Because breaking divorce news may be one of the most important conversations you ever have with your children, it’s worth the time to plan the best approach.
Parents.com recommends the following guidelines:
Both parents should tell the children together. Both parents should put their children’s well being first when telling them about the decision to divorce. You should present divorce as a joint decision and set your reactions about it aside — resentment, blame, etc. Your children need reassurance that you will still work together as parents to provide what’s best for them.
Tell all of your children at the same time. Generally it’s better for all the kids to find out at the same time. An exception may be if you know an older child will react badly and upset a younger child, in which case, tell them individually.
Figure out what to say in advance. Telling your children in a way that addresses their concerns is extremely important. It is important for your kids to understand that:
Kids often get angry, cry, shout or run to their rooms. Let them express their feelings without having your own reactions to their behavior. You may need to give them time alone. You also may feel like they need affection and to be held or hugged. Many children respond by being concerned about how their immediate life will be affected. Will they still be able to go to the same school, see their friends or go to a party they’ve been invited to attend? While that type of response may seem superficial to you, it is typical for kids to respond this way.
Answer their questions and continue to have talks with them about their concerns over your divorce. If you don’t know the answer to a question, it is important to be honest and tell them so, rather than make promises you may not be able to keep.
Divorce can be complicated because there are many facets to consider. Attorney Chris Palermo can provide you with experienced legal guidance and help you make the right decisions.
Anyone going through divorce knows it is costly and not without repercussions. For one thing, the adage two people can live more cheaply than one definitely holds true. Two homes or apartments, each with separate utility expenses and other maintenance costs create a greater expense than one residence. In addition to dividing assets and paying for lawyers, each spouse starts a new life with less income.
Economicdevelopment.org1 reported studies conducted in 2012 that showed when divorce rates dropped, economic health increased and vice versa. This is not only true individually but also on a national basis.
It is a fact that women and children experience a significant decline in income following divorce.2
As it stands, divorce rates for first marriages have dropped and are now at 41 percent. One factor leading to lower divorce rates is that many couples now marry later in life. Later in life marriages tend to last and not end in divorce. Also, fewer people are marrying.
Granted, some couples may stay together for financial reasons, and this is especially true if they are in a low conflict marriage. Marriage counseling and mediation helps many couples resolve their differences short of getting a divorce.
So, given the fact that divorce is not good for economics on a personal or national level, why are divorce rates so high?
Today’s statistics show women initiate divorces more than men do, by 70 percent 3.
A relatively new study by the University of Arizona and University of Colorado Boulder3 found that unhappiness was a main factor in women’s initiation of divorce. Women in general are more concerned about the quality of their marriage and relationships than men are.
Researchers studied 1,639 men and women between the ages of 25 and 74 who were married when they first took a personality test and divorced when taking the test 10 years later.
Women with much lower quality marriages than average experienced greater happiness after divorce than women who stayed in comparable marriages. However, women in marriages that were just slightly lower in quality than average were less satisfied after divorce than women who stayed in comparable marriages.
Despite the fact that men are far less likely to experience an income decline after divorce, they are also more content about staying in a low quality marriage. In fact, research showed divorce had either little or no effect on their level of life satisfaction.
If you have questions about divorce or family law litigation, Attorney Chris Palermo is glad to provide you with legal help.
References:
1 Economicdevelopment.org http://economicdevelopment.org/2014/12/the-impact-of-divorce-on-americas-economy/
2Future of Children http://www.futureofchildren.org/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=63&articleid=411§ionid=2802
3 Psychology Today https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-new-resilience/201508/women-initiate-divorce-much-more-men-heres-why
4 Fusion http://fusion.net/story/126905/divorce-study-marital-happiness/
A prime example is a high profile case reported in the New York Post .Tracey Hejalian-Amon is the wife of a wealthy estranged husband, Swiss businessman Maurice Alin Amon. The couple has been married for eight years, and Hejailan-Amon has filed for her divorce with a Manhattan judge because she wants to have the case heard in New York.
The couple has multiple residences, which are in Monaco, France, Switzerland and New York. Hejailan-Amon’s lawyer argues that she spends enough time in the New York apartment that it should be considered her legal residence.
The main reason for filing in New York is the legal advantage of trying the case under New York divorce laws over trying based on Monaco divorce laws. Under Monaco divorce laws, spouses can take back the gifts that they gave to the other spouse during marriage. The gifts that Hejailan-Amon received included a $15 million Fifth Avenue apartment, jewelry, cars, art and furnishings, totaling in value around $70 million. Under NY divorce law, the $25 million art collection the couple acquired during marriage would likely be considered community property and be subject to property division.
In addition to keeping the gifts, Hejailan-Amon is seeking $235,000 a month in alimony.
In a case involving considerable assets, establishing the jurisdiction where the case is heard may be one of the most important legal strategies involved in the case. The Manhattan judge said she would rule within 60 days on whether the divorce could proceed in New York.
