California Divorce and Family Law

The Best Thing to do After Divorce or Breakup: Yoga

Divorce, even at its most amicable, can cause an enormous amount of stress, anger, worry, confusion, and resentment. People often struggle to find ways to overcome the negative feelings that face them. However, in a recent study conducted by Amy Weintraub, director of the LifeForce Yoga Healing Institute, she found that yoga is the key to helping individuals, who are battling a divorce. It not only improves mood and self-esteem, but also betters emotional regulation.

"Many celebrities, such as Jennifer Anniston, Michelle Williams and Uma Thurman, credit yoga as helping them through their painful divorces or breakups. For everyday people, that concept may sound crazy but there is definitely truth in that. Yoga helps individuals learn to push aside repetitive thoughts and compulsive bad habits," said Liz Mandarano, a Manhattan family law and divorce attorney at Bikel & Mandarano, LLP and frequent blogger for the Huffington Post Divorce Vertical.

Yoga encourages individuals to concentrate on their own well-being, which helps them handle how they react to others and problematic situations. Ms. Weintraub distinguishes yoga from other forms of exercise on both a physical and mental level. She points out that yoga focuses on present body sensationand emphasizes breath work and ones' thoughts as integrated with physical movements.

Read more at Visual Strategy Magazine.

'Gray Divorces' rising

More Baby Boomers couples in Fairfax County are calling it quits. A recent study by an area law firm shows residents older than 55 are divorcing at increasingly high rates.

Calling the county "the divorce capital of Virginia," the Arlington law firm of Tully Rinckey found that divorce rates for men and women over 55 are increasing even while divorce rates are dropping for younger couples.

"The Baby Boomers are getting older, and [divorce] is becoming more culturally acceptable than it was some 10 to 15 years ago," said H. Eugene Oliver, a family and matrimonial lawyer at the firm.

While the study found the overall number of divorces and annulments granted annually in Fairfax declined 5 percent, it also found the divorce rate for men between the ages of 55 and 64 rose from 9.1 percent to 11.8 percent. For men over 65, the divorce rate rose from 5.2 percent to 6.6 percent.

"They're definitely a lot more secure living by themselves and doing what makes [them] happy," Oliver said. "They're no longer staying together for the sake of staying together."

There are a number of reasons for the growing number of "gray divorces," as the firm's report dubs them, including financial strain on the couples and greater financial independence that allows them to feel more secure, Oliver said. Child custody issues that weigh on their younger counterparts are rare among older couples.

A recent Bowling Green State University study found that the national divorce rate among adults ages 50 and older doubled between 1990 and 2009. In 2009, more than 600,000 people in that age group divorced, accounting for roughly one out of every four divorces, the study found.

Oliver said he expects the trend to continue as the Baby Boomers continue to age.

"It's becoming more and more socially acceptable to date in your 50s and early 70s," Oliver said. "[I can see this] continuing in the immediate future."

Read more at the Washington Examiner.

 

Stevie Wonder files for divorce

Stevie Wonder, 62, is ending his 11-year marriage to fashion designer Kai Millard Morris.

According to a report at www.tmz.com, the Saginaw-born Wonder filed for divorce Friday in Los Angeles Superior Court using his legal name: Stevland Morris.

In the documents, which reveal the couple has been separated since October 2009, Wonder cited irreconcilable differences and asked for joint custody of the couple's two sons:Kailand, 10, and Mandla, 7.

He reportedly stated in the papers that he will pay spousal and child support in an amount to be determined.

From the Detroit Free Press.

 

Changing Your Name After a Divorce

+ Comment now

Long Wedding Dress for Couple with Flowers (Photo credit: epSos.de)

We’re smack in the middle of wedding season across most of the country. Statistically, more couples will tie the knot in June than any other month but the official popular ‘season’ runs from Memorial Day Weekend through Labor Day – kind of like vacation season.According to The Wedding Report, nearly 2.1 million couples got married in the U.S. in 2010; on the other end of the spectrum in that same year, there were at least 872,000 divorces according to the National Vital Statistics System for the Center for Disease Control (although, according to their site, some data is missing from their report).

Making big lifestyle changes like getting married or divorced often has obvious tax consequences. But one of the biggest tax consequences can be the headache of simply changing your name: a mismatch between the name on your federal income tax return and Social Security Administration records can cause problems come tax time.

If you change your name as a result of marriage or divorce, you’ll need to make sure that you take the proper steps to update the change with Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Here are a few tips for dealing with the SSA and IRS after a name change:

If take your spouse’s last name or if both spouses hyphenate their last names – or if you use a new combined name – after marriage, you must notify the SSA. If you change your name back to your prior name after a divorce, you’ll also need to notify the SSA.

More info at Forbes.

 

Real Housewives of Beverly Hills' Adrienne Maloof and Estranged Hubby Paul Nassif Have Prenup, but That Might Not Stop Fighting

Adrienne Maloof and Paul Nassif have legally separated and appear on the verge of calling it quits for good after 10 years of marriage. But if there's one thing they won't be fighting about, it's the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills star's fortune.

That's because Adrienne and Paul have a prenup, E! News confirmed.

ven so, such a premarital agreement might not stop Nassif from going after the Bravo personality's bank account.

Already, things are getting testy between the former fun couple and their split has the makings of a nasty, drawn-out battle.

In his paperwork, Nassif requested joint physical custody of their three children—9-year-old Gavin and 6-year-old twins Christian and Colin. Maloof, however, wants primary custody of the kids, according to family insiders.

This report is from EOnline. Read it all here.

 

 

TomKat vs. Robsten: A comparative study

Two weeks ago, we all thought the divorce of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes was the biggest celebrity gossip story of the summer. Hands down, no question, right?

Then, like the stealthy vampires that they are, along come Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart with a cheating scandal and the seeming demise of their relationship, a romance that convinced a generation of (mostly) females that the things we read about in books can totally come true-true-true. . . at least kinda sort of.

The interest in these two stories demonstrates a bit of an age divide when it comes to celeb gossip. The Cruise/Holmes saga is one that, arguably, is of greater interest to the over-35 set, those who have watched Cruise marry and divorce three times during their adult lives and still remember when he was considered the ultimate symbol of male perfection. Some of those same people glance at the Pattinson/Stewart headlines and say, “Who honestly cares about these bland ‘Twilight’ actors?” Meanwhile, an infinite number of young Pattinson/Stewart fans breathlessly sift through every detail about cheating timelines and U-Haul trucks and make YouTube videos that demonstrate their emotional struggle with all this, suggesting that a lot of people care. A LOT.

Read it all at the Washington Post.

 

Syracuse fan makes unusual custody request in divorce settlement

As he reviewed the divorce settlement his ex-wife's lawyer handed him earlier this year, Michael noticed an inequity he hadn't anticipated.

His ex-wife requested custody of their son and daughter for four Jewish holidays and half their Christmas vacation. The only Catholic holiday he'd intended to ask for in the custody agreement besides Christmas was Easter.

"I'm thinking to myself, 'This is highly unbalanced,'" said Michael, who requested only his first name be printed in this story to protect his kids. "I'm not a very religious person, so I tried to think of culturally some other things that are important to me that I wanted to make sure I share with my kids."

Two of the three days Michael requested to have 7-year-old Julia and 5-year-old Liam were St. Patrick's Day and Super Bowl Sunday, nothing too out of the ordinary. His third request, however, was one neither his attorney nor his wife's had ever encountered before.

Michael asked for Julia and Liam to be with him on the day of the NCAA men's basketball title game if Syracuse is one of the two teams playing. A lifelong fan who grew up in Syracuse but now lives in the Chicago suburbs, Michael passionately supports the Orange and hopes to pass that down to his children.

Since Syracuse has only one national title under Jim Boeheim, Michael considered asking for custody of his kids if the Orange make a Final Four or an Elite Eight, but he backed off when his ex-wife said he'd have to give up something else to get that concession. In the end, he's just happy that if Syracuse cuts down the nets on the first Monday in April, he'll get to share the moment with his kids.

"Neither attorney had ever seen anything like what I requested," Michael said. "It was completely foreign to them. My wife's attorney was a bit indignant, but eventually through negotiations it worked out. It was definitely something that was highly unusual to a divorce proceeding, but to me, sports is about celebrating with friends and family. That's why it was important to me."

Read it all at Yahoo Sports.

 

 

Life After Divorce: Pick Up The Pieces By Making New Friends

Life after divorce can be taxing on anyone, especially if you are unsure about how to pick up the pieces. Many things in your life have dramatically changed, aside from your newly single status. It's likely that most of your friends are still married, and you have little or no way of meeting new people.

The first step to moving on after divorce is it to make new friends, especially new girl friends. They most likely will have awesome guy friends that they can then hook you up with. I am a big believer in networking, and from new women come new circles, and more importantly, new men.

After being a professional matchmaker for over 20 years and meeting thousands of women, I've complied the best places to meet new friends.

Read the entire excellent article at the Huffington Post.

 

Lawmaker's wife loses divorce ruling over spyware

A federal judge has ruled that the estranged wife of a state lawmaker improperly used computer spyware during her divorce from a previous husband.

The Greeneville Sun reported Thursday that U.S. Magistrate William B. Mitchell Carter ordered attorney Crystal Goan Hawk to pay $20,000 in damages to ex-husband James Roy Klumb. The lengthy ruling found that Hawk used the spyware in violation of wiretapping laws and altered a prenuptial agreement to gain an advantage in the divorce.

Carter said Klumb's civil lawsuit and a two-week trial aired much "dirty laundry."

Hawk's current husband, Republican state Rep. David Hawk, has pleaded not guilty to a domestic assault charge she filed in March. His preliminary hearing was delayed until Sept. 11, after he runs in next week's primary election.

Read more at the San Francisco Chronicle.

 

When Parents Divorce, How To Get By Financially

Not too long ago, you grew up relatively wealthy in a nice part of town with lots of family around you. When your parents divorced (which you wholeheartedly supported), there were a few things you didn’t get. And part of that is how your old life started to dissolve from the age of 20. For starters, the families who live so close by? Those relatives want to love you, but it will be hard, because the parent you live with is now Enemy Number One. They have shunned her from the community, but no one will admit it. It will feel like a betrayal to her when you visit those relatives. It will be hard not to talk about her. Those relatives will take you and your brother out to eat and discuss “how hard it is, and how they want to support you during this terrible time.” These will be some of the worst meals of your life.

Read the rest of the article at The Huffington Post.

Don't Let Divorce Destroy You at Tax Time

Divorce is one of the hardest things you may ever go through -- both emotionally and financially. But while you're focused on your now-adversarial relationship with your ex, you shouldn't forget to keep an eye on another entity that may be after a larger chunk of your assets thanks to your split: The IRS. Turns out, divorce has a huge impact on your taxes, and knowing what's at stake can help you avoid major complications later on.

Here are some of the things to keep in mind as you go through the divorce process.

Filing Status

Checking the box for either married or single may seem like the simplest thing in the world, but it gets complicated with divorce. The IRS wants to know your legal marital status as of the end of the year you're filing for. So even if you've filed your paperwork, if your divorce isn't final by Dec. 31, then you'll be considered married for the year.

However, there's an exception that allows separated parents to claim the favorable head of household status, which gives you greater deductions. To qualify, you must have paid more than half your housing costs for the year, lived apart from your spouse during the last six months of the tax year, and your dependent child must have lived in your home for more than half the year.

Exemptions for Children

The question of who gets to claim exemptions for children can make a huge difference to your tax bill. Typically, the test depends on which parent the child lives with for more than half the year. But divorced or separated couples can essentially pick who gets the exemption for children by signing a written declaration. With the current write-off at $3,700 per child, the decision you make can determine which of you will get up to $1,300 in tax savings.

Alimony, Maintenance, and Child Support

Payments between former spouses under a divorce decree fall into different categories. Cash payments that qualify as alimony are deductible by the person who makes them and are counted as income for the person who receives them. But you can generally agree to reverse that treatment and avoid any tax consequences for payments if you prefer.

Child support, on the other hand, isn't deductible by the payer or counted as income by the recipient or the child. So as you describe certain payments in your divorce agreement, be careful because the description can change the way those payments get taxed.

Retirement Accounts

As part of a property settlement, a spouse may be entitled to part of the other spouse's IRAs or employer-sponsored retirement account. For 401(k)s and other employer plans, a qualified domestic relations order can allow you to get benefits from a spouse's plan and treat them as if they're your own, thereby avoiding potentially disastrous tax consequences. Under certain circumstances, you may be able to roll 401(k) money into an IRA of your own.

Property Transfers

In general, neither spouse will realize any capital gain or loss or other tax consequences from receiving or giving up property in a divorce decree. But if you later sell property that you received due to divorce, you'll then have to pay taxes on gains, based on the original tax basis of the property you received.

To be treated as part of the divorce, a property transfer must be complete within a year of the date the marriage legally ended, unless it was specifically provided for under the divorce agreement. In that case, you have up to six years to make transfers, although later ones may still be valid if you can show valid reasons for the delay.

Community Property

Finally, most states treat each spouse's income as his or her own, even when it's jointly reported on a tax return. But in community property states, which include Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin, different rules may apply. As a result, you may be treated as having earned part of your former spouse's income during the year in which you divorce.

