Warning Signs

We have spoken to more than one husband that was surprised that their wife considering divorce.  Some of them should not have been because there were signs.  A sudden interest in self improvement is a sign that is common.  CBS had a decent blog about it recently.  http://gma.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/beware-partner-sudden-interest-fitness-220400464.html.  So, if you are considering divorce and you don't want your spouse to know, be careful about the changes you are making because your wife may notice.  And, if you see your spouse making changes, you may want to pay attention.

Marriage Warning Labels

There is an article in the Huffington Post that proposes a marriage warning label.  Here is the post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-quigley/a-modest-proposal-why-can_b_982566.html.  While this article does not help most of our clients, it is a worthwhile idea.

Misplaced criticism of proposed law

A recent article in the Free Press, Brian Dickerson: A new Michigan divorce statute, tailored for one?, criticizes a bill introduced in the House of Representatives recently for having to narrow a focus, cutting out divorce lawyer's from comment, and being unfair.  See it at http://www.freep.com/article/20110623/COL04/106230514/Brian-Dickerson-new-Michigan-divorce-statute-tailored-one-?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE.  The criticism that the legislation was "tailored" for one person is apparently pure speculation because no evidence of that accusation is provided in the piece.  In fact the proposed legislation is quite comprehensive.  See it at http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/House/pdf/2011-HIB-4672.pdf.  It finally gives actual definitions for marital and nonmarital property and establishes rules for division of that property.  Currently, lawyers and litigants must look to a variety of cases to glean that information.  Further, that law was largely created by the judiciary and not by the legislature.  There is value in having a comprehensive law drafted by the legislature and for more than just one person.  While the legislation does change current case law, that is the legislature's prerogative and job.  This piece indicates that one of the changes would be unfair to some litigants.  Those litigants are the spouses of people with premarital assets that see there assets grow during the marriage. But that may not be true. As a bit of background, a number of years ago the court of appeals decided that a stay at home mother contributed to the maintenance of a nonmarital asset which changed the character of the asset to marital.  She then got 50%.  Under the proposed legislation, it would not necessarily become marital in that situation and if it didn't, mother would be compensated for her contribution.  It does not say what mother would get for her contribution.  At this point it could be more, less than or equal to 50%.  Rather, it becomes a question to litigate.  To be clear, in the example in the piece the business increased in value by 49 million.  That mother could ask for nothing and could ask for the 49 million, or anything in between.  What value did she add?  How sure can anyone be that it was 24.5 million?  It is apparent that the commentators in the piece don't think mother's work was really worth that and they cannot prove it and that is why they have come out with such furor.  Of course this legislation is not perfect.  We would like the legislature to tell us how, when a Judge divides a $50 million dollar company in half, the working spouse is supposed to pay for it without killing the business.  Businesses aren't bank accounts but you wouldn't know that by just talking to the non-business owning spouse.  For that reason, the legislature should hold hearings.  However, it is good that the legislature is taking on this kind of task and it should be applauded no matter the initial motive.

Mother Entitlement

Mother entitlement is the phenomenen where a mother feels that she is the most important person in their child's life even when she is not or should not be.  Despite the fact that mother entitlement is rampant in divorce cases it does not get much press.  It never gets negative press.  Rather, it is ussually applauded in the press. 

A case in point is the recent the North Carolina case where  a mother with stage 4 cancer "lost" her kids to their father.  The court sited concerns about the uncertainty of mother's health in making its decision.  This has been responded to with furious outcry.  See New York Daily News, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/05/12/2011-05-12_alaina_giordano_breast_cancer_patient_loses_custody_of_children_because_of_illne.html, NBC (http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/42986817#42986817), Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/emily-cousins/alaina-giordano_b_860844.html), Daily Mail http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1385143/Alaina-Giordano-loses-custody-children-breast-cancer.html?ito=feeds-newsxml).  That the mom has cancer is unfair to everyone.  Cancer is tragic.  But why the outcry that the children will now be raised with dad?  Dad's parenting has not been critized in this story.  Dad is presumably a great dad.  Maybe he is only an okay dad or perhaps he is a bad dad.  Naturally that is not the question.  The question is why is Mother being descriminated against. 

Mother entitlement is a problem because it can be this strong and stronger.  We regularly see cases where women in all manner of unfortunate circumstances cannot see that their children may be better off with their father.  Many in the court system, society and the press are guilty of the same thing.  Because our court system only gives lip service to the best interest factors and giving both parents a fair shot at custody, mother entitlement is regulary reinforced and rewarded.  Stories like the one above only reinforce the attitude that any mother no matter the circumstances is better than the father at raising children.

Every parent in a custody case must ask themselves what is in their child's best interest and carefully consider how much they are conflicted by their own understandable but not necessarily relevant desire to be with their children.  Everyone else looking at these situations must ask themselves what is in the child's best interest and leave antiquated notions about care giving out of it.  Until everyone is more objective about what is best for the children, children will continue getting cheated out having real access to both parents.

Joint Custody

Michigan law does not adequately account for the fact that in many families both parents are a significant care providers. Under its current rules, Judges with or without the Friend of the Court have broad discretion to make temporary custody decisions without any investigation or evidentiary hearing. Frequently both parents contend that they are principal care givers. Because Judges are not issued crystal balls they make decisions with very little information that are influenced by their own bias. All to often this means that dad is demoted to a second class parent and children loose significant access to an important care giver. While dad may have the opportunity to have a trial on custody months later, he faces a significant legal bill and a mother with a distinct advantage because she has had primary custody while waiting for custody, if he wants to try.

Michigan law will not properly account for the fact that many children rely on both mom and dad for care support until judges are forced to preserve these relationships until a full investigation and or evidentiary hearing has been had. We fight this fight every day. However, more could be done by our law makers. Past Michigan Legislatures have considered passing joint custody laws. The most recent can be found here http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/billintroduced/House/htm/2009-HIB-5114.htm. While we do not endorse everything in this particular bill, it would go a long way to evening the playing field. We encourage the current legislature to consider such legislation in the near future and anyone interested in equality to contact their state legislators.

Custody Support Groups

Divorce can be a difficult time especially when children are involved. There are many references out there trying to help. An interesting one came across my desk today. Up to Parents, www.uptoparents.org, is a site that focuses on trying to get parents to move toward cooperating when making parenting time decisions. While we do not endorse all of their views the site is worth checking out.