Tag Archive for: Divorce

The Interplay Between Divorce and Immigration: Part 1

/in , , /by

With the upcoming presidential election, crisis at the border, flood of migrants, and New York City being a sanctuary city, the topic of immigration has been getting a lot of air time, with all its inherent controversies and polar view-points.  

The magnified “crisis” is confined in scope to the illegal immigration issue.  

Untarnished by the mass media coverage is the uncontroversial paths towards legal immigration that have been steadfast and secure bastions for many years.  

A longstanding path is legally obtaining United States citizenship via marriage to an American citizen. See also, https://www.ice.gov.  

United States citizenship is one of the greatest assets we have. We sometimes take this for granted. It is incredibly sought after by many have-nots.  

America on its worst days is better than many other countries on their best days.  

We interviewed renowned immigration attorney Candice L. Ackermann, Esq. of Visa Law Pros – www.visalawpros.com – to discuss the intersection between divorce and immigration.

The golden rule is that a marriage entered into between a US citizen and non-US citizen needs to be a “bona fide marriage” at the time it is entered into to be recognized by immigration. A bona fide marriage forges the legal path of citizenship for the immigrant spouse. 

A bona fide marriage must be proven to the immigration authorities with evidence and documentation.  

The two most powerful pieces of evidence are proof of joint residence and commingling of marital funds, such as a joint bank account.  

None of us are so naive as to believe that all these marriages are authentic. We all assume that a percentage is based on artifice – a couple portraying the surface layer optics of a marriage – a citizen helping an immigrant friend or acquaintance as a benevolent gesture or in exchange for something tangible or intangible promised.  

But a percentage – larger than you may think – of these marriages are based on a genuine desire to build a life with the other person.  

Notwithstanding such aspirational marital goals at the outset, with an overall high divorce rate in this country, these marriages are, obviously, just as likely or unlikely to fail and end up in divorce as any other.  

Trouble comes when the marriage irretrievably breaks down within the first two years and before the final immigration interview to remove conditions to the immigrant spouse’s green card.  

Timing is critical. If the immigrant spouse can prove the marriage was bona fide when entered into, they usually don’t have to worry if a divorce action is commenced prior to their final immigration interview, but this is not a bullet-proof catch-all. There are exceptions and nuances that need to be accounted for on a case-by-case basis.  

If you and your spouse find yourself in this conundrum and you have questions about an inevitable and impending divorce, contact us at The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein – www.cherylsteinesq.com – to learn more.

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

Victimhood Has Currency

/in , , , /by

Most people spin conflict so that they are the victor or the victim. Here’s why it’s important to keep that instinct in check.

The legal community focuses heavily on the topic of domestic violence with continuing legal education seminars and pro bono clinics. There is even a specialized court called the IDV court (integrated domestic violence), where the family law cases that have alleged elements of domestic violence are adjudicated.

Abuse comes in many forms – emotional, physical, sexual, and financial. Courts take abuse into consideration and use it as a factor in equitable distribution and spousal support, often increasing the amount of money an abused party will get. So, there is monetary compensation for it.

There is a case J.N v. T.N., in which the abuse was found to be so grave, the court awarded the abused party 85% of the marital assets. The case can be found here: https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2022/2022-ny-slip-op-22310.html. See also, DRL Section 236(B)(5)(d)(14), which can be found here: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/DOM/236.

Abuse is also an obvious factor in custody determinations, as logically, children should have measured and protected engagements with an abusive parent. Trouble comes, however, when one party exaggerates or fabricates allegations of abuse to gain monetary and custodial advantages. The irony being that such a party abuses the abuse claim as a punitive and self-enriching weapon.

For example, conjure the not uncommon case of a wife calling the police on her husband, purely as a child custody tactic. In doing so, she thinks she can get the upper hand by forcing the creation of a police record for her husband – all without thinking of the implications. The wife here is so blinded by her personal ambition of gaining full custody that she fails to see the bigger picture – that her husband would get fired if there was any hint of an abuse allegation in his private life. Whether or not the allegation was true, the allegation’s mere existence was a glaring indelible black mark against him. What she thought would help her in her custody case turned out to be a very silly move for the financials. Since her ex is now unemployed and virtually unemployable at the level of income he was making at a top bank, she is limited in the support she can get. Moreover, because the court felt her call to the police was disingenuous, she ended up being penalized on the custody front.

Everything done in divorce has a cost-benefit analysis. As highlighted above, when vindictive parties are too myopic in their strategy, they end up losing on multiple fronts.

One of the consequences of the victimhood claim is that it often keeps very unhappily married couples married.

I have seen many situations where a theme of the marriage is – “You are the reason for all my unhappiness and misery, and if we get divorced, I will make your life a living hell.”

The party being blamed chooses to stay in the marriage because they view this as a real threat. Despite their misery, it is a misery they know and have lived with for years, which to them, beats the unknown behemoth of misery their spouse vows to ascend on them if the parties divorce.

I often get postnuptial agreement inquiries from this category of married couples.

To learn more about how genuine and fabricated abuse allegations can impact a marriage and divorce, contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein.

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

Title Doesn’t Matter

/in , , /by

In marriage, title doesn’t matter. Titles to houses, cars, accounts and businesses can all get overridden by the statute and court system in a divorce.  

I often do consultations where people say things like, “I’m married, but we keep everything separate.” They operate under the assumption that, because each party has assets in their own name, it’s separate property under the law. They think that the default in a marriage tips to individual title, and that the only things that are jointly owned are whatever has been purchased jointly and/or is held in joint names – unfortunately for them, this is a gross misconception. 

Everything purchased during the marriage is presumptively marital property, regardless of title. The burden of proof is on the person who wants to prove otherwise. 

For example, someone might purchase a property in their separate name during marriage. However, title in their sole name doesn’t matter. The overriding presumption is that everything purchased after the date of marriage is marital property. 

