California Divorce and Family Law

Study: Divorced Parents Do a Good Job

Divorced parents do just as good a job as married couples in raising kids, a new study claims.

This new research overturns a commonly held belief that families fractured by divorced parents become inferior havens for children compared with stable homes.

"My findings that parenting practices are unrelated to divorce appear to fly in the face of accepted wisdom," said Lisa Strohschein, a sociologist at the University of Alberta in Canada.

Some divorced couples may overcompensate for a split-up by focusing more attention on their kids, which could partially explain why divorced and married households scored similar child-caring marks.

"Some parents may overcompensate and be extra-conscientious, and there are definitely some parents who do have problems parenting afterwards," Strohschein told LiveScience. "But on average, parents don't change their behavior."

Parental care

Strohschein examined data collected as part of the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NSLCY) in 1994 and 1996. The surveys followed about 5,000 Canadian children living in two-parent households as of 1994 and compared changes in parenting practices among the 200 households with subsequent divorces and those that remained intact.

Parents answered survey questions about three parenting behaviors:

• Nurturing: How often parents praise a child; how often parents play games/sports and laugh with children.
• Consistency: How often parents follow through with forewarned punishment, for instance.
• Punishment: How often parents yell or use physical punishment, versus calmly discussing or suggesting alternative ways of behaving to their misbehaving child.

The results are published in the October issue of the journal Family Relations and show no differences between divorced and stably married parents for any parenting behavior either before or after a divorce.

"Although divorce may be stressful, it doesn't necessarily transform parents into bad or indifferent parents to their children," Strohschein said.

However, Strohschein found that parents who had no more than high-school degrees became less consistent and relied more on punishment to discipline misbehaving children over the course of the study compared with parents who had post-secondary degrees (college and/or graduate school).

Households with an annual income ranging from $40,000 to $59,999 in 1994 showed a greater decrease in nurturing behaviors compared with wealthier homes (more than $80,000 annually).

Family facts

Past research has suggested that divorced parents fail to keep routines and maintain control over the household. In addition, studies have shown divorced parents may blur the boundaries of the parent-child relationship by turning to their children for solace.

"Undoubtedly, some parents will be overwhelmed and unable to cope with the demands of parenting in the post-divorce period," Strohschein said, "but the expectation that all parents will be negatively affected by divorce is unfounded."

The new information, she says, could be used to refine government and other programs dedicated to helping families during and after divorces.

"It does parents a disservice to automatically assume that they will have problems after divorce," Strohschein said. "That education and to a lesser extent income predict parenting behavior says much more about what makes a difference to parenting behavior."

From Yahoo News.

Know the traits common to abusers

Dear Readers:  Yesterday I printed the feedback I received regarding a letter from "Smothered in Michigan," a recently divorced mother of two. Her ex-husband had been an alcoholic. She's now dating his "polar opposite" who "treats her like a queen" and is "loving, affectionate, generous and caring."

She went on to say he stops by her job "only a few" times a day, and the minute she's home he shows up at her door. All her dinners are with him – he pays for everything – and he doesn't leave until her kids go to bed. He spends every waking hour with her and accompanies her wherever she goes. She said she knows she should feel grateful, but instead feels "indebted, stalked, controlled and burdened." Her question: "Am I just being selfish, and can I train myself to like being spoiled?"

I told her she and the man were overdue for a frank talk about personal space, that she's still healing from her divorce, and he seems so smitten or insecure that he's preventing her from figuring out where she ends and he begins.

Many readers felt she should listen to her intuition, that the man is a potential abuser, and the traits she listed are red flags.

