State laws often permit Medicaid eventually to recoup its expenses from the estate of the spouse who didn’t need care, as well as from the estate of the spouse who did receive care.
There reportedly are more and more people like this couple.
Read more in this Ft. Wayne [IN] Journal Gazette article: Couple divorce to afford cancer treatment.
An Ohio judge was reprimanded for not advancing his cases rapidly enough.
One childless couple’s case was on the judge’s docket for two and one-half years - before being handed off to a general magistrate for trial. And the Wife specifically wanted the case tried to a judge, not a general magistrate.
The judge’s caseload includes a wide mix of cases, not just family law cases. And the cases that languished the longest on his docket were divorce and child support cases.
Statistically, for the years 1998 through 2007, the judge’s peers had only 4% to 11% of their cases open for too long. But, in four of those years, the reprimanded judge had as many as 43%, 42%, 38% and 26% of his cases open for too long.
The judge defended that certain cases have circumstances that cause them to take longer to resolve. Likely true.
In at least one case, some of the custody issues in the case were mooted by the passage of time. For examply, one of the children attained the age of majority.
The odds are that that happened in other cases as well.
The judge will be retiring at the end of the year anyway though. And his statistics have improved. And he has no other blemishes on his record.
So he will be allowed to finish out his judicial term.
Read more in this central Ohio News Messenger article: No rush to judgement.
A New York State man stands accused in federal court of lying on an application for a background check to purchase a gun. The alleged lie was his denial that he was subject to an order of protection.
Under federal statute, it is a felony for a person subject to a protective order to possess a gun.
Last year, a judge reportedly entered an order of protection against the man in conjunction with a then-pending criminal domestic violence charge against him.
As part of an apparent plea bargain, the man pleaded guilty to a lesser violation. Accordingly, the man claimed that he believed that he was no longer subject to an order of protection.
But the man is also challenging the legality of the application’s question about orders of protection - based on a recent US Supreme Court ruling. The ruling proclaims the individual right to possess a gun.
As a result of the ruling, similar constitutional challenges to current legal restrictions on possession of firearms are now pending across the nation.
The US Supreme Court’s opinion, however, indicated in passing that it did not strike down long-established prohibitions on gun possession, for example, such as restrictions on possession by convicted felons or the mentally ill, or in “sensitive” places, such as schools and government buildings.
While the exceptions for felons and the mentally ill may well apply to many gun applicants with histories of domestic violence, the high court’s casual re-affirmation (in dicta) of certain exceptions undoubtedly invites many legal challenges - challenges that will leave victims of domestic violence feeling particularly vulnerable for a long time to come.
Read more in this Albany Times Union article: Landmark ruling used to challenge gun case.
Celebrity couple: Wife an actress, Husband an elderly, established theater producer.
According to Wife, Husband threatened to cut her off financially and evict her from her apartment.
Having inadequate resources to combat that until the divorce was final, she videotaped herself airing the couple’s dirty laundry, docudramatizing his alleged threats as well as other intimate matters.
Wife posted video on YouTube, a very popular site for viewing videos. Video earns 4 million “hits”. Practically the entire world sees it.
Husband accuses Wife of spousal abuse, perpetrated by publicizing her videos. Husband apparently cites this “abuse” as the grounds for the divorce. (New York remains a “fault state”.)
Wife defended that she only posted the video to generate income to keep her going until her divorce was final.
And generate income for her it did…
Read more in this [UK] Telegraph article: Tricia Walsh-Smith in court after YouTube rants and this Post Chronicle article: YouTube Sensation Tricia Walsh Smith On Day 1 Of Divorce Court.
Divorce represents one of the occasions in a person’s life when they should give some consideration to life (or estate) planning documents. Admittedly, it may not be your first thought.
But, after one of you files for divorce, do you want your spouse to be the one to make decisions about your medical treatment, or lack of same, if something should happen to you? (Recall that health care surrogate / health care proxy / medical power of attorney you executed years ago.)
And if you should become permanently or temporarily disabled after one of you files for divorce, do you want your spouse to be able to conduct all manner of financial transactions, even with your separate assets? (Recall that durable general power of attorney you executed years ago.)
And, heaven forbid, you die before your divorce is final (which may put an end to your divorce) or right afterwards, do you still want to leave all (or any) of your assets to your current spouse? (Recall that will you executed years ago.)
All of the above should be reviewed and updated as soon as one of you files. But that is far from all.
