Following on from our previous article, here are some more things for parents to look out for during divorce and ways they can avoid the pitfalls.

Pitfall 4: Expecting things to be right too soon. Children may adjust to new situations more slowly than you would like them to. They will want you to get back together, but be patient and things will change over time.

Pitfall 5: Wanting it all your way. A divorce lawyer can help you sort out details of contact, residence and finances. This is best done with an amicable spirit, so at least keep your calm. Family mediation services can be of benefit. Encouraging and facilitating your children’s contact with the other parent is by far the best way forward.

Pitfall 6: Not asking for help early enough. Helpers can be family, friends or professionals. They can help both you and your children to adapt. You don’t need to struggle along on your own, you’ll only be stressing yourself out.

Pitfall 7: Above all don’t lean on your children. Don’t expect your children to be your confidants and allies. They will naturally share their affections with you and the other parent, so don’t expect them to be on your side only.

Divorce is tough on everyone, especially children. Children have a right to a relationship with both parents and at the time of a divorce this can be especially tricky if animosity between parents is high. Here are some common pitfalls that divorcing parents often fall in to and some ways that they can be avoided:

Pitfall 1: Pretending to your children that it’s not happening and that life is just going to be the same afterwards. Be honest with your children, hiding what’s happening and the conflict between you and the other parent is not protecting them. Instead it will make them confused in the end, and may drive them away. They need to know their parents are being straight with them and can be trusted.

Pitfall 2: Children of divorcing parents often think that the divorce is their fault. These fears can be allayed by telling them that they are loved by both their parents.

Pitfall 3: Children may have mood changes caused by the situation, so do not let things escalate. Talking it over with them is helpful as they need to express how they feel. Once you have done this you will have earned their trust and they will open up to you.

It is a sad, but well known truth that divorce hurts. Many unions starting with “I do” end up with “I don’t want to anymore”. Recent statistics show that over 33% of marriages in the U.K. end in divorce.

Not only does the stress of divorce impact the adults involved, children of the union are deeply affected by the split. Feelings of guilt, betrayal and fear are only a few of the range of emotions they will feel. Many blame themselves for the divorce.

It is vitally important to hear and validate their feelings and views. Children need to be reassured that both parents will be there for them. In the event of a change of residence for the children talk to them about the move before it happens. When a move to a different school district occurs, take them to the school to familiarise themselves with the surroundings. Look for nearby parks and places of interest that will appeal to your children. Share this information with them.

Expect changes in your child’s moods and behaviours. Learning difficulties, changes in sleep patterns and decrease in appetite often appear for a time following the separation. Many children revert to wetting their beds and throwing temper tantrums.

The parents themselves are going through similar drastic changes and will at times experience depression, anger and regret. Enlist the help of family, friends and neighbours to assist with the children. This is not a time to feel you need to do it all alone, instead accept the assistance of others. It will take time for everyone to adjust to the changes that occur.

As for the parties involved, seek qualified, professional divorce lawyers. Word of mouth is a wonderful way to find recommended divorce lawyers. Go for a consultation first before deciding on a divorce lawyer.

Lastly, but most importantly, take time for you. Allow yourself the time to grieve. It is a normal part of the healing process. Facing things head on and with a plan in place will alleviate a lot of the stresses and demands placed on you. Divorce is not an end; it is simply a change in the road map of your life, a time to head in a new direction, a time for you.

A time comes when you are not quite ready to breathe your last but you do need to break free from the matrimonial bond that seems more like a hangman’s noose. There’s good news for all couples who’ve married anyplace in the world except for India. You can do away with your spouse in this lifetime and you ought to consider yourselves lucky for the privilege. In India, a couple who have taken the oath of marriage with the sacred fire as witness are bound in holy matrimony for seven lifetimes.

Can you imagine the amount of money that would be spent to divorce seven times, let alone divorce the same person seven times? If Paul McCartney were to divorce Heather Mills seven times, he would have to shell out roughly 170 million pounds. That would be an extremely simplistic estimation minus inflation, legal fees, cost of living etc. Divorce is painful and irksome no matter what the outcome, but to do it seven times. Forget about it!

Ever asked yourself, ‘Why’d I marry him/her?’ Here’s the answer to that question. According to the laws of karma, you have a karmic debt with the people you are closely bonded with. That could be your best friend, your evil high school bane or even your pet. It is a debt to be worked out through various physical, emotional, financial and social interludes which eventually negates the debt and sets you free. Of course, if it is a loving relationship, then well, it stays that way. So if you look at it through the karmic perspective then a divorce is the way that you have negated/reduced your karmic debt with your spouse and are ready to walk away and start off with a clean slate. Debt free… that’s truly food for thought. So matter who gets the Limoges set or doesn’t, you are being freed in more ways than one. And there isn’t a price on freedom, or so we’ve heard.

In 1984 the film ‘Irreconcilable Differences’ was released. Its storyline, a ten year old girl played by Drew Barrymore deciding to divorce her parents, seemed too fantastical to be based in reality.

