The Intact Family Dynamic

As time progresses in a marriage, these roles often become familiar and accepted. They evolve further as family expenses increase, such as when children start attending preschool or private school at costs which often tip the scales at $20,000 per year.  This typically means the breadwinner must work harder to keep up with these financial demands, making the breadwinner less available for family time.  Does this mean the breadwinner loves his or her children less?  Does this mean his or her children are less bonded with the breadwinner?  I would posit to say that the answer is “no.”  Many children crave the time they get to spend with their breadwinner parent when he or she is home because they are bonded with and love their other parent.

The Family Breakup

Once the family breaks apart, a schism occurs.  What used to be a team effort whereby one parent was the breadwinner (the CEO of the family’s finances) and the other was in charge of the children and the home (the CEO of the household), is all of sudden unacceptable – usually to both parents.  The breadwinner wants the non-breadwinner to return to work to help maintain what are now two households; at the same time the breadwinner wants to ensure his or her bond with the children is not forgotten and in fact is strengthened.  By virtue of the roles the parents played when the family was intact, the breadwinner was used to seeing the children in the evening and being “filled in on the day” by the other parent.  Once the family breaks ups and lives separately, this dynamic no longer occurs and the breadwinner often realizes he or she must make dramatic changes to make certain they have the time and fortitude to have frequent and continuing contact with the children.  This typically requires a deliberate effort by the breadwinner  to set aside time so the bond with the children can be maintained or strengthened since he or she will no longer see the children daily at bedtime (for example) with the daily “recap” from the other parent.

The Reorganized Family

When the breadwinner makes the commitment to be an involved parent after the breakup to the family, I often hear the non-breadwinning parent say things like, “Now he/she want to be Super Dad/Mom.  He/she never took little Johnny to the dentist before.”  Well, often the reason why the breadwinning parent did not take little Johnny to the dentist was because he or she was working to pay the family’s expenses.  So, when the breadwinning parent now decides to make changes to be more involved in the children’s lives, I ask the non-breadwinning parent to consider how this can be a good thing – a benefit to the children.  Often divorce and the breakup of a family make the breadwinner a better, more active parent.  Isn’t this in the children’s best interest?

The courts and many people will argue that the status quo -  the roles of the parents just before the schism created by the family breakup – is what should prevail as the custody plan post-breakup (and this often happens).  But, why?  If both parents are loving and safe parents, why can’t this reorganization of the family be viewed as an opportunity for the breadwinning parent to be more involved in the children’s lives?  Not every breadwinning parent wants this or has a job which allow for this, but if he or she does, there is every reason to create a new status quo so the children can enjoy the best relationship possible with each parent.

In California, most child support orders are set in an amount which for the most part is formulaic based upon certain criteria, the primary ones being income and the amount of time each parent spends with the children.  This formula no doubt “redistributes” the wealth as a means of ensuring children are supported.  Many breadwinners are upset because (1) they quickly find out that they must pay support even when, as often occurs, the other parent makes their access (visitation) with the children difficult; and (2) the breadwinner discovers they have no right to obtain an accounting of the child support to ensure the money is being used to support the children, rather than the other parent.  Excluding cases where domestic violence is found to exist, are there solutions to this disparate treatment of the breadwinner?

Interference with Visitation – No Practical Remedy Makes for an Unfairly Treated Breadwinner

The law is clear.  Whether or not the breadwinner is paying support, and whether or not the non-breadwinner feels the support order is sufficient, money and children are not connected.  In other words, a custodial parent (often the non-breadwinner) is not supposed to withhold visitation for financial reasons; and the non-custodial parent (often the breadwinner) is not supposed to withhold child support over custody and visitation disputes.  It is difficult to prove if the custodial/non-breadwinner parent intentionally interferes with visitation; but it is easy to prove when the non-custodial/breadwinner parent fails to pay support.   This proof disparity often results in the non-custodial/breadwinner paying support but being unable to enjoy time with the children, which can make this parent feel at a disadvantage and unprotected by the family courts.  This is not easy to solve without producing substantial evidence demonstrating an intentional interference with the visitation schedule by the other parent.  Unfortunately, there is no other answer to this problem.

Accounting for Use of Child Support – Not the Law, but Should the Law Change?