The problem here is that you may have no idea how much money your former spouse made. Accordingly, the IRS won't penalize you for mistakenly leaving out community property income as long as you can show that you had no reason to know about the income and that it wouldn't be fair to force you to include it as your own income.

From The Tax Center

O.C. divorce rate one of the highest in nation

Orange County, California has one of the highest divorce rates in the nation. On average, 33 people in the O.C. initiate divorce proceedings every day – including weekends.

The national divorce rate is about 50 percent. In California, it's 60 percent. 

"That's a lot of broken vows, broken homes and broken hearts."

Statistics are from the Orange County Register.

 

I'm Back

As many of my former readers know, in 2010 I ran for and won a seat on the Irvine City Council. When I ran for office, I needed to spend a considerable amount of time devoted to the task of running a campaign in a city as large as Irvine, California. Following my successful campaign, I quickly learned how much time it takes to manage the City of Irvine, the Orange County Great Park, and the Orange County Sanitation District, on which I am Irvine's appointed representative. In other words, my public service prevented me from providing regular updates on this blog for divorcing families.

Now, after about a year and a half of public service, I am excited to report that I am back providing valuable information on this blog to those involved in the divorce process. Over the next several months, I look forward to writing about current divorce and family law issues in California and across the nation. Please feel free to comment on this blog with appropriate comments.

Alimony--Using Craigslist to get out of paying?

Man offers to pay for someone to marry ex-wife

Imagine sitting at your computer and you are browsing the classified ads on Craiglist and suddenly you come across the following ad:

Nice well taken care of ex-wife. Mid 40's. Pretty and loyal. Never smoked and very little drinking. Will make someone a good companion (I know).... Will pay 10K to the man or woman who marries her in a way that stops me from having to pay her alimony.

There's the hitch. The man, trying to end his alimony payments to his ex-wife, is offering to pay a potential suitor to marry his ex-wife. Not being totally callous, the guy actually had some "terms and conditions" for this transaction.

• 1. This transaction offer only valid if she is not aware of it.


• 2. Must treat her good, no abuse tolerated by me.


• 3. This offer is null and void if it is determined to be illegal in any way -- I am not a lawyer.


• 4. The end result must be that I am no longer liable to her for alimony and you make best effort to be good to her.


• 5. This ad is not in any way intended to demean my ex-wife. She is a nice person and is a fine catch for anyone.

OOPS. I think the cat's out of the bag on condition #1. With news of the post hitting newspapers, she or some friends might find out. He might also have a problem with condition #3. At least he did not want to "demean" his ex-wife in any way--what a guy.

In most states, if you are paying alimony to your ex, don't use this tactic to end the alimony. Not only will it fall flat in front of the judge, but you can be assured your ex will not find the humor in being marketed on Craigslist.

Big thanks to Mississippi Family Law Blog.

Dating 101: How to Tell When You're Ready to Commit

Eight key questions to ask your mate -- and yourself

There is something exhilarating about taking the big leap from dating to becoming a permanent "item" and making that final commitment. But before you run off into the sunset with your mate, make sure that the time you choose to commit is the right time -- and with the right person.

As a divorce attorney, I have found over the years that most couples who wind up splitting do so because there are discrepancies or control issues over what I term the "Big Six." These six categories include: wealth/property and money; children; health, physical and mental; growth, professional and personal; intimacy and loss of love; and fear, both physical and emotional. I ask my clients to take a close look at each of these categories to determine if there are major conflicts, not only with his or her chosen mate but also conflicts within themselves.

Have you found the right person? Is it the right time? Here are eight key questions to ask your mate -- and yourself. The answers will be very telling.

1. How do you believe we should spend our money and on what? If your mate says, "On fun stuff and we'll get to the bills later," you better reconsider going the commitment route until your mate grows up a bit. Most marriages and long-term relationships break up due to stresses and squabbles over money. Splits happen when a couple's values in spending and saving simply do not match. Don't overlook this question. It is critical in determining whether you or your mate are a match and whether you are both ready for a mature relationship -- one that requires fiscal responsibility.

2. What are your thoughts about starting a family? If your mate says, "This is not something I can even think about right now," do not ignore that remark. It could be that your mate will put this decision off longer than you wish or one day stand up and announce, "I've decided against having children." You also need to be honest with yourself. Do you want children? Let your mate know this up front. You may also want to ask your mate about his/her point of view on how the children should be raised. If there are huge discrepancies in this department, there are bound to be serious problems down the road.

3. If I get sick, how will you take care of me? If your mate laughs off such a question with, "How do I know? I'll figure it out then," you should take that offhanded remark as a serious indicator that your mate might not be grown up enough to handle your critical needs. There is a way to test this one: How does your mate treat you when you get sick with the flu? Also, if you know deep down that you would not have the patience or fortitude to care for an ailing mate, be fair and let him/her know of your concerns. Who needs someone in his/her life who is only there for the good times?

4. Do you envision us growing old together? If your mate quips, "How the heck do I know, that is a long way off" or "I guess so," neither answer should satisfy you. To suggest that you or your mate is uncertain of your eventual fate together -- or cannot envision those "golden" years as a couple -- should be a neon sign with bright red lights that flash, "This may only be temporary." Commitments should be thought of as permanent, not temporary.

5. Do you ever think about your ex? If the answer from your mate is "Well, I do sometimes," then you want to ask the next question: "In what context?" If your mate shares stories about the fun they used to have together, this could mean your mate is not over his or her last love. And what about you? Do you still think about your ex? When? How? I highly recommend backing off the commitment stage until you and your mate can safely say that thoughts about your exes are fleeting or random.

6. Has your mate ever told you they scared a former mate in any way? If your mate's answer is something like "Well, yeah, I scared my ex every time I became jealous or mad," step back and think twice. Though your mate may think he/she is ready for a commitment, it may not be the right time for one. If you have had similar issues, the same may apply to you. Are you worried your mate might cheat on you or keep secrets from you or inflict emotional or physical harm on you? If the answer is yes, tackle this now, not after you have made a commitment. Maybe you or your mate could benefit from therapy, anger management, rehab, or other appropriate behavior modification assistance.

7. Is your mate good at problem solving? Does your mate meet challenges head on and collaborate on solutions to problems, or sweep issues under the rug? What about you? Are you mature enough to approach your mate to say, "We have a problem. Let's find a solution to it." How you handle problems together may well determine how long your relationship will last.

8. How does my mate deal with a "screwup?" Does my mate place blame? Does my mate take responsibility for his/her actions? How do I handle my mistakes? Do we both acknowledge our errors and resolve to deal with them? If chronic, negative behavior persists in this area, take a second look to decide if you two are a good match and if you are ready to commit. It is not unusual, for instance, to have each partner blame the other, which rarely accomplishes anything. Placing blame, or finding fault, can only worsen once you are committed.

Written by Stacy D. Phillips and posted at Yahoo Personals.

Picking the right divorce lawyer can help make the split less painful

Approximately half of all people who get married will end up getting divorced. A divorce can be a stressful and traumatic experience for men, women, children and for members of the extended family who are also impacted by the break up of a marriage.

Having the right attorney can alleviate some of the emotional sting and reduce some of the stress which are integral parts of the divorce process. Conversely, having the wrong kind of legal representation, can make an already painful experience significantly worse for you and for your loved ones.

Since I have counseled many people who are considering a divorce or who are going through a divorce, and because I have interacted with many attorneys who handle martial matters, I thought a few suggestions on finding the right divorce lawyer could be helpful to my readers:

1. Select an attorney who specializes in family law.

If you choose this kind of lawyer, it is likely that his or her office is set up to deal with the forms and paper work which are part of the divorce process. A law office which is automated to deal with divorces will streamline the experience and save you time, money and stress.

2. Decide if you are more comfortable with a male or female attorney.

This is a personal choice, but I believe it is an important one for a person who is about to end his or her marriage.

3. Interview three or four lawyers and decide who seems most competent and determine who you feel most comfortable with.

Bring a list of questions to your initial consultation and get a sense of the lawyer's knowledge and his or her communication style. Check out their websites before you meet with them. This should give you a sense as to what their practice is like. You may also want to visit www.martindale.com to get some more background information on lawyers and law firms.

4. Choose an attorney who has practiced in the county where your case will be heard.

You want a lawyer who knows the judges and the opposing attorney. If your attorney has a good relationship with the other players, you can benefit from their ability to work together.

5. Determine if you are more comfortable with a law firm or with an individual practitioner.

There are pros can cons to both.

6. Find an attorney who tries to settle things, but who is not reluctant to fight for you if things get nasty.

7. Talk to people who have been divorced.

See who they recommend. It is unlikely that you will find someone who thoroughly enjoyed the experience. However, you probably will find someone who feels that their case was handled in an effective and a pleasant manner. This is the kind of representation you want when you are dissolving your marriage.

8. Negotiate with your lawyer and see if he or she will handle the entire process for a flat fee.

Some lawyers will work in this manner.

9. Don't spend money on battles that you cannot win, just to get back at your spouse.

10. If you feel you have made a mistake and hired the wrong lawyer, don't be afraid to switch attorneys.

This can be cumbersome, but sometimes it is in your best interest to change counsel, if you are not getting along well and if the process is going poorly.

Originally from divorce360.com and printed in SanLuisObispo.com.

'Can't afford' divorce in hard times....BUT

Financial problems often drive couples apart, but the nation's overwhelming economic crisis may be holding them together.

"People simply can't afford to get divorced. They can't afford the legal fees; they can't afford having two separate places to live," said Michele Weiner-Davis, a Colorado social worker and founder of divorcebusting.com, an online community for couples considering ending their marriages.

"There are a lot of couples who decide they have to stay together and have become motivated to do so," she said, adding that her own practice is still busy.

Spouses who are divorcing are finding that the often-nasty experience is now even more contentious.

"[Spouses] want to receive a certain amount of support and the other will say they simply don't have enough money," said Michelle Thomas, a divorce lawyer who works in the District. "Divorce has become more contentious because there is less to divide. Then they are separating and the pot has shrunk. It is hard for the other spouse to comprehend that."

Home values in the Washington area have declined 19.4 percent from a year ago, according to the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has fallen nearly 35 percent in the same period, taking a huge chunk out of couples' home equity and 401(k)s. Job losses make the situation even more difficult.

Divorce rates often fall in a bad economy. Statistics show divorces declining in the District and at least two states - Kansas and Connecticut - over the past three years. Up-to-date figures were not available for Virginia and Maryland.

"Most people don't want to wait on the mortgage," said Carolyn Goodman, a divorce lawyer who works in the District, which has the lowest divorce rate in the nation. "It is very hard to refinance right now and many people are being forced to just stay on. That's where I have seen the change. People may think twice about getting divorced and just separate."

However, some may benefit from divorce in difficult economic conditions.

Cindy Hartwell, a divorce lawyer in the wealthy Connecticut suburbs of New York, says this can be an opportune time to divorce for the family breadwinner.

Read the entire article in the Washington Times.

Divorce Makes Women Look Older

Divorce is one of several factors now found to add years to a woman's face.

Lots of things make us old. Previous research has shown smoking causes premature aging in men and women, literally etching the aging in their faces. Other research has found that poor skin tone can add a decade to a woman's perceived age.

In the new work, researchers photographed the faces of 186 pairs of identical twins, mostly women, and asked them each a series of questions about their life habits and medical backgrounds. Four other people then reviewed all the photos and guessed the ages of each person.

Women who were divorced were judged to look nearly two years older than their siblings who were married, single or widowed, according to an article at the The Los Angeles Times web site. The research was led by Bahman Guyuron, chairman of the department of plastic surgery at University Hospitals Case Medical Center, part of Case Western Reserve University. It was reported in the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

Only the results for women were released. Other factors that made one twin look older than a sibling:

• Sun exposure
• Smoking and alcohol use
• Antidepressant use

Antidepressants may cause facial sagging, Guyuron speculated.

Interestingly, being heavier made those under age 40 look older, but it made those over 40 look younger, Guyuron and colleagues report. Previous research has suggested that a little weight — particularly in the cheeks — looks good on people as they age. Predictably for a plastic surgeon, Guyuron said his findings support "fillers" used in plastic surgery.

For those who prefer to keep the looks they're given, perhaps some comfort can be found in the old adage "you're only as old as you feel." A study in December found that older people tend to feel about 13 years younger than their chronological age.

Read more in LiveScience.com

In divorce, put focus on well-being of the kids

Parental visitation important to building child's support system

One in four children will experience the divorce or separation of their parents, and many will face serious adjustments. New homes and/or schools, and added financial pressures are all significant factors, but critical to a child's ability to cope is the opportunity to have regular access to both parents.

Communication is frequently an issue, often resulting in wrong assumptions by one or both parents regarding their children. Frustrated parents may refuse their children access to the other parent, and/or the non-custodial parent may be inconsistent in contacts with his or her children.

Unless parental rights are revoked, denying a parent contact with his or her children is illegal — even if he or she fails to pay child support. Domestic violence or drug issues sometimes are involved. As long as a child's safety is not threatened, he or she still can have contact with a parent, even if third-party assistance is necessary.

