PA Law Blogs » Family Law

Mel Gibson Intertwined in Child Custody Dispute and Domestic Violence Charges

Admin2 — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:00:10 +0000

Movies and talk shows often make viewers feel as though celebrities never experience family disputes, but this kind of picture is in fact far from perfect. Family law matters relating to child custody, alimony, domestic violence, and property division affect the financial stability, well-being and personal relationships of hundreds upon thousands of U.S. citizens – celebrities included.

Well-known actor Mel Gibson is at the center of a domestic violence investigation involving his ex-girlfriend, Oksana Grigorieva. The former couple is also involved in a child custody dispute over their eight-month-old daughter. If Gibson is convicted of domestic violence, his right to custody of his child may be significantly compromised in addition to him facing serious penalties.

With alleged tape recordings of Gibson and Grigorieva surfacing as potential evidence in the domestic violence case, Business Week reports that Gibson’s professional career may come to a standstill, not to mention jeopardize the outcome of the child custody battle. The article also states that Gibson served three years’ probation and attended court-ordered Alcoholics Anonymous meetings after pleading no contest to a 2006 misdemeanor DUI offense in which his record was expunged in 2009.

While it is difficult to predict the outcome of this particular case, when determining child custody or visitation, you can almost bet on a history of violence or crime being taken into consideration in any family law case. Several people are misinformed in believing that domestic violence only affects a significant other. Children can be placed in harm’s way when verbal, physical, or sexual abuse is taking place in a household.

Congressman Attempts to Protect Child Custody for Troops

Admin2 — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 12:00:27 +0000

Child custody is probably the most sensitive as well as the most contentious part of a divorce case. It’s tough enough for parents who live in the same geographical area to work out these issues. One can only imagine how difficult working out a child custody agreement can be when one of the parents is a service member.

According to a news report, Ohio congressman Michael Turner is proposing for the fifth time, a legislation to prevent past, present or future deployments from being used against a service member as the foundation for establishing or altering child custody arrangements. The last four times he proposed it, Turner met with opposition from the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Department.

Turner argues that this legislation will prevent service members from losing child custody simply due to of their military service. The Pentagon and the Armed Services Committee say there are too few cases to warrant a change in federal law. Others also believe the federal government has no business getting into the arena of family law.

Any child custody dispute can be emotionally and financially draining for everyone involved. No child custody decision is set in stone. A family law attorney can in most cases help parents resolve their issues and arrive at a compromise, which is in the best interests of the children.

Pennsylvania’s New Child Support Guidelines Go into Effect

Admin2 — Tue, 01 Jun 2010 12:00:48 +0000

Pennsylvania’s new child support laws went into effect on May 12, 2010. The most important change under the new guidelines, according to a Main Line Media News report, is how child support will be calculated in high-income cases. Examples of such cases involve parties whose combined net monthly incomes are higher than $20,000 or $30,000.

However, it must be noted that the Monthly Basic Child Support Schedule has been changed at all income levels. This is essentially a chart that determines the basic amount of child support derived from the parents’ combined monthly net incomes and number of children. It is going to be tough to predict whether the new guidelines will result in the increase or decrease of child support.

These are complex calculations and what a parent owes may depend on his or her individual case. It would be in the best interest of parents faced with a child support dispute to consult a family law attorney in order to determine what the specific impacts will be for their family.

Pennsylvania Faces Same-Sex Legal Divorce Issues

Envoca — Tue, 18 May 2010 18:38:15 +0000

While the debate over same-sex marriage has not dissipated, even in states that have legalized the union of gay couples, the challenge of same-sex divorce seems to be on the rise. Some family law attorneys in Pennsylvania and throughout the United States have encountered several issues relating to same-sex couples that were married in one state and wish to divorce in another.

A CNN article discusses the frustration that two women have been experiencing in trying to get a divorce in Pennsylvania. Apparently, the women were married in Massachusetts, but had their petition for divorce filed in Pennsylvania, where a judge denied the divorce. This denial puts these specific women, and potentially several other same-sex married couples, in quite a challenging predicament. Since the two women are still legally married, neither one of them can remarry in the future, if they want to, until they are legally divorced. Some other issues of concern regarding the limitations of divorce for same-sex married couples relate to property rights as well as child custody and visitation.

Considering that only Washington, D.C. and five states have legalized same-sex marriage and permit divorces to take place when necessary, married same-sex couples who move to other states that do not recognize gay marriage or ban it altogether, may encounter various dilemmas if their marriage does not work out. Interestingly, Maryland does not permit gay marriage, but the state does acknowledge gay marriages that have been performed elsewhere. It has therefore been speculated that Maryland will be able to perform gay divorces.

To further complicate things in the U.S. regarding marriage and divorce for same-sex couples, courts in California are still addressing same-sex divorce cases from marriages that occurred during a brief period when gay marriage was legal in 2008.

While legally married gay couples do not receive the same recognition that all heterosexual marriages receive on a statewide level, this does not mean that gay couples do not encounter similar family law issues that heterosexual couples experience. Even though everyone may not agree on many of these family law subjects, a significant amount of citizens are being affected.