As demonstrated above, the non-custodial/breadwinner parent can be at a real disadvantage with no real way to remedy the imbalance between paying child support and lacking full visitation.  Where there can be some balance between these issues and therefore between the parents is through an accounting of how the custodial/non-breadwinner uses the non-custodial/breadwinner’s child support

In California, except in limited cases, requesting an accounting of how the child support funds are used, or requiring that the support funds be paid into a trust account as a means of monitoring the use of funds, have each been flatly rejected by the state Court of Appeal. The court believes that that the recipient of child support (usually the custodial parent/non-breadwinner) should not be under the “fiscal control” of the other parent. This is a bitter pill for the non-custodial/breadwinner parent to swallow especially when their access to the children is being interfered with without any real penalty to the recalcitrant parent.  This is a patently unfair situation which only works to cause resentment. Why should the custodial/non-breadwinner parent be allowed to essentially interfere with visitation and not have to account for the child support received from the same parent who is being marginalized in the children’s lives?

For now, the law is what it is, so what can the non-custodial/breadwinner parent do to ensure some or all of the child support is actually being used to benefit the children, rather than the recalcitrant other parent?  The best solution in most cases is to designate that certain expenses will be paid directly by the non-custodial/breadwinner parent.  Therefore, the non-custodial/breadwinner parent would directly pay pure child expenses, such as school, daycare, camps, regularly occurring medical expenses (including therapy), religious school, tutoring, extracurricular activities, etc. This is often not agreeable to the custodial/non-breadwinning parent, who may feel that such control does not allow establishing the financial independence necessary for the parents to live separate lives.  If an agreement cannot be reached for this type of arrangement, then often the judge will, but this will require the time and expense to go to court.

Conclusion 

Many people speak in terms of “Father’s Rights” or “Mother’s Rights,” but custody issues are really gender neutral.  This means that the same unjust result can affect a man and a woman the same way in different cases, depending on who is the breadwinner and non-breadwinner; custodial parent and non-custodial parent.  Because many families do still mirror the traditional “Leave it To Beaver” parental roles, people talk about certain injustices being a “man’s” issue or a “woman’s” issue. The issues presented are unjust as they affect the breadwinner who is often the non-custodial parent. When this person is the Dad, the issue is typically referred to in terms of “Father’s Rights.” However, this is increasingly a misnomer in today’s modern family.

The Changing Face of a Family

As more and more women attain high levels of education, high levels of employment and stature − and as balancing work and family through flex schedules becomes the norm − serious questions are raised with regard to spousal support and how much protection women need after divorce.  But, really, the conversation must be gender neutral in the modern family because as more and more women are reaching high levels of employment, the modern family often involves the men staying at home to raise the children or to care for the household.  Increasingly we see men being displaced from the workforce and therefore seeking – and needing – spousal support when the financially supportive structure of the marriage ends.

While many people will frame the discussion around women and the traditional family, as suggested by my example above, the discussion should be framed in the terms of breadwinner and non-breadwinner – gender neutral. With that being said, whichever spouse or domestic partner is the non-breadwinner, the question is:  how long should the non-breadwinner be supported and how will the non-breadwinner pay his or her attorney’s fees in connection with the divorce?

Spousal Support Reform

The spousal support laws are under fire.  There are now five states which have significantly reformed their laws to limit and/or eliminate spousal support.  Interestingly, California is not one of those states, but I suspect it is only a matter of time before California faces reform in this area of the law.  The good news is that those states which have enacted such reform still allow the court to have discretion in each individual case.  This is important − just because two couples are married for the same number of years, it does not necessarily make the marriages the same and warrant equal treatment through a generic spousal support law.  For example, the situation where two people marry when they are 25 years old and then divorce when they are 40 years old is very different from the situation where two people marry when they are 50 years old and then divorce at the age of 65.  The 40 year olds statistically will be in better health than the 65 year olds and will have better opportunities to re-enter the workforce.  The 65 year olds do not have these same “pluses” when they divorce.  In both situations, the marriages are of equal duration, but the circumstances are incredibly different when looking at their needs for spousal support.

The Non-Breadwinner’s Ability to Pay Attorney’s Fees

Often the non-breadwinner pays for his or her attorney’s fees by allowing the attorney to obtain a lien on one-half of the community interest in the family residence as security for payment of the fees.  However, a recent Los Angeles County case, which has been affirmed by the court of appeal, has created a situation where these liens are essentially illusory and subject to removal by the court before the attorney gets paid.  This means it just got more difficult for the non-breadwinner to pay for his or her attorney’s fees while their “right” to spousal support is under fire.  Some people view this decision to be negative toward women, but it is really negative toward the non-breadwinner.  The California Supreme Court has been asked to review this decision because of the extraordinarily poor public policy it creates.