Sometimes children become "pawns" in parental battles. As parents seek to win, their children frequently lose. By supporting their child's contact with the other parent, adults validate the importance of that relationship, and minimize the focus on their own hurts or frustrations.

Parents can't control each other, and benefit most from focusing on what they can control: their own attitudes and behaviors. When adults — even when they feel disrespected — resist the urge to degrade the other parent in front of children, they demonstrate integrity.

There may be frustration with the other parent's lack of follow-through or availability, and the pain that this causes for children. While making disparaging comments should be avoided, adults should be careful not to make excuses for parental irresponsibility.

Non-custodial parents must persist in maintaining contact with their children, even if the other parent makes it difficult or a child seems to push them away. It may feel discouraging now, but perseverance generally pays off with deeper parent-child relationships later.

Parents should respect/honor the visitation schedule — both in showing up, and by being on time to pick up and drop off children. They should avoid making promises unless they can deliver on them.

Children need structure and love. Parents should make time with them as "normal" as possible, showing that they are more than simply a "Disneyland Dad" / "Magic Kingdom Mom," who constantly entertains. Kids feel safer and grow up more confident with a healthy balance between clear expectations and unconditional support.

More in the Statesmanjournal.com.

"After my divorce, I lost touch with my daughters. Now that they're older, I'm desperate to reconnect with them"

Dear Lesley,

Do you think it is possible to reconnect with two daughters in their early twenties, from whom I have been estranged for at least five years? The trouble is that I have tried to put the past behind me emotionally, and do not want to open myself up to be hurt again.

I'll try to summarise events. I divorced their mother when the girls were 12 and 14 because she was having an affair with a colleague and our home life was a mess. The divorce itself was uncontested. I obtained joint custody, bought a home and attempted to rebuild a relationship with my daughters. Naively, I believed their mother would support me in this, but instead she constantly disparaged me to my daughters and to others. Later I came to learn that this phenomenon is called Parental Alienation Syndrome.

I attempted family counselling but my efforts were undermined, both by my ex and by my daughters, who were getting out of hand. When they left school, they both moved away to go to college and carried on seeing their mother, but in all this time I have seen them only once. Over the years, I continued to send them birthday and Christmas cards and occasional emails. However, much as I wanted a good relationship with my daughters, I distanced myself from them emotionally and financially. I was not willing to accept a one-sided relationship, nor would I allow myself to be disrespected or used.

Recently, the door between my daughters and me has been opened slightly. But I take the view that, much as I would like a relationship with them, I will not attend any function at which their mother is present. I know this sounds selfish and immature but I cannot describe the emotional damage this woman has caused. My daughters have interpreted this attitude as a direct rejection of them. Can you see any opportunity for me to have a meaningful relationship with my daughters without changing my position?

Ian

Dear Ian,

I have a picture in my head of you walking backwards from your daughters, draped in silver crosses and garlic to ward them off. They are not vampires. They are young women. It is very clear to me that you long for a good relationship with them and I am going to encourage you in that. A short answer to your final question is that I do see an opportunity for a meaningful relationship with your daughters but I also think you have to consider changing your position. You can drop some of the defensive control, without opening yourself up to be badly hurt again.

It may surprise you to learn that I don't believe in happy endings. I am on the side of Solon the Lawgiver, who famously said: "Call no man happy until he is dead". He wasn't being gloomy, simply acknowledging the fact that every human life is full of twists, turns and surprises. I am not going to encourage you to believe that your family past can be completely forgotten and that you can walk off into the sunset with a loving daughter on each arm. Life is much more complex than that.

However, I do believe in redemption. I believe that human beings have the ability to take a step back, adjust their behaviour and get different results. I believe in the power of growing adults to mature and gain new understanding. I believe that if you lower your expectations, lighten up and take the long view, you can protect yourself from a lot of pain. I think you are right to shield yourself as far as possible from the caprices of your wife, but your daughters are still a work-in-progress, and so is your relationship with them.

There is so much to gain here. Last week in this column, I published letters from step-parents and stepchildren who testified to the reconciliations that come with maturity. When your daughters find partners and have children of their own, they will tap into mature emotions and may become more forgiving themselves. They will certainly welcome the contribution of a loving and tolerant grandfather. Your question is, how do you get to there from here?

You say that the door between yourself and your daughters "has been opened slightly." I'm intrigued by the passive voice. Who opened it? Was it you? Was it them? I have a picture of a half-open door with people standing warily on either side of it, looking but not daring to step. They've been hurt, too. When you say you won't be in the same room as their mother, it looks to them as if you are putting your hurt feelings above theirs.

I don't know how you have been approaching the question of a meeting, but I think it might be easier for everyone, and carry a lot less emotional weight, if you were to start with something pretty small – a lunch, say. You can't walk slap-bang into a meaningful relationship with them after so long a gap, but you could manage an hour together –­ an hour in which you listen, without preconceptions, to what is going on in their lives. An hour in which you drop any attempt to be in control. An hour in which you take a deep breath and acknowledge that you don't really know the girls (or girl – you could do it one at a time) very well, and you need to observe the good in them. You are the grown-up. You can afford to be patient.

If they want to bring their mother along, keep your cool and refuse gently. Say something along the lines of, "Sweetheart, I can see why you'd want to get your mother and me together, but we have a difficult history. Maybe one day we'll be friends but, just for now, I'd like to catch up with you on your own and get to know you a bit better. Let's take things slowly, one step at a time."

What do you really know about them? Not a lot if your relationship rests on birthday cards and the odd email, and your primary emotion is fear of being used and exploited. I can see that they were difficult teenagers, but they are young adults now. I repeat that you will build a much better relationship with them if you meet without preconceptions.

And what is wrong with helping them out if they really need help? Nobody wants to be exploited, but if, after an hour in their company, you pick up on the fact that they need help furnishing an apartment or paying for education, then offer to help if you can. It feels good. It's what fathers do – and it reinforces what is good in them.

An easier relationship with your daughters won't happen overnight. But you have the rest of your lives and, on a timescale like that, I do believe miracles can happen. Who knows, a few years down the line you might even be able, for your daughters' sake, to be in the same room as your ex-wife for the length of a wedding or a christening. Once you have healed some of your wounds, she won't be able to hurt you as she used to

By Lesley Garner at the Telgraph.

Kids Keeping the Peace When Parents Divorce

Today's New York Daily News has a headline that screams Madge's Lourdes Works a Miracle. No, Madonna's teenage daughter isn't healing the sick or parting the seas. According to the paper, what Lourdes has done is even more miraculous -- she's managed to make peace between divorcing duo Madonna and Guy Ritchie.

A source tells the paper that 14-year-old Lourdes came the couple begging, "Please don't be mean to each other." The teen told her mom and Guy that she wanted everything to be as friendly as possible. According to the source, Guy and Madonna have buried the hatchet and are making every effort to make things as civil as possible for the sake of the kids.

The fact that teenage Lourdes is managing to do what even divorce lawyers can't is a definite sign of the times, according to psychologist Cooper Lawrence. Cooper, author of "The Cult of Celebrity" tells momlogic, "It's different now than when we were kids. The way they parented us is different from the way parents raise kids today. Today, kids are involved in every family decision from what car are we going to buy to what kind of dog are we going to get. You can't have it both ways -- you can't expect the child to be involved in family decisions and then all of a sudden make a life changing decision and expect the child to have no say."

Cooper also adds that watching Lourdes take an active role in her parents' divorce sends a powerful message to other children of divorce. "Lourdes is a little girl who grew up with the paparazzi as part of her public life. She has a public image and it matters what she says and does. When she says be nice to one another it sends a different message, it's influential to other kids."

But even so, Cooper cautions about having children act as peace keepers in their parents divorce. She asks parents to be careful about their behavior and warns that children should never be put in a situation where they feel they need to step in to keep the peace. "The children have nothing to do with the divorce. When you put the kid in the middle you're screwing up your kid. It's cruel. Children learn from your behavior and how you treat people."

As a rule, Cooper tells momlogic that parents need to keep the arguments to themselves; no child should have to hear you badmouth, fight or yell at each other. "Some kids take this stuff personally. You don't want the kids to somehow think that the divorce is their fault -- and even if you say that it's not, if you continually bad mouth your ex to the child, you're sending the message that somehow the child is involved."

And above all, remember, although you want to be your child's friend, you are first and foremost a parent. Don't use this as an opportunity to talk about what went wrong in your relationship, that's not a conversation any parents should have with a child. Cooper explains, "Don't talk to the kids about the divorce except for conversations about their own feelings. You have to reassure them that it's going to be ok. Mommy and daddy might not love each other any more but we both love you."

From MomLogic.com.

Can Economy Also be Blamed for More Divorces?

Do tough economic times put extra strain on marriage? The experts say 'yes.'

While therapists and counselors say business is up thanks to our sagging economy, some divorce attornies say their phones have also been ringing with a lot of questions.

So, how are things going here in Arkansas? The Natural State already has one of the highest divorce rates in the country, only Nevada is higher on the list.

A North Little Rock attorney we spoke with says while things are usually quiet in his office the month of December, Arkansans are bucking the trend this year. Boasting one of the highest marriage rates in the country, people in Arkansas are obviously eager to "have and to hold for better or for worse."

But unfortunately, some Arkansans aren't sticking to the "as long as we both shall live" part of the deal.

The divorce rate in the United States is 3.6 out of every thousand people. But in Arkansas, that number jumps to 6.1.

Attorney Sam Hilburn says divorce proceedings are never easy, and he's been busier than usual in recent past.

"Generally during the month of December, because of Christmas, people are more reluctant to initiate or begin a divorce, and this particular year I haven't seen much fall off from that or any hesitation to go ahead and file for divorce,” Hilburn says.

Hilburn says the sluggish economy and the troubles that come along with it could be to blame for marital discord.

Obviously, money causes all kinds of stress, but with the housing market in the tank and people losing jobs, marriage could be more fragile than usual.

From ArkansasMatters.com.

Divorce the house before the spouse

Splitting up after years of marriage? Divorce your house, then your spouse.

"If you're still linked through the house, than you're not really divorced," says Kelly Lise Murray, a Harvard-trained lawyer and Nashville real estate agent.

That bit of advice goes against the almost universal desire to hang on to the family home, especially by the spouse who ends up with custody of the children. Indeed, the courts almost always give special consideration to the parent who gets the kids: Keep the kids, keep the house.

But Murray, who describes herself as a "divorce real estate advocate," says people tend to underestimate the "ghosts" that go along with keeping the house. The place is often so filled with memories, both good and bad, she says, that "it's not the family home anymore. It's a huge lodestone."

People also tend to underestimate the true cost of homeownership, so much so, according to Murray, that the remaining spouse's ability to afford the place is often drastically overstated.

Even in a friendly divorce, if there really is such a thing, certain key expenses are either forgotten or overlooked. Lawn care, homeowners' association fees, even the basic costs of maintenance and upkeep are among the costs that are rarely considered, either by the courts or the spouses.

Then there's the even bigger issue of hidden debt. Ideally there will have been no secrets between the husband and wife. But money is a major cause of divorce, and in many cases, one spouse has no clue that the other one has rung up big bills that have become undisclosed liens against the property.

"I see it a lot," says Murray, whose goal is to reform divorce law as it pertains to real estate, one state at a time. "It's frequent. And what you don't know during your divorce can hurt you long after the marriage is over."

Fortunately, a major mistake is preventable—but only during your divorce, not afterwards. So Murray's mantra is "more earlier," as in more due diligence and more information from more financial and real estate experts, all much earlier in the divorce process.

In most divorces, the spouses determine what the house is worth, and the one who gives up the place is usually given a credit of some sort for his or her half of the equity the couple has in the place. Typically, the parties split the difference based on an appraisal. So if an appraiser says the house is worth, say, $300,000 and they owe $200,000, the "out spouse"—usually the man—gives up his claim to his $50,000 equity stake for, perhaps, $50,000 in stocks and bonds.

But along with that appraisal, Murray says the "house spouse" should obtain an independent, third-party inspection of the property to determine whether there are any latent defects that could impact its value.

"You wouldn't buy a house without an inspection, so why would you accept one in a divorce without an inspection?" Murray asks. "What if something's wrong or about to go wrong? You can use the inspector's report as a punch list, and either use the marital assets to make the necessary repairs or reduce the value of the property accordingly."

Make sure to ask your inspector to estimate the remaining life of the property's major appliances and systems. If something is on its last legs, you'll want to know in advance so you can adjust for that as well. And while you're at it, order a termite inspection—the damage those little buggers cause is often significant.

The real estate divorce specialist, whose book, "Divorce This House: When Keeping Your House Equals Losing Your Divorce" ($19.95, divorceyourhousetoo.com) was released in December, also wants the spouses to have two title searches, one soon after the divorce process begins and the other shortly before it's finalized.

The first will uncover any unknown liens, encumbrances or clouds on the title that may have been placed by one spouse without the other's knowledge. Often, there is—a second mortgage, perhaps, or maybe a gambling debt that has become a lien on the property. The second will uncover anything placed on the title during the proceedings, such as a lien filed by the out spouse's attorney to cover his fees.

