Southwest Florida one year old Baby is shot by his Uncle, apparently accidentally.

Baby is expected to make a full recovery from his wound.

But, as a result of the incident, the Florida Department of Children and Families removes Baby from his Mother’s care and places him in child protective custody.

A restraining order is entered against Uncle.

Mother is allowed supervised timesharing with Baby.

Mother is reportedly following the case plan ordered by the Florida juvenile dependency court, including taking parenting classes.

There are concerns about Mother’s ability to protect Baby if Uncle is released from confinement.

But Mother believes she is prepared to resume caregiving for Baby.

Mother undergoes an evaluation by a psychologist, but the report is not ready yet.

The court orders the Mother to attend child custody mediation pending the psychologist’s report.

Mother reportedly was expected to enter a plea in this juvenile dependency case, but reportedly changed her mind during a routine status check hearing and is now seeking a trial.

Read more in this WBBH NBC TV 2 News article: Last minute decision left mom without custody of son.

When people contact a Florida family law attorney, they very often have a serious personal situation.

There may be domestic violence.

They may have been abandoned without a cent to their name.

Their home may be on the verge of foreclosure.

They may be unable to get access to their children.

And on and on.

Frequently, these people will characterize their situation as an emergency, and request that the court deal with their serious situation on an emergency basis.

Lawyers call that “emergency relief”, which is typically dispensed at an “emergency hearing”.

So, what is an emergency in the eyes of the Florida divorce court?

The truth of the matter is that the Florida family court’s perception of an emergency is quite different from that of the man or woman, mother or father, on the street.

In Palm Beach County, severe financial distress is not an emergency.

Withholding of access to children, even on an extended basis, does not create an emergency.

In fact, the vast majority of serious situations are not deemed an emergency by the Florida divorce court.

In Florida’s family court system, classification as an emergency is generally reserved for matters of life and death. Of a child.

Another type of emergency is imminent unlawful removal of a child from the Florida divorce court’s jurisdiction.

Not too much else. Although whether a situation is an emergency is evaluated on a case by case basis.

Mischaracterizing situations as emergencies to the Florida family court won’t get you far … and may even hurt your position in your case. It wastes the Florida divorce court’s most precious resource: time.

When in doubt, it is prudent to consult an experienced Florida family law attorney about whether your self-styled emergency is likely to be deemed an emergency by the Florida divorce court system.

Read more in the local rules of your county’s Florida family court.

All too often, one spouse knows virtually nothing about the family’s financial picture.

Even if the other spouse “takes care of” or “handles” all of that sort of thing with only the very best of intentions, this is a dangerous situation for the coddled spouse.

Never mind the possibility of divorce, for a moment.

What if the financial-caretaking spouse unexpectedly dies? Or suffers a devastating, incapacitating injury or illness?

How will the healthy spouse figure out and pick up the pieces, and manage the situation for the family, even on a temporary basis?

And if either spouse decides to divorce, best intentions may fly out the window.

The coddled spouse is at a severe disadvantage in determining and weighing their courses of action and options.

Depending on the particular circumstances of the case, they may have guaranteed that obtaining full and fair disclosure will be far more time-consuming and expensive than it has to be. And it is so unnecessary.

The coddled spouse is entitled to know about the family finances. And should, for the sake of all concerned, including the couple’s children.

A spouse who refuses to see that and insists upon maintaining total financial secrecy is raising a big red flag. And that should inspire the coddled spouse to take remedial action … and to educate him or herself by consulting an attorney.

Read more in this Wall Street Journal piece: VOICES: Leslie Thompson, On the Uninformed Spouse.

Husband and Mistress are having an affair.

Husband and Wife’s marriage is breaking down.

Wife finds out about affair.

Wife wants to sue Mistress for wrecking her marriage.

Can she?

This question is popping up with greater frequency lately.

The answer depends on the state where the involved parties live.

But here in Florida the answer is no.

This civil claim was abolished by statute years ago.

By way of consolation, even if the claim still existed, it would be pretty tough to prove causation of damages.

The challenge: Which came first? The breakdown of the marriage or the affair?

Read more in this [Torrance, CA] Daily Breeze column: ASK THE LAWYER: Suing the ‘other woman,’ support obligations, and who gets the dog.

Fiance is in a romantic haze. Not thinking prenup.

