South Coast Today

Q: I’ve been dating a man for a little over a month. His second marriage was the result of his getting the girl he was seeing pregnant. It lasted five very turbulent years. Their child is now 6 — and she also has three older children by another man. My problem is that my boyfriend remains in contact with his three ex-stepchildren. In his words, “I divorced their mother, not them” and expects me to accept that those children are still his children for the rest of our lives. His reasoning is that they’re his son’s siblings and they will always be a part of his life, as will his son’s mother. Is it fair to ask me to accept three former stepchildren? They really never were a family.

A: There are so many red flags here it’s hard to know where to start. We could begin with the fact that you have only dated this guy a month and you’re already in the “rest of our lives” mode. But more worrisome is that you seem to trivialize a five-year relationship because it was “troubled and turbulent and not really a family.” That was in your eyes, and presumptuous to say the least. The quality of their relationship is not really your concern and should not be used as criteria for the importance of his relationship to the children.

Source: http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100313/LIFE/3130301

The Signal

The paperwork passed through the system a year ago. Santa Clarita resident Carrie and her husband were finally legally divorced. But any relief marked by the end of a long mediation period would be overshadowed by a looming, unsettled property agreement.

One year later and Carrie and her husband still share joint mortgage of their home, leaving them with damaged credit and the loss of thousands of dollars. Upon the divorce, the pair couldn’t decide if one would buy the other out or if they would sell the home altogether, Carrie said.

Source: http://www.the-signal.com/news/article/25869/

ALBANY, NY (03/10/2010)(readMedia)– New York State Bar Association President Michael E. Getnick (Getnick Livingston Atkinson & Priore, LLP of Utica and of counsel to Getnick & Getnick of New York City) today commended the New York State Senate Committee on the Judiciary for advancing legislation (S.3890/A.9753), sponsored by Senator Ruth Hassell-Thompson and Assemblyman Jonathan Bing, that would allow a judgment of divorce to be granted to either a husband or a wife without assigning fault to either party. The legislation now moves to the full Senate for consideration. Additionally, Getnick urged members of the State Legislature to pass the measure without any further delay.

“The current fault-based divorce system under New York law severely aggravates conflict between spouses and creates an unproductive and destructive atmosphere for the children of divorcing parents,” said President Getnick. “This legislation will help to alleviate some of the stress and the burden placed on spouses and families who find themselves in these unfortunate circumstances and brings New York into the mainstream of domestic relations law.”

Source: http://readme.readmedia.com/State-Bar-Association-Commends-State-Senate-Committee-on-Judiciary-for-Advancing-No-Fault-Divorce-Legislation/1192817

Deseret News

So the bloom is off the rose, and your relationship has been heading south for a few months or perhaps even years. Both of you know it, but neither of you talks about it. You have entered the relationship doldrums. There have been broken promises, harsh words and hurt feelings. Add to that the combination of poor communication and avoidance, and you get to the point where just looking at your partner fills you with ire.

Divorce may be a thought but not an option. Between the kids and the economy, it would only cause more pain, and neither of you can handle that. So you choose to live as a couple but don’t connect, and that has got to be one of the most difficult places to be in. If the two of you don’t change this dynamic, you will only hurt yourself and your partner more by acting out your pain.

Source: http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700015151/Relationship-When-you-and-your-partner-hit-the-doldrums.html

Tennessean.com

Sometimes when a married couple is not happy together, they choose to live apart but don’t bother to get a divorce. In one such case, a couple married in 2000, lived together for only a few months before separating, but did not divorce. The wife drafted a will specifically disinheriting her husband and stating the reasons. Later, she signed a will leaving all of her property to her brother and sister, who had been supporting her.

Unfortunately, the wife wasn’t aware of Tennessee laws, which completely frustrated her estate plans. Regardless of her will, her surviving husband, the man she hadn’t even seen for years, was entitled to receive 40 percent of her net estate. Every surviving spouse in Tennessee is entitled to an “elective share” of a deceased husband’s or wife’s net estate. If the parties were married for less than three years, the elective share is 10 percent of the deceased spouse’s net estate; three to six years, 20 percent; six to nine years, 30 percent; and 9 years or more, 40 percent.

