The Un-DivorceFollow

Was perusing some stuff and came across this.

I've seen this come up time and again in family law and I've always heard the standard "I couldn't leave until the kids were older" or "I can't just throw her off my insurance."

I guess the amicable un-divorce is the new black. Granted, I'm sure that one spouse would be awfully upset if after a few years of an un-divorce situation, the other spouse wants a divorce for whatever reason.

Marriages used to be arranged for business and other non-love reasons (and still are in some parts of the world). Divorces can be approached the same way as well.

I've never understood why one party refusing a divorce would prevent one. If one person wants out, isn't that all it should take?

Because one cannot just walk out of Hell.

Thumb can tell you more about that, but typically if one partner refuses to sign on the dotted line, the other would have to sue to force the issue and let a judge decide to dissolve the marriage. Obviously that's a lot messier, more expensive, more protracted.

One thing I don't understand - and I probably asked this before - why do the children automatically go to the mother? What if, say, the mother being a lazy deabeat is the cause?

You sue for custody? Worked for me.

Sweet,




I've known people who've made their divorces as messy as possible. For instance say you put your wife through college and sacrifice a lot of time and energy in the process and then she decides she's going to leave the day after she graduates. Don't you think she should be held accountable in some way?

It is nearly automatic. There are exceptions, but the norm is to default to the mother. My son's mother was/is a deadbeat, but she didn't work so she must be the better option right? The judge looked at me before anyone had spoke and said "You're not getting custody". This after her lawyer managed to get the judge switched because the previous judge caught her in a lie (she contradicted the first part of a sentence with the last part of the same sentence, she's a little slow). I was then ordered to pay back child support for a year (I'd already payed double this amount voluntarily before going to court). I lost half my paycheck for months and got crap visitation.

Now, I have custody of my son because my ex decided to drop him on our doorstep and take off to the other side of the country. In a custody battle mom is put on a pedestal, you pretty much have to prove she's a drug addict, alcoholic, suicidal child killer to get custody as a father.

(it is getting better though, as you said)

Edited, Aug 4th 2010 12:06pm by Yodabunny

That was my experience with both custody and child support (which are different from divorce, I know). She just ignored the various court requests, papers, etc and the court just ruled without her. Had she actually responded and fought, it would have been much harder.

Cheating/adultery isn't grounds for a divorce in California and a few other states as they are "no fault" states. You wake up one day and find that you don't want to be married anymore, you can file for divorce. Irreconciable differences is usually the reason.

But there is a rise now for the spouse that got cheated on to sue the other spouse as well as the person on the side for damages. And a few people are getting awards for that.

It was a changing of the times is why no-fault was developed. People realized that forcing someone to marry another was completely unfair, so the idea of keeping someone married when they didn't want to be married anymore was along the same vein.

Reno divorces were notorious a few decades ago because that's where the quickie divorce came to be. There was a joke at one time that you get married in Vegas, but divorced in Reno.

Yup, generally, that's the way it goes. It's usually the financial aspect as to why divorces get dragged out.

The saying among divorce attorneys is "how soon do you want your freedom is directly related to how much you are willing to pay."

I remember one case we worked where the husband wanted out of his marriage as quick as possible so he could marry his girlfriend and he gave a very very generous settlement for his wife (she got the house and the vacation house in Palm Springs, he got the their business/ranch, she got all the net income from their marriage, but he kept all business assets, spousal and child support was close to $12,000 a month until the kids were grown and then her spousal support was $4,000 a month for the rest of her life, regardless of whether or not she marries).

Of course after everything was said and done, the wife said that she doesn't have enough to live on.

That's not a divorce, silly! That's "'til death do us part!"