Speaking of one spouse not being totally honest and aboveboard with the other, it might not hurt, either, to request a CLUE report from the company that insures your home or directly from ChoiceTrust.com.

The more people follow these guidelines, Murray believes, the more they will end up selling the once-family home and moving on.

From the Chicago Tribune.

US man wants value of kidney in divorce settlement

New York doctor donated kidney to wife in 2001 and is now demanding an estimated $1.5m, attorney says

When his wife needed a kidney transplant, Dr Richard Batista gave her one of his, attorney Dominic Barbara said.

Now that Dawnell Batista has filed for a divorce, Richard Batista wants his kidney back as part of his settlement demand. Or, Barbara said today, his client wants the value of that kidney: An estimated $1.5m (£993,000).

The case is being heard in Supreme Court in Mineola, New York.

Barbara said his client, a 49-year-old doctor from Ronkonkoma who graduated from Cornell University Medical School in 1995, married Dawnell Batista on August 31 1990. The couple had three children, now ages 14, 11 and 8.

After she had two failed transplants, Barbara said, his client donated a kidney to his wife in an operation that took place at the University of Minnesota Medical Centre on June 18 2001. Richard Batista said his marriage at the time was on the rocks because of the strain of his wife's medical issues.

"My first priority was to save her life," Batista said at a news conference in Garden City. "The second bonus was to turn the marriage around."

Dawnell Batista, 44, of Massapequa, filed for divorce in July 2005, Barbara said.

Neither she nor her attorney, Douglas Rothkopf, of Garden City, could immediately be reached for comment. A receptionist at Rothkopf's office said he was in court.

Medical ethicists agreed that the case is a non-starter. Asked how likely it would be for the doctor to either get his kidney back or get money for it, Arthur Caplan at the University of Pennsylvania's Centre for Bioethics, put it as "somewhere between impossible and completely impossible".

First and foremost, said Robert Veatch, a medical ethicist at Georgetown University's Kennedy Institute of Ethics, "it's illegal for an organ to be exchanged for anything of value". Organs in the US may not be bought or sold. Donating an organ is a gift and legally "when you give something, you can't get it back", he said.

"It's her kidney now and ... taking the kidney out would mean she would have to go on dialysis or it would kill her," Veatch said.

Nor can you assign a subsequent monetary value to an organ, Caplan said. "There's nothing later [you can get] in terms of compensation if you regret your gift," he said.

What's more, no reputable surgeon would perform such a transplant and no court could compel a person to undergo an operation, he said.

From the Guardian.

Custody of homes becoming main debate in divorce cases

Breaking up is hard to do and it can be even harder in a bad economy.

Lawyers say divorce rates are dropping because people simply can't afford to part ways right now.

Contact 13's Tricia Kean explains a new twist in a classic custody battle.

It was love at first sight when Marybeth Perrault found her dream home.

"I thought I would retire here and knew that this was a house that we could raise the family in," said Marybeth.

That was three years ago and now Marybeth and her husband have split and her dream home has become a nightmare.

"Now I can't stand it. The house is heavily mortgaged," said Marybeth.

Spouses used to fight to keep the house, often their biggest asset.

Now, lawyers say it can be the hot potato that nobody wants.

Attorney Gary Nickelson is President of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

He says it's the newest divorce dilemma.

"Everybody wants the asset that's worth something. Nobody wants the asset that's not worth anything or has debt attached to it," said Gary.

Neither Marybeth nor her husband could afford the house on their own, so she's living there.

They put it on the market, but so far there are no takers.

Divorce attorney Vikkie Ziegler says the current climate is forcing many couples to get creative.

"I'll allow one party to remain in the home, not pull the equity out, try to come up with a financial package, and then perhaps when a child turns 18 or graduates high school, they'll sell it because the market perhaps would be better," said Vikkie.

Nickelson says he's even hearing stories of couples staying together after they're divorced.

"'Well, we can't get rid of the house, so I tell you what. We'll just live in the house until times are better. You can take the upstairs and I'll take the downstairs," explained Gary.

Here is the Contact 13 bottom line if you are thinking about a divorce and fear your house will be a big issue, experts say it's more important than ever to plan things out.

Talk to a mortgage broker, a financial advisor and a realtor.

Before selling take into account whether you or your ex can afford the mortgage on your own and find out if you would qualify to refinance and reduce the monthly payments.

From Action News Las Vegas.

Money problems lead to busy week for divorce lawyers

The "double whammy" of Christmas and the credit crunch will make this week one of the busiest ever for divorce lawyers, experts said today.

One in four people say their relationship is under strain because of money problems, according to a new survey.

Ironically, 11% of those polled say they are being forced to stay in a failing relationship because the financial crisis means they cannot afford to leave.

Researchers for online advice centre InsideDivorce.com found almost two million couples in Britain were suffering marital difficulties and 1.3 million people were considering splitting up.

The traditional New Year rush to end marriages after the stress of Christmas means divorce lawyers brand today D-Day, or Divorce Day, kick-starting their busiest week of the year.

And with 17% of divorced men blaming financial problems for the end of their marriage, the credit crunch is putting extra pressure on relationships in trouble.

Leading divorce lawyer James Stewart from Manches LLP said: "A stressful Christmas is already often the final straw for marriages in trouble.

"The double whammy of Christmas and the credit crunch will make the first full week of January one of the busiest ever."

Relate, the UK's largest provider of relationship support, said it had a 59% surge in the number of calls to its centres over the festive period.

TakeLegalAdvice.com, a website which matches consumers with lawyers, also saw enquiries about relationship difficulties soar over Christmas, up a third compared to the same period last year.

"Christmas can be a nightmare for couples who are already experiencing marital problems," said Derek Bedlow, the site's managing editor.

"Many think about divorce but the added pressures brought about by the downturn may be the straw that breaks the camel's back."

Yet divorce creates its own financial problems, with one in three divorcees falling off the property ladder or having to downsize as a result.

Two in five reported increased levels of happiness following their split - though just 29% of men said they were happier, compared with 49% of women.

The survey's revelations about British relationships included the finding that 17% of marriages are entirely sexless - a potential trigger of infidelity, cited by two in five (38%) people as key factor for divorce.

The other common reasons for splits were abuse (34%) and boredom, cited by almost one in three (29%) people.

The survey also revealed that prenuptial agreements are still unusual, used by just 2% of people who were divorced or married.

Nearly a third (28%) of those who had no agreement said in hindsight they regretted the decision not to arrange finances before marriage.

The researchers surveyed 700 married, divorced, separated and cohabiting adults across the UK.

From the Belfast Telegraph.

Breaking Up Is Harder to Do After Housing Fall

When Marci Needle and her husband began to contemplate divorce in June, they thought they had enough money to go their separate ways. They owned a million-dollar home near Atlanta and another in Jacksonville, Fla., as well as investment properties.

Now the market for both houses has crashed, and the couple are left arguing about whether the homes are worth what they owe on them, and whether there are any assets left to divide, Ms. Needle said.

“We’re really trying very hard to be amicable, but it puts a strain on us,” said Ms. Needle, the friction audible in her voice. “I want him to buy me out. It’s in everybody’s interest to settle quickly. That would be my only income. It’s been incredibly stressful.”

Chalk up another victim for the crashing real estate market: the easy divorce.

With nearly one in six homes worth less than the mortgage owed on it, according to Moody’s, divorce lawyers and financial advisers around the country say the logistics of divorce have been turned around. “We used to fight about who gets to keep the house,” said Gary Nickelson, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers. “Now we fight about who gets stuck with the dead cow.”

As a result, divorce has become more complicated and often more expensive, with lower prospects for money on the other side. Some divorce lawyers say that business has slowed or that clients are deciding to stay together because there are no assets left to help them start over.

“There’s an old joke,” said Randall M. Kessler, Ms. Needle’s lawyer. “Why is a divorce so expensive? Because it’s worth it. Now it better really be worth it.”

In a normal economy, couples typically build equity in their homes, then divide that equity in a divorce, either after selling the house or with one partner buying out the other’s share. But after the recent boom-and-bust cycle, more couples own houses that neither spouse can afford to maintain, and that they cannot sell for what they owe. For couples already under stress, the family home has become a toxic asset.

“It’s much harder to move on with their lives,” said Alton L. Abramowitz, a partner in the New York firm Mayerson Stutman Abramowitz Royer.

Mr. Abramowitz said he was in the middle of several cases where the value of the real estate could not be determined. “All of a sudden,” he said, “prices are all over the place, people aren’t closing, and it becomes virtually impossible to judge how far the market has fallen, because nothing is selling.”

For John and Laurel Goerke, in Santa Barbara, Calif., the housing market crashed in the middle of what Mr. Goerke said had been an orderly legal proceeding. At the height of the market, Mr. Goerke said, they had their house appraised at $2.3 million, which would have given them about $1 million to divide after paying off the mortgage. But by the time they sold last year, the value had fallen by $600,000, cutting their equity by more than half.

“That changed everything,” said Mr. Goerke, who is now nearly two years into the divorce process, with legal and other fees of several hundred thousand dollars. “The prospect of us both being able to buy modest homes was eliminated. The money’s not there.”

Now, with both spouses living in rental properties, their lawyers still cannot agree on what their remaining assets are worth. Their wealth is ticking away at $350 an hour, times two.

“It’s got to end,” Mr. Goerke said, “because at some point there’s nothing left to argue about.”

For other couples it does not have to end. Lisa Decker, a certified divorce financial analyst in Atlanta, said she was seeing couples who were determined to stay together even after divorce because they could not sell their home, a phenomenon rarely seen before outside Manhattan.

“We’re finding the husband on one floor, the wife on the other,” Ms. Decker said. “Now one is coming home with a new boyfriend or girlfriend, and it’s creating a layer to relationships that we haven’t seen before. Unfortunately, we’re seeing ‘The War of the Roses’ for real, not just in a Hollywood movie.”

Read the entire article at the New York Times.

Pads owner hires Goldman Sachs to help with sale

Padres owner John Moores has hired Goldman Sachs to search for a potential buyer as he goes through a divorce from his wife, Becky.

"Goldman will look at offers and make recommendations," Moores said in an e-mail Monday to The Associated Press. "I have been told that, because these are difficult economic times, I should be prepared for a wide range of interest and offers.

"Needless to say, San Diego is a very attractive place to own a baseball team," he said.

The hiring of Goldman Sachs was first reported by MLB.com.

The owner didn't say what percentage of the team would be up for sale.

John Moores, who made a fortune in computer software, bought a controlling stake in the Padres for approximately $80 million in 1994 from a 15-member group headed by TV producer Tom Werner. Werner later became a co-owner of the Boston Red Sox.

The Moores' reportedly own 90 percent of the team. Because of community property laws in California, Becky Moores shares 50 percent of that asset and must agree to any sale. Their daughter, Jennifer, owns five percent and the other five percent is owned by Glenn Doshay, a San Diego businessman, mlb.com reported.

The Padres are going through a salary dump in large part because of the divorce. They're trying to pare their player payroll from about $72 million last year to around $40 million this year.

San Diego, which lost 99 games last year, has tried unsuccessfully to trade ace Jake Peavy, who is due to make $11 million in 2009. San Diego shed $6.5 million by trading shortstop Khalil Greene to St. Louis and pulled a $4 million offer to all-time saves leader Trevor Hoffman.

From USA Today.

Children and Divorce – 5 Parenting Tips for People Going Through a Divorce

Dealing with a divorce is a daunting task indeed.  Once you place children into the equation, the situation becomes even more difficult to handle for people who barely know what to do themselves.  The purpose of this article, however, is to help you focus on what you should do when you spend time with your children, both during and after the divorce process.

 

Remain Positive

 

Whatever you do, try your best not to let your children see you fall apart, even if that’s what you want to do most.  Children don’t understand the complexities of adult relationships and emotions, so there’s no need to burden them with emotions they can’t handle.  Do your best to keep things on a positive note; they are no doubt trying to do the same for you.

 

Don’t Discuss the Details

 

Again, there’s no reason to discuss the divorce with your children, especially if they don’t ask you about it.  Never talk negatively about your spouse and remember that your children still love them as much as they love you.  You should focus on the time you have together and answer any questions they may have as neutrally and briefly as possible.  There’s no need to burden them with extra information that may change their perceptions of either party.

 

Enjoy Your Time Together

 

When you have your children, make the time you spend together quality time.  Do fun activities that help you all bond and work together as a team.  Don’t let negative emotions get in the way or prevent you from doing things as a family.  Sure, things won’t be the way they used to be, but that doesn’t mean that you need to give up either.

 

Don’t Change Parenting Habits

 

More than during any other time, your children need you to be consistent with them.  Don’t be afraid to punish them; they still require discipline.  Be the same parent you have always been and do your best to make sure that you and your ex are still on the same page regarding routines and punishments.  Just because your relationship is over doesn’t mean your children’s needs should fall to the wayside.

 

Be Accessible and Available for Your Children

 

No matter what, you want your children to know that you are going to be there for them when they need you.  Don’t make things out to be worse than they are; no matter what, you will always be their parent.  This time in your children’s’ lives can have a huge impact on their future, so you want to let them know that you are there for them whenever they need you.

