Judge Says No To Seven-Year Alimony Rebate

The Judge’s decision brings up a variety of interesting questions for divorced (or divorcing) couples with regard to the provisions of their separation agreements. One thing is for sure, motions should be filed in a timely manner!

The GAL’s job is to investigate the family’s circumstances and dynamics and to make recommendations to the court as to what parenting plan (custody and visitation, among other issues) will serve your children’s best interests. A GAL may investigate claims of abuse or neglect by a parent, issues between siblings, substance abuse by a parent, and numerous other issues.

It is important that you cooperate fully with a GAL in order that he or she can truly assess what will be in your children’s best interests at a time when you and your spouse may not be objective due to the stress (and grief) associated with the divorce.

Everyone knows at least one person who has experienced divorce. Many people who have been through the ordeal of a traditional litigated divorce will say that it was one of the worst and most stressful experiences of their lives. They recall – usually with a shudder – the hours and hours spent in the court house, waiting for their case to be called so that their attorneys could argue yet another motion. They speak of the hurtful things their soon-to-be-ex spouse said about them on the witness stand. And they remember bitterly the emotional and financial cost of a litigated divorce. That old movie, “The War of the Roses” comes to mind.

When engaged in a litigated divorce, I have honestly had to remind my opposing counsel that “this is not our divorce.” One attorney was so engrossed in his adversarial role that he would actually walk away from me in mid-sentence when I didn’t agree with him. If we were ‘negotiating’ on the phone (and I use the term loosely because he was one of those guys who liked to demand rather than suggest anything), he’d hang up in my ear when he didn’t get his way. I often grow tired of the ‘my client is right and your client is wrong’ mentality. Oh, please. It takes 2 to tango. Or rumba, for that matter. Okay, to be fair – and honest — not all lawyers engage in such behavior. But sometimes it feels as if we’re all at war. I’m thinking “The War of the Roses” again. Maybe I should rent it.

I have spent time in court trying to present the facts to a judge while opposing counsel jumps up and objects to everything I say. “Attorney Olszewski appearing for” – “OBJECTION!” “My client would like to” – “OBJECTION!” It is annoying, at best. Even the judge thinks so. Sometimes they tell the other lawyer to be quiet and sit down. I love when that happens. I feel a silly urge to stick my tongue out at the other lawyer and say “nah nah nah nah nah nah” – but I don’t. I’m a big girl now.

By sharp contrast, when I am engaged in the collaborative divorce process, I don’t ever have to remind the attorney representing the other party that “this is not our divorce.” Nobody objects after every word I say. In fact, nobody objects at all. I don’t get the urge to stick my tongue out at the other lawyer. I’m pretty sure nobody gets the urge to stick their tongue out at me, although there’s always a first time for everything. Best of all, my blood pressure remains stable.

In the collaborative divorce process, the parties and their lawyers meet in one of the lawyers’ offices or conference rooms. The Summons and Complaint are not served upon one party by a marshal; they are handed to the person who will assume the role of defendant. The couple agrees to discuss all of the issues in a calm and reasonable fashion. They agree to exchange relevant information and documentation openly and freely, without having to draft a ton of motions and argue in court. (Think of how many trees are saved in the process!) The parties calmly and rationally present their concerns and goals. Sure, there are some emotional moments, but they are handled appropriately. At the end of each meeting, most clients leave feeling as if something has been accomplished. And they don’t feel as if they’ve been beaten up.

When children are involved, a neutral child specialist may be called in to assist the parties in developing a workable parenting plan. The focus is on minimizing the trauma and damage that divorce can cause to a child. The parents are given the opportunity to “test” the proposed plans and solutions before memorializing them in the formal separation agreement. Honest discussion and brainstorming is the hallmark of the collaborative process and it works extremely well when children are involved.

If marital assets must be divided, the parties may work with a neutral financial professional who will analyze the assets and assist the parties in understanding the most fundamental reality of divorce: that there is only one marital “pot” of assets and it must be divided fairly so that each party (and the children) will be left in the best position to move forward. Rather than arguing and fighting over each asset, the financial neutral helps the couple to value those assets and provides real world solutions to otherwise difficult decisions.

