In troubled economic times relationship decisions take on a whole new light. Marriage and divorce are not always about being in love – now these decisions are also about financial consequences.
Many couples contemplating marriage are taking financial precautions to protect their assets in case the marriage doesn’t work out. Prenuptials are one of the most common ways for engaged individuals to protect themselves financially, although for some “divorce insurance” provides a different level of financial protection.
Divorce lawyers report an increase in demand for prenuptials over the past five years, according to a recent survey by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML).
Most individuals have taken a financial beating by the recession, leaving them with not only less in their retirement and savings accounts, but often undervalued houses and real estate. Because finances have diminished, “what they have takes on a greater importance,” says Marlene Eskind Moses, president of the AAML.
An Estate Planning Opportunity
The rise in prenuptial requests is not only coming from those with substantial assets. Moses says she’s seen a big rise in requests for prenups among the middle class as well.
Putting a prenuptial agreement in place can shield you from taking on your future spouse’s debt, or assure that your pension plan remains solely in your name. By entering into a prenup, you are not predestining your marriage to fail – you are simply helping plan for the future.
No Plans for Engagement
According to the 2009 Census report, 46.3 percent of adults ages 25 to 34 remain unmarried. Despite a lower marriage rate, more people in committed relationships are choosing to cohabitate.
For those not engaged or planning to be married, yet living together, there is a growing trend toward “cohabitation agreements.” Such agreements are legally binding contracts that cover, according to Moses, everything from finances and real estate agreements to “who takes out the garbage to the frequency of sex or not gaining weight.”
Source: Divorce insurance, co-habiting and putting off marriage on the rise in downturn
The Family Support Magistrate Courts in Connecticut hear cases involving paternity, establishing the amount of child support, modifying the amount of child support (increase or decrease the current support order) and enforcing the payment of child support (contempt). Divorces and issues of visitation are not heard in Family Support Magistrate Court but rather in the Family Court.
Cases are heard by a Family Support Magistrates who are lawyers appointed by the Governor. Family Support Magistrates are not judges but have the same powers of judges to determine paternity and to establish and enforce child and spousal support orders.
For a small fee a parent may open a case with Child Support Enforcement which is a state agency responsible for establishing and monitoring support orders. Therefore, many cases involve Support Enforcement Officers who may file a Motion for Contempt against a parent for nonpayment of child support. They may also file a Motion for Modification at the request of a parent based upon a “substantial change in circumstances” of either of the parents.
In cases where the State of Connecticut has provided financial support to a family an Assistant Attorney General will be involved to represent the State’s interest in establishing orders for repayment (arrearage) to the State.
If you are a parent who has been served with documents to appear in Support Magistrate Court you should do the following:
1) Complete a Financial Affidavit. This is a “sworn” document reflecting your income, assets, debts and liabilities.
2) Bring documentation which support the figures set forth in your Financial Affidavit especially relating to income. For example, pay stubs for the last 13 weeks of employment, tax returns, information concerning benefits you are receiving (worker’s compensation, social security income or disability, or unemployement benefits). This is especially important for a Modification.
3) If you are cited for Contempt be prepared to explain why you have been unable to pay the order. For example, if you were recently laid off bring a letter from your employer or if you are physically unable to work have a letter from your doctor available.
4) Also for cases of Contempt have a plan. Are you looking for work? If so, bring proof of your job search efforts such as applications you completed, employing headhunters, registering with temporary agencies etc. Obviously, it also never hurts to bring some money (even if not the full amount of the arrearage) to court to show your “good faith” in meeting your obligation.
You may contact me by email or by calling my Fairfield office at (203) 259-5251 or in Stamford at (203) 356-1475 if you have questions about Child Support Magistrate Court in Connecticut.
Three Bethel siblings are petitioning state legislators in support of granting children over the age of 12 the right to meet with judges to discuss their wishes in a contested custody case.
In Connecticut, the “informed” preferences of a child are already among the factors set forth CGS 46b-56(c) for judges to consider in making decisions as to the custody and care of minor children. The “informed” preference of a child is not necessarily determined by age alone but by the maturity of a particular child on a case by case basis. The child’s position as to custody, visitation and the overall Parenting Plan is typically made known to the judge by professionals involved with the family such as therapists, teachers or Family Relations Counselors. Therefore, allowing the child to simply make a statement would, in most cases, be cumulative.
