It’s all over now — and it’s all over Facebook, the “twitterverse” and the tabloids. Demi Moore has confirmed her intention to divorce Ashton Kutcher.

Marriage can difficult in the best of times — even without the spectacle of social media and its own 24-hour news cycle. Then, “the couple’s relationship became the subject of tabloid speculation in recent months as rumors swirled about Kutcher’s alleged infidelity.”

In announcing her intent to divorce by a statement released to the Associated Press, Moore hinted at the difficulty a celebrity marriage — and divorce — endures. “This is a trying time for me and my family, and so I would ask for the same compassion and privacy that you would give to anyone going through a similar situation,” according to the statement.

“His friends and business advisers think he’s crazy after what happened with his ex, but Paul is insisting Nancy is no Heather,” reported celeb site, PopEater. “There’s no need to make marriage a business arrangement.”

Many family law or divorce attorneys strongly suggest a pre-nup for wealthy clients – especially those who wed later in life or to those much younger, who have a history of failed marriages, or who have significant assets worth protecting. Pre-nups protect the assets of both parties as they enter the marriage, and help ensure that property and support issues will be predetermined should the parties split, helping to avoid an expense and an acrimonious divorce.

Let’s assume a couple chooses to marry without a pre-nup in Florida, the McCartney marriage provides valuable lessons. For example…

- Maintain all of your assets separately. Do not commingle anything – money, dividends, or distributions, for example. Never have a joint bank or investment accounts. This way, what’s yours before the marriage arguably will remain yours.

- What Mr. McCartney entered the marriage with would remain his. If he earns money during the marriage, without a prenuptial agreement, all that income is considered a marital asset and open for equitable distribution. If they use that money to purchase a home, it’s considered a shared marital asset.

- Without a prenuptial agreement, she could make a claim for alimony, including temporary alimony – regardless of her wealth or worth. In fact, one could argue she should have sought a pre-nup to protect her own assets.

Pre-nups also can serve to protect the assets of children from previous marriages. What reportedly are protected in Mr. McCartney’s marriage to Ms. Shevell are trust funds held for his children and grand children, including Beatrice, his 7-year-old daughter with Mills.

At least we know someone’s assets are protected.

Then, the potential complexities grew much deeper.

Putting aside the implications for Arnold’s and Maria’s young children (coping and recovery certainly will be tough for their kids), issues raised from this news include tricky paternity matters, including Arnold’s duty to support the child.

This includes how to establish true “paternity” – especially if the mother was married when she had the child, and if any husband (none the wiser regarding the child’s true lineage) treated the boy as his own. Much of this is unknown. As such, we’re speculating on a hypothetical situation.

The issue of “presumption of legitimacy” of a child of the marriage weighs large in most paternity cases.

We are not licensed to practice law in California, so we’ll use the family’s example as if the case were to be tried under Florida jurisdiction and law. Regarding Arnold’s duty to support, under Florida law, this falls to the presumed father of a child. Even if the husband is not the father (and had no reason to suspect he wasn’t), the presumption is that the child is the legitimate offspring of the husband. To that end, most courts would not disestablish paternity – essentially making the child a bastard in the legal sense. If the husband played the role of father emotionally and financially during the child’s life, courts generally will not strip him of that designation.

Given Arnold’s acknowledgment, though, under Florida law, the boy would expect every right and privilege as a child of a high-wage earner.

The father of this young child would have the duty and obligation to pay child support.  To be sure, if Arnold is determined to be the legal father, then the child support obligations would be steep.  He’d be expected to cover most of the child’s expenses including medical and dental expenses and extra-curricular activities.  He might also be expected to pay for private school tuition and related expenses such as books, uniforms, and any other ancillary costs.

These duties and obligations would remain until the boy turns 18 year of age, or if he has not completed high school by his 18th birthday, until he graduates or by the age 19.

The issue of children born as a result of extramarital affairs creates complicated situations.  Each case is different.  While it is interesting to wonder why celebrities, athletes, and politicians often find themselves in these situations, the truth is, they’re real people.  Their lives are made potentially more complex because they’re surrounded by sycophants and “yes women” who won’t ‘just say no.’

They’re often perceived as being above the law, and above the issues of morality.  Yet, Arnold’s tale proves otherwise.

Still, the story of Arnold Schwarzenegger, his mistress and their child is not unique.  As family law practitioners, we frequently see similar cases.  The takeaway: this situation is not unique.  The case of Arnold and Maria is just very public – and provides us a case study in how surrounding issues can play out in the court of law, if not the court of public opinion.