The Lesson

Are women, or even better said, non-breadwinners under fire by the family courts?  Possibly.  So, the message to the non-breadwinner is to know and understand that it is more critical than ever to remain marketable in the workforce and to have an equitable arrangement with your partner with regard to child care, work life and household contributions.   While it may be that one person is the primary breadwinner during the marriage, the goal should be that, if there is a divorce, the lesser-earning person will not be left wholly dependent upon the breadwinner.  The tide is no doubt shifting as society changes and people are expected to be self-supporting.  Of course, each situation is different and issues of age, disability and poor health will complicate support considerations. That is why, no matter how much reform occurs, the court must still retain discretion to consider each case individually.

While the ultimate answers to these questions might be given by a judge, far before that ever occurs, a family law case should be strategized so you as the client – the person whose life is affected – have a say in what your own future will look like.  No one would imagine building a house without blueprints; a sports team doesn’t walk onto the field without a playbook; a successful business does not operate without the guidance of a budget.  Why should your family law matter – which begins the next phase of your future – proceed without a plan?

My perspective on any family law case – whether it includes a divorce, custody battle, child and spousal support or property division – is that it is a team effort between the client and the lawyer.  Not every lawyer shares this vision of a case and many clients are unaware that there are lawyers who view them as part of the team.  Here are some ideas for how you can be more involved in the strategizing of your family law case:

1. Make a “Wish List”.  A lot of time and money gets spent in divorce and child custody matters when a client’s goals are driven by the emotions of the situation and thus are unrealistic.   This is not uncommon.   If your lawyer has not asked you to do so, you should make a “wish list” of what you would like to achieve in the final resolution of your matter.  Once this is done, make an appointment to meet with your lawyer and review your list.  Your lawyer should identify those items which are likely achievable, those which are possibly achievable and those items which are unrealistic.  Once this is done, you have a good map of what (if anything) to litigate and what to focus on settling in negotiations.
2. Do Not Keep Secrets. Clients often fail to tell their attorney the whole story.  There is no advantage to sugar-coating events, telling only half of the story or ignoring what the other side may think of you.  It is better to tell your attorney everything – the good and the bad – before the information is exposed by the other side.  There is nothing worse for an attorney (and his or her client), than learning about that damaging fact in the middle of trial and then spending money in an attempt to do damage control.  Trust your attorney to strategize with you on how to deal with the good and bad facts in the case.
3. Follow the Advice of Your Attorney. Trusting a family law attorney’s guidance will help you get through the process successfully because the attorney has seen many cases. By giving you the benefit of this experience, your attorney can offer guidance on how best to manage the legal and emotional issues to achieve your goals.
4. Cost /Benefit Analysis of Financial Issues.  Most, if not all, financial issues can be weighed by comparing the money involved against the cost of resolving the issue.  This means the financial issues need to be looked at from a business perspective focused on your best interests.  Believe it or not, you are in control of much of what your lawyer does in your case.  Work with your lawyer to understand the financial issues, develop a range of possible options and then instruct your lawyer on how you would like to proceed.
5. Remember, Custody is About the Children’s Best Interest.  All custody and visitation issues are decided based upon what is best for the children – not what is best for the parents.  Therefore, developing a strategy from the children’s point of view is immensely helpful.  Most parents are not dangerous to their children.  Despite the fact the parents are clearly not good partners for each other, this does not mean either one of them is necessarily a bad parent.  Separating these emotions, accepting change will occur, being flexible and open to establishing new routines go a long way to helping you strategize with your lawyer to determine what your children’s new future will look like.
6. Focus on the Future.  Learning from the past is important but obsessing about what is done and cannot be changed is unhealthy and unproductive in working with your attorney to strategize your legal matters.   Part of strategizing your case is to focus clearly on your future.  This is often best done by seeking emotional support from a therapist. 

Critically important decisions must be made throughout a family law matter.  The sad irony is that clients typically are not in the best emotional or mental state to do so.  Besides working with a therapist to gain clarity sooner rather than later, the process of strategizing the case with your lawyer – essentially visualizing what the future will look like after the matter is concluded – will often will bring reality and the necessary clarity.  It can only occur if you are willing to trust your lawyer, who has the experience and insight to guide you through this process.