Inheritance is, by definition, separate property. That said, if someone uses their inheritance money to purchase a property that they put in their separate name — and then they use money earned during the marriage to pay towards the equity and the principal on the mortgage — then that person has commingled and made a portion of that house marital property. 

Businesses are handled a bit differently. When it comes to businesses, the titled spouse does get a leg up, and the non-titled spouse is typically entitled to smaller percentages than other aspects of equitable distribution, such as accounts, that weigh in favor of 50/50 splits. Non-titled spouses typically get approximately 5% – 33% of the value of the business interest, and where they fall on the spectrum and whether the court would go outside of this most common range is based on the direct and indirect contributions each spouse has made to the business. Let’s say a husband has a contracting business in his exclusive name, as appears on the corporate and business documents, his wife is presumptively entitled to a portion of the business, even though she is a non-titled spouse. 

Prenuptial and postnuptial agreements offer a means to explicitly delineate personal separate property from joint marital property. Their flexibility allows us to go above and beyond what the law provides and create unique solutions that make sense for the situation. 

To learn more and appropriately protect your rights and interests, contact us.

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

Rumbles Before the Quake

/in , , /by

The ground gives off a lot of clues before an earthquake — and so do people.

We often hear that someone is “going through a midlife crisis.” It can happen in a way where the person is happy, sad, or in between. A red sports car may be involved, or it may be a new model train hobby. When the person is married, the crisis ends up spreading out to affect the people around them.

In most cases, however, there has usually been some sort of shift taking place within that person that set the stage for a midlife crisis. From society’s changing attitudes to cell biology, here are three factors that I frequently see:

•Menopause: A classic example is a woman going through menopause. Many women will tell you that they felt absolutely crazy for five years. Their body stops being able to regulate itself, and then, all of a sudden, they start thinking differently and feeling differently about themselves and their whole life. Menopause “survivors” say that they had become a different person through those years.

•Mental Illness & Substance Abuse: It is not uncommon for very high-functioning people to struggle with a chronic mental illness or substance abuse problems. As they approach midlife, something happens that throws them off balance where they are no longer able to control their illness, even within the parameters that have always kept them high functioning. Of course, Covid has been working non-stop to add stress to people’s lives, which may result in relapses when there otherwise might not have been.

“Cougars” & “Hot Dads”: As society has suddenly begun to admire women and men past the age of 40, the denizens of that age group are taking notice. Men, especially, seem eager to test out the extent of their attractiveness on younger associates at work. Things like personal trainers, plastic surgery, and body contouring become a priority. This effect may also be partially responsible for the rise in divorce among people in their 40s and 50s.

Eventually, for these people, something happens where they are no longer even within the sphere of normalcy. The checks and balances they had made in their lives are no longer working, and they begin to act in ways they never had before. Either they will ask for a divorce, or their spouse will. If you ask their spouses what happened, they will often say that the person who had the midlife crisis was a workaholic with a successful career — and a substance abuse problem.

Thankfully, the 1950s are dead and buried, much like the notion of staying in an unhappy marriage. That said, divorce can still be a long and painful shift, and escaping an abusive home is still fraught with dangerous obstacles.

Contact us for more information.

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

When Your Ex Is Blabbing About You…Ruining Your Reputation

/in , , /by

The idea of people speaking negatively about us is a huge source of shame for many. We all want to exist in the world thinking that we are well thought of, or at least neutrally thought of. Whether the negative thing is true or not, it’s obviously really unsettling. 

One of the unique aspects of a marital relationship is that each spouse knows things about the other that no one else does. When vulnerabilities that are exposed in the times of greatest intimacy and closeness are used against someone, they may feel a loss of the trust that created the whole reason for marriage.

Unfortunately, divorce is problematic in its own way. It often gets used as a bombshell when talking to neighbors, and this can create feelings of tremendous isolation for the other person. I’ve seen people go to bed one night with a whole network of friends, and wake up blocked by all of them, across multiple platforms. 

Sometimes, mutual friends can actually be great facilitators during the process of mediating a divorce, as a sort of in-between. Other times, friends are caught in the middle and used as sounding boards to air out the negative feelings of whichever spouse they are with at the moment. 

One thing that few people realize is that when your ex bad-mouths you, they often reveal their own negative character traits instead of yours. Within the work environment, the gossiper is the one that is most at risk, because nobody really wants to hear that often sensationalized, quasi-true, shameful anecdote about their co-worker’s ex, especially if they are a substantive person themselves; it makes us cringe. Moreover, at work, superiors start to think their blabbermouth divorcing underling is using time and energy they should be channeling into their job to conduct glorified group therapy sessions, and consequently, they start scrutinizing their job performance more. I often say, “Chances are it’s more negatively impacting your spouse that they’re blabbing about you than it’s affecting you.”

That said, people are often still blocked from their regular friends and support systems. Across the board, I have seen people experience trouble functioning in the midst of a mass ghosting led by their soon-to-be ex-spouse. 

Ultimately, the larger world is full of people who do have an element of common sense. If they feel they know you, and have a decent rapport with you, most people will be able to navigate the gossip. 

In my next post, I’ll talk about the measures you can take, like confidentiality and NDA clauses, to protect yourself in an agreement.

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

Divorcing an Addict

/in , , , , /by

I’ve had many situations where one party is an addict and the other party has to deal with the repercussions or where both parties are addicts but one is more functional. In several cases, the parties actually met at AA. I’ve represented the addict spouse, the non-addict spouse, and neutrally mediated many cases involving addiction.

Studies show that addicts don’t necessarily get better — instead it’s about containing or channeling the addiction. Oftentimes, for a multitude of reasons, the partners of addicts are willing to cut the other party some slack because they don’t want to throw in the towel on the marriage. Sometimes, a post-nuptial agreement is done instead of a separation or divorce, sometimes nothing is done.

When thinking of addiction, most people conjure images of alcohol, drugs, and smoking, but there are so many other forms of addiction that can have deleterious effects on relationships and marriage, like sex addiction, gambling, video games and screen time, and engaging in dangerous and high-risk sports and behavior to test one’s edge and get their adrenaline pumping towards making them feel more alive, or on the flip side, to numb themselves from feeling anything.