If you face issues regarding divorce or have questions about various legal strategies, Attorney Chris Palermo will be glad provide you with reliable legal guidance and help you make informed decisions.
Suing a judge occurs rarely, but does happen. In 2015, the judge presiding over a NY divorce case sanctioned an attorney who represented himself in the divorce case. Recently, the attorney filed a lawsuit against the judge and sued for damages.
The New York Law Journal reported at the end of July that Anthony Zappin, a former associate of Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo, filed a lawsuit against a Manhattan judge who imposed a $10,000 sanction on him for misconduct during his divorce case.
The day the press coverage was released, Zappin was fired from his position as associate at the law firm and suffered significant damages including loss of future earnings potential and denial of a fair trial on custody of his son.
Judges bear the responsibility to be fair and impartial when presiding over a case. If a party in the case believes the judge is unable to be fair and impartial, several means of recourse the party can take is to request that the judge recuse himself or move to have the judge recused from the case.
In a lawyers.com article, examples given as reasons for recusal include:
It remains to be seen what the court will decide in the lawsuit brought against the judge.
If you have questions about divorce or family law litigation, Attorney Chris Palermo will be glad you answer your questions and advise the best course of legal action.
Sometimes during divorce or after a divorce concludes, the spouse receiving spousal support may begin cohabiting with another partner. Should you have to pay spousal support, which would effectively go to supporting that couple instead of an independent spouse?
Last year, a case called Sanseri v. Sanseri came before the New York Supreme Court and it addressed when a trial court can terminate maintenance.
New York law for terminating maintenance has changed over the years to keep up with our changing culture. In 1978, based on the case Northrup v. Northrup, the court ruled that unless the person was habitually living with a man and “holding herself out” as his wife, no modification was allowed.
Decades later, the NY Legislature restructured the concept of maintenance to provide financial assistance based on a model of “economic dependence.”
The husband and wife were not yet divorced because certain issues still had to be resolved. The court ordered maintenance when the divorce began based on income disparities. Later, the wife admitted to living with another man, sharing a bedroom and commingling finances through a joint checking account. She accepted an engagement ring from her new partner. She shared family activities with him, listed him as an emergency contact for her child, shared birthdays, holidays and they traveled together.
Whether she should continue receiving maintenance hung up on the point that she had never “held herself out” as the spouse of her fiancé.
After reviewing the details and applicable case law, the court ruled that the burden of proof requires that the wife show a need for maintenance or the inability to provide for herself. The court based the ruling on the new legislative economic-based theory. The wife can re-open the case and provide evidence that supports the continuation of maintenance as necessary for her to maintain independence in her current situation. Meanwhile, the court suspended maintenance, pending the outcome of the hearing to reopen the case.
If you have questions about spousal support, Attorney Chris Palermo will be glad you answer your questions and advise the best course of legal action.
In 2009, Eric Stevens filed to divorce his wife Tiffany Stevens. Since then, close to 180 motions (filed by both parties) and rulings have gone into in the divorce and custody cases.
According to the Daily News, three years after filing for divorce, Tiffany allegedly tried to hire a maintenance man to kill her husband for a fee of $5,000. She was arrested in July 2012 and has been out of jail on a million dollar bail while her criminal case is still pending.
As a result of the 2011 divorce agreement, Tiffany had sole custody and Eric had supervised visits. After Tiffany’s arrest, her parents filed a motion for temporary custody of their only grandchild. The court later reduced the father’s initially court approved supervised visits to weeknight phone calls.
Evidence from the wife’s lawyers included a psychological examination of her ex-husband that indicated a personality disorder of depression with psychotic characteristics. She had obtained restraining order against Eric, which he violated. He denied her claims about the exam. He accuses his ex-wife of being a long-time drug addict.
Eric’s latest legal strategy was filing a complaint against the court appointed guardian ad litem for his daughter. He alleges attorney corruption and perjury and filed the complaint with the Statewide Grievance Committee in Connecticut, which handles lawyer discipline cases.
The above divorce and child custody cases are far from the norm, and most cases resolve much sooner and without this degree of complexity.
Find about your legal rights and discuss the actions you should take or not take with an experienced divorce attorney early on in your divorce. Following effective legal advice can make a significant difference in how your divorce unfolds.
Chris Palermo is a Suffolk County divorce atorney who has compassion for his clients and works closely with them to resolve issues effectively and protect their interests.
So often we hear about celebrity divorces that end horrifically, whether in legal battles over one spouse getting his/her lion’s share of the wealth, battling over child custody or tragic tales of drug abuse that translate into wild dramatic scenes. Consequently, when celebrity couples end a marriage amicably and have prenups in place so legal settlements are easily reached, it’s wise to also take note.
The New York Daily News reported that Rapper Wiz Khalifa and model Amber Rose reached a divorce settlement on June 7, 2016. They actually celebrated their heartfelt feelings for each other instead of the fact of their divorce.
The couple were married for 14 months and signed a prenup before marrying. Rose will receive a total of $1 million and has already received $356,000. Khalifa will pay $14,800 per month in child support and the couple will share joint custody of their three-year old son.
