Nancy J. Bickford

Nearly one million children are affected by divorce each year. Parents and families struggle to help children who are experiencing negative effects after their parent’s divorce. Psychological and sociological research is widespread with evidence of the detrimental effects that divorce can have upon children after separation. Research has shown that, on average, children from divorcing families more frequently experience behavioral and adjustment difficulties during later childhood, adolescence, and even into adulthood. Children have been shown to exhibit a wide variety of responses to divorce and other family changes; frequently these responses include anger, a sense of loss, betrayal, shame, embarrassment, depression, loyalty conflicts, and guilt.

With about half of all marriages ending in divorce, many children may experience a difficult time adjusting. Studies show that the detrimental effects that parents’ divorces may have on their children include: depression, aggression, anti-social and/or self destructive behavior and diminished academic performance. Researchers have identified three factors as the most important predicators of negative effects on children of divorce: 1) instability in the child’s life, 2) the absence of effective parenting, and 3) interparental conflict.

Instability

Divorce can be extremely emotional for everyone involved; however, it is important to maintain stability in a child’s life. The more stable you can keep the child’s life, the better adjusted they will be after their parents get divorced. Stability means maintaining regular contact with the other parent by getting child custody and visitation orders in place. You also want to surround yourself with relatives and friends during this hard time. Stability also means following a familiar day to day routine with the child. This is often challenging because the routine is going to change for the child after the parent’s get divorced. A minimum number of transitions after divorce are the most beneficial for the children. If possible, keeping the children in the same school, home or neighborhood, always helps the child relate to some stability. Instability can leave a child feeling confused, alone, and at fault for the divorce.

Ineffective parenting

Parents who are unaware of the effects divorce can have on children or have had on their particular child cannot help them through it. Some parents may not know how to help their children cope or even ways to deal with the divorce themselves. Others may be unaware of resources in their community such as parenting classes and family counseling. It is important for parents to get educated about the effects divorce may have on children and get help for themselves if need be. That way the parents are equip to help a child who is experiencing a difficult time, because ineffective parenting can leave children feeling lonely, hurt, and unloved.
Continue reading

We often blog about the importance of social networking sites as tools in family law cases. Facebook is an invaluable resource for spouses, parents, and family law attorneys to use in order to dig up information on the opposing party in a particular case. Recently, Facebook has surfaced on the family law radar in a new and unexpected way. One of Facebook’s well-known features is its ability to suggest family members, acquaintances, or friends that the user may want to “add as a friend” on his or her Facebook page. This friend suggestion tool alerted Alan Leighton O’Neill’s wife that her husband was married to another woman. O’Neill’s first wife clicked on the Facebook page of his second wife and saw her husband in a wedding photo with another woman. As a result of the friend suggestion tool, felony bigamy charges have been filed against O’Neill.

In San Diego, any married person who marries any other person is guilty of bigamy. Alan Leighton Fulk married his first wife on April 16, 2001. In December of 2011, he petitioned the court to change his name to Alan Leighton O’Neill. This tactic was used in order to accomplish his second marriage only five days later.

Under California family law statutes, paternity can be established in a number of ways depending on the relationship between the father and mother. Through the combination of statute-mandated presumptions and DNA testing, determinations regarding paternity made by the court can have a significant impact on child custody and child support.

An unmarried father must sign a paternity declaration in order for his name to appear on a child’s birth certificate. The paternity declaration is significant because it creates both support obligations and parental rights for the father. In San Diego, there is a rebuttable presumption that a man who accepts a child into his home and openly holds that child out to be his own is the child’s biological father. This presumption is rebuttable through the use of blood tests to determine paternity. If no blood tests are conducted and introduced into paternity proceedings, the man is presumed to be the child’s father.

A child conceived during a martial relationship in which the wife is cohabitating with the husband is presumed to be a child of the marriage. In other words, the mother’s husband is presumptively the child’s father. If the husband is sterile or impotent, the marital presumption will not apply. This presumption may be overcome through the use of blood or DNA testing to determine paternity. The presumed father must petition for court-ordered blood testing within two years of the child’s birth. Therefore, unless a motion is filed within the two-year statute of limitations and blood testing establishes the husband is not the father, the mother’s husband is conclusively presumed to be the father. The presumption will still apply even if another man is proven to be the biological father of the child.