However, in a landmark case in 1992, Kingsley v. Kingsley, an eleven year old boy, Gregory Kingsley, petitioned a court in Florida to terminate the rights of his biological parents, Rachel and Ralph in favour of adoption by foster parents, Lizabeth and George Russ. Rachel contested the application although her estranged husband, Ralph, did not. Circuit Court judge Thomas Kirk determined that Gregory had the capacity to bring the action and ordered the severance of Rachel Kingsley’s rights and Gregory’s adoption.

An appeals court ruled that Gregory, as a minor, did not have the capacity to petition for divorce. Nevertheless, since his foster parents had correctly filed for adoption, the court ruled that because abandonment by Gregory’s natural mother had been proven, the adoption should go ahead.

Although Gregory Kingsley was not divorced from some form of guardianship, this case still challenged the traditional notion that parents owned their children

According to California Law, Family Codes, section 7120
7120. (a) A minor may petition the superior court of the county in which the minor resides or is temporarily domiciled for a declaration of emancipation.
(b) The petition shall set forth with specificity all of
the following facts:
(1) The minor is at least 14 years of age.

The other stipulations are that the child lives willingly apart from its parents, is able to manage its own financial affairs and none of its income is from illegal activities.

Nearly all states in the USA have a law permitting a child to become emancipated from its parents although the minimum age at which this divorce or emancipation is permitted varies. In most states the age of majority is set at eighteen years. In Alabama for example where the age of majority is nineteen years, a minor must be eighteen years old or more to be able to petition for divorce.

Nebraska has no statute regarding the emancipation of a minor, although the child can still petition a court to divorce their parents. Nebraska also sets the age of majority at nineteen years. South Dakota sets the minimum age at sixteen years. In all cases the child must fulfil basic criteria to ensure the divorce is in their best interests.

Recent research carried out by Professor Stephen Jenkins of the Institute for Social and Economic Research is challenging a popular myth about the financial consequences for men and women after divorce. Whilst many believe that it is the women who benefit financially, it has actually been found that in many cases, it is the men who end up having more money after a separation.

Men, and particularly those who are fathers, have been found to have increased their income by around 1/3 after a divorce. On the other hand, women, whether they are a mother or not, commonly have their income reduced by around 1/5. The study revealed that when a man leaves a childless marriage, his income increases immediately by around 25% and commonly continues to rise. For a woman, the amount of money coming in to the home often decreases sharply and quickly and is likely to stay low for many years to come. These financial changes after divorce can even have such an impact as to lift a man out of poverty and plunge a woman into destitution.

A common idea is that divorced women with children will be financially stable due to maintenance payments made by the father. However, information found by Jenkins shows only 31% of divorced mothers are actually receiving regular payments from the father of their children. Those who do receive these payments may not experience such a substantial loss on their income.

If a woman was working before the divorce, or began earning soon after, Jenkins believes the negative effect on the income can often be a little less. Research suggests the number of divorced women in work has increased from around 66% in the 1990s to around 74% in 2002. Not only does this give a woman her own financial independence through the work she does, but is also advantageous due to the government rewards that can be received by being a mother and by being employed.

Many family and divorce lawyers have come out in support of this research, repeating that it is often the women that suffer real economic hardship after the breakdown of a marriage. Researchers in this area suggest that the only way that this will change is if men and women have equal roles within the family and the workplace.

American ‘pop-psychologist’, Dr Phil, claims, “Children would rather be FROM a broken marriage than IN a broken marriage”. Essentially, the point he’s trying to put across is that it would be much healthier for children to live in an environment free from acrimony and accusations.

In a family where the parents are considering a divorce or separation of any kind, frequently the arguing and disagreements turn into full-blown fights, and many times even involve the couple’s innocent children. This kind of environment can affect children on a psychological level.

Children who are used as pawns in the arguments between their parents begin to believe that they have some kind of power over their parents’ actions and reactions. They mistakenly blame the disintegration of their family unit on themselves, and this leads to stress as a result of their inability to understand what they’ve done wrong or how to fix it.

Parents can mislead themselves into believing that they are acting in the best interests of their children, when in fact their words and actions have the opposite effect, and can cause serious problems later in life as these children struggle to develop and/or maintain lasting relationships with the opposite sex.

On the other hand, when a marriage has reached the stage where a couple would even consider consulting a divorce solicitor, it is often the case that each partner thrives once they’ve left the toxic confines of the relationship.

Children will see the parents’ ability to start a new life and be stronger, healthier people as a result of a painful and difficult decision. They will realise that having the courage to walk away from a negative situation can be the better part of valour. Children may be able to take the valuable lessons learned by their parents and apply these to their own lives, assuming, of course, that their parents have learned these valuable lessons.

In cases of abuse this is especially true: for instance, a mother with the courage to remove her children from a potentially dangerous and certainly poisonous family arrangement has demonstrated to her children their priority in her life and her ability to think for herself and take wise, independent choices.