This post was contributed by Kelly Kilpatrick, who writes on the subject of a criminalist. She invites your feedback at kellykilpatrick24 at gmail dot com

Divorce rates higher when child has ADHD

Parents of children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) may be more likely than other parents to divorce before their child's 8th birthday, a new study suggests.

The study included nearly 500 couples - 286 had a child with ADHD and 206 had a child without this condition. The researchers found that couples with a child with ADHD were almost twice as likely to divorce before their child turned 8 years old. After that age, however, divorce rates were similar in both groups of parents.

Past research has found that compared with couples with a child without ADHD, parents of children with the disorder tend to argue more often and be less satisfied with their marriage. But studies have come to conflicting conclusions regarding the divorce rate.

These latest findings, published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, suggest that divorce may be more common in families with young children affected by ADHD.

"Families that 'survive' through that age, perhaps because they are low on all of the risk factors, apparently will make it through the rest of the child's childhood," Dr. William E. Pelham Jr., one of the researchers on the study, said in a statement.

Other factors associated with divorce in couples with a child with ADHD included antisocial behavior in the father; a maternal and paternal history of divorce; parent substance abuse; and depression in the mother.

It's also important for parents to realize that a child's ADHD alone will not break up a marriage, according to Pelham, a professor of psychology and pediatrics at the University of Buffalo, State University of New York.

"Certainly we are not suggesting that having a child with ADHD is the only reason these marriages end in divorce," Pelham explained. "Disruptive child behavior likely interacts over time with other existing stress in the family to spark conflict in a marriage and, ultimately, divorce."

Unfortunately, he and his colleagues point out, children who already have behavioral problems may have a particularly hard time dealing with divorce. With this in mind, the researchers write, health professionals who treat children with ADHD should try to routinely ask parents about their marital relationship.

They add, however, that divorce is sometimes the best option for couples having serious marital conflicts.

From Reuters.

Love in stormy times

When the economy sours, unhappy couples often stay together out of financial necessity. But the unhappiness festers, leading to infidelity and other beastly behavior

You can argue over it. But you can be soothed by it, too. It often motivates you to be a better spouse. Sometimes all a little marital tension needs is a nice, generous use of it.

No, not sex. Money.

Money can make relationships easier or more difficult, but is it always dependent on how much there is of it to go around? What happens when challenging economic times make money more scarce?

Quite a lot, it would appear.

Some divorce professionals see a reluctance to separate among unhappy couples when the economy sours. Legal fees are prohibitive, as is the cost of running two soon-to-be-separate households. Houses are harder to sell in the current market, which makes the investment return less certain. Inflation is high. Husband and wife hunker down together to fight the wolf at the door, energized by a renewed sense of survival, joint purpose and richer-for-poorer commitment.

Sorry, that last sentence is false.

Silly me, I must have been having a romantic moment to have even considered the idea. I get all goose-bumpy about how hardship can bring people together. If the United States is facing down the worst financial crisis since the Depression, as many economists warn, you'd think that people would break out M.F.K. Fisher's 1942 classic, How to Cook a Wolf, and think up inspiring, plucky ways to raise their spirits and keep their families intact and afloat, a buffer against the world.

But no.

"I haven't found that this kind of [economic] strain is a positive thing. I haven't seen that it's a cause for reconciliation," observes Deborah Mecklinger, a Toronto marriage counsellor and divorce coach. A spouse who wants to separate may be held back by inopportune economic times, but the unhappiness festers and often leads to "covert behaviour," Ms. Mecklinger says. The would-be bolter may decide to have a secret affair to get through the period until divorce is more affordable. Call it the Recession Affair - it pays emotional dividends.

And if thoughts of separation cannot be stuffed under the rug or smothered in the embrace of a temporary lover, spouses react in one of two ways, divorce experts say. They may work more closely together to find a reasonable economic solution. Often, they decide not to liquidate assets until the market has a chance to recover. The sale of the marital home can also be put off. "Lots of people are converting the basement into an apartment or an attic, and they figure that they will live separately but together and won't incur the cost of a separate household," reports Deborah Graham, a collaborative family lawyer in Toronto. "Our advice to people is that it's not a viable long-term solution - two years maximum. And we write in escape clauses in their agreement."

But often, the wolf at the door can bring out the beast in the spouse.

"When things are tight, the pie is smaller. There are fewer resources to spend [on legal bills] but couples end up spending more because they are fighting for the fewer resources to be divided up. It's a Catch-22," one family lawyer observes.

And then there's the all-important valuation date, or V-date, as lawyers commonly refer to it.

"We get calls, and the wife says, 'He wants to come back,' and I say, 'Well, if he genuinely wants to try, have him agree in advance that the valuation date won't change," says Philip Epstein, a leading family lawyer at Epstein Cole in Toronto. "And then we'll see if he is really interested in reconciliation or in just changing the V-date."

One of the most punishing aspects of divorce in turbulent economic times is the valuation date - the point at which a financial snapshot is taken of the marital assets for division. With the stock market on a roller coaster, that can mean the difference between $100,000 in value one month and $50,000 the next. If the V-date shows the value at $100,000 but market conditions at the time of the division of assets drive it down to $50,000, the higher valuation still stands.

In Ontario, the valuation date is fixed to the day of separation. Judges rarely agree to readjust the value of assets on the V-date at the Ontario Court of Appeal, even when there are wild swings in the market. There is little room for judicial discretion. Which means that the V-date can be a victory date for some spouses, if market conditions are in their favour on the day they separate.

But the Ontario statute on the V-date can encourage devious behaviour on the part of warring spouses. One way to change the V-date, before a separation agreement has been reached, is to reconcile or pretend to. When co-habitation resumes for a period of 90 days or more, a new V-date is set.

"There are no depths to which the human mind can't sink," Mr. Epstein acknowledges ruefully.

In other provinces, there is a floating valuation date, which means that parties have flexibility to agree on a date they deem economically fair to both, and if not, they can argue the case in court, where judges have greater discretion to reapportion family assets. Mr. Epstein, who is also editor-in-chief of Reports in Family Law, acknowledges that, "in Ontario, property trials are discouraged because it is a fairly rigid system, but it is a scheme that works tremendous unfairness in difficult economic times."

Even when spouses react compassionately to an economic crisis, such as a job loss, many come to regret their generosity.

"I have seen many cases in which the husband loses a job, and the couple make a decision to postpone divorce in order to avoid the double whammy," Ms. Graham says. Many middle-aged men start up a consulting business from home, as job prospects dwindle for their age bracket. Often those new ventures are not successful. "Years can go by, and at some point, the wife, who has been employed outside the home, says, 'I can't do this any more,' and she leaves, but now she has a big spousal support obligation."

Ah, money and the Me Generation.

For better? For worse? I don't think so. The boomers have lived through a sustained period of economic prosperity, and perhaps as a result have never had the opportunity to experience how hardship can engender a greater sense of commitment to each other.

Mr. Epstein explained it best when he offered his impression of how a souring economy affects some people's decision to divorce: "[They] say, 'I was prepared to put up with you when times were good, but not now. If I am going to suffer, I'd rather suffer without you.' "

From the Globe and Mail.

Windsor, Ont., man claims wife stole winning lottery ticket before divorce filed

A 59-year-old Windsor, Ont., woman is being sued by her 81-year-old husband, who alleges she stole his $3.5-million winning lottery ticket before filing for divorce.

In documents filed with the court, Gerald Moore alleges Patricia Moore conspired with family members to deceive him and claim the prize in early April.

He claims his wife gave the ticket to her daughter from a previous marriage for her to cash.

The lawsuit, which also names the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corp., claims Patricia Moore manipulated her husband's "medication for the purpose of rendering him physically emotionally and psychologically incapable" of understanding the situation.

The allegations have not been proven in court.

Patricia Moore - who the suit alleges was given $1.5 million of the winnings by her daughter - filed for divorce in August.

From the Canadian Press.

Divorce qualifies for capital gains exclusion

Q: I was told by a prominent accountant that there is a loophole in the law that states that you can be exempt from paying capital gains (if you are in a home less than the two-year period) if there are "unforeseen circumstances" involved. Are you aware of this? At the time I was going through an "unforeseen" divorce.

A: In general, in order to take advantage of the up-to-$500,000 exclusion of gain ($250,000 if you file a separate tax return), you have to own and live in the house for two out of the five years before it is sold. But the law does allow a partial exclusion under certain circumstances.

There are three "safe harbors," meaning that if you meet these tests the IRS will not challenge you: 1) changing to a job that is at least 50 miles farther away; 2) major health problems; and 3) unforeseen circumstances. In this third category, if you could not have anticipated an event before you purchased your house, you may also be able to claim a partial exclusion.

While this is fact-specific - and in many cases you will have to get a special ruling from the IRS - there also are some safe harbors that the IRS will recognize. These include: an involuntary conversion of your house; natural or man-made disasters resulting in a casualty to your home; divorce or legal separation; and multiple births resulting from the same pregnancy. It would appear that you may qualify based on your divorce.

The exclusion is equal to the number of days of use times the quotient of $500,000 divided by 730 days. Note that 730 days is two full years. If you are single - or do not file a joint tax return - change the $500,000 to $250,000.

Your accountant knows what he is talking about, so you should ask him to do the calculations. But I do not think he said that you can escape all capital gains tax.

From the San Francisco Chronicle.

Divorce Tips!

Maybe you have been thinking about it for some time. Maybe it is a sudden revelation. Perhaps your spouse has made the decision for you. Whatever the situation, it sends a shudder up and down your spine! Divorce is one of life's most upsetting events. Those who leave have different emotions from those who get left, but the degree of turmoil is about the same. It is easy to get overwhelmed, but working through an action plan and taking it step by step will help you get through this painful time.

Firstly, create a cash plan for the separation period. A divorce typically costs more and takes longer than you expect. Money that previously used to support one household must now be stretched to support two! On top of regular transportation, food and accommodation costs, you now have an additional drain on your financial resources in the form of court fees and legal fees. It is therefore important to accumulate some cash reserves during this period. If possible, put some money aside from your regular paycheque, into a bank account or money market account in your own name. Do remember to reveal all your assets, including your cash reserves, when you divide the assets, to make sure your divorce agreement is valid.

Gather financial records e.g. tax returns, statements for all assets and debts, land deeds, marriage certificates, pension statements to name a few. Take an inventory of your safe deposit box. Call a realtor for an estimate of worth on your home, cottage or rental. For exact values call an appraiser. If you have a lot of antiques, use an antiques or second-hand dealer to value your antiques / furnishings. Use the "Lemon" aid book or call your general insurance broker to get an estimate of vehicle values. Remember to get your pension valued by a professional pension valuator. Keep track of any inheritances you may have received and keep it separate from family assets. Make out a net worth statement for yourself and your spouse. List all your assets firstly and then subtract all that you owe, to calculate your net worth on the date of separation. This information will be required by your lawyer and financial divorce specialist to help along in this process.

Put together a team of specialists to help you. Your divorce requires competent professional assistance and emotional support. Money can be the most contentious issue in any separation or divorce. It is vitally important for your future well being that the financial settlement be as satisfactory as possible for all concerned, both in the short and long run. A competent financial expert is invaluable in this process. Financial professionals who have taken advanced training in the area of divorce settlements are recognized as Financial Divorce Specialists and use the designation FDS. The Financial Divorce Specialist does not provide legal advice but can evaluate and offer suggestions based on proposed financial settlements. A divorce or family law lawyer will be able to provide you with the legal expertise required. A mental health professional may be required to provide you with a safe emotional outlet and expert guidance on managing stress and parenting issues. Look at other options to resolve your differences e.g. collaborative divorce, or mediation. Remember to stay focused on the major issues and be prepared to give way on minor items.

Get a copy of your credit report from the credit bureau. Do not forget to inform creditors in writing that you are no longer responsible for a debt (and include your separation or divorce decree if you have it). Establish your own line of credit and get a credit card in your name preferably when you are still together, so that you don't get turned down when you are on your own.

Do make sure that you protect your support payments by making ensuring you have insurance (life, disability, critical illness) in place and that you are the registered owner of the policy.

Get a new will made and if you are considering a new relationship do get a Pre-nuptial agreement signed. Use the expertise of your financial divorce specialist to ensure that your financial plans for the future are in your best interest.

From the Ottawa Business Journal.

Dividing up real estate during a divorce

When a married couple who own a home decides to part ways, division of the residence and its equity can become one of the most contentious issues among those to be negotiated.

Often, spouses are able reach an agreement on how to divide their property equitably – ultimately saving time, curbing excessive attorney fees and avoiding the pain that comes with a drawn out legal proceeding. But if both parties cannot reach a peaceful arrangement, the court will ultimately decide how the property will be divided, say the experts.

The apportionment of real estate and other property in a divorce is governed by state law, and, consequently, it differs from state to state, says Joe Russo, broker with Docks Only Real Estate, Lake Norman, N.C.

"There is no 'usual' settlement in any divorce," he says. "Different arrangements can be made, depending on what the parties agree to, as in a prenuptial agreement."

