Emotional Stages of Divorce - Kübler-Ross

Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, M.D. (July 8, 1926 – August 24, 2004) was a psychiatrist and the author of the groundbreaking book On Death and Dying. She proposed the Five Stages of Grief as a pattern of phases, most or all of which people tend to go through, in sequence, after being faced with the tragedy of their own impending death. I believe these stages as modified also apply to Divorce and I share them with new clients. The Emotional Stages of Divorce are:

Denial /Shock

ANGER

BARGAINING

FEAR/GUILT/DEPRESSION

ACCEPTANCE

FORGIVENESS

When a couple reaches ACCEPTANCE it is much easier to resolve the case. I know an adversary attoney who once said at a seminar that he files motions in a case to buy time until the couple gets to forgiveness. As always, you can post a comment about this blog, Divorce Mediation, or Tucson Arizona by following the directions at the right in the green column or at the bottom of this website or participate in our Presidential poll located at the below the directions. WM 2/29/08

Marriages of Limited Duration

We see in the news a lot about how marriage is defined. There is a bill in the Arizona legislature for a constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a women. See article at http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0212gay-marriage0212.html. Arizona and other states have covenant marriages. To enter into a covenant marriage, the couple first must have premarital counseling from a member of the clergy or a marriage counselor. Then, when applying for a license to be married, both persons must show their intention to enter into a covenant marriage by signing a special statement (or "declaration") on the application form. In a covenant marriage, legal separation or divorce may be granted by the court only for specific reasons listed in state law. See more about covenant marriages at http://www.supreme.state.az.us/dr/Text/Covenant.htm

It seems to me after having been a divorce mediator for 30 years that the person you marries is not always the same person you divorce. I have often thought that we should apply the same concept found in leases to marriage. A couple would not get married for life but for a set time with options to renew. If the couple did not renew, they would no longer be married. A novel but interesting idea. As always, you can post a comment about this blog, Divorce Mediation, or Tucson Arizona by following the directions at the right in the green column or at the bottom of this website or participate in our Presidential poll located at the below the directions. WM 2/27/08

Things I Would Like To Change In Divorce - Health Insurance, Mortgages, and Country Club Memberships

After working with divorcing clients for 30 years, I have a list of items which I would like to change and feel are inherently unfair. The first item is health insurance. When a couple divorces in every state I am aware of other than Massachusetts and Rhode Island, if a couple has family health insurance coverage, one of the parties must get individual coverage and one can keep the existing policy. Often this means the cost of health insurance doubles. All states should have the Massachusetts model which allows divorced parties to stay on the family coverage until one of the parties remarries. The second item is mortgages. When married couples get a mortgage to buy a home, they are both usually named on the mortgage. This is the case even when the mortgage is based on only one income. When the couple divorces and one party keeps the home, the bank will not usually allow the party who no longer owns the home to be taken off the mortgage. This requires the person who retains the home to refinance at a greater cost in order to remove the other party from the mortgage. If the person who retains the house otherwise qualifies, the bank should allow the parties to remove the name of the person from mortgage who is not retaining the home. Finally, country club memberships. When couples divorce, country clubs usually do not allow the couple to split the membership. Only the husband or wife is allowed to retain the membership. I often have a problem where only one party can take their children to the country club. If it is the father who retains the membership and the mother takes the children, she must drop them off and leave them unsupervised. All of the issues are currently decided in what is the best financial interest of the health insurance company, the bank, or the country club. The issues should be determined on what is the best interest of families. You can post a comment by following the directions at the right in the green column or at the bottom of this website. WM 2/26/08

Divorce Movies

While preparing for our first program on Divorce TV about the culture of divorce, I put together the following list of movies about divorce. We also found an interesting law review article entitled "Divorce Goes to the Movies," in University of San Francisco Law Review, Volume 30, Number 4 (1996) by Ira Lurvey and Selise E. Eiseman. Some of our movies came from this article. See the entire article at http://tarlton.law.utexas.edu/lpop/etext/usf/lurvey30.htm Let us know if you can think of any other movies and any comments you have about them. You can post a comment by following the directions at the right in the green column or at the bottom of this website. WM 2/24/08

