We believe readers need a little more insight regarding the realities of the “simplified divorce,” especially as the number of such divorces rises – almost doubling in Palm Beach County and up 20 percent in Broward County, the article notes. Overall, these make up about one in 10 divorce cases in the two counties, the paper reported.

A “simplified divorce” is a legal definition relating to a couple with no home and no children. They have nothing in common other than a marriage they want to dissolve. They might not even have joint banking accounts. It can be the simplest form of divorce. Add children or assets, and complexity grows in kind.

For these couples, Broward County Courts (and many courts) offer a “Dissolution of Marriage Packet.” In Fort Lauderdale, the packet costs $30 and includes all the forms you may need to file for divorce (the firms also are available from the Florida Supreme Court, though they can be difficult to find online).

The $30 fee also covers enrollment in a class, led by experienced family law attorneys, to help couples fill out the forms correctly. Fill out the forms wrong and the judge may send you back to do them correctly.

The article discussed the role of family law mediators. In an effort to reduce the burden on the courts, many jurisdictions require couples seeking divorce to first try mediation before going to court. At a cost of $60 per session for each party (for couples who make less than $120,000 in income), the mediator hears the case, tries to help the sides negotiate the terms, and come to an agreeable divorce. The process could take two sessions or more.

Yet, a mediator often was never a divorce attorney. He or she cannot offer advice – and cannot steer the parties away from a bad choice. For example, a woman gave up her career or schooling 20 years ago to become a housewife and raise the children may agree to forego alimony and get a job. No divorce attorney representing her would advise terms that would leave her below the poverty line.

The next step up is a Supreme Court Certified mediator. This person generally was or is a family law attorney. The cost is higher than a non-certified mediator – often $250 an hour or more. If this mediation fails, the next step is a trial before a judge.

Another option is “collaborative divorce.” In this process, each party hires its own attorney, request disclosure of documents from the other party, and then seeks to come to terms. If this fails, the parties then must fire their existing counsel and hire new attorneys. The process of bringing a new attorney up to speed raises the costs with any failure. Yet if the couples are committed to the intent of collaborative divorce, it could work.

Generally speaking, we advise against a “do it yourself” divorce. Parties seeking this route, especially if they have children or assets, often will turn to friends or family for advice. They don’t know their rights or responsibilities. They don’t know what constitutes a “fair” settlement, in terms of finances or timesharing / child custody.

They don’t know the chance of looking back, in a few years time, wondering if their “simple” divorce ended up making their lives complex.

Another example of Big Brother’s incessant invasion of privacy via iPhones and Android, they protested.

Yet, what about couples in divorce? For divorce lawyers and family law attorneys, the implications are less dramatic.

The truth is, the ability to track your spouse (even with the apparent simplicity provided with an app to do that) is generally meaningless in the divorce court. We advise our clients to be more concerned about what they write in texts, on Facebook and other social media than where they travel with their iPhones.

Sure, it’s compelling drama for one spouse in a divorce case to imagine getting a subpoena for the other spouse’s iPhone location records to see if the spouse was where he/she said he/she claimed to be at such-and-so time.

It’s interesting. Scary, even.

But it’s not likely to make much of a difference. Like some other technologies, it’s impractical – and generally unusable – in a divorce action. Judges generally don’t care to get involved with spousal whereabouts, unless one side claims the other is dissipating (spending) joint assets on an affair.

In sum, this is much more difficult than helpful in a marital law situation.

Our advice: Don’t worry about where your iPhone may travel; beware, though, texting or posting to Facebook about those travels.

While the numbers were refuted, the truth is: Facebook may reveal details of a broken marriage. In fairness to social media, if marital problems exist, though, they didn’t begin with Facebook. The social media service – with its public photographs and open revelation of topics that might previously have remained private – brings issues to a head.

If a spouse is suspicious, he’ll search Facebook. If a spouse has a good divorce lawyer, she’ll use what’s found as corroborating evidence.

Our advice:

- Watch what you reveal on social media. If discussion of yourself in a compromising situation, or photos with your lover on a romantic vacation, will hurt your case, don’t post such content.

