When the Judges are the Scariest Part of the Job

Last night during our "date night" my husband decided to tell me one of the reasons he loved our country. He decided to relay this information to me after I had imparted to him the details of my day. It was overall a rather good day and  in my world this warrants bright discussion and celebration. When I got to a rough patch involving some new jurists that had now entered the field of matrimonial law I explained that I was less than ecstatic with the thought of having to explain the entire world of matrimonial law each time I entered the chambers.
This is where my husband declared our country to be his beloved. You see he explained we need to give this kind of power to someone, and we the people decide who to give it to. Then if we are unhappy with how that power is used, we can take it away. This of course is a very rational and sound way of thinking about our system of government, however in terms of the judiciary branch it takes some time before we can change our minds about jurists.  A supreme court judge in our state serves a 14 year term.  That is an awful long time to be unhappy with the way a particular individual handles the power given to them.
Mulling this over he shook his head and declared that he agreed but asked about the alternatives as far as dealing with my situation.  Without blinking an eye I indicated that my adversary and I had reached an accord on this right away.....we would settle the case. As difficult as our clients were, the thought of putting them up on the stand to be judged in this forum was suicidal for us all. Now we just have to convince our clients that it is time to move on with their lives.

When the Judges are the Scariest Part of the Job

Last night during our "date night" my husband decided to tell me one of the reasons he loved our country. He decided to relay this information to me after I had imparted to him the details of my day. It was overall a rather good day and  in my world this warrants bright discussion and celebration. When I got to a rough patch involving some new jurists that had now entered the field of matrimonial law I explained that I was less than ecstatic with the thought of having to explain the entire world of matrimonial law each time I entered the chambers.
This is where my husband declared our country to be his beloved. You see he explained we need to give this kind of power to someone, and we the people decide who to give it to. Then if we are unhappy with how that power is used, we can take it away. This of course is a very rational and sound way of thinking about our system of government, however in terms of the judiciary branch it takes some time before we can change our minds about jurists.  A supreme court judge in our state serves a 14 year term.  That is an awful long time to be unhappy with the way a particular individual handles the power given to them.
Mulling this over he shook his head and declared that he agreed but asked about the alternatives as far as dealing with my situation.  Without blinking an eye I indicated that my adversary and I had reached an accord on this right away.....we would settle the case. As difficult as our clients were, the thought of putting them up on the stand to be judged in this forum was suicidal for us all. Now we just have to convince our clients that it is time to move on with their lives.

DIVORCE STATISTICS

Resolution is again backing calls for divorce law reform in England and Wales after newly released statistics highlight the flaws of a “blame centred” divorce process. The latest figures released today by the Office for National Statistics show that behaviour and adultery were cited in the vast majority of divorces.

In 2008, of all decrees awarded to one partner (rather than jointly to both), 67 per cent were awarded to the wife. In more than half of the cases where the divorce was granted to the wife, the husband’s behaviour was the fact proven. Of the divorces granted to the husband, the most common fact proven was the wife’s behaviour (34 per cent of cases).

Resolution, contends that this is because couples cannot currently get a divorce without having to blame one another for unreasonable behaviour or adultery unless they wait for two years.

Family break ups are a sad fact of modern life. With one in three children experiencing the breakup of their parents’ relationship before their 16th birthday, it’s essential that conflict is kept to a minimum when families separate. But, as these figures show, the present system encourages mud-slinging and blame. At the moment couples not wanting to blame one another have to wait two years before they can get a divorce. But for many, waiting two years to sort out their finances rules out this option.

Resolution is calling for a new system whereby couples can divorce on the grounds of “irretrievable breakdown” of their marriage with a maximum waiting period of six months. We urgently need to replace this blame centred divorce process with a civilised process for a civilised society.

I've Never Done This Before.........


Walking into an attorneys office to discuss the termination of ones marriage to some people is the equivalent of getting dental surgery without pain medication. Believe me, I do understand just walking through the door is sometimes a very difficult decision.

Unless however, you are walking into an attorney who is counsel to the "stars" most clients entering into any attorneys office chances are, will be dealing with their first divorce. Sure there are clients who come in and say that they have been married before, but most will also say the circumstances were quite different so in effect each time is like a first.