Today I'll share the classic warning signs of an abuser. Read on:

• PUSHES FOR QUICK INVOLVEMENT: Comes on strong, claiming, "I've never felt loved like this by anyone." An abuser presses for an exclusive commitment almost immediately.
• JEALOUS: Excessively possessive; calls constantly or visits unexpectedly; prevents you from going to work because "you might meet someone"; checks the mileage on your car.
• CONTROLLING: Interrogates you intensely (especially if you're late) about whom you talked to and where you were; keeps all the money; insists you ask permission to go anywhere or do anything.
• UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS: Expects you to be the perfect mate and meet his or her every need.
• ISOLATION: Tries to cut you off from family and friends; accuses people who are your supporters of "causing trouble." The abuser may deprive you of a phone or car, or try to prevent you from holding a job.
• BLAMES OTHERS FOR PROBLEMS OR MISTAKES: It's always someone else's fault if something goes wrong.
• MAKES OTHERS RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS OR HER FEELINGS: The abuser says, "You make me angry," or "You're hurting me by not doing what I tell you."
• HYPERSENSITIVITY: Is easily insulted, claiming hurt feelings when he or she is really mad. Rants about the injustice of things that are just a part of life.
• CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OR CHILDREN: Kills or punishes animals brutally. Also may expect children to do things far beyond their ability (whips a 3-year-old for wetting a diaper) or may tease them until they cry. Sixty-five percent of abusers who beat their partner will also abuse children.
• "PLAYFUL" USE OF FORCE DURING SEX: Enjoys throwing you down or holding you against your will during sex; finds the idea of rape exciting.
• VERBAL ABUSE: Constantly criticizes or says blatantly cruel things; degrades, curses, calls you ugly names. This may also involve sleep deprivation, waking you with relentless verbal abuse.
• RIGID GENDER ROLES: Expects you to serve, obey and remain at home.
• SUDDEN MOOD SWINGS: Switches from sweet to violent in minutes.
• PAST BATTERING: Admits to hitting a mate in the past, but says the person "made" him (or her) do it.
• THREATS OF VIOLENCE: Says things like, "I'll break your neck," or "I'll kill you," then dismisses them with "Everybody talks that way" or "I didn't really mean it."

From Dear Abby in the Orange County Register.

Unhappy holidays: Start of divorce season

Maybe it's the most wonderful time of the year.The day after Thanksgiving, the first prayer I say is, 'I wish it were January 2nd,'" sighs John Mayoue.

The new Grinch? Nah. Just a lawyer (no, they're not the same thing) who's famously discreet about his famous clientele. So don't expect juicy tidbits about the high-stakes unhitchings of Jane Fonda, David Justice or Marianne Gingrich (ex-Mrs. Newt No. 2) to surface in the Atlanta attorney's new book.

Instead, "Protecting Your Assets From A Georgia Divorce" (PSG Books, $19.95) is aimed squarely at the local Everyman and woman. From choosing the right lawyer to understanding how a "fair" settlement isn't necessarily an "equal" one, the book is a comprehensive, somewhat cautionary primer for Georgians considering or already in the process of divorcing.

Unfortunately, its arrival may be a case of perfect timing. An eyepopping number of marriages find the proverbial lump of coal in their stockings in December, says Mayoue, who evinces little cheer in making that statement. During a conversation in his Vinings office recently, Mayoue — who is donating all author royalties to Camp Sunshine, an Atlanta-based facility for children with cancer and their families — discussed divorce at the holidays and beyond in Georgia.

Q: If everyone reads your book, couldn't you possibly put yourself out of business here? Why take that risk?

A: I really do think that we lawyers have an obligation to educate the public. And it seems to me to be not very good consumerism to walk into a lawyer's office knowing absolutely nothing, before paying someone several hundred dollars. I've always found it peculiar that people do not get educated in a legal matter that affects 50-plus percent of all people who get married. Yet if you had an illness, you would certainly read up about it, if you had a business you were interested in getting involved in, you would certainly read about it.

Q: Still, most divorcing people will need a lawyer's services whether they end up going to trial or not. Is settlement what you're always working towards?

A: Always. Every lawyer I know is going to make every reasonable effort to get a case settled first. Because settlement is something that the parties can control — they can basically control things such as custody, visitation and the allocation of assets and debts. And the courtroom is a risky environment for anyone. What's different in particular about Georgia is that we are the only state that continues to have jury trials in divorce cases.

Q: What are the pluses and minuses of that?

A: To me, jury trials are the great equalizers. Judges, just like any person, tend to have tendencies or biases. My experience with juries is they tend to be enormously fair, and that's all you can ask for. [But] it can be a bad thing for people who watch too much television, because they believe the jury is going to stand up and say, "You were the wonderful spouse and the other spouse was the lousy one!" They may say that indirectly in how they allocate assets, but they don't ever say it explicitly.