Sadly, not every couple is suited for the collaborative process. Highly argumentative, abusive or controlling people would likely have a difficult time maintaining the level of civility, respect and dignity that is required of all the participants. For those unfortunate people, adversarial litigation is usually the only way to obtain a divorce. If you’re one of those highly argumentative, abusive or controlling people, do me a favor and call another attorney. Thanks. I’m trying to keep my blood pressure down. I’d be happy to recommend that lawyer who likes to hang up on me. I’m sure he’d take your case.

Divorce isn’t pleasant but it doesn’t have to be a nightmare. For those who are willing to at least TRY to separate their emotional pain, anger and disappointment over being stuck in a divorce from the REALITY that there WILL be a divorce no matter what, the collaborative process is a good choice. Such couples work with the collaborative team (their lawyers and the other professionals) to work out fair and equitable solutions that make sense in the long-term, not just the short-term. They are often surprised at how well they are able to communicate with their spouse in an environment that feels safe. They come away feeling that they have been treated fairly and with respect. They focus on themselves and their families, remembering the entire time that when the divorce ends, they can remain civil to each other rather than becoming bitter enemies. Think about that when you’re envisioning yourself and your ex-spouse at your daughter’s wedding 15 years from now.

If I had my way, I’d re-write the statutes to require that all divorcing couples must attempt the collaborative process before engaging in litigation. If couples have to divorce, they should at least try to do so with dignity and respect. Divorce doesn’t have to be a nightmare.

I think I’ll watch “The War of the Roses” now.

Are there other ways to enforce my child support order?
What is an income withholding order?
What is a medical support order?
How does my daycare order work?

Fortunately, Connecticut’s Support Enforcement Services publishes a concise but helpful brochure designed to answer these questions and several others. The brochure also lists contact information for the agency.

Download: For Custodial Parent — Answers to Common Questions (available in .pdf format).

[Source: Connecticut Judicial Branch]

If you take your chances with an online class, you may be out the cost of the tuition, you won’t be considered “in compliance”, and you’ll have to take the classes again (and pay the fee) for a State-approved course.

For more information, see: Parenting Education Programs

Unlike traditional court-based divorce (litigation), the participants in a collaborative divorce are empowered to make their own decisions rather than to rely on a judge to do so. The divorcing spouses and their collaborative team work together to form an agreement based upon the individual needs and interests of the couple (and their children, if they have any).

The participants sign an agreement stating that they will not litigate the case in court. They agree to share all information required to facilitate the process and don’t hide information from anyone in the process. If one of the participants breaks the agreement and takes the case to court, the collaborative lawyers and other professionals are discharged from the case and will not participate in the litigation.
Collaborative divorce is usually less expensive than traditional divorce for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, because the process takes place outside the courtroom, the spouses do not incur fees for multiple court battles (which often require hours of waiting around in the hallway waiting for your case to be called). When assets need to be properly valued, the participants work with a neutral financial professional (who is also collaboratively trained). By sharing this professional resource, the participants pay a much lower fee and the process is often expedited.

There is an enormous emotional component to every divorce which can often cause one or both of the spouses to feel considerable anxiety. The collaborative approach recognizes this basic human element and factors it in to the process. When needed, a neutral coach works with the couple to help them with the emotional aspects of difficult issues and helps to promote productive communication.
The participants are represented by separate lawyers who are there to advise them about the complicated legal issues. However, unlike traditional divorce, a lawyer is not there to try to convince a judge to give his or her client exactly what that client wants – without regard for the needs and interests of the couple (and their children). The collaborative lawyer’s job is to refocus the participants on their common goals, which include being able to meet future financial needs, to have well-adjusted children, and to be able to move forward with as little disruption and trauma as possible.

Collaborative divorce may not be suitable for all couples. However, a candid discussion with a collaboratively-trained attorney will help you decide if the process is right for you.
For more information, visit Collaborative Divorce Professionals.

Parents who are engaged in the divorce process should take a few moments to view the video released by the Connecticut Judicial Branch called “Putting Children First.” The video features Superior Court Judge Elaine Gordon, who handled custody disputes as an attorney and now hears those difficult cases as a judge. Some of the statistics reported in the video may be shocking.

The video is available on DVD by calling the External Affairs Division at 860-757-2270.

Watch: Putting Children First
(This link will take you to the Judicial Branch website. Click on the link for the video and it will open on your computer screen in a media player such as Windows Media Player, which you must have installed on your system).

