Tag Archive for: Custody

When Children Are Treated Like Chattel in Divorce; Don’t Let Your Kids Get Lost in the Shuffle!

As parents go through the pain of divorce, it can become a petty competition between spouses, and the children become the rope in an ugly, unfair tug-o-war. 

People going through divorce may get reduced to their own worst, most childlike state. They may project a lot of what’s happening to them onto the children. They may use the children as tools, using the kids as an excuse to justify what they want. 

Here’s a case in point. A mother wanted primary custody of the children. The arrangement she was asking for would actually deprive the father of a lot of parenting time. She claimed he was “out to lunch” when watching the kids, like they could set the house on fire and he would still be sitting there buried in his work.

This mother could have chosen to serve the summons when the kids were not at home. She could have kept it private, but she didn’t think it through, so she served her husband with divorce papers at breakfast in front of their children.

Astonished and angry, he started to engage the children, saying, “Look, Mommy’s trying to make me a homeless bum and kick me out. Who would you want to live with?” It became a round table breakfast discussion. These kids should never have been in that position! 

The wife had been considering divorce for at least a year. The husband didn’t want a divorce. He got served totally out of left field and was in a state of shock. It got quite intense and he became a little bit physically violent — when he had never been before. 

Later the wife kept using the incident as an example, “Isn’t he inappropriate that he was engaging the children and got violently angry?” She had completely lost sight of her own behavior, forgotten that she caused the entire horrible situation with her ill-considered timing. 

People in crisis forget and engage with their children as if they’re adults. They’re so wrapped up in their pain they can’t see that they are acting in immature and inappropriate ways.  

In another case, the husband was doing drugs, getting violent, drinking, coming home and, leaving again. The wife was in a lot of pain but kept saying she wanted to stay because of their child. In truth, she was just afraid. It would certainly be better for the child not to have such a volatile home life. The mother was projecting her emotions onto her child because she felt no sense of control in her life. Children are adaptable; the real issue was her feeling needlessly guilty about saying, “I don’t want this for myself.” 

Another danger is that sometimes when a person loses intimacy with their spouse, they may lean too heavily on their children for emotional support. They may start sleeping in the same bed as their child to avoid feeling alone. They may vent to their children because they don’t want to tell other people about the breakup. It starts to become not what a child and parent relationship should be. 

When a parent is trying to use the child to alleviate all of their feelings of emptiness and loneliness at the end of a marriage, it forces a child into a very difficult predicament. They will be profoundly confused, grow up too fast, or both. 

How Can These Destructive Behaviors Be Corrected? 

First, I have to make my clients see how they are behaving. I stop them in their tracks, while they’re telling me the story, to help the client be self-reflective and perceive their own behavior in order to modify it. 

My clients are flawed just as much as their spouses are flawed. I help them detach from their own issues and concentrate on getting the children through the transition. It often helps to have a child in neutral therapy with their very own counselor who can actively help guide the parents about their behavior. 

When divorcing parents can’t work together for their benefit, children get lost in the shuffle. In these families, the parents really need ways of breaking impasses and processing toxic emotions so they and their children can heal and move forward.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Beware Selling Clients the Brooklyn Bridge

When parties first engage in the divorce process, they often do not know the law, how their situation looks from the outside, and how things unfold in court. Part of the attorney’s role may be to give the client a gentle wake-up call. Sometimes when you’re strategizing with them, they’re not sure what tools you may use to try and seal their case.

In part because clients aren’t always telling you the full stack and sharing all their skeletons, I would not tell a client that I could get them relief such as sole custody, 100% rights to a business formed during the marriage, a guarantee that the statutory cap will apply for maintenance and child support when the income exceeds the cap, or the ability to relocate with their children — all of which are big-ticket, multi-dimensional items of relief.

In sharing the personal details of their lives, clients are often vulnerable — opening themselves up to outsider’s judgment and/or disapproval of how they are managing their lives. Attorneys need to know the larger context and help the client see it too.

During a recent client intake, the client revealed that she wanted to not have to pay her husband a penny, even though she earned more than him, to get primary residential custody, and to carte blanche be able to relocate with the children domestically. The latter one, being the one she desired most was the biggest wild card in her case, carrying the greatest improbability.

Her argument that she could offer them a better life elsewhere (perhaps questionable in it of itself in light of them already having the garden, backyard, family nearby, good schools, and residing in a good neighborhood in New York) was overshadowed by the overarching question — Can you offer the children a better life elsewhere than the life of having a father regularly present in their lives who they’ve seen daily to date and have a good relationship with?