Frequently conservatorship issues arise in California family law cases. On Tuesday March 20, 2012, Francesca Hilton, daughter of superstar Zsa Zsa Gabor, asked the court to grant a conservatorship over her ninety-five year old mother. Hilton claims that her mother’s husband is mishandling her finances and possibly tampering with her medical treatment. In an effort to protect her mother’s estate and health, Hilton requested that the court give her power over her mother’s finances and medical care. If the court decides not to appoint Hilton as her mother’s conservator, Hilton’s attorney stated that she would be willing to allow a third party to do the job. In response to her accusations, Gabor’s husband has alleged that Hilton is filing for conservatorship in an effort to get her mother’s money. A hearing has been scheduled on May 2, 2012 to litigate the conservatorship.

While conservatorships are relatively common for older adults like Zsa Zsa Gabor, it is not often that a conservatorship is granted over a young and healthy adult. Recently Jamie Spears’ conservatorship over his daughter’s estate has been the subject of celebrity gossip. Pop icon Britney Spears was declared mentally incompetent in 2007 when her father became the conservator over her affairs. Britney’s team has been accused of using the conservatorship as a form of protection for Spears. Many lawsuits have been filed against Britney and/or her affiliates and, considering she is mentally incompetent, she has not been forced to participate in the litigation including depositions. The conservatorship has also had consequences for Spears’ personal life and career including the sale of her home, the postponement of her wedding, and a new contract to act as a judge on The X Factor.

Recently, in Corpus Christi, Texas two grandmothers were awarded custody of their one-year-old granddaughter, Gabby. The child’s mother, Victoria Valdez, was only 16-years-old when she tragically died from severe head injuries caused by a car accident on New Year’s Day. The child’s 18-year-old father, Gabriel Padron, was driving the car when the accident occurred and is suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol. Although he admits to drinking prior to the crash, he denies being drunk while driving his vehicle. No arrest has been made and charges have yet to be filed; however, he has been accused of intoxication manslaughter. Toxicology results are still pending.During the custody case, Gabby’s aunt testified that Padron was a dangerous domestic violence perpetrator and was unsafe for Gabby to be around. Valdez’s sister further testified that the victim refused to leave Padron out of fear. During the trial, witnesses testified about both grandparents’ role in Gabby’s life prior to the accident and what accommodations Gabby would have in their custody. These witnesses described the baby’s room, clothes, crib, and toys in each home. As part of a temporary custody agreement, the paternal and maternal grandmothers will share custody and Gabby will continue to reside with her paternal grandmother who cared for her immediately following the accident. Gabby’s father was only given weekend visitation.

In San Diego, generally, following the death of a custodial parent, the surviving parent is entitled to sole legal custody. However, other relatives such as aunts, uncles, or grandparents may fight to obtain custody of the child. These relatives may file a guardianship or dependency action, or in the case of grandparents, a motion for grandparent visitation. If the relatives are successful in showing it is not in the child’s best interest to remain with the surviving parent, they may be awarded custody. In the Texas case, family members testified about the father’s violent behavior and suspected drunk driving and eventually were granted temporary custody of the minor child.

Under California Family Code section 3104, a grandparent of a minor child may petition the court for visitation rights. The court may grant reasonable visitation if the court does the following: (1) finds that a grandparent-grandchild relationship existed prior to the action and that it is in the best interest of the child to visit with the grandparent, and (2) carefully balances the parent’s right to exercise his or her authority and deny visitation against the interest of the child in having visitation with the grandparent. It is important to note that this type of petition may not be filed while the grandchild’s parents are married unless one or more of the following exceptions apply:

Although most people can gamble on a recreational basis, millions suffer negative consequences in their lives from problem gambling. According to the National Council on Problem Gambling about two to three percent of adults experience gambling-related problems each year. These problem gamblers have an uncontrollable urge to gamble and cannot stop gambling despite the negative consequences that result from their gambling. These negative consequences are frequently financial problems that impact the gamblers personal life, family relations, educational endeavors and/or employment.

Sometimes the gambling and problems stemming from the gambling becomes so bad that the non-gambling spouse files for divorce. When this occurs, the non-gambling spouse usually reports that the gambling spouse gambled away a significant amount of community property assets and that there are outstanding gambling debts. However, the non-gambling spouse may not be liable for the outstanding gambling debts.

Generally, all assets and debts incurred during marriage are considered community property. Family Code §2625 makes an exception to the general rule stating that, “All separate debts, including those debts incurred by a spouse during marriage and before the date of separation that were not incurred for the benefit of the community, shall be confirmed without offset to the spouse who incurred the debt.”

This Family Code section provides the court with the ability to assign gambling debts to the gambling spouse. This is one of the few insteances where a court has the discretion to make an equitable division based on fault rather than an equal division of debt.