- If you’re in the midst of a divorce case and have a social media site, take it down. Facebook and other such services have simple, one-touch “Deactivate” buttons. Once the divorce it finalized, you can reactivate the site.

- Beware details that point to fraud. Extra-marital affairs are not illegal, But if it’s later discovered via social media that marital funds were spent on an extra-marital affair – or a fraud was committed in hiding such spending – that may qualify as sufficient cause to reopen a finalized case. Similarly, if you claim you were broke, and you post a picture of yourself on your new boat, for example, the court will not look favorably upon the revelation.

In pursuit of the best possible client outcomes, some firms are not leaving this to chance. At Barry I. Finkel P.A., we’ve amended our retainer agreements to require clients to divulge whether they have social media sites, and, if so, to deactivate or take them down during the course of the divorce proceeding. This can help eliminate social media as an issue.

The takeaway is this: Facebook and divorce cases are almost mutually exclusive by design. Facebook may be bad for your marriage – if you’re bad for Facebook. Ultimately, it’s about the person, not the page.

Increasingly, family law attorneys are advising their clients to turn to “cohabitation agreements” or “non-marital cohabitation agreements” to help keep assets and possessions with their rightful owners. Akin to a prenuptial agreement, these are different by their very name and nature: Cohabitation agreements are for those who choose not to marry.

For a growing number of Americans, this is an important development. The number of cohabiting unmarried partners increased tenfold between 1960 and 2000 (U.S. Census Bureau); it grew by 88% between 1990 and 2007 (U.S. Census Bureau), notes advocacy site, Unmarried.org.

Whether for heterosexual or homosexual couples, cohabitation agreements are intended to provide a smoother transition should the couple decides to split. The document can protect the couple from the cost and potential litigation by “clearly regulat[ing] their property rights and what arrangements might be made for mutual financial support, dealing with debt, caring for children, etc.,” according to Wikipedia.

Click here to watch a video and learn more about Cohabitation Agreements.

Typically, in the case of divorce litigation, they’re underwriting expenses associated with one side’s discovery and research needed to ensure that party – often the wife – gets her fair share of the couple’s holdings. If their side prevails in court, the lender may take 20% of the gross proceeds or more, depending on the agreement.

“With some in the financial world willing to bet on almost anything, it should be no surprise that a few would see the potential to profit from the often contentious and emotional process of ending a marriage,” the Times wrote.

Over the next few days, we will present two sides to this trend. We’ll start with an argument supporting the practice, written by Barry I. Finkel, a veteran family law attorney.

Legal lending is a great idea. In some divorce cases among high net worth individuals, discovering the business holdings can be challenging – if not impossible. The couple, or just one spouse, may have numerous business entities, whose ownership, corporate structure, bank accounts or financing are convoluted at best, or deliberately muddled at worst. Such confusion often is conjured in an effort to throw off research – by business partners, the authorities, or a spouse.

In the case of a divorce case where one party – most often, the wife – must discover hidden assets, a family law attorney’s role is not to play Sherlock Holmes. His or her job is to make the best use of the available information to present the client’s strongest case.

Frankly, investigative firms can do a much better job uncovering hidden assets. Those findings then can be used by the attorney in the courtroom to support the client’s case.

Those firms and experts are expensive to retain. The process of investigation can take hundreds, even thousands of hours. Few law firms are prepared to invest that level of cost or man hours. Moreover, is many states, it’s illegal for a family law firm to finance a case or underwrite the costs of discovery in hopes of taking a percentage at the end.

Simply put, without these “lawsuit lenders,” the wife in the divorce case may never get her fair share.

Imagine an estate is worth $10 million, and because of the research, the wife is awarded half, or $5 million. I say she’s better off financially having paid $1 million to the lender, than possibly having never known what the estate truly was worth.

In essence, the lawyer gets paid, the lender gets paid, and the wife gets zealous, appropriate representation and what probably amounts to a more fair settlement or award than if she went into the negotiations or case blind or underfinanced.

It’s only fair.