Another case presented a high performing husband and father who worked long hours in finance. He wanted custody of his children stating his wife was an alcoholic and good for nothing. When we dug deeper, we learned that he, in fact, drank more than she did, but in light of his high performance at work, he considered himself a highly functional drinker and avoided using the term alcoholic altogether to describe himself. It appeared his wife had unraveled some several years back after she was let go from a prestigious job and never managed to regain her footing after that, but his contempt for her undermined who she was now, which was a functional enough mother, perhaps sloppy at times, but still quite present and active.

A case in point on the support end was a father making over $600,000 for the 5 years preceding the divorce who was adamant that he would only pay the statutory caps for maintenance and support, stating that they were modest spenders and quite frugal. There was some truth to this, except that they lived in New York City, and that alone meant that their modest living would require payments above the caps to sustain the accustomed lifestyle.

There is also the controlling personality type who called the shots during the marriage with the other spouse going along. These clients often think they will be able to navigate the divorce in a way to continue to get their spouse to go along with them, except that their spouse, self-aware enough of their namby-pamby quality, typically hires an overly aggressive attorney to compensate, who pushes back at every turn.

We all get these laundry lists of desired reliefs. As a service provider, we work for the client and are their cheerleaders, but realistic ones, that don’t overpromise and underdeliver; this is a key element of being supportive and effective for the client.

Being a cogent advocate and mouthpiece for the client and helping them to see the full breadth of their situation’s appearance to an outsider when all the relevant factors are weighed are not mutually exclusive; they are part of the same overarching role.

Please contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any related questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

Help! Is My Attorney in Bed With My Ex’s Attorney?!

On several occasions, I have been the incoming attorney where the client did not trust the attorney they initially retained, because they felt that attorney was in bed with their ex’s attorney, so to speak.

They had observed the two attorneys — opposing counsel to one another on the given case — engage in overly friendly behavior and banter in the court hallways and overheard their attorney cutting deals and verbally committing to settlement agreements to the opposing counsel that they had not spoken about with them (their own client) previously. In one particular case, the client overheard her attorney agreeing to have her pay a sizable amount in maintenance without first discussing it with her (this was before the new maintenance legislation was passed); in another case, the client overheard his attorney agreeing to give the wife full custody with limited visitation to him (the father) where the client was a very hands-on and involved father and wanted a 50/50 custody split.

These observations breed distrust, as the client feels that their attorney is not advocating for them. They feel their attorney is in cahoots with opposing counsel and is more interested in their relationship with opposing counsel than with them, the client, thereby selling them down the river in the process.

It is important for attorneys to have a positive rapport with one another, but there is a fine professional balance.

The relatively small pond of attorneys specializing in matrimonial and divorce law can often feel confined and incestuous. The attorneys tend to see each other frequently (for example, in court, at continuing legal education programs, and they are often repeat opposing counsel to one another). They are familiar with and often respect each other’s work.

A friendly professional relationship between your lawyer and opposing counsel can benefit you, because it can help the case proceed more smoothly and quickly. For example, if your lawyer is friendly with opposing counsel, opposing counsel will be more likely to extend professional courtesies when they are requested and less likely to argue over points of minutiae that are vacuous holes of time and money. A friendly professional relationship generally also involves mutual respect for the other person’s skills and professionalism. A lawyer who is respected by his/her colleagues can be a more effective advocate for you.

There are best practices attorneys should follow to foster the client’s security and confidence in them and the progress of the case. Foremost are the needs for transparency and honest, clear, open communication.

Before agreeing to a deal on your behalf, your lawyer should discuss with you the goals of the representation, the scope of his/her authority to reach an agreement on your behalf, and the specific details and ramifications of any particular piecemeal or global settlement.

While your lawyer should advocate zealously on your behalf — both in negotiations and when arguing to the court — keep in mind that it’s also part of his/her job to advise you about the realistic chances of achieving your goals in light of the governing law. Although clients do not always welcome this kind of information, if your objectives are realistic, your lawyer may be able to help you resolve the case more quickly than if your objectives are unrealistic. Having realistic goals can also help minimize the emotional turmoil that can accompany divorce.

To ensure transparency, your lawyer should regularly update you and accurately report to you about what is going on in your case. You should be copied on all written communications.