In the case In re Marriage of Cairo, Wife was able to prove that debt incurred during marriage on credit cards in Husband’s name was for Husband’s gambling. The Trial Court characterized the credit cards in Wife’s name as a community property obligation and the credit cards in Husband’s as his separate property obligation. The Court of Appeal affirmed relying on the predecessor to Family Code §2625, which also stated that debts not incurred for the benefit of the community can be assigned without offset to the spouse who incurred the debt.

On the other hand, if the gambling spouse wins big when gambling with community property assets, then those gambling proceeds could be considered community property assets and equally divided between the parties.

In the case In re Marriage of Shelton, after separation Husband gambled $10,000 of community property monies at a casino in Nevada, won $22,000 and bought Ferrari for $32,000. Husband claimed that $22,000 of the value of the car was his separate property. The Trial Court disagreed and characterized as the car as community property. The Court of Appeal affirmed holding that the character of the gambling proceeds follow the character of their source. In this case the source of the monies used to gamble were community property, therefore, the gambling winnings were also community property. The Court of Appeal rejected Husband’s argument that the winnings were his separate property post-separation earnings because gambling is primarily a game of chance where the skill component is small.

In the case In re Marriage of Wall, Wife used her post-separation earnings (or support payments) to buy an Irish Sweepstakes ticket and won $120,000. Although Husband claimed the winnings were community property, the Trial Court disagreed and awarded the winnings to Wife as her separate property. The Court of Appeal affirmed. Unlike the Shelton case, in this case the source of the monies used to buy the Sweepstakes ticket was Wife’s separate property. Therefore, the Sweepstakes winnings were also her separate property.
Continue reading

It is not surprising that many California couples decide to adopt pets. But what happens to those pets when the couple decides to seek a divorce? Across the country custody battles over family pets are increasing. Although pets are not technically the couple’s children, they can become a core part of the family that neither spouse is willing to part with. If the couple does have children, the judge is likely to order the pet to stay with the child.One reason these pet custody cases are on the rise is the dissolution of same-sex marriages or domestic partnerships. These legal unions are relatively new and the couples tend to adopt pets in lieu of or in addition to children. Unlike children, pets are a form of property in every state. In the past, pets have been divided up along with the rest of the marital property without distinction. The family courts are changing and beginning to recognize that pets are more like children than furniture. The shift may be resulting from a widespread recognition of pets as part of the family rather than mere possessions. Litigants are now passionate and unashamed to fight for custody of a pet.

When a couple divorces, the best interest of the child guides a judge’s decisions on child custody and visitation. For pets, this is not the case. Since pets are a form of property, the laws regarding pets are generally aimed at benefitting the owner. The court will consider the same factors when deciding who gets custody of the pet as they would in deciding who gets custody of a television set. The court takes into consideration factors such as: whether either spouse owned the property prior to marriage or post separation, how much the property is worth, and any agreement the couple reached about who gets the property.

As California family law stands today, there is no pet visitation provision. The courts simply have the authority to award custody of the pet to one party or the other. If splitting couples wish to split time with their pets they must work out a visitation schedule together. These schedules can be negotiated with the help of lawyers and mediators. Some can be rather elaborate and include long-distance traveling for the pet, a holiday schedule, daycare expense sharing, grooming responsibilities, training, treats, food, medical care and other related decisions. Like parents who share legal custody of a child, some couples agree to share a form of legal custody of a pet. This means that both parties will have the right to make decisions regarding the health, safety, and welfare of the pet including end of life decisions.Another area of family law that has begun to recognize pets as family members is domestic violence. In the past, domestic violence restraining orders could not be issued to protect pets. More recently, this has become a common practice. Under California Family Code section 6320(b), “on a showing of good cause, the court may include in a protective order a grant to the petitioner of the exclusive care, possession, or control of any animal owned…the court may order the respondent to stay away from the animal and forbid the respondent from taking, transferring, encumbering, concealing, molesting, attacking…the animal.” Local community organizations have also reached out to victims of domestic violence and their pets. For example, Rancho Coastal Humane Society offers shelter for the pets of these victims while they escape their abusers and seek shelter themselves. Because abusers tend to threaten harm to the animal as a tool to control their victim, these programs facilitate a victim’s decision to escape and take part of the abuser’s power away.

After a long and embarrassingly public divorce, Beverly Hills Housewife Camille and Broadway star Kelsey Grammer reportedly end their custody battle. The couple shares two children: Jude, 7 years old, and Mason, 10 years old. It seems that Camille will have physical custody of the children since their primary residence will be with her. Kelsey will reportedly have “meaningful contact” with the children. After a 13-year marriage it appears both stars have moved on. Kelsey remarried within two weeks of finalizing his divorce. He and his new wife are expecting twins. According to Camille’s statements on her show the “Real Housewives of Beverly Hills” , she is also happily in a relationship with lawyer Dimitri Charalambopoulos.