Q: What else distinguishes Georgia when it comes to divorce?

A: You can get divorced [here] in 30 days. In some states like New York, they have a 1-year waiting period. ... Georgia ranks in the Top 5 states in terms of our divorce rates. Nevada, of course, is the leader, but the next four states are all Southern states. We're the church-going region, according to what polls show, yet our divorce rates are higher than the rest of the country by far. In fact, the great irony is that the state that brought us Teddy Kennedy and legalized gay marriage has the lowest divorce rate in this country. And so we Georgians need to be careful about throwing stones at the rest of the country.

Q: Doesn't divorce at least take a holiday this month along with the rest of us?

A: It's actually the start of the season. People have these pent-up thoughts about relationships and careers and where they are with life. It's just a very difficult time for people.

Q: Is it something in the eggnog?

A: Thanksgiving, Hannukah and Christmas, I believe, bring out the worst in many people — particularly people that are in troubled relationships. For some reason at this time of year, we use the holidays as a benchmark, and I think it's extraordinarily unhealthy to do so. In December, for example, we have the highest number of suicides, divorce filings and bankruptcies of any month.

Q: Can the holiday season push some people to think about divorce when they might not have otherwise?

A: Absolutely. One of the biggest things that aggravates people during the holidays is the expenditure of family resources: Do we have to have a Christmas where little Johnny and Mary get every new electronic device out there? Are we going to borrow against our home in order to spend lavishly on our friends and relatives? What kind of holiday we're going to have is sort of analogous to what kind of marriage we're going to have. Christmas is becoming incredibly lavish for people, and social scientists will tell you that 90 percent of the root of marital trouble is money.

Q: What about people who wait to file for divorce so as "not to ruin the holidays?"

A: I think it is a good philosophy when it involves children. When you have children who are the victims of these cases and they're thinking the wonderful thoughts we all thought of Christmas, Hannukah and New Year's when we were young — it's absolutely devastating to explain to a child during this time of year that not only is Santa not coming, but that Mommy and Daddy are divorcing. Yet there are some people that feel very justified in doing so. I'm not trying to be self-righteous or to criticize them. If they come in and say, 'Look, I'm determined,' what we say is at least go see a child psychologist and discuss how you will tell your children. And oftentimes that will persuade them that at least they should wait, or perhaps they shouldn't do it at all.

Q: So if someone walks into your office in December talking divorce, one of your questions is "Why now?"

A: Always. Many people cannot be talked out of doing it now and that's certainly their choice. But we do try to tell people that it probably is not the best time to add another level of stress to their lives. Often they will have very firm convictions as to "why now."

Q: Which is?

A: It's almost a prelude to the New Year's resolution.

This Q&A from the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

Postnuptial Agreements

In February, the TV-talk-show psychologist Dr. Phil introduced his viewers to a new twist in domestic drama: a husband asking his wife to sign a postnuptial agreement. A postnup? Like a prenup, a postnup is a contract that divides a family’s assets between spouses — only this time it comes after the marriage vows have been spoken.      

Postnups are fast becoming a familiar part of the marriage-law landscape. A poll published this year by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers found that almost half its members had seen an increase in the practice. Most states now recognize postnups (though many still place significant restrictions on them).

One reason couples use postnups, according to Stuart S. Greenfeig, a Maryland attorney who specializes in them, is to try to shore up rocky marriages. “They generally arise when there’s concern about the stability of the marriage — for example, when one spouse has committed adultery,” he says. Some clients wanting a divorce may end up reconciled through a postnup that guarantees more assets to the aggrieved spouse. Postnups also arise from simple economics: when a couple goes through a major financial change — the wife gets a major promotion and a significant income increase, for example — they may want to renegotiate their original terms. (Many postnup couples already have prenups.)

But why so many of these agreements now? One factor is that hedge funds and other high-value equity partnerships increasingly urge new partners to get postnups. It’s a phenomenon of the new gilded age: postnups assure such firms that a divorcing partner won’t be giving away part-ownership.

Thanks to the New York Times.