When people cohabitate, what is their legal relationship to each other, if any?  This is an important question to be considered before a couple makes the decision to share their lives without the formality of a marriage.  This consideration is also important for same-sex couples who decide to cohabitate without a formal marriage (where such is allowed) or a Registered Domestic Partnership.

The Law

Common law marriage, whereby a valid marriage is created by operation of law without satisfying solemnization and other legal requirements of formal marriage, was abolished in California in 1895.  Despite the fact there is no common law marriage in California, this does not mean that quasi-marital rights (called palimony or Marvin actions) cannot arise in a relationship where the parties lack a legal marriage or Registered Domestic Partnership.   In order for this to occur, the equivalent of a contractual relationship between the parties must exist, one that usually does not involve a written contract but instead is implied or based on oral statements and therefore is typically very difficult to prove.  If such a quasi-marital relationship exists, there is no requisite time period associated with the length of the relationship to prove a legal claim regarding the relationship.

Take Control and Plan

A legally binding relationship can thus occur as a result of cohabitation. The problem is, usually people have no idea whether these legal requirements have been met until the relationship ends.  This means expectations of each person may be different throughout the relationship, as well as at its conclusion.  Imagine believing you have the equivalent of a marriage and that the property acquired during the relationship will be shared equally, only to learn you have no legal interest in the property.  Similarly, you may believe all property purchased during the relationship with your earnings was your separate property, only to learn that an implied contract was created and now it must be shared.  These unexpected and unplanned results can be resolved by entering into a cohabitation agreement which will set forth each person’s rights and responsibilities during their relationship.

The process for creating a cohabitation agreement is the same as that for a prenuptial agreement.  My previous blog post about the Mediated Premarital Agreement fully explains the options.

Conclusion

As more and more people cohabitate, either before marriage or the before entry of a Registered Domestic Partnership; or without every getting married (think of the decades-long relationship of Goldie Hawn and Kurt Russell), financial issues often need to be sorted out when the relationship ends.  Therefore, living together should not be taken lightly and should be viewed as a legal relationship worth the same careful consideration as a marriage.

The Definition

Premarital agreements, also known as prenuptial or antenuptial agreements, are an ancient concept. In the Jewish religion, marital contracts called ketubahs have been around for more than two thousand years. Many other ancient cultures also have the equivalent of prenuptial agreements.  The modern secular prenuptial agreements that exist in the United States can be traced back to sixteenth-century England.  From these historic roots, the modern “prenup” has a basic focus for two people about to marry:  setting forth the rights of each person in the property of the other should they later divorce.

Typical Scenario

From ancient times to the present day, the typical scenario in arriving at a prenuptial agreement for a couple about to marry is for one person (often the wealthier of the two) to have his or her lawyer prepare a prenuptial agreement and then give it to the other person, saying some combination of words which amount to “I love you…please sign here.”  The popular perception is that the agreement protects the assets of the wealthier person against a “gold digger” who marries more for money than for love. The person receiving the prenuptial agreement often has little negotiating power other than to call off the wedding.  This approach mirrors the adversarial process in our court system.

Working Together:  The Process

It is time to move past the ancient times and outdated, confrontational viewpoints.  Rather than being adversaries, soon-to-be-married persons should view themselves as partners in the crafting of a prenuptial agreement. That is the concept behind the mediated prenuptial agreement. The process of preparing such an agreement is as follows:

• The first step is to hire a family law attorney who is a trained mediator.  The parties discuss their finances, their concerns, and the goals of the prenuptial agreement in a neutral setting with this mediator.  The goal is to start from common ground – rather than from polar opposite positions – as the couple works together to achieve an agreement which protects both of their interests.
• After this first meeting, each party hires their own independent attorney.   The importance of this is to ensure that each party fully understands the legal consequences of the terms and agreements discussed in mediation. Although there are three lawyers involved in this process rather than two lawyers in the adversarial model, the overall attorneys’ fees are less.  This is because the approach is cooperative rather than adversarial; and, it always costs more money to fight rather than to cooperate.
• Next, the mediator will draft the prenuptial agreement for review by each party’s attorney.
• A request for further negotiations about or revisions to the terms of the written agreement are presented to the mediator by each party’s attorney for discussion and resolution.
• The final agreement is prepared by the mediator and signed by the parties and their attorneys.

Because the mediated prenuptial agreement is a cooperative process, rather than an adversarial negotiation, the creation of the agreement takes time.  It is recommended that the process for the mediated prenuptial agreement, commencing with the hiring of the mediator, should start three to four months before the wedding date.  That should allow adequate time to finalize the agreement in advance of the wedding so the parties can focus on the joy of their big day.