This kind of action can empower young people to make tough choices in a bid to achieve their goals and create a healthy and stable life for themselves in later years.

A contributor to James Dobson’s Focus on the Family once said that if a couple can find even three reasons to stay together, they should do so for their children’s sake. In a case such as this, and in fact in any case where divorce is even being considered, counselling should always be pursued as a first course of action. Potentially the problems could be resolved and the family unit restored before a divorce lawyer needs to be approached.

But where counselling has been tried and has failed, a healthy and wise couple may well find that going their separate ways is in the best interests of all concerned.

The secret is to be well-informed and wise in any decision of this magnitude.

Most Hollywood marriages are short lived; however, Mel and Robyn Gibson had been married for twenty eight years, until Robyn Gibson filed for divorce over ‘irreconcilable differences’ at the Superior Court in Los Angeles.

The couple married in 1980 without a prenuptial agreement. As such Robyn Gibson is thought to gain a large share of the actor’s earnings. She is also requesting the actor pays for spousal support and solicitor fees.

Furthermore, they have a big family of six sons and one daughter, Robyn asked for joint custody for one of their sons Tom who is the only one under eighteen.

The marriage had been on the rocks for a long time. The actor had gone through troubled times, being arrested for drink driving and making headlines with anti Semitic remarks.

However, it is rumoured that Mel’s alleged affair with Russian singer Oskana Grigorieva caused the divorce.

The actor has made a name for himself playing lead roles in movies such as Mad Max, Lethal Weapon and Braveheart.

The Passion of the Christ was Mel’s most successful and most lucrative movie which he wrote, produced and directed.

He also starred in a movie called What Women Want, which is ironic as his wife wants a half of his 1.2 billion dollar fortune, making their divorce the most expensive divorce in Hollywood history.

Why do we love celebrity divorce? We are fixated with the television and newspapers trying to find out how much the settlement is going to be in the latest scandal, what he or she did to bring about the divorce. Gruesome isn’t it?

According to Forbes, the most expensive divorce was that of Michael and Juanita Jordon, costing £75.5 million.

Next comes Neil Diamond and Marcia Murphy at £75 million. The statistics make the divorces of most of us seem insignificant.

But what is the true cost of divorce? Is it the money? What about the children? Even in the most amicable of divorces, one of the parents loses their full time status. Your own emotional needs suffer as you cope with upheaval and change - emotional and physical as well as dealing with finances, all whilst trying to maintain a stable home environment for your children.

However, it’s not all doom and gloom as the Office for National Statistics show that in 2007 divorce was at its lowest level since 1981 and fell to 11.9 divorces per thousand married men and women in England and Wales. Perhaps the availability of mediation and counselling has played a role in the lowering of divorce rates, or perhaps there are more cohabiting couples and therefore no need to divorce and become a statistic.

In the end there is just one reason why we hunger for details in celebrity divorces - they reflect our own situation. It doesn’t matter how much money they have and how glamorous the couple are, vulnerability makes us all equal when it comes to the cost of divorce.

Is a quickie divorce right or wrong? Some would argue that it is as it means many go into marriage without the commitment it should be given. But what about the commitment to themselves as individuals and to the overall happiness of the family unit?

Is an unhappy marriage the better option, and if it is then who suffers? If people divorce then who suffers? At the end of the day Divorce does not paint a picture of happiness or happy thoughts but neither does a lifetime of being married, but not together, is it not better that people go their separate ways and get the most from their lives? As the saying goes, we are a long time dead!

Some may say a marriage takes hard work but should it and if that hard work does not pay off then is it not time end it? People will experience endings throughout their lives to certain chapters of their lives and these should be allowed to happen in a way that suits each person and their personal circumstances. For some it may be that they need significant time for these endings to be positive and not affect their lives in a negative way and for some the quicker they happen the better!

A marriage is something that people plan and conduct in a way that they wish that is personal to them so should people be judged for how they possibly go about ending a marriage? People are individuals with individual needs and one couple are not the same as the next so if a couple decide to go for a so called quickie divorce then should they be judged?

Divorce is the legal procedure that people go through so that their separation is legalised, it does not mean that the decision to go through with this has not taken time and consideration. Divorce can be a painful and emotional time for all involved so why should it be prolonged, should it not be as quick and as painless as possible so that people can move on to the next step of getting over such a time? Or should it be that people should take longer to divorce so as to ensure they are doing so in a socially acceptable way?

Divorce happens every day and if people want to do this in a quick and convenient way that suits them then who are society to judge them?

Likewise if people feel they need time to go through a divorce then should that be judged? We live in times where people can exercise their rights as individuals much more freely and unfortunately where people feel freer to judge others also. The truth of the matter is that there are many more options out there for people to explore when considering divorce and how they wish to do this is their right. Be it a quickie divorce or a prolonged legal battle it is the right of individual couples to pursue it the way they see fit and is absolutely nothing to do with anyone else. The more options and services there are available to people during a divorce then possibly the more likely they are to find a solution that means a more positive solution for all involved, regardless of its timescale.