When it comes to property division, most states fall within one of two categories: community-property states and equitable-distribution states. In the former, most property earned or acquired during the marriage is shared equally between the two spouses, including a home. In the latter, the court partitions the property in a fair and just manner, depending on the decision of the judge and the laws of the state. Courts in equitable distribution states have much discretion and will examine multiple factors when deciding what is a fair and equitable division of the property, including the length of the marriage, each spouse's earning capacity, the contribution of either spouse in obtaining the home, and each party's health and age.

Other key circumstances, such as the presence of any minor children and when the home was bought, can significantly affect how the home will be divvied up by the court. Typically, if the residence was purchased during the marriage and the husband and wife have no minor children, the judge will partition the property equally between the spouses.

One way this is done is to set off one spouse's interest in the home with other property. For instance, the wife will get the house, while the husband may receive other property worth the equivalent of the home. In many cases, the court may determine it best to force a sale of the home and apportion the proceeds between both parties.

"Usually, both spouses share the equity in the house," says Elinor Robin, Ph.D, a divorce mediator in Boca Raton, Fla. "They may share it at the time of divorce or they may set a time limit – for instance, three years – during which time the home will be sold and the equity shared."

Read more at the New York Daily News.

Seven Myths of Divorce

Myth 1: Most men cheat on their wives.

Actually, the best designed study to date indicates that nearly 80% of men report that they have never cheated on their wives.

Myth 2: Most divorcing women are jilted by their husbands.

Many studies have corroborated that the great majority of divorces (two thirds to three quarters, depending on the study) are initiated by women. This makes sense because numerous studies indicate that men are generally happier being married than are women, they report less marital frustration and dissatisfaction, and are less likely to consider the option of divorce.

Myth 3: Women bitterly regret divorce.

Most divorced women do not regret divorcing. Moreover, divorced women are generally happier than divorced men. And one large study suggests that many middle-aged women become happier after their divorce. These women showed an increase in positive self-image and self-esteem and were inspired by their divorce to gain more control of their lives. Many enjoyed sex more after their divorce.

Myth 4: Women emerge from divorce more emotionally scarred and psychologically damaged than do men.

This is generally not true. Not only are divorced women happier than divorced men, but they are better off emotionally too. In study after study they consistently outscore divorced men on psychological tests to assess emotional health and well-being.

Myth 5: Ex-spouses are highly antagonistic toward one another, even to the point of acting unethically.

Divorced couples, of course, vary widely in the civility of their interactions. But about half of divorced men and women even describe their relationship with their ex-spouse as friendly or cooperative.

Myth 6: Most divorced men can remarry while most divorced women cannot.

It is true that divorced women are less likely than divorced men to want to remarry (after all, they are happier than the men with being divorced). But both groups do remarry at very high rates--and soon. About 80% of divorced men and 75% of divorced women remarry whether or not they have children, and most do so within three years.

Myth 7: The economic consequences of divorce devastate women more than men.

Women are generally worse off financially in the years immediately following a divorce. This has less to do with divorce than with the fact that women generally make less money than men.

From the Independent.

Fed up with gossip, British millionaire posts details of his divorce settlement on the Web

Businessman Gary Dean was sick of the gossip. He found that following a divorce from his wife of almost 20 years, local rumormongers had branded him a cheapskate.

So he took the unusual step of posting details of his divorce settlement on the Internet, allowing neighbors and strangers alike to learn of the luxury cars, expensive jewelry and 3.7 million pounds (US$7.4 million) in cash awarded to his former wife, Helen.

"Over the course of the last year I have been subject to gossip about my divorce, some of it just silly tittle-tattle, and some of it malicious," Dean, 47, wrote on the site,

http://www.deandivorce.com.

Dean said he had been depicted by some as a "greedy, tight, ruthless" man "who abandoned my wife and children."

"It's simply not true at all and I've decided that instead of allowing the rumor mill to continue churning out nonsense, I'd just set out the actual facts to stop it," Dean wrote.

Divorce hearings in Britain are held in private, and the details of settlements rarely become public. When Paul McCartney and Heather Mills divorced earlier this years, the judge took the unusual step of revealing details of the US$50 million settlement to appease intense press and public hunger for information.

Details of the Deans' divorce, settled at a court in Preston, northwest England, in July 2007, show that Gary Dean agreed to pay his wife a lump sum of 3.7 million pounds, plus 15,000 pounds (US$30,000) a year for each of their four children until they are 17.

His wife also got to keep all her jewelry, diamonds and watches, a Mercedes E500, an Audi convertible and the personalized license plates 7HD and 10HD.

The site also provides a description of the couple's comfortable lifestyle, which included "two or three holidays a year on average in high-class hotels."

"I take no joy in setting this all out here," wrote Dean, a publishing and advertising millionaire who lived with his wife and family in the village of St. Michaels, northwest England.

"I'd rather it be unnecessary, but if it stops the gossip, the sneering looks and the seriously defamatory comments being made about me it will have been worth it."

He told Friday's edition of The Times newspaper that being a millionaire in a small community had made him something of a local celebrity.

"If I lived in a city like London, Manchester or Birmingham, where there are a lot of wealthy people, the type of money I have earned would mean nothing," he said. "When you live in a small area it's almost like living in a goldfish bowl."

From the International Herald Tribune.

ABC, NBC Say Economy Is Having Opposite Effects on Divorce Rates

NBC says economy is keeping marriages together; ABC says it's splitting them up

Only on the network news could one culprit – the economy – be blamed for both a rise and a fall in divorce rates. But in one week, NBC and ABC managed to do just that.

NBC “Today” co-host Natalie Morales reported July 11 that divorce rates are down because the “troubled” economy is forcing people to stay together for financial reasons.

Just six days later, “Good Morning America” anchor Chris Cuomo reported that divorce rates are up because the bad economy is tearing couples apart.

“Bad economy, could it be bad news for marriages? Well if you start asking the divorce attorneys, they say yes. In New York, one attorney says 20 percent surge in divorce filings since the news on Wall Street,” Cuomo said on the July 17 show, adding that “money in marriages is always an issue.”

The graphics read “Is rough economy bad for love?” That was following ABC reporter Deborah Roberts’s introduction of the segment where she said “declining stocks could mean soaring divorce rates.”

The ABC cast discussed the causes for the high divorce rates and insinuated that people on Wall Street marry for money. ABC weatherman Sam Champion was put off by his vision of a supposedly calloused Wall Street attitude of, “Well, if we don’t have the money I’m out.”

Roberts added, “But you’re also talking about a certain segment of the population. Wall Street folks, and not to paint them all with a broad brush, but a lot of people who maybe did get into this thing for money.” Cuomo, meanwhile, came up with the simplest explanation for the high divorce rates (according to ABC): “Money corrupts.”

ABC’s report ran in complete contrast to the “Today” report on NBC July 11. “[W]hile the price of divorce normally doesn’t run that high, there is evidence the troubled economy is forcing some troubled couples to stay together, at least for the time being,” Morales said on “Today” July 11.

Farnoosh Torabi, a correspondent for the financial Web site TheStreet.com, explained that, “for example, we’ll take the Miami-Dade County – for example – in south Florida. They had an 18 percent drop-off in divorce filings from January to May of this year, compared to the same period last year…[I]ncidentally, also in that same area, real estate prices have fallen 20 percent.”

From the Business and Media Institute.

Time sharing tips for single parents

It takes effort for divorced parents to avoid fighting and snooping.

Too many parents fight over the details of child sharing and forget to focus on what is really important, the child's needs and feelings.

Unfortunately, it seems to be, "You are getting more time than I am" or "You are inconveniencing me." Translated to the child: "I am a lot of trouble to my parents."

Conscientious divorced parents find that they want to make sure their child is comfortable with their time sharing plan, but aren't sure how to make it easier as the child is passed back and forth between households.

The following tips are those which parents have found helpful as they share their child:

•Set up a regular schedule and make a calendar at each house, no matter how young the child is, to show when it's mom's day and when it's dad's day. Then the receiving parent stays at their home and the parent who has just had the child brings the child to the other parent's home.

A few minutes before the child is about to leave for the other parent's home, you can cheerfully mention it's almost time to get ready to go home to see mom.

Mom can do the same, saying, "Dad's going to be so glad to see you when you get home to his house."

•For mothers and fathers who have a difficult time with phone conversations, many parents make a habit of keeping a spiral notebook, which gets passed back and forth between houses.

In this diary-type notebook, they note such things as: "Got a good behavior sticker from his teacher today." "Fell off his bike and skinned his knee." "Didn't want to take a bath again, so I tried giving him stickers for each time he didn't whine when it was bath time. That seems to be working."

The point is communication about your child, and letting the child know you two are talking about her and care about her.

By sharing their experiences with their children in this way, parents know what happened during their non parenting time. Funny things the child did can also be shared between parents. Other parents set aside 10 minutes a week, when the child isn't around and go over things the child may need. Others are able to phone each other when issues come up about their child's schedule at school, or colds or illness.

•Other successful tips include keeping a picture of the other parent in the child's room; allowing a nightly phone "Good Night" kiss with the other parent; being flexible with the other parent when there is a family event or visit from an out of town relative on their parenting time.

What not to do in timesharing?

Don't pump your child for information about the other parent's life or lifestyle. It isn't your business. If you really want to know something, pick up the phone and clear up your child's comments with a simple question or two.

Suppose your child comes home and says, "Dad left us alone while he was outside with his girlfriend." A 4-year-old may not realize that dad simply went outside, got something from his girlfriend's car, and came right back into the house. To the 4-year-old, the time period may have seemed like an hour.

Check things out with the other parent, it will relieve your mind and keep lines of communication open as you build your child's future with happy childhood memories, rather than memories of his parents' fights.

From the Orange County Register.

Some ex-wives have to pay 'manimony'

When Susan Harris divorced her husband of five and a half years last December, she got the apartment, extra closet space and the covers all to herself.

Her ex? He got $37,440.

That money is being doled out in 48 monthly alimony payments. Or, as it's called in some circles, "manimony."

Over the course of the couple's marriage, Harris, 31, who makes more than $100,000 working in ad sales in Alameda, California, brought in more than two-thirds of the household income, while her ex-husband (who declined to comment for this article) worked toward becoming a credentialed teacher.

The couple had no children or joint property other than a rental apartment. When things started getting rocky in the relationship around year two, Harris was loath to end things, partially because she was concerned that she'd be obligated to continue supporting him financially, even though he was employed.

Her concerns were well founded. Legally - under state laws - both women and men are entitled to alimony if there's a large discrepancy in spousal income.

However, that doesn't mean men seek alimony.

"Thirty-three percent of higher-earning spouses are women, but fewer than four percent of alimony payers are women," says Ned Holstein, president of Fathers & Families, a family-court reform organization in Boston, citing U.S. Census Bureau data.

Finances of marriage

For most of the history of marriage, money changed hands before the ceremony, often in the form of dowries. But as divorce started to become more common in the 1900s, so did post-separation monetary agreements.

"Traditionally, marriage was a financial arrangement. Joining hands in marriage meant joining bank accounts, and bank accounts were largely in the hands of men," says Roderick Phillips, a professor of history at Carleton University in Ottawa, and author of "Untying the Knot: A Short History of Divorce."

"The trend in the 20th century has been to allow women to recover what they had before the marriage and to compensate them for anything they sacrificed during the marriage," says Phillips.

The Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act of 1970 gave men as well as women the right to ask for alimony. Up until the 1980s, however, there were only a handful of cases in the U.S. in which a woman was ordered to give money to her spouse in a divorce case. However, "in recent years there's been a greater movement towards gender equality," says Phillips.

'I'm a man! I can take care of myself'

Some husbands have settled for increased custody instead of going to the mat for money, says Holstein.

"I hear a lot of men say, 'She earns way more than I do, but I wasn't going to ask for alimony because I get the kids 40 percent of the time and I don't want to rock the boat.' Then there are a lot of men who are just ashamed to ask for it."

Nancy Chemtob, a divorce attorney and a founding partner of Chemtob Moss Forman & Talbert, a New York City law firm that focuses on divorce, family and matrimonial law, agrees. "Men don't brag about it, and women aren't proud of it."

"I think men are chided for not making money and women are not. It's not even brought up if a woman in court says she is not working. Where if it is a man, it's brought up, says Chemtob. "The law is equal, but... the mentality isn't."

Mark Berlin, 45, an office manager at Office Depot in Chicago, was awarded $250 a month in alimony on top of $925 a month in child support when he divorced the mother of his two sons in 2005.

"I didn't really even want the alimony, but she made more than me and [the court] said that's what she had to pay," says Berlin. He puts the payments, which will continue through 2010, into college savings for his kids.

"I do think that there shouldn't be discrimination against one sex or the other, says Berlin. "Still, when I first realized she was going to be paying me, I felt very embarrassed. I felt like, 'I'm a man! I can take care of myself!'"

Changing times, changing attitudes

Not all women resent paying money to their exes -- and not all men feel uncomfortable being on the receiving end. As the number of alimony cases increases, attitudes are gradually beginning to change.

Jeffrey Leving, an Illinois divorce lawyer and author of the book "Fathers' Rights" attributes a rising trend in women paying spousal support in part to an increased number of fathers serving as primary caregivers.

"I also think that there are more men wanting to function as the sole parent and raise children than ever before," says Leving. "It's becoming more socially acceptable for men to be primary parents."