Although many, many people do not realize it, their will does not control how all of their property passes. Much of people’s property today is non-probate property, which passes in accordance with how the asset is titled or a beneficiary form. Their will has no bearing on it.
Some examples include insurance policies, IRAs, jointly titled assets and trusts.
If your spouse is in debt up to his eyeballs, do you really want your life insurance payable to him or her, if your intention is to provide for your kids? (Recall that beneficiary designation form you executed years ago.)
401(k)s seem to fit into the garden-variety non-probate category of assets too, but be forewarned that federal law kicks in to protect a surviving spouse - unless special paperwork is executed. Although your spouse probably won’t agree to it during the divorce, that paperwork can be made part of a settlement.
And then there are state elective share statutes, also designed to protect a surviving spouse no matter what the deceased spouse’s will says. But again, there is special paperwork that can take your estate out of your spouse’s reach, but your spouse probably won’t agree during the divorce.
So, in appropriate circumstances, when possible, some pre-divorce planning may be desirable.
The above are just a few of the life (or estate) planning matters you should consider when contemplating divorce.
Read more in this Newsweek article: Financial Planning: Wills And Other Ways.
Psychologists believe that birth order of both spouses plays a significant role in the success of a marriage.
The best marriages are believed to be between oldest sisters and youngest brothers. Why?
Because, in a nutshell, oldest sisters are accustomed to being mommies and youngest brothers are accustomed to being babied. Such matches are made in heaven.
On the other hand, firstborn children tend to be dominant. Pairing them up is virtually a recipe for disaster. There will be constant competition and strife, which may eventually lead to divorce.
Similarly, only children are all used to being the center of attention. Again, attempting to mate such competitive spirits in a successful marriage is likely doomed to fail.
While psychologists admit that birth order shouldn’t conclusively decide whether to proceed with a particular union, they suggest that intendeds analyze their respective birth orders and the implications of same before embarking on marriage.
While perhaps lacking in romance, this perspective gives prospective life partners a barometer against which to judge the likelihood that their proposed match will last until death do they part.
Not to mention the dating advice it provides for some: if you want to avoid divorce, psychologists recommend that oldest sisters should set their sights on youngest brothers and youngest brothers should court oldest sisters.
As the song says, “what’s love got to do with it?”
Read more in this San Luis Obispo Tribune article: Birth order can indicate whether your marriage will work out — or not.
Canadian child protective services removed a seven year old girl and a two year old boy from their parents’ home - because the girl was sent to school with a swastika painted on her arm and other Nazi-like graffiti on her body.
Authorities were also somewhat concerned about possible drug and alcohol abuse and truancy.
But mostly it was the swastika that got them going.
The removal touched off a political firestorm in our neighbor to the North.
The parents have since separated.
Rumor has it that the children will be released to their mother before long.
The case raises the question: is this the type of conduct, as offensive as it is, properly targeted by child welfare laws?
Now every parent has to wonder and worry: where is - and should - the line be drawn before the state may remove children from their parents?
Read more in:
About $170 billion in economic stimulus payments were earmarked for taxpayers to promote consumer spending and stimulate the weak economy. That was the plan.
But tax refunds and the like may be intercepted before they reach the taxpayer to pay off support obligations of the taxpayer.
So far, nationwide, nearly $1 billion in economic stimulus payments have been intercepted for back child support, back taxes and repayment of student loans in default.
In West Virginia, nearly $3 million in back child support was collected through interception - but $761 million is owed.
Of course, intercepted monies may still promote consumer spending and stimulate the economy. Only the spending won’t be by the originally intended taxpayer.
Read more in this Charleston [WV] Daily Mail article: State targeting economic stimulus payments for those who owe child support.
A Washington state woman is undoubtedly the envy of many spouses contemplating divorce.
Her husband simply up and disappeared one day - about four months ago.
In some instances, the disappearance might eliminate the need for a divorce entirely. Instead, the missing spouse could eventually be declared dead.
But, for whatever reason, this woman apparently couldn’t wait anywhere near that long.
She reportedly already filed for divorce, weeks ago. The grounds she relied upon were her husband’s alleged willful abandonment.
Interestingly, in her court papers, the woman alleges that she was a victim of domestic violence by her husband and requests that any visitation with their children be supervised.
She also sought a court award of all of the couple’s property and asked the court to distribute all of their debt to him. Good deal.
Police have tentatively concluded that the man’s disappearance was not suspicious.
Rather, they believe that he simply chose to disappear and start his life over.
Read more in this Seattle Times article: Wife of missing man files for divorce.
There have been countless incidents of one spouse murdering another during a divorce.