R.I. court won't let gay couple divorce

Ruling cites 1961 law, deals setback to pair married in Mass.

In a split decision, Rhode Island's top court said yesterday that it will not allow a lesbian couple who married in Massachusetts to get a divorce in the Ocean State.

The 3-to-2 ruling was viewed by advocates of gay marriage as a setback and by those who oppose the recognition of same-sex unions as an act of wisdom.

The court concluded that a key 1961 Rhode Island law defines marriage as an legal union between a man and a woman, not same-sex couples. Unless and until the Legislature changes the wording, same-sex couples married in Massachusetts cannot get divorced in Rhode Island family courts, it said.

Cassandra Ormiston, who married Margaret Chambers in Fall River in 2004 after Massachusetts became the first state in the country to legalize same-sex marriages, denounced the ruling, saying it discriminates against same-sex couples.

"There have been people throughout history who have been discriminated against," said Ormiston, 60. "And they have fought the good fight and prevailed. It will be the case with my minority as well."

"It won't stand," she said.

Louis Pulner, the lawyer for Chambers, said his 70-year-old client has stayed out of public view during the high-profile litigation triggered by her failed marriage.

"They are in legal limbo," Pulner said of the two women. "We simply asked [the court] to allow people to get divorced if they had a valid marriage from another jurisdiction."

According to Ormiston, the couple lived together for a decade  before they got married. The marriage collapsed two years later.

In a statement, Governor Donald L. Carcieri of Rhode Island and at least one group that opposes gay marriage praised the ruling.

"I believe this is the appropriate result based on Rhode Island law," Carcieri said. "It has always been clear to me that Rhode Island law was designed to permit marriage, and therefore divorce, only between a man and a woman."

The lawyer for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian-based group, said the ruling affirms that marriage is between a man and woman and anything else is "counterfeit."

"Not only is today's ruling a victory for marriage, it's also a tremendous step forward against judicial activism," Austin R. Nimocks, a lawyer for the Arizona group, said in a statement.

But Rhode Island's attorney general, Patrick Lynch, and the Boston group Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders criticized the ruling. "It is unfair to the couple in question and other couples similarly situated," because they cannot legally end their marriages, Lynch said in the statement. He said the ruling does not affect the status of same-sex marriages of Rhode Island couples not seeking divorce.

Karen Loewy, a staff lawyer with GLAD, which filed an amicus brief siding with the couple, said she was "incredibly distressed" for them. Short of persuading the Rhode Island General Assembly to legalize gay marriage, she said, the only certain way the couple can get a divorce is for one of the spouses to move to Massachusetts and establish legal residency.

"It's the one guaranteed place they could get a divorce," she said.

The court's majority said the Legislature, not the courts, should change state law. But dissenters said Rhode Island already handles divorces for couples married elsewhere and should do the same for the couple.

In a telephone interview, Ormiston rejected the idea of moving to Massachusetts for one year so she could be divorced in the Bay State.

"I simply will not support my own discrimination," she said. "The courts have denied me my civil rights. But we will prevail because this is the American justice system."

From Boston.com.

Billionaire Marriages: Why Get Hitched?

With Google CEO Larry Page's wedding planned for Dec. 8, BusinessWeek takes a look at what billionaires risk when they tie the knot

Google co-founder and Chief Executive Larry  Page's wedding this weekend is supposed to be a secret affair. But his own search engine is undermining the effort. A recent Google search for "Larry Page marriage" revealed a number of details about the event. Page will definitely be married on Dec. 8 to a woman named Lucy Southworth at an "undisclosed location." According to one blog post, Page might be married on Necker Island, Richard Branson's 74-acre estate in the British Virgin Islands.

In this Web-friendly age, billionaires, politicians, and others who live in the public eye have a hard time keeping information about their lives private. Because the public is so interested in the marriages of the rich and famous, every detail of a billionaire's personal life—from courtship to wedding to, if they're unlucky, divorce—ends up shooting through millions of fused networks and popping up on millions of strangers' computer screens. It's true if you're Bill Gates of Microsoft, Warren Buffett of Berkshire Hathaway, or Oprah Winfrey of Harpo Entertainment. Page is no exception.