Chemtob says close to one-tenth of her clients are women who pay alimony to their exes. "When I first started 14 years ago, that number was zero," she says.

For the last two years Alexis Martin Neely, a family lawyer and author of the financial planning guide "Wear Clean Underwear," has paid her ex-husband between $1,300 and $2,000 a month in alimony -- in addition to child support. During their six-year marriage, he was a stay-at-home dad. Currently he is unemployed and has custody of the children half the time.

"I'm grateful to be able to support him being able to spend time with the kids," says Neely, who is 34 and lives with her two children in Hermosa Beach, California. "It's just money -- I can always make money. But I see people embroiled in conflict for years of their life, and that's something you can't ever get back."

Read it all at CNN.

Court order needed to split retirement accounts in divorce

Q: You wrote in a column that there is a one-time reprieve from early-withdrawal penalties if you cash out. I am recently divorced and my ex has his 401(k) account with about $3,000 that is mine. He tells me he can write a check, but I have to pay all the fees. How does this play into what you said about this one-time reprieve?

J.R.

A: Divorcing couples can split retirement accounts and even cash them out penalty-free as part of a settlement, but it has to be executed properly, and this is what many couples fail to do, divorce planners said.

Splitting up the 401(k) account should be done through a court-issued qualified domestic relations order, said Rita Medaglio-Barrera, a certified divorce financial analyst with Paragon Capital Management in Smithtown, N.Y.

"He can't just write her a check" and have it qualify for the penalty exemption, she said. "She's probably out of luck," because going back after your settlement and re-negotiating this is unlikely, she said.

Done properly, an ex-spouse can receive a one-time distribution from the plan without having to pay the early-withdrawal penalty of 10 percent. The income taxes due on the account still have to be paid, so that should be taken into consideration during the division of the couple's property.

If the spouse doesn't need the money right away, it can be rolled into an individual retirement account, though Medaglio-Barrera said individual employer plans often have their own rules governing how those rollovers are done, and it can involve a couple of separate administrative steps.

To be valid, the court-issued qualified domestic relations order must include (among other items) correct names and addresses of you and your soon-to-be ex, details on the division of the money and information on the retirement plan in question, the analyst said.

The professionals preparing the documents need to have the retirement plan's summary plan description, because that typically spells out the specific legal language needed in the order to be able to access the funds in the 401(k), Medaglio-Barrera said. Many plans actually contain language that must be repeated exactly in the order to be valid.

Then the retirement plan must verify the details of the order before issuing a distribution, a process that also involves several steps. In short, splitting up retirement plans shouldn't be an afterthought in a divorce. They require specific, detailed language of their own and must come directly from the employer plan, not your ex-spouse.

Finally, keep in mind that the orders cannot force an employer to perform actions that run counter to the company's summary plan description. Some plans allow couples to split the assets and then maintain two accounts in the employer plan. Others might require that funds remain in the plan until the employee retires. Many allow the immediate cash-out option, as well as the option to roll the money into an IRA, which is what most advisers recommend to help clients preserve some long-term finances as they exit a marriage.

From the Chicago Tribune.

Divorce muddies water in real-estate transaction

Question: My husband and I sold our home nearly two years ago and moved into a condominium that we own jointly. He has now left me, and he wants a divorce. I will be living in the condo until it's sold and we divide the proceeds. Will we be able to exclude capital gains on the sale of this property as our principal residence because we had just sold our home?

Answer: While individuals are allowed to exclude the capital gains generated from the sale of personal residences an unlimited number of times (up to $250,000 of gain each per sale for individuals), there must be at least two years between the sales.

If fewer than two years have passed between sales, you might be able to prorate the exclusion depending on the facts.

Because many homes are sold as a result of divorce, the law recognizes the special problems associated with divorcing couples.

In order to allow the "departed" spouse to either attain or retain the required two-year occupancy needed to qualify his or her ownership interest for the full capital-gains exclusion, the law allows the departed spouse to count the time the other spouse occupies the residence just as if the departed spouse was still living in the home.

However, it is important to remember that this "tacking" can take place only if the remaining spouse is authorized to continue occupancy pursuant to court order or marital agreement. And if one spouse purchases the interest of the other incident to a divorce, the purchasing spouse will be allowed to take advantage of the selling spouse's period of ownership. Here, we suggest that your property not be sold until at least two years have passed from your prior sale, but be sure to check with your tax adviser.

From the Orlando Sentinel.

Madonna Hires Divorce Lawyer?

Could the rumors be true? Is Madonna done with Guy Ritchie? According to UK's Holy Moly, Madge has reportedly hired Britain's toughest divorce lawyer, Nicholas Mostyn QC.

Madonna and Guy have been dodging breakup rumors for a while now so this isn't exactly shocking news but the odd twist it that the report claims Madge and Guy didn't have a pre-nup. Say what you will about Madonna, but she's one smart businesswoman. There is no way in hell she would get married without a pre-nup.

Apparently the couple has just "grown apart" over the years and "The adoption of David Banda attracted a huge wave of negative publicity, allegedly putting further strain on the relationship."

Madge met with Mostyn about 10 days ago to allegedly discuss the divorce proceedings. What do you guys think?
From Hollyscope.com.

Same-Sex Couples Face Another Growing Hurdle -- Divorce

Next week, same-sex couples across the country who want to marry will be welcomed in California. But what happens if they later want to divorce?

That is one of the many legal issues that could confront California newlyweds who return to home states where same-sex marriages are prohibited. Unlike a Massachusetts ruling a few years ago, a landmark court ruling last month allowing same-sex marriages in California will permit almost any out-of-state couples to wed there.

But that doesn't mean their lives after the wedding will be easy. Some gay and lesbian couples joined by marriage in Massachusetts or Canada, or under civil unions from, say, Vermont, contend with legal limbo in other states. Among the tricky issues, apart from divorce, that can make the honeymoon feel decidedly over are employee benefits, bankruptcy filings and inheritance rights.

John McCall Jr., a Dallas lawyer who represents gay and lesbian clients in property and custody disputes, says that thanks to the legal thicket same-sex couples can face, his clients "over and over again tell other couples considering marriage to run in the other direction."

Cassandra Ormiston and Margaret Chambers were married in Massachusetts in 2004 but tried, in vain, to divorce in Rhode Island, with the state's high court saying last year that the state defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Now, Ms. Ormiston is trying to establish residency in Massachusetts to divorce there.

That can add to an already difficult process. Joanna Grossman, a law professor at Hofstra University School of Law in New York who specializes in family law and sex discrimination, says she has been contacted by more than 50 people who entered Vermont civil unions and now want out. The problem, she tells them, is that you have to establish residency in the state to file for divorce.

To wind down a relationship, same-sex couples have to navigate a process that may force them to appear in three different courts, including a civil court that treats the separation as a business breakup. Says Mitchell Katine, an attorney who handles same-sex separations: "It's not fair to parties to have their relationship of 20 years treated like a breakup of two people who operated a Kinko's."

Health care and other benefits pose similar issues. In May, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that public employers in the state can't offer health insurance to same-sex domestic partners, because of state law limiting marriage to one man and one woman. In New York last year, a state court ruled that a man couldn't recover workers' compensation death benefits after a partner, with whom he entered a Vermont civil union in 2000, was struck by a car and later died.

The law is far from settled. In February, a New York court ruled that a community college in the state had to recognize a Canadian same-sex marriage for purposes of awarding spousal health benefits. Following the decision, the New York governor's office in May ordered state agencies to recognize same-sex unions from out of state. Then a conservative religious organization sued, arguing that the governor overstepped his authority.

Another issue is health decisions. Texan Dennis Milam, who married his longtime partner last year in Canada, has legal papers authorizing him to act on his spouse's behalf. Still, Mr. Milam says he worries about emergencies. "What if something happens at 2 a.m. and you are upset and don't remember your papers?" he says.

Gay and lesbian advocacy groups, while hailing the California decision, fear the creation of "bad law," or setting unfavorable precedent, that might result if couples try to assert their new status elsewhere. The groups are expected to issue a joint statement Tuesday advising California newlyweds against filing suit in their home states. "We need to lay the groundwork by changing the climate -- convincing community leaders, moving public opinion -- before we rush into court," the statement is expected to say.

Still, a surge in litigation is likely, says Glen Lavy, a lawyer for a group that opposes gay marriage. "We are not encouraging people to bring these suits, but we are prepared to defend marriage wherever these suits occur," he said.

From the Wall Street Journal (subscription required)

Slicing Up Assets in Advance

It's one thing to write about prenups, and quite another to live through their making. Doing a prenup isn't for sissies.

There I stood, in Vera Wang's dreamy Madison Avenue shop, trying on a wedding dress. On either side, 25-year-olds, with their mothers, their bridesmaids and their 22-inch waists. In the center, me, trying to pull something white and swishy over my hips. Available wedding dates are few for brides of a certain age. You have to celebrate after your grandchildren get out of school and before your friends go away for the summer. So I'll be a June bride. I have two more weeks and am hustling to finish the paperwork.

Oy, the paperwork!

When my husband died four years ago, I hadn't expected love to come back into my life. It did, in the person of Carll and his children. Between us, we have eight. That raises the unromantic question faced by all parents who go to the altar, bringing families along. What do you do about the money?

If you do nothing, state law intervenes. When one of you dies, the other can claim a share of the assets, no matter what it says in your will. If you divorce (gulp), a court can divide the property in ways that seem fair. Couples wanting a different result have to draw up a prenuptial agreement—a legal contract defining the financial arrangement they prefer.

It's one thing to write about prenups, as I have before, and quite another to live through their making. Most decisions were easy. One, however, required us to dig into feelings that were hard to talk about. Embarrassing, even. Doing prenups isn't for sissies.

The easy things were our separate assets. Neither of us needs financial support. The prenup says that what's mine goes to my kids when I die, and what's his goes to his.

There's a twist with my retirement fund. You can leave an Individual Retirement Account to anyone you want. By law, however, some or all of your 401(k) or pension trust is earmarked for your spouse. A prenup can't change that. To free me to leave my pension trust to my kids, Carll has to sign a special waiver after we marry, not before.

So here's the nightmare (only an obsessive financial reporter could think this one up): I say "I do," waltz from the wedding ceremony to the party tent, trip on the dance floor, break my neck and breathe my last. Carll inherits the pension trust and can't give it back to the kids without paying a gift tax. They rebel. I haunt the lot of them.

There is a whole lot more from Jane Quinn in Newsweek.

Rabbinic Court head supports use of prenuptial agreements

Rabbi Eliyahu Ben-Dahan, administrative head of the Rabbinic Courts, recently expressed his support for prenuptial agreements as a potentially important remedy to the tragic situation of agunot ("chained women" - women who are denied a divorce).

Ben-Dahan also said that the Rabbinic Courts have in the past upheld prenuptial agreements.

"Prenuptials can be very helpful in expediting divorce procedures," said Ben-Dahan in a telephone interview over the weekend.

"Especially in cases where it is clear that the couple's divorce is unavoidable, but where halacha does not give the Rabbinic Court judges the power to obligate the husband to give a get [writ of divorce]."

The use of prenuptial agreements to facilitate the divorce process is a controversial issue among Rabbinic Court judges. Some rabbis oppose the use of most prenuptials, claiming the agreements make it too easy for one side to end a marriage. They are concerned that making divorce too easy will endanger the Jewish family institution.

They also argue that the use made in prenuptials of monetary incentives to encourage a recalcitrant partner to acquiesce to divorce is really a form of coercion prohibited by Jewish law.

Marriage and divorce among Jews in Israel is governed by Jewish law. As a result, rabbis and Rabbinic Court judges are responsible, respectively, for tying the knot and having it severed.

Careful to sidestep a potential confrontation with Rabbinic Court judges who oppose the use of prenuptials, Ben-Dahan made it clear that his comments expressed his personal opinion and were not to be construed as representing the official Rabbinic Court policy.

Ben-Dahan said it was not the role of the Rabbinic Courts to push for a wider use of prenuptial agreements.

"The role of the courts is to adjudicate, not to legislate," he said. "Nevertheless, from my experience with divorce cases, I can definitely see how prenuptials help shorten long, drawn-out divorce proceedings." Ben-Dahan rejected the claim by opponents of prenups that such agreements make it too easy to end a marriage.

"Although we should be concerned about rising divorce rates... I am convinced that the vast majority of couples who end up at the Rabbinic Courts for a divorce are mature adults who have resolved to end unsalvageable marriages."

Ben-Dahan also pointed out that Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar, in a recently released volume of halachic responsa entitled "Shema Shlomo," favored the use of some prenuptial agreements.

Prenuptial agreements dictate that in a case of divorce proceedings initiated by one of the two partners in a marriage, the recalcitrant side - usually the husband - will be obligated to pay a large sum of money monthly until the marriage is dissolved.

The common amount stipulated is $1,500 or half of monthly income, whichever is higher.

This obligation normally kicks in six months after the divorce proceedings are initiated.

Ben-Dahan made his support for prenups public at a conference last week.