Or thinking prenup but unwilling to broach the subject with his or her significant other.

What to do?

Well, one way to avoid having to talk with the intended spouse about this possibly unpleasant subject is to simply take unilateral premarital action.

And set up a trust.

A properly drawn – and properly funded – trust can protect a person from themself.

That includes the spouse they may choose in the event that things don’t work out (or, even if they do).

And the creditors they may become indebted to.

Although more expensive than a prenup, a trust offers certain advantages, such as privacy and autonomy.

In fact, in many situations, a trust is desirable even when there is a prenuptial agreement.

Read more in this Financial Advisor magazine article: Shielding An Estate From Unloved In-Laws.

In the US, the number of adults who are not married has surpassed the number of adults who are married. A record forty-six percent of young adults have never married.

Both statistics are firsts in a hundred years.

It has something to do with the weak economy. Something.

But the diminishing popularity of marriage is also an evolving trend. The poor economy has just intensified it.

Romantic partners are more likely to simply cohabit these days. That’s less scary in these uncertain economic times.

Sociologists do anticipate pent-up demand for marriage to get triggered when the economy picks up. But probably only temporarily.

Read more in this New York Times article: Saying No to ‘I Do,’ With the Economy in Mind.

Thirty years ago, Florida outlawed adoption of children by gay couples. And that’s been the law here ever since.

However inconsistent though, gay couples have been allowed to serve as foster parents for foster children.

Setting up the situation where children live for extended periods with gay parents, with neither the parents nor the children permitted to harbor hopes of becoming legally related to each other through adoption.

And so it is for a gay man who has been caring for two foster children as his own for the past five years, since the younger child was only four months old. He refuses to accept that outcome.

At trial, the court found there was no credible evidence that children raised by gay parents did any less well than children raised by heterosexual parents.

Florida is the last remaining state to prohibit all adoptions by any gay people. And that is the basis of an appeal that was just decided.

An intermediate appellate court has struck down Florida’s law as violating constitutional guarantees of equal protection of the law.

An appeal to Florida’s highest court is anticipated.

In the meantime, the state will no longer enforce the statutory prohibition of adoption by gay parents.

One thing is clear. For the many children in foster care in Florida, the pool of prospective parents who just may adopt them has suddenly grown a lot larger.

Read more in this New York Times article: Florida Court Calls Ban on Gay Adoptions Unlawful and this Miami Herald article: Appeals court: Florida ban on gay adoption unconstitutional.

Father and Mother are engaged in a child custody legal battle in Michigan.

According to Father’s own attorney, Father has made threats against the presiding family court judge – and also has threatened to blow up the county judicial building.

Father is now under arrest for felony terror and bomb threats, and remains held in confinement.

A visiting judge may have to be assigned to hear Father’s criminal case due to potential conflicts of interest.

Father faces up to twenty-four years’ imprisonment if convicted of the charges against him.

Read more in this [Adrian, MI] Daily Telegram article: Indiana man faces trial for Lenawee County court threats

2010 brings new concerns to the world of divorce. And calls for new measures.

And so it is that some divorcing couples are starting to adopt divorce social media policies and put them in writing. A targeted species of nondisclosure agreement, concentrated on keeping the details of a divorce off of social media.

That’s right.

Couples are coming to terms about how much or how little of their divorce they want to see aired on social networking sites. Where it will be there for all the world to see. Forever.

No photos. Keep the kids out of it. Too soon to talk about new significant others. No character assassinations. Synchronized “no comments”.

What’s off limits. Including that everything is off limits, and it’s best to just take a break from social networking until it’s all over.

Such social media divorce agreements will undoubtedly find their way into prenuptial agreements of the future.

Read more in this [Ontario] National Post article: Divorcing spouses quit Facebook in favour of privacy.

Texas Father and Mother have three year old Son.

Father and Mother divorce.

At trial, the divorce court awards Mother primary custody of Son.

So Father allegedly abducts Son … for seventeen years.

Mother and Son have apparently had no contact for all those years.

Now twenty years old, Son reads a newspaper article about his own kidnapping as a child.

Son tells Father to turn himself in.

Father is charged with interference with child custody.

Read more in this Associated Press article: Texas woman’s ex-spouse, son emerge after 17 years and this Houston Chronicle article: Taken as boy, solves case as a man.