Source: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20100309/COLUMNIST0302/3090329/2047/BUSINESS

Crain’s New York Business

For most, dissolving a marriage has become prohibitively expensive, and divorce rates nationwide have plummeted during the economic crisis. But for a subset of New Yorkers, particularly high-tax-bracket financial and legal types, divorce is the latest means of wealth preservation. “For those high-wage earners who are in a marriage that they want to end, there has never been a better time to get divorced,” says Jason Marks, a partner with law firm Kluger Kaplan Silverman Katzen & Levine.

Since most financial executives earned less over the past year or two than at any point in a decade, filing for divorce now means a much lower income for calculating alimony. The end of hefty cash bonuses on Wall Street is also nudging unhappy couples into divorce, and the nearly 40% drop in investment portfolios since the 2007 peak means there’s less to divide.

Source: http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20100307/SMALLBIZ/303079963#

Cincinnati.com

Question: I am looking for a financial planner with credentials who can figure out how much money will be required to live on after my divorce is final. Where do I start?

Answer: A Certified Divorce Financial Analyst (CDFA) is a designation that a financial professional can earn by taking courses and exams offered by the Institute for Divorce Financial Analysts. These advisors specialize in divorce-related financial issues. The role of the CDFA includes acting as an advisor to one party’s divorce lawyer or as a mediator for both parties. There are nine located in the Cincinnati region. To learn more about divorce-related financial planning considerations, visit the Institute for Divorce Financial Analysts and review their frequently asked questions and referral resources to determine if your situation requires assistance from a CDFA.

Source: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100305/BIZ01/3050382/1076/BIZ/Simply+Money++Finding+a+divorce+advisor 

Orlando Sentinel

Q Full custody of our only grandchild was recently given to her mother, who went through a bitter divorce with our son. The mother refuses to let us have any contact with our 7-year-old granddaughter, who we worship and adore. The only time we hear from her is when she can sneak a phone call, and she tells us how much she misses us. As grandparents do we have any legal rights to see our granddaughter?

A The issue you raise has caused much heartache and heated debate concerning the tension between constitutional rights of parents and what is best for our children. Unfortunately, you don’t have any legal right to see your granddaughter. The prior Florida grandparental visitation statute has been declared unconstitutional. Parents, whether divorced or married, have a fundamental liberty interest and constitutional right to privacy and decision-making in raising their children.

Source: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/law/os-ask-a-lawyer-contact-with-granchild-0320100308,0,6247643.column

Washington Examiner

Thanks to plummeting property values, divorcing couples now find themselves fighting for the right not to keep the house. The crippled real estate market has turned once-valuable assets into huge financial burdens. Homes bought at or near the peak of the housing market in 2005-2006 have lost tens of thousands of dollars in value in just a few years, forcing many discordant couples to keep a painful reminder of a failed relationship.

“Instead of fighting over the house, we’re fighting over who gets stuck with it,” said Steve Halbert, 57, an Arlington homeowner going through a divorce. Halbert and his wife bought their house in 2006, shortly before their marriage and the housing market took a turn for the worse. “We thought we’d be walking away with hundreds of thousands of dollars in equity. But there is no equity,” he said. As a four-time divorce — and a real estate appraiser — Halbert said he’s accustomed to heated legal battles over property ownership. But unlike his first three trips to divorce court, Halbert said he’s hoping to lose possession of his house this time around.

Source: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/No_-you-take-the-house_-86255162.html

USA Today

Couples who live together before marriage and those who don’t both have about the same chances of a successful union, according to a federal report out Tuesday that turns earlier cohabitation research on its head. The report, by the National Center for Health Statistics, is based on the National Survey of Family Growth, a sample of almost 13,000. It provides the most detailed data on cohabitation of men and women to date.

Past research — using decades-old data — found significantly higher divorce rates for cohabitors, defined as “not married but living together with a partner of the opposite sex.” But now, in an era when about two-thirds of couples who marry live together first, a different picture is emerging in which there are few differences between those who cohabit and those who don’t.