It is also unclear whether the proposed legislation would permit a child to simply offer a statement regarding their wishes or whether the child would testify and therefore be subject to cross-examination. If the latter is the case, the procedural safeguards set forth in Practice Book § 32a-4 pertaining the child witnesses in juvenile cases should be considered. It seems contrary to the child’s best interest for courts to accept a practice of embroiling children in such a high conflict process. This is view is consistently shared by most mental health professionals. I understand the purpose of the proposed legislation is to “empower” children but at what cost?
Read the article from the Connecticut Post here:
New scientific research from Brown University finds that divorce can be socially contagious. Researchers concluded that if a friend divorces, your chances of getting divorced jump by 75 percent.
According to the British Daily Mail newspaper, researchers found an effect they describe as “divorce clustering” among groups of friends. Once a couple within a friendship group divorces, it can compel other couples to examine and question their own relationships. The reflection can cause a ripple effect of divorces.
Shrinking the Social Stigma
Another effect a friend’s divorce has upon the friendship group: it diminishes the social stigma attached to a break-up, even when those marriages have children involved.
Divorce can spread “like a disease,” according to researcher Rose McDermott. It spreads among friends as well as among family members and even co-workers.
McDermott and colleagues from Harvard University and the University of California analyzed data from the Framingham Heart Study, which tracked more than 12,000 people in the Massachusetts city since 1948.
Breaking Down the Odds
While a divorce in a circle of friends can drive up the chances of divorce among the other friends by 75 percent, a divorced co-worker can increase the chances of a permanent split by 55 percent, while a divorced sibling makes a person 22 percent more likely to divorce.
McDermott says one way to stop the spread of the divorce “disease” is to be supportive of married friends and of their unions. In a statement from Brown University, McDermott said, “Paying attention to the health of your friends’ relationships can inadvertently strengthen your own marriage.”
Legislation which would require the Department of Children and Families (DCF) and the Department of Agriculture to cross-report animal cruelty and child abuse is is being reintroduced.
The bill failed to pass earlier this year.
Research has shown that there exists a connection between those who abuse animals and those who abuse children. The purpose of the bill is to identify those individuals with this increased propensity for abuse and to intervene before abuse or violence occurs.
The bill is scheduled to be revived next year.
More than 2.5 million reports of child abuse and neglect are made every year in the United States. Abuse denies a child the opportunity to live an emotionally and physically healthy life – and has become a national issue. In California, more often than not, it becomes the dark reality of tabloid news.
In late July 2010, “Passion of the Christ” director Mel Gibson and his former girlfriend, Oksana Grigorivea, were involved in an alleged domestic dispute. Within days, the couple was being investigated by the Los Angeles Department of Child and Families Services (LA DCFS). Allegations had surfaced that Gibson, who has had a recent history of violent behavior, attacked Grigorieva while she was holding their infant child, Lucia.
In situations where a child could be harmed or at risk of harm, these types of investigations are to be expected. Children are victimized by familial strife and domestic violence, even if they are not direct victims of physical assault. Children who witness domestic violence have been found to eventually exhibit violent, risky or delinquent behavior. Additionally, children who are exposed to violence in the home may not develop adequate social skills and have difficulties learning.
While many think domestic violence is a social ill that impacts the poor, this is clearly a myth. Rich and famous people are perpetrators and victims of domestic violence as well. Before Mel Gibson, the media reported about other stars, such as Charlie Sheen, harming their spouses, girlfriends and children. Domestic violence and child abuse can affect everyone, regardless of economic status.
In August, Gibson and Grigorivea were cleared in the LA DCFS investigation and the case was closed. Agency investigators were not able to substantiate the allegations made by each party against the other regarding Lucia; however, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department is not precluded from conducting its own investigation of the incident. Additionally, the LA DCFS agency can initiate new investigations if new concerns arise within the Gibson/Grigorivea family.
Child maltreatment and domestic violence are growing problems in America and solving these overlapping ills will depend on consistent treatment of offenders and collaborative efforts by law enforcement, social services agencies and families. If you are a victim of domestic violence or have concerns related to child neglect, talk to an experienced family law attorney in your area who can help you get the protection that you need.