“The first-time event was designed to make what can be a painful event as painless as possible — that meant free parking included and, for many if not most, no missing work — and to close a lot of cases, about 400,” the Sun-Sentinel reported (Read the article here).

Many parties can and often do agree on the equitable distribution of assets and liabilities, and even timesharing (custody) of the minor children. At our firm, we have assisted several families in obtaining their “no-fuss,” easy divorce, at little cost to them.

Divorces don’t have to cost thousands of dollars. Parties need to agree on the big stuff, and agree to put the children first, or their financial well-being first, when deciding to divorce. Parties who can successfully remember to put themselves and their children first, will succeed in obtaining a low-cost divorce.

We have done a number of quick divorces where one party comes to us with an agreement already determined by the parties. We type it up, advise our client of his or her rights and responsibilities, and take that person to the final hearing. Often, such a divorce can be obtained in three months with no fighting, no drama, and minimal legal fees.

We often offer a reduced retainer when a client comes to us with a settlement. We still have to comply with the statutes and file petitions, answers, and financial affidavits. But that is part of our low-cost service – and low-drama divorce for the client.

It’s called “co-parenting,” and occurs among parents who put their child first – and not their own selfish angers and resentments. Too few families can do this. Most want to exclude the other party and his or her family over the holidays.

In fact, settlement agreements historically designate that the children go to one parent one year and the other parent the next year for these holidays. While this makes it very easy for parents to plan and know when they have their children during the holidays, it is less fun for the children.

All kids want their parents to stop fighting and simply be okay to hang out on a major holiday at a big family event. That’s because both parents are special and loved by the children.

Parents often need a reminder that just because their feelings have changed about their spouse or ex, the children’s feelings have not. This article is a great reminder of this. Read the entire story here.

A recent Wall Street Journal article on the place of prenuptial agreements among Baby Boomers — and others looking to protect existing assets — raises important questions.

As the article stated, “Baby boomers looking to protect their assets are increasingly turning to prenuptial agreements — legal contracts drawn up before a marriage that dictate what happens to assets in the event a couple should part ways, either by divorce or death.”

An interesting point about Baby Boomers who lost significant assets accumulated throughout a long career is that second marriages tend to bring up the subject, especially if one party has significant assets and adult children to whom they intend to leave their estate.

Pre-Nups are hopefully not the first time a couple talks about money and finances and how they plan to handle these items during the marriage, but it will certainly get the ball rolling. Discussing everyone’s assets, debts and what will stay with whom will allow for everyone to formulate realistic expectations about finances during the marriage.

In fact, money problems are one of the leading causes of divorce. In fact, Mexico, cleverly requires couples to declare separate or community property on their marriage license. This forces the couple to discuss at the time of applying for the license how they plan to handle finances of the marriage. If one party insists on separate property and the other does not agree, he or she then can determine whether they intend to apply for marriage or not.

The U.S. could learn from this practice.

Pre-nups generally are drafted for people with money. Because of their usefulness in starting the discussion about marital finances, pre-nuptial agreements should almost be required by states issuing marriage licenses.

Another point about pre-nuptial agreements: if the law changes after the fact, a carefully crafted pre-nup may not protect certain provisions because of the change in law. A pre-nup will not shield an asset after a change in the law.

If you have any questions about how a pre-nup can protect your assets or your family’s inheritance, contact a family law or divorce attorney before you say, “I do.”

According to a new book and its review on MSN, “Whether you are happily married now, or hoping to be one day, there’s one topic you’d probably rather not think about: divorce. Yet, most of us know at least one wedded couple who has split up. And then there’s that ominous 50 percent statistic, which often scares us into believing that a marriage’s survival is as subject to chance as whether a coin will flip heads or tails.”

The MSN writer spoke with licensed marriage and family therapist Shannon Fox and divorce attorney Celeste Liversidge, who authored the book Last One Down the Aisle Wins: 10 Keys to a Fabulous Single Life Now and an Even Better Marriage Later. In the story, they offer guidance on the seven worst deeds a divorcing couple can commit…

Read the entire article here.