Yes, the rich really are different from you and me. For most people, a wedding is a simple, joyous occasion. Family and friends gather to celebrate the ceremonial joining of you and your true love. For billionaires it's more complicated, with stresses and strains that others don't bear. They don't just have to choose a florist and a band; they usually need a good lawyer, too.

Marriage Means Business

Attorneys familiar with billionaire marriages urge their clients to proceed with care and caution. "A billionaire has to treat an upcoming marriage as a merger. But it's a merger with a potential enemy," says New York divorce lawyer Raoul Felder.

Prenuptial agreements are important, but they're no guarantee of a satisfactory split if things go south. Consider the divorce of Steven Spielberg, now at DreamWorks Animation, and his first wife Amy Irving. She claimed their prenup was invalid because it had been written on a napkin and she hadn't had legal representation. A judge tossed it out; Irving got $100 million.

The prenup of Bob Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, held up, but it still cost him plenty. He agreed to a deal with his wife, Sheila Johnson, in which she would receive half of their assets if they split up. By the time they did get divorced in 2002, his media empire was worth billions—and she got her half. "Very rich people have trouble sometimes knowing exactly what they're worth," says Felder. "Worth is often ephemeral."

Valuations are tricky, too. Donald Schiller, of Chicago's Schiller, Du Canto & Fleck, the nation's largest matrimonial law firm, says valuing a billionaire's worth is particularly complicated when real estate and other privately held property is involved. "You can't evaluate them the same way you can evaluate assets traded on the New York Stock Exchange," he says.

Dishing Dirt

Another issue that comes with prenups is privacy. Agreements can include confidentiality clauses to prevent one of the parties involved from giving out information about a marriage in case of divorce. That can mean barring anything from TV interviews about the ex to writing a book. "Prenuptials often waive a spouse's rights to develop intellectual property from details of the marriage," says Schiller.

He continued, "If it's a well-done premarital agreement and well-documented, the person trying to get out of it could end up with a lot less [if he or she goes public]," Schiller says. "You have to make it…very expensive…for somebody to give a lot of personal information out to the public."

Friendly Divorces Are Rare

It's possible to have an amicable divorce, even if you're a billionaire. When Tim Blixseth, the billionaire founder of the Yellowstone Club, split from his wife, Edra, in 2006, they divided up $2 billion in combined net worth in a single afternoon.

But that is the exception. You're more likely to see a high-profile mudfest like the one Roman Abramovitch, the Russian oil magnate, got into in March, 2007. His wife, Irina, learned that Roman was dating a 23-year-old Russian model, Daria Zhukova. Irina hired two prominent British lawyers, filed for divorce, and ended up with half of her husband's assets.

Given all of the billionaire marriages that have ended badly, Larry Page may well have a prenup ready before he takes his vows on Dec. 8. Money doesn't buy happiness, even if you're capable of spending billions.

Still, Page could give up half his wealth and still be plenty rich. With Google's stock trading near $700, his stake in the search engine is worth nearly $20 billion.

From Businessweek.

Divorce Squanders Earth's Resources

Divorce leaves more than a trail of legal documents, stinging egos and uprooted kids. The split-ups wreak havoc on the environment.

A global trend of soaring divorce rates has led to a surge in the number of households with fewer people. The result: We collectively devour more space and gobble up more energy and water, say the authors of a new study published online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.            

"Not only the United States, but also other countries, including developing countries such as China and places with strict religious policies regarding divorce, are having more divorced households," said co-author Jianguo Liu of Michigan State University. "The consequent increases in consumption of water and energy and using more space are being seen everywhere."

The study gives the down and dirty truths on exactly how much of Mother's Nature's resources go down the tubes when unions are severed. But the remedy for such "squander" is made for TV: Fall back in love, or at least cohabitate.

Dirty divorce

Past research by Liu and his colleagues, published in 2003 in the journal Nature, revealed globally the number of households increased more rapidly than actual population growth between 1985 and 2000. "Even in areas with declining population size, we still see a dramatic increase in the number of households," Liu told LiveScience.

