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.

Lost in much of the discussion is how this case likely would play out in divorce court. Moreover, this case provides various lessons in how marriage and divorce should be handled, regardless of whether the participants are celebrities.

While Ms. Nordegren apparently has pursued the counsel of Los Angeles divorce lawyer-to-the-rich and famous Sorrell Trope, there’s been no word of Mr. Woods’ counsel. If she has hired Mr. Trope, it’s advisable that Mr. Woods seek similarly high-caliber counsel.

If this marriage is destined to end in divorce, it’s likely that the case will be resolved quickly. Celebrity and athlete divorce can dramatically damage one’s public persona; paying more in a settlement in pursuit of expeditious closure often is advisable – and preferred over prolonged tabloid fodder.

Still, this could prove to be lengthy – and costly. Many have theorized on outcomes. From a divorce attorney’s perspective, the following are reasons for bringing this case to a quick end:

- Nip disclosure. This will keep a lid on disclosure; after all, anything entered into public record – including income, is open for all to see.

- Stop the presses. Once it’s final, the talk and pursuit by the paparazzi and tabloids likely will end – eventually.

- Tiger will be able to re-start his golf career. Once he’s on the golf course – and winning – again, many of his sponsors likely will come back on board.

The lessons of the Woods-Nordegren case should be strong and clear: Securing qualified legal counsel early on is an important act to ensure the party’s rights and interests are protected. While the presence of paparazzi and sponsors is uncommon among the common couple, quick closure often brings a chance to move on with one’s life.