Enforceability

If it later becomes necessary to enforce the prenuptial agreement, it is common for one party to object claiming that they did not enter into it voluntarily, but were instead pressured to sign the agreement under duress.  We often see this argument when the prenuptial agreement is the product of the old adversarial model. While there are no cases in California which discuss this issue specifically, it stands to reason that, if the parties spend time in a cooperative process of the mediated prenuptial agreement and each party has an their own attorney who reviewed and approved the final version, the claim of duress will be eliminated or severely weakened. In other words, the chances of enforceability are increased.

There are other potential ways to object against the enforcement of a prenuptial agreement, but working with one’s own attorney after meditating the terms of the agreement will help each party to understand those risks and how best to minimize them in the future.

Conclusion

No lawyer can or should tell any person that any contract or agreement is “iron-clad.” This certainly applies to prenuptial agreements, which are subject to an ever-changing body of law.  But the real goal of the parties here is to draft an agreement that is used as a tool during the marriage to guide the financial expectations of the parties, which will hopefully avoid a divorce in the future. If the parties ultimately decide to end their marriage, a negotiated prenuptial agreement is more likely to be enforceable and used as the roadmap for a peaceful divorce.

The Real Issues

There is a lot of discussion about the morality of same-sex or gay marriage; its hypothetical impact on the institution of heterosexual marriage; the purpose of marriage (i.e., procreation), the meaning of family, etc. However, these moral and religious issues are a red herring; they are not the legal issues upon which the Supreme Court should base its ruling on these cases.

Aside from legal, moral or religious advocacy, there are real financial and day-to-day burdens shouldered by same-sex couples when there is no state and/or federal government recognition of their ability to marry.  Here are examples of the unequal treatment same-sex couples must endure under the current laws which define them as legal strangers to each other:

1. Estate Taxes.  Edie Windsor, the plaintiff in the DOMA case now before the Supreme Court, brought suit after the death of her same-sex spouse, whom she married lawfully in Canada and lived with for 40 years in New York (where same-sex marriage is legal). The IRS assessed an estate tax in excess of $300,000 against Windsor as the surviving same-sex spouse because the couple was not lawfully married in the eyes of the federal government.  When the spouse in a heterosexual marriage dies, the estate of the deceased spouse transfers to the surviving spouse tax-free.  Same-sex couples are treated as strangers because the estate of the deceased is taxed.  Windsor, the plaintiff in the DOMA case, is seeking a refund from the federal government for the estate tax assessed against her because her marriage was not recognized and she did not receive the same estate tax treatment as would the surviving spouse in a heterosexual marriage where no tax is assessed upon death.
2. Spousal Support. When heterosexual people divorce and spousal support is ordered, the person paying the support is allowed to deduct those payments on his or her federal tax return.  The recipient spouse must then pay tax on the spousal support.  In the divorce of a same-sex couple, or in the dissolution of their lawful Registered Domestic Partnership (which is allowed in California), the payor of spousal support Is not allowed to deduct this payment on his or her federal tax return because the federal government does not recognize the same- sex relationship.
3. Division of Property.  When heterosexual people divorce, the division of property is a tax-free transaction under federal law.  However, because the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriages, the division of assets in a same-sex divorce is subject to federal tax.
4. Social Security.  Heterosexual people who are married benefit from a myriad of Social Security and other federal benefits.  Same-sex couples are denied all of these benefits because the federal government does not recognize the legal status of their relationship.
5. Hospitals.  When a spouse is incapable of making decisions about his or her medical care, the other spouse has the right (unless there are directives to the contrary) to be a decision-maker.  When a same-sex marriage is not recognized, this right is frequently denied to a spouse.
6. Income Tax Benefits.  A sampling of some of the tax benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples which are often denied to same-sex couples includes:  Head of Household status; Earned Income Tax Credit; Married and Filing Jointly tax status (this is always denied); Child Tax Credit; Joint Capital Gains tax exclusion (married couples enjoy a maximum $500,000 exclusion, individuals receive only a maximum $250,000).