Charlie Sheen and ex-wife Brooke Mueller

Following Sheen’s very public spectacle – accompanied by his history of public outbursts, substance abuse and violence – it was no surprise that he lost visitation with his twins. Ex-wife Brooke Mueller obtained an injunction and a court order for the immediate removal of the parties’ twin sons from Sheen’s house.

Divorced or separated parents who have legal custody, time-sharing or visitation agreements should behave in public to ensure the ex-spouse has no evidence or cause that may compel the courts to revisit those agreements.

What can people in contentious divorce or separation situations learn from this episode? The goal is to remain sufficiently civil to avoid the involvement of the courts, guardians ad litem or other professionals. Why? Because these court-appointed professionals can dictate your rights and responsibilities regarding interaction with your ex-spouse or children. To do so…

- Don’t make threats. With the rise of domestic violence, the courts rightly have little tolerance for even the threat of violence, either against the spouse or children. Sheen’s history of public threats left the court cautious to ignore him again.

- Watch what you say. Calling your two girlfriends “Goddesses” or your employer rude or vulgar names only raises suspicion of the courts or court-appointed professionals regarding your mental stability.

- If you have a substance abuse problem, seek professional help. If a counselor or therapists advises you to enter rehab, follow their advise. If a counselor suggests parenting courses, take them.

- Watch your private life. If your life becomes a party – especially one witnessed by your children – people may question your fitness as a responsible parent.

In our experience, “everyday” people would have faced far greater scrutiny regarding their custody or time-sharing than Sheen. In many situations, celebrities are surrounded by sycophants who won’t Just Say No to the celebrity’s strange or even dangerous behavior. This circle of hangers-on won’t call the Department of Children or Families or attorneys in an effort to improve the situation.

Had they, the celebrity might have gotten help earlier, such public displays could have been avoided, and the children – young as they may be – could have avoided the situation altogether.

We can only hope that this becomes the wake-up call that Sheen apparently needs. A similar example comes to mind. When her partying and questionable behavior led to loss of parental rights for Britney Spears, the singer quickly dropped from the public spotlight and sought help.

Maybe losing his kids will help Charlie Sheen change. Personal and family therapy may lead to a reunification process.

Actor Kelsey Grammer

Many family law or divorce attorneys strongly suggest a pre-nup for wealthy clients – especially those who wed later in life or to those much younger than themselves, or who have a history of failed marriages. Pre-nups protect the assets of both parties as they enter the marriage, and help ensure that property and support issues will be predetermined should the parties split, helping to avoid an expense and an acrimonious divorce.

Mr. Grammer, an actor who also owns a production company with wife, Camille, offered her $30 million. The offer was to be inclusive of alimony and child support for the couple’s children, ages 6 and 9. She rebuffed his offer and countered with at $50 million. Meanwhile, the divorce has grown acrimonious and very public.

Is Mr. Grammer, who was married to Camille for 14 years, setting himself up for a similar outcome? He reportedly has said it would be an “insult” to request a pre-nup from Ms. Walsh. Time will tell.

The key message, one that most family law attorneys try to tell their clients, is that both parties continue to work very hard to keep their problems out of the public eye. This divorce was effectuated with almost no fanfare – given the notoriety it gained at the beginning.

What’s more, as is common with many celebrity divorces, Elin apparently was offered a significant pay-off for a tell-all tale. She declined. This is an example of a family truly putting the children first.

Among the other lessons:

- The cost of infidelity is not quantifiable. We don’t know the deal they struck. Any prenuptial agreement probably shielded the lion’s share of Tiger’s assets. But the bad publicity certainly took a toll on his earning capacity. Infidelity is not worth the trouble. We’re confident that Tiger believes that in hindsight none of the ladies were worth what he paid in his career, his personal life, his financial life, and for his children.

- Never react. Even when angry, pause, calm down, and take an action. The press coverage of Elin hitting Tiger with a golf club probably was more hurtful and damaging to them than humorous to us. Even for average citizens, such knee-jerk reactions can result in police dispatch and arrests. Think about how your actions will affect your children, your life and that of the spouse you once loved. Always handle yourself with dignity.

- Avoid publicity. During this time in their lives, the couple could have benefited from less publicity – especially negative exposure – and more understanding. Their two small children have eyes upon them, and the very public breakdown will be forever recorded in print and online.

They seemed like the model couple. They’d lived a life together that many married (and, honestly, divorced) people seemingly can only dream of. Of course, they’d had tragedy and illness. But they have money. They raised their children. They enjoyed politics at the highest echelon of the American system. They were ready to coast into their Golden Years – together.

Al & Tipper Gore in happier times.

The Wall Street Journal wrote how the Gores “have spent virtually their entire adult lives in the public eye and they have done it together. They presented themselves as a package,” the Speakeasy columnist wrote, “and the idea of their brand was sealed with a public kiss on the stage of the Democratic Convention in 2000.”