But a Colorado husband allegedly went one better.
A process server came to his home one evening to serve him with divorce papers - and a domestic violence restraining order.
Oddly, the man’s wife accompanied the server. Perhaps she was there to collect their children, who were at the home.
The man could have simply ignored the doorbell or accepted the papers, like most targets of process service do. That’s certainly what he should have done.
But, instead, this man apparently beat and stabbed the would-be process server.
Now the man faces first degree murder charges.
Read more in this [Larimer County, CO] KUSA TV 9 News article: Man killed while delivering divorce papers.
A 16 year old Florida girl has been charged with a domestic violence crime and is being held in juvenile detention.
She allegedly admitted to putting seasoned salt into her mother’s food. How is that a crime?
Apparently, her mother is allergic to seasoned salt, among other things.
The mother has reportedly been experiencing allergic reactions for weeks, this latest one serious.
There is no indication whether the allergic reaction could have resulted in death.
When the girl’s half-sister learned of her tainting of their mother’s food, the accused threatened her life.
A recent similar incident between two unrelated, younger boys touched off a media debate as to whether a child willfully tainting another child’s food with a substance to which that child is allergic should be a chargeable offense and, if so, the severity of the penalties that should be considered.
The beginnings of an epidemic of juvenile angst … that has the potential to take a lethal turn against friends and family?
Read more in this Tampa Bays TV 10 news article: Police: Mom’s food spiked.
Show me a former spouse writing an alimony check, and I’ll show you a griping former spouse. Some things never change.
But other things do.
For example, in our brave new world, sometimes the wife earns more than the husband. In fact, in approximately one-third of marriages these days. And, sometimes, she earns a lot more.
Perhaps that is what drives the couple to divorce. Perhaps not.
Either way, more and more frequently these days, the former spouse writing the alimony check is the ex-wife, not the ex-husband. And when she is the one, she’s no happier about having to do it than the typical ex-husband is. Maybe less so.
But, the scenario of the ex-wife writing an alimony check is not coming to fruition in all cases where it could, that is, where the law would support it.
Part of the reason is that many ex-husbands simply won’t hear of collecting alimony from their ex-wives. It simply offends their sensibilities.
But part of the reason is a larger, gender-neutral settlement trend away from what Florida calls permanent, periodic alimony.
Why? Because neither party wants the extended, additional ties to each other. (Or the deterrents to forming permanent attachments to new significant others.)
The Solution: agreements to dispense with traditional alimony as such, in favor of adjusting property division to deliver a one-time windfall to the spouse who would have received alimony. This may well be characterized legally as “lump sum alimony”, but lay people tend not to think of it as alimony at all.
Read more in this Wall Street Journal article: Men Receiving Alimony Want A Little Respect and this Looking Fit magazine article: Female Top Earners Cite Increased Strain, Marital Troubles.
Many separating / separated parents fully appreciate the danger of abduction of their children abroad. Perhaps to their foreign-born ex’s homeland, someplace where he or she will have a legal advantage in child custody proceedings.
Most separating / separated parents do not perceive such a danger within the US today. But consider this …
A little boy went missing from his father’s home in Pennsylvania - in the morning, last Father’s Day.
The alleged culprit(s)? His mother, who had lost custody of the boy. And her boyfriend.
Macon, Georgia had just been ravaged by numerous tornadoes. But the American Association for Lost Children nonetheless was able to trace the missing child to that city.
Mother and boyfriend were reportedly charged with interference with custody of a child, among other charges.
And four other children were allegedly removed from the mother and boyfriend’s home and taken into state protective custody.
Nearly a year after the boy’s abduction. Right here in the US.
Read more in this Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article: Area man spearheads boy’s rescue.
Couple is having marital difficulties. One spouse, most often (but not always) the wife, suggests marriage counseling.
The other spouse, most often (but not always) the husband, refuses. Or goes along - but refuses to participate meaningfully.
He (or she, as the case may be) doesn’t want to discuss his (or her) innermost feelings with a stranger.
Now, it’s just a matter of time before the frustrated spouse files for divorce.
Enter a modern spin on marriage counseling: Marital Mediation.
Anyone familiar with the divorce process is likely acquainted with mediation in divorce cases.
Well, a Connecticut mediator and social psychologist is applying mediation techniques to marriage counseling.
The Marital Mediation process flushes out areas of conflict and fosters communication and negotiation, and facilitates agreements on mutually desirable corrective actions.
There is less emphasis on exploring and confronting emotions, and more emphasis on committing to a written contract for proactive, logical behaviors to improve the marriage.