The conference, organized by The Council of Young Israel Rabbis in Israel, Matan, Mifnim and Yad L'isha, together with the The Rackman Center for the Advancement of the Status of Women at Bar-Ilan University, brought together rabbis, marriage professionals and lawyers and taught them the benefits of prenuptial agreements.

From the Jerusalem Post.

Subpoena of Internet Service Provider Records in a Divorce Case:

From London v. Does 1-4, an unpublished Ninth Circuit memorandum from last week:

In 2005, Jennifer London, a United States citizen who was domiciled in St. Martin, began divorce and child custody proceedings against her husband, Richard London, also a United States citizen, in St. Martin, a French territory governed by French law. Jennifer sought a divorce from Richard based on adultery, a ground for a fault-based divorce. To establish the adultery, Jennifer introduced evidence in the divorce proceeding to suggest that Richard had used five pseudonymous Yahoo! email accounts to solicit sex on the Internet. Richard denied that the email accounts belonged to him and claimed that Jennifer had fabricated the evidence.

Thereafter, Jennifer filed an application in district court for an order to conduct discovery on the five Yahoo! email accounts under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 for use in her foreign divorce case. The district court granted the application and issued a subpoena to Yahoo! directing it to produce: (1) documents identifying the names, addresses, and telephone numbers provided by the users of the five email accounts; (2) documents describing the dates on which the five email accounts were created; (3) documents describing the Internet protocol address (IP) from which the five email accounts were created; (4) documents identifying Internet groups in which the account users participated; and (5) documents reflecting group board postings made by the account users. Jennifer served Yahoo! with the subpoena, and agreed to waive the right to documents listed in item five. Richard and the four Does moved to quash the subpoena, which the district court denied....

The proof sought, given the nature and character of the foreign case, is critical to establish adultery, secure the divorce, and defend against allegations of fabrication. Such evidence may be the only way to identify the user of the email accounts used to solicit adulterous sex. The request is not an attempt to avoid foreign evidence rules, and is not unduly intrusive or burdensome because it seeks to gather only identifying information for the accounts, such as the names and addresses of the users, and not the content of any communication. Given the need for the evidence, and the minimal invasion required, the [Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices] factors weigh in favor of granting the request.

Appellants’ contention that granting the [discovery] request violates their First Amendment right to anonymous speech is also without merit. Appellants cite no authority for the proposition that the First Amendment bars release of identifying data for email accounts used to solicit sex partners on the Internet. We have held that exposure of some identifying data does not violate the First Amendment. See People of State of Cal. v. F.C.C., 75 F.3d 1350, 1362 (9th Cir. 1996) (holding that order identifying phone numbers through a caller identification service did not violate the First Amendment right to speak anonymously). Thus, because a legal privilege was not implicated, the district court properly denied the motions to quash the subpoena.

From the great Volokh Conspiracy.

Quoted in the USA Today

Who gets custody of the dog is complicated, 'hotly contested'

When couples split up these days, a matter every bit as intense as who keeps the house or plasma TV is increasingly being slammed onto the table for discussion: Who gets the pets?

Joint custody, sole custody with visitation, no ongoing relationship at all or splitting the pets between partners are all up for consideration, as are who pays expenses for the animal (no matter who has custody) and what happens if the custodial caregiver becomes incapacitated or links up with someone who hates dogs.

"There has definitely been an increase in pets as part of the settlement," says attorney Donald Frank, partner in Blank Rome's Manhattan office. In a 2006 survey of lawyers by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 25% reported an increase in pet custody, about 90% of the cases involving dogs.

And it's sometimes a "very hotly contested issue," Frank says.

Most times, divorcing couples decide about pets (regarded as property) fairly early in the settlement process, "often in a series of phone calls between lawyers," Frank says. But sometimes, he says, the matter must be resolved by a judge.

Divorces aren't the only breakups with implications for pets: Live-in relationships that fall apart often prompt animal-care negotiations.

Lorna Doone has two homes

When Amelia Glynn, 35, and her boyfriend broke up last year, she requested shared custody with the pit bull he brought with him into the relationship. The dog "was important enough to me that I wanted to make a joint-custody agreement," Glynn says, so Lorna Doone spends alternating periods with each.

Glynn wrote about the arrangement in her just-launched pet column on SFGate.com, the San Francisco Chronicle's online operation. The piece prompted several readers to write emotionally about similar experiences, including one divorced couple who share custody of their Boston terriers and an unmarried couple who worked out a split-time deal for their Taiwanese dog.

"It's just not weird" to want to continue a relationship with a beloved pet, Glynn says.

But it can be complicated.

In the best case, the couple put aside emotion, resentment and recrimination and "focuses on figuring out what's best for the animal," says Jennifer Keene, author of a new book that offers guidance for doing just that: We Can't Stay Together for the Dogs: Doing What's Best for Your Dog When Your Relationship Breaks Up (T.F.H. Publications).

When Keene, 30, now a dog trainer in Beaverton, Ore., and her husband decided to divorce three years ago, they instantly agreed on arrangements for their two dogs. Keene took Moxee, an Australian cattle dog mix with some behavior problems, and her ex took Sixxy, a pointer mix.

The need for expert advice

Keene's pet-custody resolution was quick and amicable, but she discovered there wasn't much in the way of expert advice about how to navigate the matter properly. So she set out to research and write a step-by-step guide, including training tips for dogs that come unhinged with the changed family dynamics.

Architect Sara Vreed, 31, of Portland, Ore., put those tips to good use recently when she and her long-term boyfriend broke up.

"I knew to be concerned about the transition," Vreed says, because when the couple broke up for a time two years ago, Ivo, her sheltie, showed some classic stress signals — he had behavior problems and loss of fur on his belly. This time, she sought Keene's advice and learned the importance of "sticking to routines and keeping things positive," and, after just a couple of days of acting up, Ivo is calm and cheerful and hasn't had fur loss.

It's not always simple to keep a dog's equilibrium solid in the lead-up to the actual physical separation, or in arrangements after the split. No single approach works for every relationship or for every dog, Keene says. "You've always got to consider the individual characteristics of the dog."

Splitting up two dogs that have lived together isn't right in all situations, Keene says, although it was in hers, because the two dogs were friendly with each other but not really strongly bonded. And whether there's one or several pets, attention must be paid to which partner has the time, energy, interest and schedule to give each animal what it needs.

Because there's no "in the best interest of the dog" standard in law, says lawyer Jeffrey Lalloway of Irvine, Calif., the pet's living arrangements should be discussed rationally.

Do what's best for the pet

Sometimes it's best for the dog to stay with the person who keeps the house where it has lived, but not always, Keene says. Sometimes it's best to have a split-time arrangement so each partner gets some time with the pet, but sometimes it isn't, because some dogs aren't adaptable enough.

Still, experts agree, at the end of a relationship, rational discussion may be in short supply. As Frank points out, "People are very invested in their pets." One or both partners may demand custody simply to antagonize the other, but Frank says it's most often because "this is already an emotional time for them, and the thought of also losing their dog" is painful.

Keene empathizes. But in the end, "if the person who is most heartbroken at the thought of losing the dog is not the one who can, realistically, provide a good environment and life for it, my hope is that person will put aside his or her own desires and do what's best for the dog."

From USA Today.

What Happens to Child Support, Alimony when Ex Declares Bankruptcy?

According to the AP Former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey was quoted as saying: "I want to pay child support. I want to fulfill my obligations. Unfortunately, I have had to bankrupt myself to pay legal fees upon legal fees."  What if this happened to you?  What would you do?

 40 percent of individuals who file for bankruptcy do so as a direct result of divorce, medical crisis or unemployment, According to “The Fragile Middle Class: Americans in Debt,”
How a bankruptcy affects someone who is divorced depends a lot on the settlement agreement. A primary concern, for the spouse owed money, is what will happen to spousal support, child support and property settlements, said Mathew Weber, a CPA and forensic accountant. “The rules (for bankruptcy) are pretty straightforward,” he said, adding, “The cases are pretty complicated.”   

If your ex files for bankruptcy, all creditors -- including you if you're owned spousal or child support -- would receive notification from the court. Then you have to file a claim right away or " the court can discharge” the debt, Weber said. “People who are creditors in bankruptcy would be well advised to assume the worst about what the judge will decide,” said attorney and divorce mediator Lee Borden.

Thanks to the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), individuals who are owed child or spousal support are protected from losing those funds in court. According to Borden, the laws that served primarily as a bankers’ protection bill also helped with family law claims. “All family law claims are now called first priority. That means that they enjoy a priority when it comes time for the trustee to decide who gets paid and who doesn’t,” Borden said.   

Before the protection act, Borden said lawyers couldn’t prosecute the family law claims until the end of the automatic stay – a period where creditors left you alone. That, however, is no longer the case when it comes to child support and spousal support. “Child support and alimony, both of these are current supports, can be processed and prosecuted even despite the stay,” Borden said. “It in fact, now enjoys a privileged position.” 

 “Support, whether it’s child support, maintenance, alimony, are not discharged,” Borden said.  This rule does not apply to property settlements or back support.   Borden also warned that bankruptcy judges have a primary objective to assist the debtor, not the creditor. “Bankruptcy judges view the world through discharged colored glasses. They are all about helping debtors to get back on their feet,” he said. “They want to get the debtor as fully discharged as possible.” 

Property settlements are another big issue in bankruptcy court. Settlements can include situations in which an ex-spouse agreed to pay for the mortgage or car payment, Borden said. Settlements can also entail the owing of any kind of monetary family court award, other than support. 

In another example, Borden said if an ex-spouse agrees to take over a car payment that was financed under the couple’s names, and the individual files bankruptcy, he or she is no longer required to pay that debt. In return, however, the lending agency can turn to the other spouse and request that money from him or her, even if the ex-spouse still has the vehicle.  

According to Weber, settlements require a certain amount of examination. “The situation is this. If you have a property distribution … you now have to take a look at that,” he said.  

A lot of times bankruptcy cases involving family court claims that are discharged eventually wind up back in family court, Weber said. “When somebody files for bankruptcy, that really only applies to the collection of debt,” Weber said. “When child support and maintenance are involved you now have to go back to the family court.” 

 “The court is going to take a look. They want to know who it is going to harm more, the payer of the recipient,” Weber said. In a recent case, Weber said a woman was owed $1 million and her ex-husband filed bankruptcy. “I did an analysis of both of their lifestyles,” Weber said. “She had basically nothing.” On the other hand, Weber said the ex-husband was maintaining his lifestyle despite the folding of his business.   

The main question the family court is going to ask, Weber said, is who is most harmed by the property settlement and bankruptcy. “We compare the harmfulness to him as opposed to her,” he said. “It would certainly harm her worse (to lose the payout).”  

It is Weber’s task to review each individual’s lifestyles and determine what, if anything has really changed in terms of economic income. “I’m trying to really look behind the numbers and see what’s going on, I prepare a report and we have to testify in court,” Weber said.  

The court’s decision is going to ride on the judge’s opinion. “There is going to be two conflicting experts and the judge will believe, who he believes based on what is presented,” Weber said. “Sometimes, they try to paint a picture that is many times not accurate of their true economic income. Many times somebody is just trying to shift income around.”

Read the entire article at divorce360.

Divorce, death pose tax twists

I always enjoy reconnecting with clients during tax season. Many times joyful events have occurred during the year, such as marriage or the addition of a child to the family. These positive events often have a favorable impact on their tax return.

Unfortunately, difficult situations also arise that bring challenges to the preparation of the tax return. Many of my clients are aging and are facing health problems. Sadly, some clients had to cope with the death of a spouse in 2007. A sound record-keeping system and the help of a family member or close friend can be extremely important in situations such as these.

On top of the emotional strain, the tax implications of divorce can be very unsettling, especially because of community property laws. In Texas and other community property states, communal assets are distributed equally, regardless of who earned more or spent more during the marriage. The courts typically allow the couple a certain amount of flexibility in deciding how to divide things.

Even if assets are split equally in dollar amount, certain assets may have less favorable tax treatment than others.

The two largest assets most couples hold are typically a house and retirement plan assets. In most cases a home can be sold with no tax impact, whereas the liquidation of retirement plan assets is a taxable transaction. If the retirement plan assets are sold before the account holder reaches age 59 1/2, the IRS assesses an additional penalty of 10 percent.

Stocks and bonds held in taxable accounts could generate capital gains or capital losses.

One approach to an equitable distribution of assets in a divorce would be to segregate assets by categories -- for example, cash and money market accounts, retirement assets, taxable stocks and bonds, personal property and real estate. Then assets in each category could be split evenly. This approach may not be appropriate if one spouse wants to keep the house; if the home represents a large portion of the total assets, this will skew the distribution. In this case, it may be best to hire a financial professional to assess the tax impact of various allocation approaches.

Divorce courts typically allocate the couple's debts evenly, but many creditors ignore this allocation and hold both parties liable. In some cases, there may be protection under the IRS Innocent Spouse provisions.

I typically suggest that clients pay off all joint liabilities before dividing asset accounts and close all joint accounts. In most cases mortgage debt can be assigned to the spouse who will keep the house.

Taking these extra planning steps during the divorce process will eliminate having to address financial problems after the divorce, when an amicable settlement is less likely to be reached.

More at the El Paso Times.