I have a case in which a woman was married to someone who is a sex addict. He spent the down payment for a new house on his addiction. Because they have three young children, the wife took a wait-and-see attitude. For his part, the husband went to a rehab facility and found 12-step meetings to attend afterward. Unfortunately, as time went on, it became clear that his addiction was a factor once more. While it did not affect his career, he was not able to juggle his addiction and his marriage. I represented the wife in the divorce getting her 75% of the parties’ assets in an equitable distribution relief package to compensate her for the money the husband dissipated on prostitutes, escorts, and his porn addiction.

Another common situation I’ve come across is when there is a combination of addiction and rather acute mental illness, such as bipolar disorder. This is especially relevant when there are changes to medication used to treat mental health issues, or the person simply stops taking their prescribed medications. These situations can change overnight, and often cause people to want an immediate divorce in order to protect the children, in addition to protecting assets, and their own mental health and sense of safety.

Gambling addiction is also widespread. A client’s husband recently revealed to her that he has $150,000 in gambling debt and a co-debt with someone else for over $50,000. She is obviously very concerned about her assets, which primarily consist of the marital home. One option for this couple would be a post-nuptial agreement, putting everything in the non-addict spouse’s name.

Within more religious and tight-knit communities, I’ve seen many miserably unhappily married people choose to stay married to an addict solely because they fear stigma. Often, they have children and are afraid that others will think the addiction is inherited. If people live in a community where addiction is a highly stigmatized black marker, they don’t want people to know, so they choose to “stick it out” in their marriage — a very loveless marriage for the sake of maintaining a facade.

Feel free to contact me if any of this resonates and you or your spouse struggle with an addiction.

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

When Your Spouse is on the Wrong Side of the Law

/in , , /by

People find themselves on the wrong side of the law for various reasons. They get in trouble with work, with business, with taxes, with government officials. So sometimes, divorce becomes necessary in order to disentangle and protect the family’s assets. Other times, it’s a matter of conscience.

I had a case where the husband had been put in jail because he had been stealing money from a fund that he was responsible for. Over the course of many years, he began taking money to subsidize his lifestyle with his wife. His wife made a good living, and he wanted to present that he was contributing towards the marriage as well. In truth, the wife didn’t know that much about the husband’s job, and she didn’t ask. He was a consultant, and they filed their taxes separately. 

The fund that the husband was responsible for eventually discovered his embezzlement. He ended up doing a stint in jail, and the wife stayed with him throughout this ordeal. The wife was not prosecuted or implicated in any way. This marriage did eventually disintegrate into divorce – the seed being planted with the husband’s criminal activity — but it took many years. 

In another instance where the husband was found guilty of embezzlement, the couple owned many joint assets together. They wanted to get a divorce in order to protect the wife’s share of the assets and transfer all the assets into her exclusive name, thereby protecting them. 

Sometimes, people trigger an investigation into their (ex-)spouse. For example, a wife may know that her husband used fuzzy math on his tax returns. They may stay married, and benefit from the questionable returns while they’re married. It’s only after the divorce — or during a very, very contentious divorce — that they will call the IRS. That is not only personally distasteful to me, it is also illogical to facilitate the imprisoning of your ex-spouse because then they cannot work and make support payments. Further, the children are deprived of a parent and have to deal with the emotional turmoil and stigma of an imprisoned parent.   

Finally, there are extreme scenarios of finding out your spouse committed a crime and got away with it. For example, finding out your spouse has affiliations with a supremacist or hate group, a terrorist organization, has stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars and gone undiscovered, and in the most extreme scenario, has committed rape or murder in their past and never got caught. These are not just scenarios that play out in mystery novels; while not run of the mill, these events happen and need to be handled delicately. 

There are ways to build up some armor and distinguish yourself from your law-breaking spouse. Post-nuptial agreements can address all kinds of different issues. If the marriage is in a more advanced stage of deterioration, you can pursue a separation agreement or divorce. Contact me at cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com to learn more.

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

“Me, Too” Divorces: A Case Study

/in , , /by

Whenever we hear about a case of sexual harassment in the news, there is often a divorce happening in the background. The divorce part is just not the centerpiece of the story. I’ve had several situations where the wife’s husband was accused of sexual harassment at the office, and it became a major consideration in our strategy. 

For example, I had a case where the husband was a charming, easy-to-love guy. The wife was successful in her own right, and he pulled out all the stops for her. She ended up relocating for him — and a few years later he was asked to resign from his job due to multiple sexual harassment claims.

He ended up going from a high salary to $30,000 a year scraping together various consulting gigs. The wife went from being the less-monied spouse to being the monied spouse. When the marriage broke down, having a financially ruined husband became an urgent problem. His reputation had been tarnished within his industry so much that it was unlikely he would ever get another high-paying position. 

My client abhorred the idea of paying support to someone whose career came crashing down because of his own actions. Despite what was morally right, it appeared that the black and white letter of the law was on the husband’s side. According to the statutory maintenance guideline calculations, my client would have had to pay a sizable maintenance to him. The wayward husband’s attorney requested this relief to shake up my client and put her on the defense; he picked up on my client’s (understandable) particular revulsion to paying support — and liked to bring it up to unnerve her. He requested the relief in his pleadings, audaciously filed a motion for support, and sent barrages of correspondences on the subject. 

Despite the guidelines, I advised my client that the judge would not rule in the husband’s favor.

That’s because judges look at the “whole package” and exercise several factors afforded to them to deviate from the statute as they deem fit towards a fair and judicious outcome. I expected the judge would be sympathetic to my client because her story was so indicative of the moral character of the husband. Ultimately, we prevailed, obtaining a judgment that freed my client and that she felt great peace about. 