AFFAIR WITH A STRANGER (RKO 1953)
ANNA KARENINA (1948)
ANTARES (2004)
AWFUL TRUTH, THE (Columbia 1937) (directed by Leo McCarey)
BASIC INSTINCT 2 (2006)
BLAME IT ON RIO (1984)
BLUME IN LOVE (Warner Brothers 1973) (directed by Paul Mazursky).
BROOD (1979)
BYE BYE LOVE
CELEBRITY (1998)
CHINATOWN (Paramount/Long Road 1985)).
CIMARRON (RKO 1931).
COOLER (2003)
COURTSHIP OF ANDY HARDY, THE (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1942) (directed by George B. Seltz),
DARK WATER (2002)
DAYBREAK (2005)
DECISION OF CHRISTOPHER BLAKE, THE(Warner Brothers 1948).
DESERT HEARTS (Desert Heart Productions 1985) (directed by Donna Deitch).
DINNER WITH FRIENDS
DIVORCE OF LADY X, THE (London Films 1938) (directed by Tim Whelen)
DIVORCE - ITALIAN STYLE (Lux/Vides/Galatea 1962)
DIVORCE AMERICAN STYLE (Columbia/Tandem 1967)
DIVORCE HIS, DIVORCE HERS (1973)
DIVORCEE, THE (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1930) (directed by Robert Z. Leonard, 1930)
DODSWORTH
DODSWORTH (Samuel Goldwyn 1936) (directed by William Wyler, also featured Paul Lukas, David Niven and Mary Astor).
DROWNING ON DRY LAND (1999)
FALLING DOWN (1993)
FOOL'S GOLD (2008)
FOREVER DARLING (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/Zanra 1956) (starring Lucille Ball and Desi Arnaz, directed by Alexander Hall).
FOUR CHRISTMASES (2008)
GAY DIVORCEE, THE (RKO 1934) (directed by Mark Sandrich, featuring Betty Grable and Edward Everett Horton as the lawyer)
GOOD MOTHER, THE (Warner Brothers/Touchstone/Silver Screen Partners IV 1988) (directed by Leonard Nimoy)
GUARDIAN (2006)
HE MARRIED HIS WIFE (Twentieth Century Fox 1940) (directed by Roy Del Ruth).
HEARTBREAKERS (2001)
HEARTBURN (1986)
HOUSE ARREST (1996)
HOW TO COMMIT MARRIAGE (Cinerama 1969) (directed by Norman Panama). Bob Hope movie with Jane Wyman and Jackie Gleason,
HUSBANDS AND WIVES (1992)
I LOVE YOU AGAIN (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/Cosmopolitan 1940) (starring William Powell and Myrna Loy),
IN NAME ONLY (RKO 1939) (directed by John Cromwell), Cary Grant
INTERIORS (1978)
IRRECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES (Lantana/Warner Brothers 1984) (directed by Charles Shyer).
JERSEY GIRL (2004)
JOE SOMEBODY (2001)
KRAMER VS. KRAMER (Columbia 1979) (directed by Robert Benton)
LAWS OF ATTRACTION (2004)
LIAR LIAR
LOVER COME BACK (Universal 1946) (directed by William A. Seiter),
MAN ON FIRE (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1957)
MANHATTAN (United Artists 1979) (directed by Woody Allen).
MARRIAGE CIRCLE (1924)
MARRYING KIND, THE (Columbia 1952) (directed by George Cukor; Judy Holliday and Aldo Ray.
MCLINTOCK! (United Artists 1963)
MEXICAN SPITFIRE OUT WEST (RKO 1940)
MICKI & MAUDE (Columbia/Delphi III/B.E.E. 1984) (directed by Blake Edwards).
MISFITS (1961) WIDESCREEN $7.15
MORGAN! (British Lion/Quintra 1966).
MRS. DOUBTFIRE
NEW DAUGHTER
NINA'S TRAGEDIES (2005)
NO PLACE FOR JENNIFER (ABPC 1949)
NOTHING IN COMMON (1986)
ONE MORE RIVER (Universal 1934) (directed by James Whale and featuring the film debut of Jane Wyatt).
OUR WIFE (Columbia 1941) (directed by John M. Stahl), starred Melvyn Douglas
PAYMENT ON DEMAND (RKO 1951).
PEPPERMINT SODA (Films de L'Alma/Alexandre Films 1977) (directed by Diane Kurys).
PLAY IT AGAIN, SAM (Paramount/APJAC/Rollins-Jaffe 1972) (directed by Herbert Ross).
POWER AND THE GLORY, THE (Twentieth Century Fox 1933).
PROZAC NATION (2003)
QUESTION OF LOVE, A (Blinn/Thorpe Productions in association with Viacom 1978) (directed by Jerry Thorpe, starring Gena Rowlands, Ned Beatty, and Bonnie Bedelia)
RARE BIRDS (2001)
REUNION IN RENO (Universal 1951)
RICH KIDS (Altman/Lion's Gate/United Artists 1979) (directed by Robert M. Young)
RICH ARE ALWAYS WITH US, THE (Warner Brothers 1932) (directed by Alfred E. Green and featuring Bette Davis).
SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE (Cinema 5 1973) (directed by Ingmar Bergman).
SERVING SARA (2002)
SHOOT THE MOON (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer 1982), an extraordinary movie of raw emotional power directed by Alan Parker, and starring Albert Finney and Diane Keaton.
SHOOT THE MOON (1981)
SILENCE OF THE HEART (1984)
SMASH PALACE (Aardvark Films 1981)
SNOW ANGELS (2008)
SQUID AND THE WHALE, THE (2005)
STEPFORD WIVES (Fadsin/Palomar 1974) (directed by Brian Forbes).
STEPMOM (1998)
STEPMOM
THE FIRST WIVES CLUB
TRAVELLING HUSBANDS (RKO 1931).
TWICE IN A LIFETIME (Yorkin Company 1985) (starring Gene Hackman and directed by Bud Yorkin).
TWO JAKES, THE (Blue Dolphin/Paramount 1990) (directed by and starring Jack Nicholson in
UNDER THE TUSCAN SUN (2003)
UNMARRIED WOMAN
WANT A DIVORCE (Paramount 1940) (directed by Ralph Murphy), Joan Blondell and Dick Powell
WAR OF THE ROSES, THE (Fox/Gracie Films 1989) (directed by Danny De Vito).
WEDDING CRASHERS (2005)
WEDDING CRASHERS