This approach may well better serve couples where at least one of the spouses refuses to discuss his or her emotions with a stranger.
But one thing is the same in Marital Mediation: both spouses must be willing to “come to the table” and give the selected form of marriage therapy their all. Otherwise, it is doomed to fail.
Read more in this Wilton [CT] Villager article: Counselor offers different way to help heal a marriage.
Florida’s Marchman Act. A statutory scheme to compel an assessment for substance abuse and, if warranted, treatment.
It doesn’t sound as though it has anything to do with divorce or family law. But, unfortunately, surprisingly often, it does.
A previously happy marriage strained by one spouse’s substance abuse.
A parent-child relationship upended by the parent’s substance abuse.
A child endangered by their timesharing parent’s substance abuse.
Even before something horrendous happens, desperate family members may seek help under the Marchman Act.
Often, family relief under the Marchman Act is too little or too late - or both. Those are the cases that culminate in divorces and proceedings to modify custody and/or visitation.
But sometimes, every so often, the Marchman Act really can offer a life line to a family member who has gotten in way over their head - and knows it, but needs a special kind of help to climb out.
And so save the substance abuser. And their marriage. And their family.
Read more in this Sun Sentinel article: Marchman Act a valuable tool for families trying to help addicts.
California has an interesting child custody bill pending.
Proponents of the bill would leave more of the burden of putting forth evidence on custody directly on the parties - and more of the burden of determining custody on judges, based on that evidence.
First, the bill aims to limit the use of formal custody evaluations by professional custody evaluators, typically therapists of some kind.
Second, the bill explicitly prohibits use of the much-debated and criticized term “Parental Alienation Syndrome” - and the word “alienation” - in custody evaluations.
Interestingly, opponents of the bill include several psychological associations - and the California Bar’s section of family law members.
I have posted several times about parental alienation syndrome and the debate raging over its legitimacy:
One California evaluator points out that some evaluators tend to find alienation in almost every case - and others rarely, if ever, find alienation. Unfortunately, the basis for their conclusions may have less to do with the case at hand than the expert’s point of view.
Many women’s groups contend that alienation claims have led to custody awards to abusers.
Many men’s groups contend that alienation claims have damaged, if not destroyed, their relationships with their children.
Sadly, there is truth in both positions.
And even some psychologists admit that often it is not possible for evaluators to tell whether alleged child victims of alienation are in fact victims of abuse - or coaching.
Read more in this San Bernardino Sun article: Bill wades in to custody battles.
More marriage and divorce statistics.
According to the Pew Forum, among US residents, of all religions, followers of Hindu are the most likely to be married and the least likely to be divorced.
However, the sampling of Hindus was the smallest, so that was where the greatest margin of error existed.
Next least likely to be divorced were Jews, Muslims and Mormons, all coming in four percent higher than Hindus.
Next were Catholics, at one percent more likely to be divorced.
Read more in this India West article: U.S. Hindus Least Likely to Divorce: Survey.
A millionaire and his wife are pitted against each other in an ongoing custody battle … over their dog.
The “father”, who has no children, has spent over $60,000 to win custody of the pooch.
At first, the couple engaged in roughly equal timesharing, by agreement.
Then the “mother” accused the “father” of abuse.
The judge didn’t buy it, and the “father”’s timesharing resumed …
Until the “mother” moved to Connecticut.
Since then, the “father” has had no time with their pet.
The “father” is filing an appeal.
Read more in this New York Daily News article: Fur flies over dog custody.
About half of American marriages end in divorce.
But they tend to last a bit longer today (8 years) than in the past (7 years).
Teen marriages, the most susceptible to failure, have declined.
Most couples are tending to marry a bit later in life.
About two-thirds of all American breakups are initiated by the wife.
Couples who are very demonstratively affectionate in public settings are most likely headed for trouble.
Modern divorces can be nasty and expensive.
Last month I posted Canada to Enforce Premarital Agreements Crossing into Religious Issues.
In that case, the Canadian Supreme Court ordered a man to pay his ex-wife nearly $50,ooo for making her wait 15 years for a religious divorce - in violation of their prenuptial agreement.
The Canadian high Court based its ruling both on the contract and a Canadian statute that penalizes spouses who hold up religious divorces.
Now the ex-husband is seeking an appeal to challenge the statute as interfering with freedom of religion and as being discriminatory, because he argues that it targets Jews.