One of the judges I’ve admired in my career always emphasized the importance of providing a “whole picture” to the judge. The relevant laws allow for a degree of discretion to the judges, which makes it possible to do things like bypass spousal support guidelines in the interest of fairness. In this case, the whole picture showed a cloud of bad behavior that obscured the one issue that seemed in the husband’s favor. 

As ludicrous as it might sound for a wife in this instance to have to pay her husband support, it’s not so simple, for example, the courts typically prefer that a former spouse pay support than that the befallen spouse become a ward on the state. Further, as mentioned, the statutory notice of guideline maintenance, in its most literal form, favors the husband, and seeking maintenance is also often used as a strategic scare and intimidation tactic of the husband’s legal counsel to get the wife to settle on other terms, such as equitable distribution.  

Join me next time when I discuss another “Me, Too” divorce, and feel free to send me your story to cheryl@cherylsteinesq.com.

Until next time…… 

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

When Your Spouse Is Gay

/in , , /by

Most people who find out their spouse is gay think they’re facing a unique situation — but, realistically speaking, there are a lot of LGBT+ people who have gone the traditional way of marriage and starting families. Many of them are near retirement age and got married when the world was a less tolerant place. 

While each situation is different, in my practice, divorces where one spouse is gay tend to be more amicable as an overall generalization, with there being some highly contentious ones every now and again. There’s oftentimes already a deep attachment and an understanding in place that they were never going to have a conventional marriage. They created a different kind of life together, and now they have to untangle it. 

That mutual respect is why so many couples like this are more inclined to mediate their divorces. In many of my cases, the person who is not gay is attached to the one that is, and the person that is gay usually does not want to be harsh. I have also had experiences where the couple tries initially to mediate, or resolve the situation amicably, and they end up litigating. That can happen for a number of reasons, including the non-adversarial setting of mediation, which has been known to make financial manipulation more likely to occur. 

Within the various religions, one party being gay may present seemingly unsolvable problems in a divorce. Oftentimes, religions bring with them a culture that involves every member of a multi-generational family. Some religious communities have their own systems of dealing with marriages and divorces. Information that is private in the secular world is everyone’s business in small communities. Because of that, couples may work out an agreement in which they are divorced in everything but name — unless the parties are completely willing to be open and potentially jeopardize some of the relationships with their family members, including parents, siblings, uncles still moored in more traditional and less accepting dogmas.

In many of these cases, the non-gay spouse did have suspicions over the years that their spouse might be gay. A lot of times, it was chalked up to depression, the gay spouse exhibiting behaviors such as being withdrawn, detached, and lack of interest in sexual encounters with their spouse. The reality is the gay spouse is often depressed if they feel trapped in a marriage with someone of the “wrong” sex who they lack sexual interest in and are often conflicted about how to handle their situation — do they stay out of a sense of loyalty to their family or do they go out of a sense of loyalty to their true innate nature. So, for many, getting that divorce is important to their continuing mental health.

To get started, contact me.

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

The Best Revenge Is Living Well

/in , , , /by

Recently the country has witnessed the difference between demanding justice and demanding revenge. The lens of 2020 made it clear that they are two distinct things that may overlap in places, but differ in fundamental ways. The toll wrought by the desire for revenge was far more destructive than anyone seeking justice through peaceful protests. 

Divorcing people are all too familiar with the murky, gray area where justice and revenge overlap. All too often the initial desire for justice transforms into a yearning for revenge for one or both spouses. Maybe one spouse looks like they’re really enjoying life and it just rubs the other spouse the wrong way. What’s worse, anxiety — in no short supply nowadays — amplifies every other negative emotion and inches us ever closer to the edge. 

I happen to be working on a case in which the mother made it very clear that she wants a 60/40 split on custody. The father wants a 50/50 arrangement, but the mother held firm. There was no monetary benefit attached to the 60/40 arrangement; the mother would receive the same support package either way. As it turns out, life just unfolded in a way where the father was getting the 50/50 split he initially desired. Then, out of some kind of desire for revenge, the mother started to alienate the youngest child — who is the most vulnerable and malleable. This is incredibly unhealthy, and none of the members of this family can be said to be thriving. 

Sometimes the revenge dynamic takes on a more competitive quality. One spouse might look at the other and, based on something like their spending, feel left out of an apparently amazing life. It may look like the other is spending a fortune on what seem to be luxuries, like going for massages or buying an expensive humidor. (Meanwhile, neither one of them has reined in their spending!) 

A much more simple way to get revenge is to live well and enjoy your life. The idea of living well encompasses more than just meeting the marital standard of living. It is forward-looking, previewing what you need to live well in the future. That includes physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being.

Even though support packages are based on the standard of living during the marriage — in other words, hindsight — a lot of what we seek in support packages or equitable distribution has to do with projection into the future. Traditional “wisdom” says the best projection of the future is the past, but in a divorce, you may be doing things you’ve never done before, so the past isn’t much of a guide.

As an attorney, it is my duty to make sure a client never settles a case with terms they later regret. Invariably that leads to a feeling of betrayal, creating an environment for things like vengeance to flourish. And what the vengeful person does not release on their spouse, they release on the rest of the world.

Realistically speaking, the best revenge is getting the best deal. To ultimately live the best life, and create a support system that includes everything that you need to bolster and support yourself — whether it’s therapy, job training, education, or a new wardrobe for presenting yourself to the world. 

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

Flattening the Curve in Divorce

/in /by

When I heard the term “Flattening the Curve” associated with COVID 19, it was eerily familiar, with great resonance. 

Divorce is about flattening a different kind of curve. Instead of spreading out medical care, divorce professionals spread out the financial and emotional impact of divorce on a family. 

COVID is here; it is looking society straight in the eye; there is no averting its presence; it’s the stark reality, so too is divorce when it’s impending and underway. It’s about spreading the consequences out over time or mitigating them to make them more manageable so the parties can transition into a new norm.  

How does that work in the real world? States have laws that govern divorce and essentially cushion people; they spread out the repercussions and soften the blow so that the transition is manageable — and neither party is left disadvantaged. 