Read Men more likely to leave spouse who has cancer. [MSNBC]

[Source: Lee's Divorce & Family Law Blog]

If you cannot afford the filing and marshal fees, you may submit a fee waiver to the court. A judge may grant or deny your request to waive all or some of the fees. To apply for a fee waiver, you must complete form JD-FM-75 which is a financial affidavit.

Finally, if you have minor children born to the marriage, BOTH parties must attend state mandated parenting education classes (usually held in 2 three-hour session). You may apply for a fee waiver for the classes if you cannot afford them, using form JD-FM-75.

Divorce is an emotional rollercoaster – but are you paranoid?
[originally posted by Marilyn Stowe]

How healthy is divorce litigation for everyone involved: clients, their families, the lawyers and others? How healthy is it for anyone involved in these cases?

Paranoia is a profound distrust or suspicion of others, which goes hand-in-hand with the belief that one is being persecuted. In divorce, these feelings can have some basis in reality. There may indeed be someone out to get you. Usually, it is the person to whom you had hitherto been closest: your spouse.
Unfortunately, divorce causes some people to become irrational or even delusional. Their perceived “persecutor” is nothing of the sort and may actually be a spouse who wants nothing more than to move on with his or her life.

The painting above is called “Paranoia”. What are the figures in the painting staring at and so worried by? There is no-one visible outside, so what or who do they think may be coming in through the door? Are they right to be worried or are they paranoid?

Its painter, Neo Rauch, is a stellar artist who was born in East Germany. His parents died in a train accident when he was four weeks old and he has clearly been profoundly affected by his background. A collection of his art was exhibited under the title Para at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York in 2007, to rave reviews. I was in New York and visited the exhibition with my son Ben.

I must confess that only recently have I come to appreciate Neo Rauch’s work. His paintings can be very difficult to understand. They need a lot of thought. They certainly appear to be telling a story, but Rauch denies this. His paintings pose questions. Rauch says that his pictures can mean “anything to anyone”. So it is up to each one of us to decide what they actually mean.

Likewise, the emotional rollercoaster that is divorce encourages different people to respond in different ways. Innocent spouses can be accused of harassment and misconduct. The accuser may then refuse to allow the other parent to see a child. Thus the paranoia continues to play out, all the way into the courtroom, with the hapless child caught in the middle. Sadly, this is not uncommon behaviour in my experience.

In other cases, paradoxically, what appears to be delusional or paranoid behaviour is actually a perfectly valid and healthy response to a sinister situation. In such cases the persecutor will stealthily, relentlessly and deliberately increase the pressure and the cost – financial and emotional – upon the victim, while going to great lengths to make others believe that the victim is to blame. When the victim complains, the complaints are dismissed and he or she is wrongly criticised.

In all cases the perpetrators may be assisted by others, frequently members of their own family, close friends and unwittingly, even their own lawyers. I recently saw a TV programme about this phenomenon, which is called “groupthink”. The word is used to describe what happens when a group of people support one another, without questioning their plan of action. Lawyers will be familiar with clients who insist on bringing a family member or close friend with them, to provide unquestioning support. Lawyers, who act on their client’s instructions, may also become part of that unconditionally supportive group. But is this healthy?

Divorce causes emotional turbulence, which can affect the minds of both parties and their supporters. Profound love can turn into profound hate. Most people come through the divorce process bruised – but recover. But in a few, thankfully rare cases, those with controlling personalities may find it difficult to let go. Supported by their ‘group’, they may stalk their former partner playing mind games, determined never to stop until the spouse is worn out, exhausted and beaten.

All this of course, is why we have our Courts of Justice. The judges are there to level the uneven playing field, to identify the victim and to protect them from the perpetrator. Our courts are a bastion of strength, and their function is to apply justice.

Even so, I must confess that as a family lawyer, I enjoy the luxury of extended thought. I am currently advising the scriptwriters of a top British TV programme about a fictional court case. It is good fun because it gives me free rein to let my imagination run riot!

It has occurred to me, as I consider all the mind games that could play out in the courtroom, that perhaps a judge, alone in his ivory tower, could also play mind games with the parties before him. His motives could be many and varied. He would enjoy his power over them all. The parties would think he was administering justice. Despite all the evidence, however, the victim would become his prey.

Scary stuff! Could it happen in real life? Think of life as a Neo Rauch painting: I will let you make your own mind up!

Editor’s note: This article originally appeared on “Marilyn Stowe Blog”. I happened upon it from a post I read on the “Massachusetts Divorce & Family Law Blog”