The Parental Divorce Reduction Act - - Comments from a Divorce Practioner

I have been reading with interest some of the blogs regarding the Parental Divorce Reduction Act. Many of the ideas seem excellent; some of them I disagree with.

As a specialist in family law for over 40 years, I strongly believe that a divorce should be the last resort, not the first resort, and that too many people will file for divorce, often for the wrong reasons. The Act's purpose is to reduce unnecessary divorce, decrease parental conflict and litigation surrounding a divorce, and educate parents regarding the impact of divorce on families. These are all admirable goals.

There are some key provisions to the Act that I would like to discuss. The first requirement is that there be counseling prior to commencing an action for divorce if there is a minor child of the marriage. The Act requires parents to complete a divorce education curriculum, followed by an eight-month reconciliation reflection period. The Act goes not to state that this will apply unless there is domestic abuse or criminal activity. The Act also goes on to state that the counseling provisions will be self-funding through additional fees regarding marriage licenses.

Here are some of my comments and thoughts regard the aforementioned key provisions of the Act. My first question is how will the Act be funded? The proposals for self-funding make a lot of sense, but the problem I see is that right now, especially in Michigan where I practice, along with many other States, we've been going through a severe recession and there are not enough dollars to go around to keep the present system working fully much less adding other requirements and costs.

The main problem I see is the waiting period if there are minor children of eight months before filing a petition to the end the marriage. The following are my thoughts and comments:

1. Many states require that the parties live separately and apart for at least a year before filing. It seems that this would be in conflict, because if people are trying to save a marriage, they normally do not separate.

2. In Michigan where I practice, if there are minor children, after filing there is a six month statutory waiting period to give people the time to reflect and make sure that they want to go forward and finalize the divorce because of the impact of a divorce on children.

3. If, after the counseling is completed and one or both of the parties still want to go ahead with the divorce, I question the need for the eight month waiting period before filing, and would argue that after filing, there could be an extension of the six month period to eight months.

4. Often people need court protection. Let me give you some examples.

(1) If one party is failing to pay bills, or is hiding money or transferring assets, there is a need for immediate court intervention and protection.
(2) The Act has an exclusion for domestic violence. How do you define domestic violence? In a situation involving physical violence, it is easy to define.

(3) But what about situations where there has been a history of threats and coercion, but without actual physical violence?

(4) What about a situation where one spouse is using intimidation towards the other?

(5) What about the situation where there is emotional abuse, but no physical abuse?

(6) What if one spouse is using the children to relay messages or putting the children in a very uncomfortable position, but there is no physical abuse?

(7) What if one spouse is using economic abuse towards the other by failing to disclose assets, or keeping control of the finances?

As a practitioner with extensive experience over many years specializing in family law, I have concerns, because many marriages have an imbalance of power between the parties. Often, one spouse is very controlling, and the other spouse feels powerless. These are reasons why the idea of an eight-month cooling period sounds nice as an ideal, but in actuality, may not make a lot of sense even if there are children. Also, there are a lot of attorneys who just like to litigate and heat matters up. How will this legislation control that?

In conclusion, while I believe there is a lot that is good in the proposed legislation to reform marriage and save as many marriages as possible I do have some questions and a lot of reservations. Let me know what other thoughts or comments that you have.

By: HENRY S. GORNBEIN
Family Law Attorney & Legal Correspondent
DivorceSourceRadio
40900 Woodward Avenue, Ste. 111
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304-5116
248/594-3444; Fax [phone]
DivorceSourceRadio.com
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

 

Follow Henry Gornbein on Twitter: www.twitter.com/.

Comments

[Timothy P Flynn]

07:00 AM on 06/23/2011

Bold Err: Don't worry about "Big Brother" on this one. The act Mr. Gornbein references was from the NM legislature. The senate bill died, currently bearing the official status: "action postponed indefinitely".

[Bold Err]

02:07 PM on 06/16/2011

This is just another intrusion into our personal lives by a Big Brother that thinks it knows what is best for *everyone*. I guarantee the "approved counselors" would be faith based, and charging $200 per hour. They would be booked out many months, making the "counseling" period stretch to years, even before the 8 month "reflection period".

Personal relationships are just that, PERSONAL. We don't need more governmental intrusion into our lives. The divorce laws need to be such that divorce is easier, not more difficult, to lower the conflict levels and make the incidence of violence lower as well.

[CTMaloney]

09:10 AM on 06/16/2011

You didn't mention that women file for divorce 2/3 of cases, and that it is actually their initiative in about 80%. What is your suggestion? Men are more tolerant and feel more committed in marriage. Part of the reason is that women rely on gender-biased courts expecting to get child custody, house, and child support. A remedy would be for all states to NOW legislate PRESUMPTIVE EQUAL PARENTING. My state of Maryland has refused because of feminists in the legislation and the huge influence of NOW opposing equal parenting. If you never lost your children to gender-biased courts and social workers, and had them brainwashed against you and suffered Parental Alienation, you can't begin to feel what we are talking about.

[Keystone 30]

08:38 PM on 06/16/2011

That's right, it's literally incentivised. The court essentially says to the woman, you file for divorce you'll get everything we get our cut and if he disagrees or contacts you we'll jail 'em without trial. This is the astounding unbelievable situation of what goes on in these rapacious corrupt courts.

[cwaged1002]

10:48 PM on 06/15/2011

Is there any part of our personal lives that is not on the legislative agenda?

[ProgressiveVoice]

09:48 PM on 06/15/2011

This is the first I've heard of the Parental Divorce Reduction Act. How ironic! Are these the same people that advocate abstinence education in lieu of sex education?

IMO a Parental Divorce Reduction Act that actually wants to reduce parental divorce would require counseling BEFORE marriage, parenting classes BEFORE marriage, lessons in communication, child development, conflict resolution, etc - all BEFORE marriage.

[jdmn17]

08:03 PM on 06/15/2011

Once more the government enters into personal choices. If they would only spend this kind of focus on creating jobs, They might be surprised if they worked to make the economy better. Forcing people who can't stand each other to go to counseling (to what end and who pays?) and remain together for six to eight months is just as likely to result in bloodshed than reconciliation. Add in that one partner wanting to push things along starts bringing home their new lover for all night trysts in the spare bedroom - the potential for abuse and more pain is immeasurable.