Child Custody Disputes Over Religious Practices

Envoca — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:03:48 +0000

While going through a divorce is not something that married couples anticipate when they are first starting out, couples who practice different religions, have children, and later divorce, may face opposing beliefs when it comes to deciding how their children should continue to be raised. In several instances, a divorce provides substantial closure for a couple and they can move on with their separate lives. However, this is a bit more challenging when children are involved and custody issues must be dealt with, especially when an interfaith marriage no longer provides a compromise that used to work.

According to a Chicago Sun Times story, more and more child custody disputes seem to be based on issues relating to religion due to an increase in interfaith marriages. When on better terms, married couples usually can reach an agreement as to how religious teachings and practices will be incorporated into a child’s life. However, divorce can create more tension than what existed during happier times, only fueling the fire of disagreement. Based on the story, the director of DePaul University’s Interfaith Family Mediation Project claims that this pressure of raising a child according to specific religious practices stems from a divorced individual returning to their families. In doing this, a parent may receive pressure from their family to raise the child in their religion as opposed to the ex-spouse’s religion.

In addition, it is speculated that a parent’s fear drives the majority of child custody disputes over religion. For instance, a parent may be concerned about losing a connection with their child if the child follows the other parent’s faith instead of theirs. For many families, holidays and holy days are spent together as a time to celebrate and practice their faith, all while sharing that time and building on their relationships. Some divorced parents are afraid that their child will drift away from them and become closer to members of the other family and closer to the other parent.

Even if a parent does not receive their desired outcome at a child custody or visitation hearing, circumstances change as a child gets older and as a parent’s financial and social conditions evolve. Modifications of child custody and visitation happen on a regular basis, and with the help of a family law attorney, most parents are able to reach a fair solution with the child’s best interest in mind.

SuperParents: Balancing Family-Life, Work and Job Hunting

Envoca — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:00:44 +0000

Most parents throughout the U.S. would agree that maintaining a household and taking care of children is a full-time job. While every family composition is different – two parents, single parents, grandparents raising their children’s children, etc. – there can be no set way of doing things, no rule book or outline we can follow to make sure that kids are happy, loved, healthy, and financially supported; all while allowing parents and caregivers to have the same. And to further complicate things, what happens if a stay-at-home parent wants to go back to work? How difficult or easy is such a task?

The Washington Post touches on these very issues in covering the work and 2005 study of one writer, Katherine Reynolds Lewis, who focuses on jobs, family issues and finances. Based on the article, approximately 1/3 of mothers who are married stop working at some point in order to tend to their children. In examining the unemployment rate of the U.S. at almost 10%, when looking at long-term joblessness for women between the ages of 45 and 64, the U.S. Labor Department statistics reports that these women fit into a number that has more than doubled in the past year. Lewis’s 2005 study determined that about 40% of stay-at-home mothers who want to re-enter the workforce are able to get full-time jobs and another 34% are able to get part-time employment.

Lewis also concludes that a period of over ten years of not working may lower an at-home mom’s chances of finding employment. For 2009, the Census Bureau calculated that out of 5.1 million stay-at-home moms, 23 % of all married mothers had children younger than the age of 15 living in their home. And we’re not just talking about mothers when it comes to balancing caring for children and employment opportunities. Fathers who have chosen to stay at home to care for kids are also faced with the challenge of re-entering the workforce after several years, although this is only more of an issue in recent years.

While studies similar to these seem few and far between, family law professionals handle cases relating to how a marriage (and perhaps the dissolution of that marriage) influences the employment and finances of parties involved. While some may recommend that neither a mother nor father should stay out of the work-force for too long, even if that means paying for a kind of child care service, others would never suggest such a thing. Members of a family must decide what is best for them as individuals and for the family as a whole, while also considering that work experience is more valuable than ever amidst a financially unstable economy with significant unemployment rates.

Returning Children like Clothing: Problems with Adoption

Envoca — Fri, 16 Apr 2010 20:47:59 +0000

What happens if an American adopts a child from another country, only to decide later that the kid wasn’t the right fit? The answer may depend on whether you equate adopting children with exchanging clothing to match your new jeans size. One woman out of Tennessee decided that simply sending her adopted 7-year-old son alone on a plane back to Moscow was the solution to her not being able to handle his “emotional problems”. In response to what many people throughout the world are viewing as an irrational and criminal decision, the United States will now have to smooth things over with Russia.

An Associated Press story highlights growing concern regarding the status of United States adoptions through Russia that are currently in progress. Russian officials have not been very clear on whether an official suspension on adoptions is in effect as a result of the recent incident. The story mentions that a U.S. delegation will be going to Moscow early next week to reach an understanding and agreement of adoption procedures currently pending. So far, there have not been formal orders to suspend adoptions.

According to a Voice of America report, U.S. officials note that over 1,500 Russian children were adopted by American families in 2009. And based on the U.S. Child Citizenship Act of 2000, that’s more than 1,500 automatically new U.S. citizens from adoption.

As the case with the young boy being returned to Russia demonstrates, adoption is not for everyone. However, how a person handles this realization in accordance with ensuring a child’s well-being is of the utmost importance. Perhaps this specific parent did not fully consider how a child would change her life on a personal and even financial level. She also may not have been fully aware of what she wanted and what she could provide in terms of the child’s age, gender, personality, interests, race or medical requirements.

