,
The Nacol Law Firm PC
The Nacol Law Firm PC

Posts Tagged ‘dallas divorce attorney’

Baby Boomers and Divorce

Sunday, August 1st, 2010

With high profilers, Al and Tipper Gore announcing they are separating after 40 years of marriage, many Baby Boomers (USA born  between 1946-1964) may be wondering who is left in the ”Happily Ever After” group! 

 

Today’s Baby Boomers are more educated than any previous American Generation and their divorce rate is triple that of their parent’s generation. Break ups among long term married couples are becoming more frequent with longer life spans and the growing  regrettable acceptability of divorce. In 2008, ¼ of all divorces reported were marriages of over 20 years with divorces of couples 55 or older rising moderately.  A longer life span means the possibility of a new relationship, and opportunities for repartnering after age 55 are greater than they used to be.

 

The top three reasons for long term marriage dissolutions are Abuse, Infidelity, and Money Control Issues. Another rising issue is couples who have been married for decades. Baby Boomers start taking their marriages for granted and are focusing on different issues until it is too late to seek a reconnect with their estranged spouses. These break ups are referred as “Cold Divorces” characterized by isolation, distance and disengagement and are usually a product of a gradual buildup. Empty Nester divorces are also on the rise, since the spouses no longer have their children to hold the marriage together. An AARP survey of older divorced couples found that two-thirds (2/3) of the divorces were initiated by the woman, frequently to the surprise of the man.

 

A recent poll was conducted by the National Association of Divorce for Women & Children and the Baby Boomer on divorce.  The results were really startling!  41% of all participants said that dealing with finances, debt and security were the most challenging parts of finalizing a divorce. Asset division was second at 19%, and Custody of the Children was third at 13%.

 

Depicting divorce as an unsettling emotional roller coaster ride, 41% of the participants reported coping skills would have been helpful to cope with the divorce process, 28% reported Stress Management, and failure of Communication Skills was a close third at 26%.

 

Finally, 55% of the participants reported having an amicable relationship with their former spouse. 15% could not be in the same room with their former spouse and only 4% reported they had learned to tolerate the other for the sake of their children! Many expressed sadness, shame and embarrassment for having to divorce.

 

Some warning signs to look out for in a Boomer Divorce are:

  • Spouses who argue at least once a week about money are 30% more likely to get divorced
  • If your parents are divorced, you are 40% more likely to get divorced
  • If both of you have been previously divorced, you are 90% more likely to seek divorce than those of a first marriage.

 

The US Census estimates about half of all marriages end in divorce! As you grow older people change, but to preserve a marriage, the spouses  need to continue working on their Marriage to Keep it Intact!

Divorce sucks (a view from the trenches) – Part V

Monday, June 14th, 2010

Trial Strategy – Constructive or Nonproductive

Throughout the tenure of a divorce or custody suit, strategies are employed to improve the strategic position of a spouse before the court or a civil jury.

A non-all-inclusive list of such pursuits of a spouse and his or her attorney may include the following non-productive trial strategies:

  • False claim of child abuse – frequently attorneys and/or their clients will make artificial or transparent claims of child abuse either directly to a jury in a trial or through the filing of a frivolous Child Protective Services complaint.  Such ineffective claims may include claims of physical abuse (when in truth is a properly administered and appropriate corporal punishment for grievous conduct dangerous to the child), false claims of injury (whether it be normal scrapes and bruises occurring from play, garden variety accidents all children have, or fractures to the arm or leg occurring through no real fault of either spouse). Frequently, the claims are exaggerated with photographs and close up shots and, on occasion, artificial support from the minor child through the coercion of a spouse.  Jury’s are very resentful of this approach and will hold the party asserting such frivolous claims accountable at the end of the day.
  • False claims of alcoholism, substance abuse and/or prescription drug excess – painting a picture of a spouse as an alcoholic or a danger to his or her child based on a glass of wine at an Italian restaurant is frequently a ploy attorneys will use given great social resentment to alcoholism, DWIs and general drug abuse.  Certainly, if the abuse is real the claim is valid and is constructive.  However, frequently clients will exaggerate social alcohol consumption that is reasonable and is looked upon by the jury as a waste of their time and they will frequently hold the party falsely alleging such abuse accountable.
  • WAR by financial attrition - if there is insufficient community property to adequately fund both sides of a divorce, one spouse may use outside sources of income in the form of family loans, gifts, spend thrift trust disbursements or other disbursements from relatives to financially bring the opposing spouse to his or her knees and demand agreement to terms that are unreasonable and not productive for the underfunded spouse or the children of the marriage.  Regrettably, the divorce process is part of the adversary system of justice and leaves this unfair loophole open in such circumstances.  Though not outright unethical, such conduct and strategy does not pass the smell test.
  • Cookie cutter witnesses – preachers, rabbis, soccer coaches, parents, grandmothers, grandfathers, brothers and sisters generally bring a yawn from the jury or the court.  If their testimony is direct, short and fact driven on an important core issue in a divorce or custody suit, they are necessary.  In general, the jury’s perspective is, “what do you think a preacher, grandparent or soccer coach is going to say about the child in their care…that the mother or father they support are bad?” 
  • Use of the children as spies – attorneys or clients that use the children to spy and give testimony before a court or jury almost always fail in their goal.  Most judges and a majority of juries are highly resentful for bringing minor children into the fray and such a strategy is doomed to backfire before the judge or jury.  Clearly, if a relatively mature child is the ONLY source of information that is core to the case and IF there is no other third party professional or other source to support the issue, sometimes the testimony is necessary.  This is especially true in cases of real abuse, parental alienation and other destructive conduct that is fundamental to the issues of the case.