Asking questions and getting information is the reason you have chosen to enter my office in the first place. You should never feel ashamed or embarassed by the questions that you ask. The only thing you should feel embarassed about saying is "I've never done this before" or "This is my first divorce." These unnecessary statements meant to mask what you perceive as your ignorance regarding the law is something most lawyers will just want to roll their eyes about.
Of course you don't know the law, you aren't meant to, that is why you are in our office in the first place. There is no need for you to make excuses for your questions. This is not a test, where you pass or fail based on your knowledge or lack of same. None of my clients are "experts" at divorce. I am the only expert...if you will:)
So my first piece of advice to clients. Do not apologize for what you don't know. Embrace the fact that you are seeking information and knowledge and soak it up like a sponge. Feel comfortable with the lawyer you ultimately choice and then let him or her do her job. Afterall....I have done this before...

I've Never Done This Before.........


Walking into an attorneys office to discuss the termination of ones marriage to some people is the equivalent of getting dental surgery without pain medication. Believe me, I do understand just walking through the door is sometimes a very difficult decision.

Unless however, you are walking into an attorney who is counsel to the "stars" most clients entering into any attorneys office chances are, will be dealing with their first divorce. Sure there are clients who come in and say that they have been married before, but most will also say the circumstances were quite different so in effect each time is like a first.

Asking questions and getting information is the reason you have chosen to enter my office in the first place. You should never feel ashamed or embarassed by the questions that you ask. The only thing you should feel embarassed about saying is "I've never done this before" or "This is my first divorce." These unnecessary statements meant to mask what you perceive as your ignorance regarding the law is something most lawyers will just want to roll their eyes about.
Of course you don't know the law, you aren't meant to, that is why you are in our office in the first place. There is no need for you to make excuses for your questions. This is not a test, where you pass or fail based on your knowledge or lack of same. None of my clients are "experts" at divorce. I am the only expert...if you will:)
So my first piece of advice to clients. Do not apologize for what you don't know. Embrace the fact that you are seeking information and knowledge and soak it up like a sponge. Feel comfortable with the lawyer you ultimately choice and then let him or her do her job. Afterall....I have done this before...

HUMAN BED-WARMERS

I was asked a strange question today. As a divorce lawyer where do I stand on Holiday Inn’s announcement that it is to trial human bed-warmers?

To be honest, I never thought that I was obliged to take a stance on this issue. However, as someone who has recently taken to wearing socks in bed when temperatures have plummeted, it occurs to me that maybe I should have a view.

On reflection I can understand why the question was posed. The element of suspicion that might be engendered when one spouse returns from a business trip to tell their partner how the bed was warmed for them by a god or goddess dressed from top to toe in fleece, could theoretically be damaging for their relationship. However, Holiday Inn has given assurances that the bed-warmers will leave before the guests snuggle down between the sheets, so I do think it would be unfair for anyone to suggest otherwise.

Nonetheless and after careful consideration, I am going to say that I do think Holiday Inn by its actions could inadvertently risk increasing the divorce rate. After all, a bed that’s cosy from head to foot avoids the need for a couple to snuggle up together. Now what is that going to do for romance and those couples looking to rekindle lost feelings? There has to be a risk that this practice, if fully implemented across the complete chain of Holiday Inn’s hotels, could add to the number of failed marriages.

Come to think of it will our political parties with their love of legislation and currently vying with each other on ways to keep marriages intact, soon add to their manifestoes a bill to outlaw the art of bed-warming? Banning electric blankets, hot water bottles and humans dressed in fleece might still do nothing for their ratings but it will keep me in my socks for a little longer.

GIFT EXPERIENCES AT DEBENHAMS

There has been a considerable amount of hoo-ha this week about Debenham’s decision to offer a divorce gift list. The store is reported to claim that it’s in response to the growing popularity of parties, cakes and cards to celebrate the unravelling of the knot. However and in so doing it has come in for criticism for trivialising marriage and making divorce a fun event.

Purely in the interests of scientific research I visited the Debenham’s website this evening to see what was on offer. There was no obvious department on the tabs at the top of the page and I therefore tried Gifts. Although broken down into Occasions, Recipients and Categories, I could find nothing for divorce or divorcees. Browsing the other tabs, I wondered if the store might even be so bold as to have included this new line under its wedding tab. I duly clicked, but “relief,” there was nothing there to undermine the institution of marriage. In desperation I tried every tab, but there was nothing.

Finally I tried a search of the whole site. “Divorce gift list” I inserted. The first entry it came back with was: “Gift experiences: Audi R8 thrill.” Now you’re talking!