I associated divorce with flattening the curve when working with a client recently. It was a husband and wife with a marital home. The husband wanted a divorce and told the wife that he was moving out. Critically, he told her that he would only pay the mortgage for three more months. In that case, we were able to spread the transition over a longer period of time. He was in the wrong to threaten to leave her in the lurch when they had built a life together and assumed mutual responsibilities accordingly.  He was not let off the hook from paying his obligations pursuant to his hasty timeline and we were able to provide the necessary cushion and adequate timeline for the parties’ mutual release of responsibilities to one another. 

Another option that encourages flattening the curve of divorce is pendente lite and post-judgment maintenance and child support. Pendente lite simply means “during litigation” – it is to be paid while the case is ongoing, until the divorce is final. Post-judgment maintenance is tiered and paid out pursuant to the length of the marriage. Longer marriages yield longer pay-outs, with a marriage over 20 years, irrefutably dubbed a “long term marriage,” potentially promising a pay-out duration equivalent to half the length of the marriage, pursuant to the statute. Further, ancillary issues such as the ability of the payee to get up to speed on a career track and the parties’ respective ages and health issues are factors considered when determining maintenance amount and duration. 

Interim agreements are another option to prevent drastic changes in the parties’ standard of living from happening too soon or harshly. 

Cuomo has said about his relationship with Trump through this pressing Covid19 time that their personal differences and political orientations aside, when you are in a foxhole with someone, it doesn’t matter whether you like him or her, you are mutually single-focused in your aim to get out safely. Divorcing parties often share this sentiment when dealing with the IRS and taxes; even very litigious divorcing parties agree that they are on the same side as each other and “friends” to collaborate, align and save themselves tax dollars. The question is, “Are conflicted and divorcing couples also sharing this sentiment and approach in handling their conflicts, separation, and divorce through this time?” Are they in agreement that they must cooperate for the sake of each other’s well-being and the children’s to get everyone to the other side of this pandemic safely? 

The answer varies.

Some parties say that the pandemic is making everything else – including their separation and divorces – seem so trivial. Others, overwhelmed as it is by the drastic and fundamental changes in daily living, feel further crushed by increased hostility and feeling out of control both internally and from their exes.  

Maybe it can also be a time for us all to reflect on our own flexibility and willingness to negotiate? #quarantinegoals 

Stay safe!

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@cherylstein

YOU ARE NOT THE PERSON I MARRIED

/in /by

Basic Second Law of Thermodynamics is that things gradually fall apart — into a state of disorder and disrepair. As powerful as gravity, the overwhelming force of the world’s natural tendencies is hard to beat. 

It is no surprise that, as humans, we too peak in our state of optimal growth and then our systems, more often than not, decline. Most people expect this to happen, but way down the line, in some fuzzy distant future. However, life does not always follow the script and premature illness is challenging to grapple with. 

Classic wedding vows include “in sickness and in health;” there is this overriding expectation that spouses can stand by each other through the most vulnerable times, but not everyone can or wants to stay in a marriage that goes from friend, companion, and partnership to caretaker when their spouse’s health turns south during what may be the “prime” years of their lives.

“Superman,” aka, Christopher Reeves, was a famous case of caretaking by a spouse. Michael J. Fox has been very open about his Parkinson’s and remains married throughout his ordeals. The much beloved novel from the 1970’s by Erich Segal, “Love Story,” portrayed a strong love in the midst of a wife dying of cancer; but, not all marriages unfold this way in the face of illness or disability; not all spouses feel so committed, love to this degree, or can handle their spouse’s ailments. 

I have seen a full spectrum of reactions to a spouse’s illness in the face of separation and divorce from exceedingly collaborative and amicable to vicious and hostile. The former instances include extending as much time as needed to the ill spouse to acclimate to the idea of divorce; agreeing to pay well above the statutory maintenance guideline amounts to comfortably support an ill spouse; living under a separation agreement for an extended period of time rather than finalizing a divorce so the ill spouse can remain on the other’s health insurance plan, which separation allows for but divorce bars; proceeding with a divorce but agreeing to pay the permitted 3 years of COBRA for dependents to allow the ill spouse to have continued health insurance for at least that duration of time; and agreeing to remain married for a minimum of ten years so the ill spouse can collect off the other’s social security, which is permitted once couples are married for ten years.  

On the litigious end, I have seen a husband and father who left his cancerous wife, subpoena his only child, an adult son, who had moved in to his mother’s house to help her while she had cancer; the husband’s agenda was to impute his son’s income to his ill wife, so that he wouldn’t have to pay her maintenance. 

More of these “cheery” stories include a husband who stayed with his ill wife, with whom he had two children, for years but had a long term extra-marital affair that fostered additional children, who he funneled more money to than to his wife and children of the marriage. He said his wife’s progressive illness killed any semblance of what he wanted and needed out of a marriage, but that he felt too guilty to leave her while his children with her were growing up. He commenced a divorce action when his children of the marriage were grown, but they were onto him, and it became a case of children against father. The children were actually attorneys, and they pieced together that their father had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on his “other” family. They were intent on getting the best deal they could for their mother to compensate her for all the marital money their father had spent on the other woman and children in his life. For better or worse, this man was not a sympathetic character before the presiding judge, who practically forced a very harsh settlement deal down his throat in open court.  

Often when someone can’t handle their spouse’s illness, they stay out of guilt, fear of a protective relative, or because of perceived obligation, but eventually check out. They feel like a prisoner to their relationship and are often resentful. 

Both the healthy and ill spouses in these instances are sympathetic in different ways and require strong advocacy; they suffered enough, and until we walk in another’s shoes, it can be difficult to pass judgment on their actions and decisions.

Please contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any 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@cherylstein

Good Samaritan Divorce

/in , /by

Is there a price tag to being a Good Samaritan in Divorce? 

“A Good Samaritan — a charitable or helpful person.” 