Productive strategies:

  • Here is a novel idea.  How about truth and sincerity.  It has been this writer’s experience that a jury will give some ear to experts, social workers, teachers, coaches, doctors, preachers and other witness with personal knowledge.  Inevitably, the final result is driven by the truth and sincerity of the spouse testifying.  With predictable regularity a jury will make their decision based squarely on the shoulders of the spouse testifying and the honesty and forthrightness of their testimony.
  • Experts – psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, doctors and other professionals will be given credibility to some degree by a jury IF their opinions are based on acceptable, acknowledged predictable science and IF they have spent sufficient time with the minor child and/or both parents to render a believable opinion.  Rent-an-expert’s testimony is disdained by most juries and seen for what it is - as an opinion for hire.  The longer the relationship between the testifying expert and the minor child, the greater the likelihood will be that the opinion is fairly received and considered by a court or jury.
  • Election by a minor over 12 years of age- any child over the age of 12 may sign an election (affidavit) of their preference of primary caregiver.  The courts will strongly consider these elections and in the large number of the cases make a decision based on the child’s wishes.  Juries will favorably consider such elections so long as they are based on believable facts and parental propriety.  However, the securing of such an affidavit when in conjunction with a new car, a new wardrobe, or a loose, undisciplined parental attitude towards control of the child will result in the opposite of what the spouse seeks in obtaining such an election.  The elections are not binding on the court, but if they are legitimate and based on fact, they are highly cogent evidence which the court and the jury will strongly consider.
  • Depositions of paramours, IRS agents, psychologists, doctors, ex-wives, employers, secretaries, etc. – well thought out, terse, and to the point testimony on facts that support a claim revealed in depositions is far more effective than hearsay or other testimony that is not likely to be received well by the jury.  It is important that such deposition testimony be short, to the point and dispositive of a real issue in the case. 

The above is not an inclusive list of strategies employed during the divorce proceeding, however, if properly employed or excluded may be instrumental in a positive result for the client during this very difficult time.

The Nacol Law Firm P.C.
Law office of Attorney Mark Nacol
Seriving the Dallas / Fort Worth Metroplex for over 30 years
Tel: 972-690-3333

Parental Alienation And False & Malicious Domestic Violence Allegations

Monday, May 24th, 2010

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is a generally recognized platform that may result in child abuse. This occurs when a custodial parent of a child from a separated family uses deception to deliberately alienate children from their non custodial parent.

 

Misplaced Domestic Violence Restraining and Protective Orders are an excellent tool to advance the Alienating Parent’s malice! Misguided Protective Orders of a Court based on such false representations may remove the Accused Abuser Parent from the home, bar the Accused Abuser from seeing his/her children and give the Alienating Parent total physical custody of the children. The Accused Abuser Parent is now effectively “Guilty Until Proven Innocent”.

 

Once the Alienator obtains a Restraining Order through false domestic violence allegations, the Accused Abuser Parent may find it difficult to defend himself or herself against the false allegations.  This sends the implied message to the children that “Daddy/Mommy” is bad or dangerous, stamped by the court.

 

The Accused Abuser Parent may only see his/her children in a cold and uninviting supervised visitation setting. Supervised Visitation Centers are facilities where a child is taken to meet with the Accused Abuser Parent in a third party monitored location.  A third party observes the Accused Abuser Parent during their visit with their children so that the child is “protected” at all times.

 

Often the supervised visit is demeaning for the visiting parent in the eyes of his/her child.  The impression to the child that “Daddy or Mommy” is dangerous comes across loud and clear since most children only see lock up situations on TV and these people are seriously viewed as being bad.

 

Many Alienating Parents use this scary situation to encourage their child not to see the Accused Abuser Parent at all. The more time a child is out of contact with the Alienated Parent the deeper the scaring and recovery period for that child.

 

Dr. Richard A. Gardner coined the term “Parental Alienation Syndrome” (PAS) in 1985. Dr. Gardner found that a child subjected to continual negativity and manipulation by the Custodial Parent over an extended period of time against the other parent would eventually adapt the distorted view presented. At the end of the day, what the Alienating Parent fails to understand is that his/her selfishness makes his/her child the “victim” who pays a hefty price in lost self esteem.

 

Unfortunately, False Domestic Violence Allegations have become more common in Divorce / Child Custody Proceedings. Most Judges usually enter a restraining or protective order for the safety of the child and in too many cases an Accused Abuser Parent is guilty until proven innocent!