A fairly wealthy man who was going through a divorce decided that he did not want to support his children or let his wife have any of the marital assets, so he lied to the divorce court and the bankruptcy court by hiding assets in other people’s names. The result? A prison sentence of almost 18 years, $2.8M in real estate confiscated and a $500k fine. Wouldn’t it have been cheaper just to pay child support? Click here.
Here is an article about a 14 year long divorce – and it’s still going! The husband pays his wife $15,000 per month and he is claiming that he is poor and cannot afford the mansion that he is living in, but cannot sell it until he can settle the divorce. I find it strange that he can be ordered to pay $15,000 a month to his wife but has no money himself. He also says she is bilking him of millions. The implication is that he has millions somewhere. I can’t decide whether I sympathize with him or not. Read here.
A new study reports that the divorce rate in the United States may be going up. Read the Article Here
Some military personnel may wonder how Courts would view their military service if they were involved in a child custody dispute. In Adams v. Bracci (2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 00143, New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, January 12, 2012), the New York Supreme Court’s Appellate Division (the first level of appeal in New York State) decided a case in which the child’s best interests were served by an award of sole custody to a military service member who wished to relocate for the military.
The decision was based upon the benefits of remaining in the military for the parent, who was required to move. The military provided economic stability and benefits such as health insurance. The Court also based its decision upon the fact that the military employment involved daytime hours. Daytime hours allows a schedule that coincides with a child’s usual schedule of hours.
Another issue in this case was a finding that the non-military parent was not working with the military parent to foster the military parent’s relationship to the child.
The Huffington Post has reported that Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) will not be included in the DSM-V: Click Here for Huffington Post Article. The DSM-V is the handbook used by mental health professionals to diagnose personality disorders. Those in charge of the DSM-V believe that PAS is a relationship issue, not a personality disorder.
The bad behaviors that would have led to a diagnosis of PAS had PAS been included can still be brought forth i n custody proceedings. Pennsylvania considers the attitude of parents towards each other and the effect that it has on the children when determining custody. If a parent appears to be interfering with the custody time of the other parent, Pennsylvania judges may take action, including an award of primary custody to the parent suffering the interference or even contempt if the situation warranted it.
Even more importantly, if a custody case is difficult to the point of PAS being suggested by one of the parties, a custody evaluator would most likely be able to analyze the situation and give the judge the necessary insight for the judge to be able to put an end to the problem.
Ultimately, PAS being included or rejected should not make too much of an impact on Pennsylvania parents.