There are infinite ways of exercising kindness to one’s spouse during a divorce, but we will focus on the timing of divorce here.  

Sometimes, in a divorce, one party needs more time while the other wants the divorce finalized immediately. The one that wants the immediate resolution will try to exercise grace, extend the other party significant latitude, and give them more time, sometimes years to ease the blow and transition for the party having a harder time with the concept of the divorce and disentanglement. What can happen is that two, three, or even more years go by before the divorce process is underway. 

Due to that wait time, the spouse that has exercised patience can end up having to pay much more than if the divorce had been commenced earlier, because of the equitable distribution cut-off date being postponed and the maintenance entitlement, as a correlation to the length of the marriage, being longer. 

For example, wages/income earned, bonus payments, retirement accruals would be subject to equitable distribution, so you have cases where parties have been living separate and apart and want half of the other’s bonus payments and funds in separately titled accounts that income has gone into, in addition, to support payments.  

The cut-off date for equitable distribution is demarcated by the filing of a summons for divorce or the parties entering into an agreement, such as a postnuptial or separation agreement specifying the equitable distribution cut-off date. 

On the maintenance end, the formula states that for a marriage up to 15 years, maintenance is 15-30% of the length of the marriage; at 15-20 years of marriage, maintenance is payable for 30-40% of the marriage; and for a marriage over 20 years, it’s payable for 35-50% the length of the marriage. So, the longer you’re technically attached to someone, the longer you’re paying them. 

In one extreme case, a well-off husband, who worked for 5 years trying to negotiate an agreement but never filing a summons or doing anything to cut off equitable distribution, ended up being obligated to pay his wife a lot more due to the patience he extended to her during that 5 year period when they were still married, although living apart. 

In this situation, the more monied spouse exercised kindness and allowed the other spouse more time, which in turn cost him more than it needed to. Both spouses knew the marriage was over, and the spouse who needed more time was totally unsympathetic in the final divorce. 

Sometimes, the waiting spouse is acting from pure altruism — out of empathy and compassion towards their spouse; often, there is also an interlaced self-serving quality, as the waiting party thinks their spouse will be cooperative and less aggressive in their demands when they finally come around. 

Sometimes, this works in the reverse, where the non-monied spouse gives the other party latitude and by the time they are ready to proceed, there is a lot less money to divide, as assets have dwindled. 

The “feel good” concept we’ve all heard: “You attract the energy you put out” simply does not always unfold as such; far too often, the party putting out gracious energy gets taken advantage of, as cynical as it sounds.  

Unfortunately, being a Good Samaritan can get a divorcing party taken advantage of and leave them feeling beaten down and resentful.  

There are practical solutions to stop-gap this, including but not limited to, stop the clock agreements; equitable distribution cut off agreements; postnuptial agreements and interim agreements; filing a summons but holding off on filing a request for judicial intervention while the agreement is being negotiated.  

Feel free to contact us to discuss the various containment methods and best strategy approach where these Good Samaritan dynamics operate in the shadows.

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

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

/in /by

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

What’s Mine Is Mine, And What’s Yours Is Ours

/in /by

While courtship is premised on a showering of gifts and benevolence to one’s partner, being a tightwad and hoarding for one’s self often signals the beginning of the end. No surprise.

Money can often end up becoming the main source of tension within a marriage, ultimately leading to a divorce.

I recently had a case where the husband, a sophisticated, forward-thinking man well into his 50’s, could not stop talking about his bar mitzvah. In his youth, he was one of those entrepreneurial kids who was always engaged in business ventures, ranging from corner lemonade stands to snow removal. He proudly accumulated money and saved it in an account together with his sizable bar mitzvah (quite large from generous family and friends), birthday, and special-occasion gift money. When he married, he chose to make this account the primary marital account, commingling the funds with money he earned while he was married and third-party gift money he received during the marriage.

His wife operated under an alternate paradigm where she very carefully kept her premarital accounts separate.  When she received sizable inheritance and gifts from third parties during the marriage, she placed the money in her premarital separate accounts, maintaining their separate property integrity status.

The husband felt they were a team and everything he had was dibs to all. The wife felt that way about her husband’s money but not her own. She reasoned that the husband was the mutually agreed upon primary supporter and his job was to support the family. However he managed to come up with the money, she really did not care, so long as it supported the family and she did not have to worry about it. She rationalized that her role of primary homemaker came with its own responsibilities and stresses, and her husband should not be dependent on her premarital, gift, and inheritance money; she did not want to share it.

Because money is fungible, the husband lost out on any separate property money credit due to his commingling, while the wife preserved hers. The wife operated under a classic “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is ours” prototype.  

This is a bit like a chicken and egg situation. Did the wife begin to see that the marriage was going south and consult with a matrimonial attorney at some point to learn how to keep her money separate? Or was it the fact that she seemed to have an attitude of selfishness that ultimately led to the divorce? As stated from the beginning, money issues are often a major component of marriage breakdowns. The husband described himself as feeling like a cow towards the end of his marriage, being milked for his paycheck, his wife being disinterested and dismissive of him for all other purposes. Interestingly, they got along and saw eye to eye in many other respects, including sharing most larger-scale values and child-rearing approaches.

In long-term marriages, some believe that at the end of the road everything should be thrown into the marital pot and split equally; that if they spent that many years together, we’re partners, and complemented each other’s roles in many respects, the notion of separate property should be washed away, regardless of the statute’s letter of the law definitions and classifications. This is a common approach in highly cooperative mediation cases. However, don’t bet on it, as it is the minority approach.

Feel free to contact us with questions regarding separate and marital property classification, appropriate planning, and protection mechanisms.

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

Will an Arbitration Clause Protect You?

/in , , /by

When clients come to me wanting a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement, they are typically the party initiating and driving the process because they have assets to protect and want to minimize or completely contain their exposure. These same clients also tend to be litigation averse and view the entire litigation arena as a threatening, menacing process that will invade their privacy, wear them down, diminish their wealth, and possibly compromise their integrity.