Camille filed for divorce on July 1, 2010 after learning of Kelsey’s affair with a stewardess, Kayte Walsh. Kelsey was able to marry his new wife Kayte Walsh before settling all aspects of his divorce with Camille through the bifurcation process. In order to accomplish this, Kelsey asked the judge to grant a divorce decree while suspending the division of the large and complex marital estate. The estate is estimated to be worth $120 million dollars and because the couple did not have a prenuptial agreement, Camille demanded $50 million.

We have blogged several times about the potential problems that Facebook and other social media sites can have on a divorce. The same potential for problems also applies to the text messages you send. Although it is sometimes difficult to get text messages into evidence (meaning properly in front of a judge), once the text message is in evidence, it could change the outcome of your case!Unlike Facebook and other social media posts, text messages cannot be deleted or recalled. Any text that you send to your spouse, or even to a third party, can end up being used against you in a divorce. With phones now having up to 64 gigabytes of storage, or more, texts from many years ago could end up being presented as evidence to the judge in your divorce case.

• If you threaten to harm your spouse in a text, that may be the basis for a restraining order, or even criminal prosecution.

• If you call your spouse names in texts, the judge could end up with an unfavorable opinion of you.

• If you say one thing in your declaration (such as, “I do not use drugs”) and text something contrary to your spouse or a third party (such as, “I can’t believe how stoned I was at the party”), you will ruin your credibility with the judge.

In a recent story on NPR, Ken Altshuler, president of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, provided the following tips for keeping your texts out of court, upon which I elaborate:

• Do not text your spouse anything that you would not want a judge to see. This also applies to Facebook and other social media posts, messages or comments, emails, and even voice mail messages. It is always best to assume that any text, anything you write or any voice message you leave for your spouse will end up in front of your judge. Some examples of what not to post, blog or text about can be found here.

• If your spouse or former spouse sends you an inappropriate text, do not respond in kind because a judge will see that. The judge usually does not care who started an inappropriate exchange because the exchange is usually just a small part of the bigger picture. In one of my cases after reviewing hateful emails back and forth between the parties, the judge (slightly misquoting Mercutio’s famous line from Shakespeare’s Romeo and Julie), said “A pox on both your houses.” When the other party blurted out, “She started it!” the judge replied, “Sir, two wrongs do not make a right – and your emails back to here were totally inappropriate, no matter who started it.”

• Do not send messages that set your spouse up for an inappropriate or angry response. On the other hand, some Judges will look into who started it. You do not want your judge to find that you were the party that started it, or someone who is baiting the other side. This could ruin your credibility with the judge for the rest of your case.

• If you are worked up and want to send your spouse a message, take time to calm down before putting anything in writing. Again, if it is in writing, you must assume that your judge will eventually read it. If you are unsure about a written response to your spouse, send it to your attorney for review before sending it to your spouse.

Always remember, do not text anything to anyone that you would want the family law judge in your case to see or read.
Continue reading

How do I collect unpaid or back child support in San Diego?

Times are tough already between the economy and normal monthly expenses stacking up. The last thing a custodial parent needs is to worry about obtaining and collecting child support. Attorneys in the San Diego area can help you obtain and collect unpaid or back child support that is owed to you.

Why do I need a Child Support Order?

If you are the primary custodial parent, you have a right to child support to help with your monthly expenses. The non-custodial parent is just as responsible for providing for the child(ren) as you are. Having an oral agreement for child support with the non-custodial parent is not good enough. You need to obtain an order from the court for the child support agreement to be enforceable. Without a court order the non-custodial parent has no legal obligation to pay child support to you even if you have agreed to terms for child support payments. If the co-parent stops paying the amount of child support you informally agreed to, then you will have little recourse if he or she stops making payments and you will not be able to collect arrears for the months they did not pay or only partially paid.

How do I file for child support?

Obtaining a court order is easier than it sounds and the state’s enforcement tools (discussed below) often provide incentive for the non-custodial parent to pay child support.

If you were not married to the child’s parent at the time the child was conceived, you will have to first file a Petition to Establish a Parental Relationship (“Petition”) to establish paternity. You will need to provide your attorney, and the court, whatever information you have about the other parent’s whereabouts and your relationship with that person. The Petition also allows the court to make child support orders once paternity is established.

If you were married when the child was born, paternity is presumed unless the other parent challenges paternity. However, you will have to file an Order to Show Cause to obtain child support. The court will determine a guideline amount based on both parent’s income, timeshare with the children, and various other factors.
Continue reading

Contact Information