Then, in a not-too-uncommon and increasingly modern occurrence, they split.

Marriage therapists who work with older couples aren’t as surprised as the rest of us seem to be. We’re living longer. Many have the security of dual-income economics to now enjoy life apart. And desires that were stifled in deference to the family unit are more easily pursued and fulfilled once the nest has emptied. Therapists told the Journal, “…they’re less willing to spend their last decades with someone who leaves them unfulfilled. At the same time, working wives are less dependent on husbands for financial support, and husbands have Viagra and other new incentives to find other romances.”

Call it “the New Biology” – and the New Economics. Nothing has gone wrong. People are more robust in their later years, and they have just grown apart. People in their 50s, 60s, even their 70s are unwilling to go without – whether “without” means sexually, being personally fulfilled, or enjoying a more active lifestyle.

We’re seeing this in our family law practice, too. The most common warning signs are:

- Increasingly frequent disagreements. Not knock-down, drag-out arguments. They might even be amicable. It’s just that things are seen differently.

- One or both are miserable in the marriage. Satisfaction is gone. As needs change, so, too, do the dynamics of the relationship.

- Sex is unfulfilling – if it’s there at all.

- Free time might be spent with friends – or just in different rooms of the house.

For late-stage couples, equitable distribution of assets presents its own unique issues. Significant tax consequences may be involved. With the Gores, Al is earning income from book royalties and speaking fees. Tipper can expect to split those proceeds. While the source may be different, actively-employed, high net worth couples may have similar financial issues. Assets, property and income will need to be equitably divided.

Many family law attorneys attempt to treat late-stage marriage like a “normal” divorce. The non-working spouse may claim permanent alimony. Asset distribution – and the tax implications – may be more dramatic for both. This could require the involvement of a financial planner or tax advisor skilled in such cases.

Though the dollars may be less, even middle-income couples have concerns. Assets, retirement plans or pensions must be divided. Real estate has to be sold – or equitably shared. Credit card debt has to be addressed. And with earning capacity gone from those already in retirement, you’ll now be providing for two households.

The goal – for high net worth or middle income families – is to minimize the tax implications before getting on with your new life.

Watch and learn how this important element of family law may affect Ms. Bullock and other adoptive families facing divorce.

“It depends on what stage the adoption is in,” Finkel told the Daily News. “It may be that he would have certain rights to that child, depending on where the adoption process is at this point.”

Click here read the entire story online.  Or click here to download a copy.

If James makes timesharing or custody claims down the road, Bullock and her attorneys could have another argument: His fitness as a parent, Finkel told the Daily News.

“And there is nothing to stop her from arguing in court that Jesse may be unfit or that there may be other reasons why he is not equipped to meet the needs of the child,” Finkel said.

The Woods-Nordegren case has been made even more difficult because of the sensational nature of Woods’ numerous affairs.

But those things that made his case sensational also highlight the steps often needed to reconcile. For her part, Elin hired a high-power family law attorney – if only to prove the seriousness of her intentions or improve her negotiation position. To the outside observer, this move may have revealed the seriousness of her intentions – and scared him straight.

While statistics are hard to come by, reconciliation – even after one party cheats on the other, or one moves out of the residence – is not uncommon. But it often starts with an overture of remorse or corrective action. In Woods’ case, he apparently acknowledged to his wife the error of his ways, and sought counseling for his “addiction.”

Moreover, one detail the public may never know is whether reconciliation in the Woods-Nordegren case was tied to modification of the couple’s prenuptial agreement. Nordegren’s hiring of a powerful divorce attorney may have been an effort to get the prenup changed to her benefit.

In Florida, divorce court is set up to encourage reconciliation. Even if one party files for divorce, the courts can abate the action for 90 days while the parties attend marital counseling in the hopes of reconciling. Some judges will order the counseling with the abatement; others simply will give the parties 90 days before moving the case along to resolution.

Also, if one party hires and attorney and pays a retainer, that money stays “on account” and the party has counsel of record. If in a year resolution is deemed impossible and things just don’t work out, that party already has counsel and will not have to pay again until the initial retainer is used up.

Woods’ situation also highlights the role of counseling programs in the reconciliation process. From drug or alcohol counseling to anger management, marital, gambling or sexual counseling, to parenting courses and other intervention, these programs often are attended by one or both parties attempting to get back on track.

Separation is not the acknowledgement of a fait accompli. Think of it as a “cooling off” period needed for both parties to consider or reconsider their positions without the volatility or pressure of the other as a constant reminder or aggravating presence. It gives both a chance to emotionally calm down, seek guidance or counseling, forgive the other – or decide whether reconciliation is the next step in the couple’s path.