As a mediator/litigator, I am in favor of mediation-arbitration clauses for certain clients and this genre of clients fit the bill.

Because they have money and assets, these clients may be the ones responsible for their spouse’s attorneys’ fees during a divorce (under Domestic Relations Law Sections 237 and 238) and they may also be subjected to the rather taxing plight of having to pay numerous expert’s hefty retainer fees to assess their many assets.

Conversely, when clients come in wanting me to be their review attorney for an agreement that has been drafted and prepared by their significant other, they are typically the party with less, who may benefit more from having the court-litigation card to pull out and not cornering themselves into a mandatory resolution through mediation and/or arbitration. On the one hand, I’d be woe to call it the litigation trump card; but essentially, that’s what it is.

Because they have less, they often end up being more dependent on their partner and may need additional oversight, so you want to ensure that their agreement will not bar them from seeking judicial intervention should it be necessary.

What exactly is arbitration and will it offer the first category of clients the protection they seek?

Mediation is a completely voluntary process and non-binding, whereas arbitration is binding. This means that if arbitration is written into the agreement, both parties must participate and submit to the arbitrator. Agreements that contain arbitration clauses usually state that the parties will first try to resolve their case through mediation, and if that is unsuccessful then they will submit to arbitration. Best practice is to include a mechanism for selecting a mutually agreed upon arbitrator so the parties are not left in a situation where they have to attend arbitration and cannot agree on an arbitrator.

Unlike litigation, arbitration decisions are not published. Because it is a more private process, many of the arbitrators are retired judges, and the arbitration meetings take place in comfortable offices, as opposed to courtrooms with court officers and a more authoritative, bureaucratic, and austere milieu. The arbitrator’s decision is also not the final step in the process.

The arbitrator’s decision is also not the final step in the process. Each arbitration decision needs to be signed off on by a judge and formalized by the court. As parens patriae (legal protector of citizens unable to protect themselves, such as unemancipated children), the court also has the ultimate decision-making authority with regards to custody and visitation issues.

There are notable differences between the courts.

The first department (New York County, namely Manhattan, is in the first department), will uphold an arbitrator’s decision, including custody and visitation issues — being that they believe that because a judge ultimately signs off on it, the parens patriae principle is actualized.

The second department (Kings County, namely Brooklyn, is in the second department) will not necessarily uphold an arbitrator’s decision with regards to custody and visitation issues.

New York and Kings counties are my backyard, so I’ve highlighted them to point out the differences between the court’s viewpoints regarding arbitration. These discrepancies carry over into other counties and judicial departments as well, which is why it’s important for clients to have realistic expectations regarding the enforceability of an arbitrator’s decision, particularly if they are planning to include an arbitration clause in their agreements.

While a prenuptial agreement cannot address parenting issues, such as custody and child support, it can state that the parties agree to submit to arbitration to resolve all issues in their divorce. Based on the above discrepancies between the judicial departments, if the parties have a prenuptial agreement with such an arbitration clause and they have children and live in New York County at the time of a divorce, this would mean the arbitrator can determine the custody and parenting issues, it would be binding, and the court just rubber stamps the arbitrator’s decision. However, if the parties live in Kings County at the time of the divorce, they cannot be assured the judge will uphold the arbitrator’s decision on parenting issues.

The relief and clarity for those who want to include an arbitration clause in their agreements is that while they cannot guarantee it will render the arbitrator’s parenting-related decisions enforceable, the courts across the board uphold the arbitrators’ financial-related decisions, including equitable distribution, maintenance/spousal support, and child support.

I recently had a case where opposing counsel initially objected to including an arbitration clause, which was important to my client, because she did not know the law and whether it was enforceable.

Knowledge is power and when I sent opposing counsel the law indicating the degrees and nuances of its enforceability, she acquiesced on the point and my client was relieved knowing that the financial matters, which are most important to him will be resolved through arbitration and not litigation, which he fiercely opposes. He also felt assured knowing that if they reside in New York County with their children at the time of a divorce, even the arbitrator’s custody-related decision will be upheld.

Educate both clients and opposing counsel, when warranted, of all the potential issues and limitations that could come up when they want to include mediation-arbitration clauses or straight up arbitration clauses in their agreements.

Feel free to contact me if you are considering an arbitration clause in your agreement.

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

Divorcing XoXo Style

/in /by

Any experienced matrimonial attorney who straddles the litigation and mediation spheres can attest to the general misconception that mediation is calm, smooth sailing, and hunky dory, while court cases are vicious and adversarial.

This most definitely is NOT the case!

At times, during mediation, spouses can be at each other’s throats, while litigation cases may be quite untroubled and contained, especially with the help of skilled attorneys who can cut through the malarkey, and not take extreme and impractical positions that are huge time and money wasters.

Regardless of which method of divorce clients engage in — mediation or litigation — there is the potential for calm, open-heartedness, and kindness and the potential for contention, obstinacy, and destruction along a continuum throughout the process.

People often ask me how I do what I do. There is a view that it is disheartening or like being implanted in the deep bowels of sewage. On the contrary, it is often very inspiring and like chicken soup for the soul.

People’s character is most put to the test when they are navigating unfamiliar terrain and troubled waters, and that is, especially, what can make this practice so humane.

I recently had a litigation case where the couple had not touched or been remotely intimate in quite some time. The wife had a tremendous amount of resentment towards the husband, as he had engaged in an affair that she learned about.

Notwithstanding such, the husband displayed no visible guilt and was very difficult during the litigation, playing hardball at every twist and turn. Everything was a battle with him. Finally, at the 11th hour, he agreed to terms that were beneficial to the wife, and she was more than content with what she would be receiving.