The Current Decision

There is no doubt same-sex or gay marriages are treated differently than heterosexual marriages.  Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg referred to this difference as treating marriages as either “full marriages” or “skim milk marriages.”  The legal questions presented now to the Supreme Court will likely not result in finality on this issue due to the complex nature of the legal arguments.  Hopefully over time the legal issues will evolve to the point where the Supreme Court is forced to make the determination of whether equal rights for same-sex couples should exist throughout the United States under the 14^th Amendment to the United States Constitution.  The cases now before the Supreme Court may not allow for this type of sweeping decision, but they will no doubt further define the legal landscape for future litigation on this very important and historic issue.

Horrific Situation

All of these questions (and more) are part of each custodial exchange, which is stressful for the children and the parents.  Hopefully over time, these questions lessen as each home is able to duplicate many of the children’s needs.  Now, layer on top of these logistics, hostile parents who argue with each other, refuse to acknowledge the other, accuse each other or just generally shoot that look of disapproval to each other, all in front of the children at the custodial exchange – which can occur several times each and every week.  This situation is horrific for the children.  It reminds them each time that their parents have strong dislike – even hatred – for each other.

Minimizing Hostility

Because children are the innocent victims of divorce, especially when parents clearly cannot see how their childish behavior impacts their children, it is left to the lawyers and judges to create custody orders which lessen the likelihood that the children must witness the poor behavior of their parents.  Such orders can include one or more of the following requirements in an attempt to minimize hostility at custodial exchanges. While none of them is ideal, they are the best that can be done given that the parents themselves are unable to control their own behaviors.

1. Exchange the children at school or day care.  Then the parents do not even have to see each other.
2. Exchange the children at a public place (such as a restaurant, coffee shop, library, or a security desk at a mall) where parents will be reluctant to make a scene.
3. Have a third party attend the custodial exchange.  People tend to be on better behavior when they know others are present.
4. Pick up the children from their babysitter or nanny without the other parent present.
5. Make a video recording of any custodial exchange conducted in public (i.e., not inside someone’s home).  It is best to do this in a way that the children do not know the recording is taking place.   This is typically not necessary if the exchange occurs in a very public location where people would rarely act out.
6. Exchange at a supervised visitation center.  There is an expense to doing this, but the location is safe and often observed by a neutral third party.
7. Exchange inside a police station.  This is a safe location where the desk officer can document that the exchange occurred (or didn’t due to a no-show by one parent).  However, most professionals agree the police station is the least desirable location because children are often frightened and fear that one or both parents – or worse, they themselves – are in trouble with the law.

Keeping Peace

Custodial exchanges occur as often as three or four times per week.  The exchange itself is often stressful and full of anxiety for the children.  If parents are unable to act civil during a five-minute exchange, then they must consider one of the alternatives suggested above to keep the peace for the sake of the children.

I wanted to take the opportunity of this blog post to highlight the most difficult aspect of these grey divorce cases:  MONEY.

The dividing up of assets and the payment or receipt of financial support changes everyone’s life plans and as a result, it is critical that each party work not only with their lawyer, but with a financial advisor.  Here is a checklist of issues to be reviewed with your lawyer and financial advisor:

1. The house, which is usually not thought of as part of one’s financial plan, must now be viewed in that new light.  How can the house factor into your future financial plan?
2. What housing expenses can you afford after the divorce?
3. Will it be necessary or maybe even desired to downsize your housing?
4. What are the cost differences between renting and owning a home, including the tax consequences?
5. Is it a better long-term investment plan to rent or own a home?
6. Is it a better long-term investment plan to own a home or investment property?
7. What are the percentages of liquid vs. non-liquid assets in what you own?
8. Is your retirement plan still viable?  Do you need to rethink what your retirement will look like in terms of timing, expenses and location?
9. What assets are you best off keeping in order to support your retirement?
10. How will you be able to rebuild your savings after the division of assets?
11. Will you need to return to work, or delay your retirement?
12. Will you need to reduce your lifestyle?
13. What health expenses should you expect as you grow older – and how will you meet them?
14. What sources of income can you expect (i.e., investment income, support, social security, retirement plans) and will they be adequate?

Getting divorced is one of the most frightening parts of anyone’s life because of the unknown future consequences.  This situation is far greater when the divorce occurs late in life because the spouses have fewer remaining years in which to recover financially and emotionally.  Therefore, planning with the help of a professional is the best course to follow.  As stated by Samuel Johnson in James Boswell, Life of Johnson (April 18, 1775, Act 66), “Knowledge is of two kinds, we know a subject ourselves, or we know where we can find information upon it.” Your financial advisor and your lawyer have the information that will help you prepare for your life beyond grey divorce.