The couple filed for divorce in 2014 and the divorce proceedings took a far different turn from how it first began with Rose alleging Khalifa cheated on her. She now tweets that he was the only man she ever loved and they “still really, really love each other but just can’t be together.”
Unfortunately, the messiest celebrity divorces are often the ones that garner the most media attention. Even so, other celebrities have split amicably. According to ET, some other friendly divorces include:
It’s never too early to find out about your legal rights and discuss the actions you should take and not take when considering divorce. Being legally informed and receiving effective legal advice can make a huge difference in the type of divorce you experience.
Suffolk County divorce attorney Chris Palermo is a compassionate attorney who works closely with clients to resolve issues and protect their interests.
Johnny Depp’s claimed net worth according to Celebrity Net Worth is $350 million but actual worth may be closer to $400 million. After two years of marriage, his wife Amber Heard filed for divorce in a Los Angeles court last week. They married without a prenuptial agreement, and she requested spousal support but Depp denied the demand International Business Times reports.
Depp was paid $61.1 million for his role in Alice Through the Looking Glass and averages a yearly income of $41.1 million.
Prior to marrying Amber Heard, Depp had been with French model Vanessa Paradis for 14 years. They never married, but had two children together. When their relationship ended, according to hollywoodlife.com, the spit was amicable. He was worth $300 million at that time, and in a settlement, he awarded $150 million to Vanessa.
Romance is blissful and when you fall in love, the idea of breakup is not real. Perhaps the idea of ever splitting up is too painful to entertain. Yet, in today’s society and especially among celebrities, marriage often does not last.
Johnny Depp’s previous relationship did not require a prenuptial agreement, and he willingly gave half his wealth to his partner.
Because California is a community property state, a spouse is legally entitled to half of the community property. Yet the recent breakup does not appear to be so amicable. The divorce began with Amber Heard filing for a restraining order for alleged domestic abuse. At this point, the characteristics of this breakup are more like a battle, in contrast to the much longer partnership that ended with such grace.
If you have considerable wealth, for practical reasons, consider consulting with an attorney about creating a prenuptial agreement.
Suffolk County divorce attorney Chris Palermo can discuss prenuptial agreements with you and the benefits of creating one prior to marriage.
Nothing speaks like a testimonial. When you do a good job, satisfy a client’s needs and deliver above and beyond what was expected, everybody wins. A job well done simply makes everyone feel good. Many times, happy clients are willing to write a testimonial for you. And testimonials serve a valuable purpose in promoting your good work.
Forbes Magazine suggests that businesses ask satisfied clients or customers for testimonials, simply as part of doing business.
Here’s what some of Chris Palermo’s clients had to say:
Very professional and patient. The staff is very enthusiastic. It is great that the staff speaks Spanish. Excellent attorney and very helpful especially in times when life feels like riding a roller coaster. Thank you Chris, Bea and Riley!!
—Nora Antonucci (1 month ago)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I highly recommend Christopher Palermo. I’ve had the pleasure of using him for my divorce as well as my child support case. He has your back all the way & fights hard for you. The girls in his office were very attentive & helpful. If they weren’t available for any reason & I had to leave a message, someone would always get back to me in a timely manner. If I needed advice after my cases won & were closed he still gave me his time & attention of his opinion & the best advice he had for me.
—Danielle Rivellese (1 week ago)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Christopher Palermo is a great lawyer by far and always got me results! Staff is wonderful! Great communication. I highly recommend this law firm.
—Nathalie Vukas (3 weeks ago)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“Highest Recommendation 5.0 stars”
—Artisan Visual (5 months ago)
A father recorded a conversation between his son and his ex-wife’s live-in boyfriend. Later on, when he turned in the recording as evidence, the boyfriend’s attorney challenged the admissibility of the recording, calling it illegal eavesdropping.
According to ABC News, the boy was five years old and the father decided in good faith that recording the violent conversation he was overhearing was necessary for his son’s protection. Months later, on when neighbors called the police because they heard screaming and crying, the father turned in the evidence. Authorities arrested the live-in boyfriend, Anthony Badalamenti, and he was convicted of child endangerment, assault and weapon possession.
The ruling set a precedent for parents being able to eavesdrop on their children when it is done in good faith for the child’s protection.
However, the judge in the case cautioned about certain limitations, including:
The ruling does not establish whether a parent can eavesdrop when an older child explicitly refuses to allow it during conversations with the other parent.
This case appears to set a broader precedent about parental eavesdropping than a similar earlier case. An earlier court ruling from a Brooklyn judge allowed evidence from a mother who placed a recorder in her autistic son’s backpack due to suspected abuse by his bus matron.
It will be interesting to see how New York case law develops regarding parents who eavesdrop on children.
If you have questions about whether to record events involving your child, discuss your concerns with attorney Chris Palermo.He will be glad to answer your questions and provide you with effective legal guidance.