Fog of Divorce

Lessons about divorce can from other areas. The 2003 movie, "The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara is such an area. " Internet Movie Database says it is "a film about the former US Secretary of Defense and the various difficult lessons he learned about the nature and conduct of modern war." The movie won an Oscar in 2004 for Best Documentary. See more detail about the movie at Internet Movie Database http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0317910/ I have adapted these eleven lessons to divorce below. As always, you can post a comment by following the directions at the right in the green column or at the bottom of this website. WM 2/22/08

The Fog of Divorce - Eleven Lessons
1. Empathize with your spouse.
2. Rationality will not save you.
3. There's something beyond one's self.
4. Maximize efficiency.
5. Proportionality should be a guideline in divorce.
6. Get the data.
7. Belief and seeing are both often wrong.
8. Be prepared to reexamine your reasoning.
9. In order to do good, you may have to do something you don't want to do.
10. Never say never.
11. You can't change human nature.

What Are My Rights?

The most common question we are asked when a potential client telephones us about divorce mediation is "What are my rights?" It happened again this week. Obviously this reflects anxiety about the fear of the unknowns of divorce. This question is usually followed by the questions, "How much alimony must I pay or how much alimony will I get?" Clients want to be reassured that they will be financially ok. As mediators, we can not advise a person of his or her rights and maintain our neutrality. We tell him or her we have the answer to the question but if we answered it we would no longer be neutral. Although we don’t answer the question we advise the client it would be helpful if he or she either seeks review counsel or the person and his or her spouse come in to see us together. We usually advise the person that if he or she seeks professional help he or she will not be financially devastated by the divorce. However, as the fixed cost being divorce are higher than the fixed cost of marriage and the amount of money available will be about the same, both parties will have less money to work with and will have a reduced life style. The party is not always satisfied with this answer. The person must decide whether they want a validation of his or her own opinion or want a truthful opinion. Parties should be aware of an attorney telling them what he or she wants to hear in order to get the case. There are no guaranteed results in a divorce case. We often in jest suggest the party get a written guarantee from the person advising them which includes the advisor paying if the person does not get what the advisor said the person would get. The results are even less predictable when a case goes to trial and a judge decides. There may be a range of results which are acceptable or a worse case and best case scenario but every case is a role of the dice. Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know. In divorce mediation the couple maintains control and decides their our results. This is safer and more satisfying. There is also what I call the peace benefit. The couple is better able to resolve problems in the future with out the help of a third party. What are your rights? It may be up to you. As always, you can post a comment by following the directions at the right in the green column or at the bottom of this website. WM 2/21/08

When God and the Law Don’t Square - In the News

An article in Sunday’s February 17, 2008 New York Times by Adam Liptak entitled " When God and the Law Don’t Square ( entire article at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/17/weekinreview/17liptak. ) brought to mind many thoughts and lead to a long discussion between Mary and me. Britain’s Archbishop of Canterbury commented in a recent interview that "a Western legal system should make room for Shariah or Islamic law." In particular, he seemed to be saying Shariah should apply to divorces. He seemed to single out divorce law and not other areas of the law. Why should it only apply to divorces? If it is good for divorces, shouldn’t it be good for all areas of the law including criminal and corporate?

The culture of origin of a couple has been an issue in many of the cases we have mediated. We point out to the couple that although they may have been married in another country, they are getting divorced in this country and must comply with the laws of the United States. The Archbishop seems to favor family law cases being resolved by religious courts if the parties agree. We have always liked that mediation allows for self determination but there must be some limits. The limits should include that the parties are treated fairly and that U.S. laws are not violated. We wonder whether allowing religious courts to adjudicate legal matters would lead to a chaotic patchwork of decisions and a fracturing of our society’s social contract.

We do not disagree that the parties should be able to make mutually agreed decisions about religious observance. For example, if the parties agree, we make provisions in our agreements that parties ‘will cooperate in obtaining a Jewish Divorce also known as a "Get" or an annulment but the parties have never agreed to allow the religious court to do more than grant the divorce or annulment. For more discussion, the article refers to a law review article by Robin Fretwell Wilson "The Overlooked Costs of Religious Deference". Washington and Lee Law Review, Vol. 64, No. 4, 2007 http://ssrn.com/abstract=1028776 . As always, you can post a comment by following the directions at the right in the green column or at the bottom of this website. WM 2/18/08