|
|
(a.k.a. the divorcing person's guide to the psychological warfare of words that may be expected over the next several months.)
- "I will tell them x, therefore, you will never get the children."
[x can be an affair, the fact that you are seeing an analyst, an "addiction" to two or three glasses of wine per day, or many another
situation. Chances
are, x has little or nothing to do with the best interests of the children and therefore will be disregarded in
any planning for the children's lives.]
- "Your attorney is a dud, or out to get our money, or why don't we use one attorney and save money, or your attorney is really
partial to me, etc., etc."
[These are divide and conquer tactics. If there is a way to save attorney fees and costs, we are looking for it as well and will be
glad to discuss it with
you.]
- "Unless you play this my way, you will never get a dime."
[The threatener has been used to being in charge of things. that is no longer the case. The property will be divided evenly. Support
will be awarded,
probably in accordance with the schedule.]
- "Why are you trying to take my money (my pension, my children, etc.)?"
[The answer is simply because you are entitled to it and you are willing to share.]
- "I'll go to jail before I'll pay you a dime."
[So be it. There are various ways to enforce support obligations
through a wage assignment (i.e., garnishment). Ultimately, contempt of court can mean a jail term; however, this is very rarely
the case and most of
these people end up paying voluntarily.]
- "I'll quit my job before I'll pay you that kind of money."
[Attempt to get a witness to this kind of statement. If intent can be proven to avoid support obligations by quitting one's job,
these support
obligations will be enforced at the same level.]
- "When the judge sees my expenses, he/she will award less (more) than the support from the 'schedule.'"
[This is not true unless there are extraordinary expenses. It should be remembered that the supported spouse will get less money
than needed and the
supporting spouse will pay more money than can afforded.]
- "You will never see the kids again."
[There are uniform acts to prohibit child napping. the Court will usually upon request enjoin each party from moving out of the
country without the
other's written consent or a court order. A parent who plans to move to avoid visitation will find that the
visitation is scheduled for much longer periods of
time and involves additional expenses for travel. Failure to allow visitation
is one of the reasons why the Courts change custody from one parent to the
other.]
- "I will consider reconciling with you only if you sign this agreement."
[If you are going to reconcile, why do you need the agreement? Why must the agreement be in favor of the party making such
a demand? Be extremely
suspicious of any such statements.]
- "If you don't see this thing my way, the Judge will order that we sell everything."
[The Court will not order the sale of an asset unless there is a good economic reason for it, in the best interest of both parties. Instead
, the Court will
generally do all or a combination of the following:
- Award individual assets or obligations to one or the other party;
- Award an asset to both parties, fifty percent each, because the asset, such as a limited partnership, cannot be valued; or,
- Provide that one party receive an asset such as a residence, conditioned on an equalizing payment or note to the other. Where
there are minor children
and tight economic circumstances the Court may also temporarily award the family residence to the
custodial parent with the sale and equal division to
occur later.]
It is suggested that anyone suffering unduly from these kind of comments and threats, keep a running diary with dates, places,
occasions and summaries
of conversations occurring. (Do not tape record a conversation without consent; it is a felony with
a heavy fine!)
It is not recommended that you phone your attorney as each of these threats occur unless you have reason to believe that action
is being taken to
implement them. The purpose of listing them here is to show how common they are and that the best thing to
do is ignore them and go forward with attempting to reach a
reasonable resolution of the case at hand.
|