It is anticipated that the Canadian Supreme Court will decline to hear the appeal, possibly because the ruling was supported on contract grounds independent of the challenged statute.
Read more in this Montreal Gazette article: Man challenges divorce law.
Here in South Florida, we have a lot of unmarried senior couples, in “second-time around” relationships, cohabiting with each other. The reasons for not remarrying vary.
Although Florida is not a common law marriage state, bare cohabiting can leave some important things up in the air - or up to a judge. A cohabitation agreement may avoid either outcome and facilitate clarity and control.
The agreement can set out household financial arrangements and expectations in the event of death or breakup.
The agreement, with companion documents, can give a cohabitant medical decision-making authority they would not otherwise have.
The agreement, with companion documents, can give the right to manage business / financial affairs of the cohabitant in the event the cohabitant is unable to do so.
The agreement, with companion documents, can provide for disposition of part or all of an estate to a cohabitant.
Little is automatic for an unmarried couple and extra effort may be required to “take care of” the surviving cohabitant - if that is the intention.
A cohabitation agreement is a starting point toward that goal, but not the ending point.
Although it is not specfic to Florida, more can be read in this ElderLawAnswers’ article - Cohabiting Seniors: Protect Your Rights.
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.
The Arizona Daily Star brought a lawsuit to compel Arizona’s Child Protective Services (CPS) to disclose records in two cases culminating in the deaths of three children.
In Arizona, as in many states, including Florida, juvenile dependency cases are sealed and confidential.
The problem with that is that it all but eliminates oversight by the legislature and accountability to the public.
When there are deaths or near-deaths of children, some Arizona legislators believe that records should have to be turned over to anyone making a request for them, unless disclosure would impede an investigation. Legislation to implement that policy is pending in Arizona.
More pending legislation would
Notwithstanding opening of hearings, the proposed legislation prohibits disclosing personal identifying information about children outside the courtroom.
Some legislators fear that too much information will be made public - and haunt the children involved.
Read more in this Arizona Daily Star article: House discusses opening some CPS files.
Continuances are a fact of life in the legal system, for many reasons. But, in some cases, things really get out of hand. And judges usually don’t like it.
Take this California case. Many court appearances and many continuances.
The wife had two types of cancer and suffered from bipolar disorder. Out of money, she was representing herself.
And she checked herself into the hospital because of her psychiatric condition on the day before her re-set trial.
The trial judge decided that enough was enough and proceeded with the trial in the wife’s absence.
On appeal, the court reversed. The appellate court held that the woman was entitled to an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act and a related California court rule.
The court ruled that the trial court did not have the same degree of discretion in denying a continuance as an accommodation to a disability as for other reasons.
Read more in this Los Angeles Metropolitan News-Enterprise article: C.A.: Judges Violated ADA by Denying Trial Delay to Bipolar Pro Per.
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.
Payment - or non-payment - of child support may affect children in ways that go beyond money and are, sometimes, unintended.
For noncustodial parents who are struggling to meet their legal obligations, it may mean children making do with less during visitation - and the rest of the time too.
For parents fighting about child support, it may mean children experiencing misguided guilt - or anger and frustration - toward one or both parents.
Children may act out.
They may empathize with the nonpaying parent.
Or they may experience denial of a deadbeat parent’s delingquency - or resulting low self-esteem.
Or it may affect them years later.
Children may imitate a responsible parent - or an irresponsible parent.
And they may learn the value of a dollar.
Read more in this South Texas Monitor article: For children, child support can’t buy peace of mind.
Postcards from Splitsville.
It sounds like a joke. But it’s actually about a very serious subject …
A tool for helping kids (and adults) cope with divorce - and express their true feelings in a safe, supportive environment.
All as part of an eight week divorce recovery workshop started in Arizona for kids three and up.
It’s also for their parents, as participants - or as observers of the impact of their divorce on their kids.
This volunteer-led workshop could catch on and spread.
Read more in this Arizona Daily Star article: Group lets kids share sad sentiments and the Divorce Recovery website.
Ohio man is convicted of bigamy.
Man is sentenced to probation - and ordered to get a divorce from one of his three wives within six months.
Man fails to get divorce.
Man is arrested for probation violation.
Man is confined to house arrest.
Man is again ordered to get divorce.
Man faces jail time for probation violation and, presumably, original offense.
But the judge doesn’t want to put Man in jail. The judge just wants Man to get a divorce from one of his wives.
However, that still appears to leave Man with one wife too many …
Read more in this Cincinnati Enquirer article: Bigamist gets time to divorce a wife.
| Listen to Janet |