Liu and Michigan State colleague Eunice Yu thought divorces could perhaps reconcile the anomaly. They analyzed global household data for both divorced and married homes in 12 countries between 1998 and 2002. The countries included the United States, Brazil, Costa Rica, Mexico, South Africa, Greece and Cambodia, among others.

Though China wasn't included due to lack of relevant data, the authors suggest the same trend occurs there. "Even in China, where divorce was traditionally uncommon, divorce rates have recently surged," they write. They add that 1.9 million Chinese couples divorced in 2006, compared with 1.6 million in 2004.

Results showed on average there were 27 percent to 41 percent fewer individuals living in divorced households compared with married ones. Between 1998 and 2002, divorces in the 12 countries studied accounted for 7.4 million extra households.

In 2000, divorced households ranged from 16 million (15 percent of the total households) in the U.S. to 40,000 divorced households in Costa Rica, or about 4 percent of the total.

Environmental footprint

No matter how many people live in a home, the extra house itself requires resources to construct it and takes up space. It requires fuel to heat and cool. A refrigerator uses roughly the same amount of energy whether it belongs to a family of four or two, as an example.

Analysis of U.S. data for 2005 showed that divorced households used an extra 73 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity and 627 billion gallons of water compared with married households.

The researchers also compared married households in the United States with households that had weathered divorce and remarriage: The environmental footprint rose, then shrank back to that of married households.

Other lifestyle trends that impact family living structures include the demise of multigenerational households, and people remaining single longer, the researchers concluded.

The results, Liu said, indicate another lifestyle trend needs to be taken into consideration in environmental strategies.

"People have been talking about how to protect the environment and combat climate change, but divorce is an overlooked factor that needs to be considered," Liu said.

Via Yahoo and LiveScience.

2,600 Photos to Be Divvied in Divorce

Nancy Goliger and Bruce Berman's photography collection began in 1991 when the Hollywood couple — he is chairman and chief executive of Village Roadshow Pictures, she is executive vice president of creative advertising at Paramount Pictures — commissioned emerging artists to hit the road and take pictures.

“As I was able to afford to, I then began to buy more established, important images that were at the root of photography,” Mr. Berman said.

A selection from the collection — at last count some 2,600 photographs — was exhibited last year at the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles.

Now, because the couple are divorcing, about 500 works are heading to auction at Christie’s in New York, starting in April. The rest are being given to three Los Angeles museums: the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, the Museum of Contemporary Art and the Getty, whose donors have included the couple.

“It wasn’t until about two or three years ago that I realized I was a collector,” said Mr. Berman, who worked with Rose Shoshana, a Los Angeles dealer, to build the collection.

It has not been determined which images will go to which museum. “I have asked the museums to give me a list of prioritized preferences,” he said. “Nancy and I want to give them what they want and need.”

The task for the Christie’s experts is how best to sell 500 photographs. “People tend to think that selling so many photographs floods the market and depresses prices, but auction history indicates just the opposite happens,” said Joshua Holdeman, international director of Christie’s photography department.

Rather than sell them all at once, however, Christie’s plans to hold three different sales: one limited to works by Diane Arbus, in April; another of images by William Eggleston, scheduled for October; and a third offering a selection of photographers — from Walker Evans and Dorothea Lange to younger artists with less well-known names — planned for  2009.

Together the three sales are estimated to bring $7 million to $10 million. “It’s a truly American collection that goes from the Depression era to artists who are alive and working today,” Mr. Holdeman said.

Among the highlights are “A Family on Their Lawn One Sunday Afternoon in Westchester, N.Y.,” a seminal 1968 Arbus work estimated at $30,000 to $50,000, and “Los Alamos Portfolio,” 80 prints of Eggleston images taken from 1967 to 1974 and considered his most important work, which carries an estimate of $250,000 to $350,000.

The Evans work includes “Interior at Biloxi, Mississippi,” a 1945 photograph of a fisherman’s bedroom estimated at $30,000 to $50,000. “Black Maria,” a 1955 Lange shot of the back of a police van replete with bullet holes, is estimated at $40,000 to $60,000.

“I am surprised that I don’t feel sad,” Mr. Berman said about the collection’s dispersal. “It’s time to move on.”

From the New York Times.