The parties were scheduled to be in court on Monday morning, and the attorneys worked arduously over the weekend to draft the extensive and detailed agreement to be just so, exactly as the parties had agreed. Monday morning, in court, the husband takes one look at his wife and tells her that, after everything they had been through over the years, he thought about it overnight and decided he wants to give her more and will give her the house outright and pay off the mortgage, so she can have peace of mind about it. She was so touched that he went above-and-beyond what his monetary obligation would have been under the law and as per what they had already agreed upon (to her satisfaction), and that he was attentive to something so meaningful to her.

She felt that he could never undo what he had done to salvage their marriage, but that this was a token to her and his way of acknowledging her hurt and trying to make amends. The attorneys had to step outside the courtroom at that point to start making changes by hand to the pre-printed agreement. Five copies had to be edited in the courtroom hallway. After the parties signed and were orally allocuted, they walked towards each other and held one another in the deepest embrace for the longest time. And after they let go, they did it again, and she thanked him for giving her the closure she needed. The judge, who is normally no-nonsense and runs a tight calendar, stopped in her tracks, and just sat there staring at them with a warm smile and the brightest twinkle in her eyes.

In another case, the parties had been separated for three years, and the wife had a new partner whom she very much wanted to marry yesterday, but for the slight problem that she was still married to husband #1. She lashed out at her ex constantly, and vented all her frustrations at him for not resolving their outstanding issues sooner, so she could move on. He was very resentful and felt she was somewhat verbally abusive to him in her constant beratements. She then found out that the doctor recommended he undergo shoulder surgery or he would be severely limited from playing sports. All the while, he had been covered under her health insurance plan, with her covering the cost. She had an employer through which she received health insurance, but he was an independent contractor, and it would have been very costly for him to secure his own health insurance, as one must do upon divorce, when they can no longer be covered under their ex-spouse’s insurance plan.

Upon learning of the doctor’s recommendation, without skipping a beat, she told him she absolutely wanted him to have the surgery and have the necessary physical therapy treatments afterwards, without feeling pressured about it, so he could play the sports she knew he loved so much, and that she would wait until his treatments were finished to proceed. She was able to put her own needs to move on in abeyance for the larger picture of not depriving him of his passion.

There are mediation cases where parties yell at each other to drop dead, yet they keep coming back to protect one another (for a multitude of reasons) and their children, albeit it being very difficult for them to even be in the same room as their spouse.   

The reality is that people indulge more in the negative — anecdotes about spouses yelling at each other to get hit by a bus, telling each other that they are terrible fathers and mothers, and looking to one-up the other, but I can match every negative anecdote with at least one positive one, and probably even more. Perhaps the light shines greater when it is surrounded by darkness, but there are many rays of sunshine in this practice. The rebuilding can, and often is, greater than the breakage. The personal character demonstrated when one is put to the test often triumphs.

Feel free to contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein to discuss constructive ways towards separation and divorce.

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

Equality Schmality

/in , , /by

Men often voice that they feel they get the raw end of the stick during divorce, without a larger understanding of their situation.

Generally, women are perceived as victims and sympathetic characters in divorce, both in the monetary and parenting realms.

People often ask me if I am a female-or male-oriented attorney and which sex I predominantly represent. I represent both equally, and each case is fact specific. At any given moment, I represent mirror image situations-for example, a female client who would like to impose that her ex keep to a very time specific visitation schedule, and a male client lamenting that his wife is overly rigid in demanding that his visitation must take place within very precise time frames.  

Arguably, men are often still considered second fiddle when it comes to parenting, even though there is a whole movement underway in the direction of 50/50 parenting, often titled “50/50 is the new default,” as in a 50/50 joint physical and residential custody arrangement.

When actions are commenced, typically it is the husband who moves out and the wife who remains in the marital residence with the children. Men often have a hard time with the idea of leaving the house and no longer sleeping under the same roof as their children every night. Something they took for granted is suddenly gone.  

There is still the general presumption that women are the natural caretakers. Men often have to fight hard to obtain a more liberal access schedule. They often verbalize finding it offensive that they suddenly have to “visit” with their children during prescribed hours. (Euphemisms have been contrived, such as “parenting time” and “access schedule,” but it doesn’t change the underlying concept.) The emotional trauma that many men experience when this happens is not spoken about. Men are expected to “man up” about things, while women are more touchy-feely, often attending support groups or leaning on their immediate social circle.  

In a more traditional situation, such as with a stay-at-home mom, or if the woman is a teacher, of course maintenance is going to be paid, of course the woman is going to be the primary caretaker. But when it’s the reverse and the man is the one that stays home caring for the children or is a teacher, there’s a presumption that something must be wrong with him. Why isn’t he in a more manly profession?  

When the woman is the higher income earner, the man often feels pressured to give up maintenance or to reduce the amount that he takes. It’s almost expected that the man should come up with faster ways to make money or simply not leech off his wife. In the reverse situation, the pressure would be less, because it’s expected that women leave the workforce when they have children to care for. This dynamic is often most evident in mediation when both parties are in the room together, openly expressing their viewpoints.

An additional noteworthy point is domestic violence and abuse towards men.

Domestic violence towards women is a well-known phenomenon, but we hear little about domestic violence towards men, and not because it isn’t pervasive. It is, in fact, quite commonplace, as many divorce attorneys can tell you.

I have seen situations where men, who are 6’2” and over 200 pounds, are the victims of physical and emotional abuse by their 5’4″ wives. These men may be in high-power positions, dominating during business meetings, but tell me they’re terrified to go home to their wives. This issue is not spoken about and very little sympathy goes towards men. They’re expected to suppress their feelings and don’t really have any forums to talk about or deal with it. A lot of these men feel they can’t reveal what’s going on in their lives because of their high-powered professional positions; for all intents and purposes, they have everything together.

It is not a pity party competition between the sexes-rather an observation. Many of my male clients have expressed that they wish there were more resources available to them, while they are going through separation and divorce, to help them through the process. I have a long list of support groups to dispense to my female clients and often think I need to get all my male clients together to create their own support group, because they are so hard to come by.   

Contact The Law & Mediation Offices of Cheryl Stein with any questions if you are preparing for or going through a separation or divorce.

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