As the U.S. seeks further understanding in Russia’s alleged adoption limitations, Americans who have been waiting months, if not years, to be parents, hopefully will not be penalized for another person’s mistake.

The Role of an Executor

Admin2 — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:11:58 +0000

If you have read the MSNBC tabloid story about singer Michael Jackson’s will, it seems like a road map of “He said and he said.” When Jackson signed his will in 2002, he named three executors to administer his estate when he died. One executor resigned in 2003, and the other two were left with the huge task of managing Michael Jackson’s estate and debt. The two remaining executors of Jackson’s estate were close business associates, attorney John Branca and music exec John McClain.

At first, Jackson’s mother apparently objected to the executors her son appointed, but then thought better of it. She decided to trust that her son made the right business decision for his family. Jackson’s father, a man to be feared according to some, has challenged the appointment. Could it be because he was not in the will?

The testator appoints an executor through a will or by a judge during the probate process. The role of an executor is to sell or manage assets, pay taxes and bills and ensure heirs receive their inheritance. Becoming an executor can be a huge responsibility; some individuals pass along the role to an attorney.

In another account taken from the Probate Lawyer Blog, Jackson’s executors had an unusual request—to take a portion of Jackson’s proceeds from unreleased music. For now, the two executors are dealing with companies coming out of the woodwork who feel entitled to some of Michael Jackson’s estate. It seems like the role of Michael Jackson’s executor is a full-time job unto itself and may be for some time to come.

The Sex Education Debate: Should Schools Teach Abstinence Only or a Comprehensive Program?

Admin2 — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 16:00:41 +0000

Laws pass that affect your family every day. With divorce rates and the number of single-parent households on the rise, it is more important than ever that children be taught information that is nourishing and effective in the school system.

Teaching abstinence in place of contraceptive use has received a lot of attention in the media as of late. The Fiscal Year 2010 Omnibus Appropriations bill ends funding for the so-called “failed” Community Based Abstinence Education program, instead funneling significant funding into “medically accurate, evidence-based” condom-focused teen pregnancy prevention programs, according to a press announcement released in December by the American Civil Liberties Union.

If we look to our government for leadership and accurate information, the use of these monies would imply that condom-based sex education programs are scientifically proven to decrease the number of pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases in teens through the increased use of contraceptives. However, a recent study at the University of Pennsylvania might say otherwise.

This study, appearing in the February 2010 home Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine (published by the American Medical Association) followed students who received one eight-hour abstinence-only intervention in middle school and found that two years later, they were one third less likely to have initiated in sexual activity. This was in comparison to peers who had attended a health class that was non-sex-ed.

On the flipside, according to the study, contraception-only sex-ed programs (a.k.a. “safe sex programs”) or programs that combined contraception and abstinence (a.k.a. “comprehensive programs”) did not increase contraceptive use, nor did they delay sexual initiation.

The University of Pennsylvania study concluded “theory-based abstinence-only interventions may have an important role in preventing adolescent sexual involvement.”

So why does Congress insist on opposing optional support for funding abstinence-based programs, in spite of evidence that abstinence-based programs are just as effective (if not more effective) as comprehensive sex-ed programs? It’s confusing. Even more confusing is the question of why, at a time when qualities such as commitment, intimacy and love should be closely linked to sex and those links reinforced through school programs, Congress and the current administration have eliminated all abstinence programs that are funded by the federal government.

Will You Benefit from the New Childcare Tax Credit?

Admin2 — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:00:27 +0000

According to a release this month by The White House Office of the Press Secretary, the current administration’s budget proposes an increased tax credit for child and dependent care for middle- and low-income families. The administration will propose this tax credit increase along with several other policy initiatives meant to help middle-class families based on “meetings, conversations and feedback from around the country.”

The proposal would nearly double the tax credit for child and dependent care for families that make under $85,000 per year. How? By increasing those families’ tax credit rates from 20 percent to 35 percent of all qualifying expenses. In short, all families that make under $115,000 a year will see an increase in their tax credit. Simply put, the percentage of dependent and childcare expenses that taxpayers with an adjusted gross income of up to $85,000 could claim, will nearly double. In addition, those struggling to get into the middle class may be eligible for additional funding to help pay for childcare. For low-income families, the budget proposes to increase funding for childcare by $1.6 billion with the hope of helping approximately 235,000 additional children.

However, there is a catch to the tax credit.

In order to qualify, caregivers are required to pay someone else to care for their dependents/children. That means that parents who make income concessions, such as split shifts (so that one parent is always present to raise the children), are not eligible for the credit. That includes households where one parent forgoes their income completely so that he or she can stay at home and raise the children.

Thus, while the intention of the tax credit is to help middle class families facilitate more stable homes and home life, it would only provide a financial benefit to families who pay for childcare outside of the home. This is a double-edged sword. Families who already use day care will receive a credit for doing so, but those families who choose to try to create a stable home and family life by keeping one parent at home will be penalized, in essence, by the withholding of this credit from them.