Sometimes, the assigned judge will ask the lawyers to come up to the bench or into the judge’s chambers without their clients. Because transparency is extremely important, your lawyer should ask the judge if you can be present. If your lawyer can’t say something in front of you, he/she shouldn’t say it at all.

Feel free to contact The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
Offices in Manhattan and Brooklyn
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com

How Enforceable Is Your Divorce Agreement?

The agreement is finally signed. The ink is drying. The divorcing parties want to let out a big sigh that it’s finally over. But is it?

Last month, I wrote that there is no such thing as a gentleman’s agreement, but what about when you have a signed and duly acknowledged agreement?

Good lawyering is, among other things, the art of utilizing words in the most poignant and effective manner. Words, sentences, and terms are carefully calibrated; their misuse can have a deleterious effect. Every word present can count. Every word missing can count. Details matter!

Even a written and signed contract is not always as enforceable as people often think. When terms are included that are against public policy, those terms hold no weight.

An example of this relates to custody. Everything pertaining to custody is subject to court review and approval. Some divorcing parties are resistant to court. They want everything completely private—between themselves and their mediator and/or select arbitrator only—with no court interference. Regarding custody issues, however, the court is the parens patriae (a doctrine that grants the inherent power and authority of the state to protect persons who are legally unable to act on their own behalf), and they cannot be divested of that authority. The court cannot be written out of the agreement. Similarly, naming a guardian for a child in an agreement is likely to be unenforceable.

On a further note, parents cannot assign their decision-making authority to third parties. It is common for parties to erroneously write in their agreement something like the following: “If the parties disagree regarding health-related issues, the child’s treating physician shall make the decision; if the parties disagree regarding the child’s educational needs, the child’s principal shall make the decision.” Clauses such as these would not be upheld. The respective physician, principal, etc. can assist the parties in coming to decisions but cannot be the ultimate decision makers.

With regards to support, maintenance cannot be waived if the result is that one of the parties will become a “public charge,” meaning eligible for public assistance. This is, obviously, upsetting where one of the parties makes a significant amount of cash off the books and indicates on their tax returns that they are making nearly nothing, rendering them eligible for many government assisted programs, and the other spouse is paying taxes on their total income. This can create an unfair imbalance in that the tax paying spouse may be obligated to pay maintenance to the spouse skirting tax laws, and this cannot be waived.

Child support is a biggie! A divorce agreement waiver of child support will not be enforced if the needs of the children are not being met; and if parties indicate that they opt out of modifying child support if there is a substantial change in circumstances, the court is likely to hold the “opt-out” unenforceable when a “substantial change in circumstances” rolls around.

Agreements that resolve divorce often reflect a delicate balance among issues of custody, support, and equitable distribution. Apples are often exchanged for apples, and they are also exchanged for oranges. For example maintenance, child support, and equitable distribution all boil down to money and monetary values and exchanges. A little less in one category being exchanged for a little more in another category would be like apples being exchanged for apples. Sometimes, however, the parties barter things like mitigated support obligations being exchanged for the ability of one party to relocate with the children a greater distance away from the other parent; that would be more akin to apples being exchanged for oranges.

If part(s) of the agreement are later determined unenforceable, that can grossly affect the equilibrium of the agreement the parties initially agreed to voluntarily, believing they knew the values and rights they were exchanging in a concrete way. It can lead to a windfall for one party, and the other party being forced to give up significantly more than they anticipated and bargained for.

Independent covenant and severance clauses are staples in all the agreements to ensure that, if parts of the agreement are held to be unenforceable, the remainder of the agreement stays intact. However, in the worst-case scenario, a faux pas can invalidate the entire agreement.

For example, as it relates to the bigger all-encompassing picture, an agreement that mandates the divorce or mandates that the divorce not transpire violates public policy and can invalidate the whole agreement. In this scenario, even a severance clause cannot yield a messianic salvation for the agreement.

A large majority of people have no patience to read through dense and tedious agreements. However, it is critical that the divorcing parties perform the painstaking task of reading their agreement and understanding its provisions, consequences, and enforceability in totality.

First and foremost, my goal is to inform clients of the law so that they understand what they are agreeing to along with any accompanying positive and negative repercussions. I present the options and advise clients what I think the most appropriate options are for their particular situation. Feel free to contact me with any questions.

Cheryl Stein, Esq.
The Law and Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein
Offices in Manhattan and Brooklyn
Phone: (646) 884-2324
E-mail: cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com