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

The post Divorcing an Addict appeared first on Cheryl Stein, Esq..

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

The post YOU ARE NOT THE PERSON I MARRIED appeared first on Cheryl Stein, Esq..

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

The post Equality Schmality appeared first on Cheryl Stein, Esq..