at one time do everything they can to destroy each other after a divorce. I realize that some stuff happens in marriages to cause people to loath each other. But when children are involved, concern should be for the kid's best interest. The man in this case will likely loose his job if he goes to jail for 6 months and may not be able to find another job, that will make child support payment even harder.

After my divorce, it was crystal clear.

It's not so much the people, but the system that sets up one side as a winner, and the other side as a loser. It sets up children not as human beings, but prizes to be won or lost.

It is a highly profitable business for the attorneys, mediators, appraisers and all others involved in it. When one or both parties fails to recognize this, no amount of good intentions matters even one bit.

You'll notice that the opposing attorney made sure they were going to get paid, big time, even though the matter was already settled. This is how it works. Family court is set up to make sure the lawyers make money.

The "best interest of the child" has very little to do with it. Attorneys and hangers-on making money is what it's all about.

Except of course there's lots of joint savings and 401k's to loot first.

Divorce attorneys have a very hard job in representing their clients. The lawyers don't cause divorces but you want them to give their services away to those who do. If you wanted to protect your money so badly, perhaps you shouldn't have put yourself in the position where you had to part with some of it to begin with.

Unless you've never been involved in a divorce, in which case you're merely talking out of your ass.

... that do their level best to keep tensions high and keep the fracas alive. If you haven't ever seen that then I doubt you are actually a family law attorney.

but by & large most family law attorneys just want to make it to the end of the case in peace. But clients want high emotional drama & games, so guess what happens?

Of course there are a few bad attorneys, just like there are a few bad apples in any profession. Does that mean all divorce attorneys should be obligated to give away their services to those who haven't been able to make their marriages work?

Also, I never said I was a family law attorney so you can doubt it all you like.

... about anyone giving anything away. My own son is at Harvard Law right now so I don't have a particular beef with lawyers. I merely find that family law is fraught with bullshit paradigms (read my other post on the subject) and I'm pretty sure it was lawyers that are responsible.

So, you might want to reread this sub-thread before moving forward.

.. does not imply I agree with all of it. I certainly hope you are not an attorney.

In case you are unfamiliar with the term "nodody said.." that mean "I didn't say...", a common colloquilialism I expected you to follow.

You were wrong and now want to change your own words with insults. I certainly hope your "Harvard Law School" son is better at this than you are or he might end up starving to death.

It looks like you have little to offer other than insults and half-assed excuses for your mistakes. Looks like I was spot on when talking about how some can't take responsibility for their own actions.

Blaming others for your mistakes is no way to go through life. I hope your son avoids that trait.

unrelated to this person.

and that's exactly what she did: helped us create our family.

That's a might big brush there.

and not have to listen to all the whining & complaining that comes with family law cases. My time is money. Time spent listening to someone whine about the damn TV remote is time I can't spend actually getting something done on that case or another case.

If parties don't want to spend bank on their divorces, perhaps they should treat it like a business transaction & honestly divide the property & debts 50-50 & act rationally regarding the children (visitation & support). But if you want to play games with everything, expect to pay for it. I know many attorneys who refuse to take family law cases because of all the bullshit they have to put up with from their clients.

And that the courts should make issues out of the pettiest things! Let's have a court ruling on how the ex H is a bastard for hogging the remote.

I just had a guy tell me all about the kids he has in college, the mortgage, etc. as if I, who he just met, ought to subsidize that by not charging "much" for my time. It's weird how it's always the lawyer who should carry the burden. Never to go the college and ask that they lower their bills since he has to pay an attorney to do something else he wants to do!

I should take their sob story to my office landlord or the phone company or the state bar who has to have its annual tribute so that I am allowed to continue. And the CLE providers.

I don't even make that much and it's due to this attitude. Though admittedly there are some very good people who value my time.

Tell them that upfront and stop scamming people into believing you actually care about representing them.

And the system is set up to not only allow that, but to encourage it.

My divorce took over 2 years. I did everything I could to settle, expedite, concede, and agree to just about anything. But that wouldn't make any money for my ex's attorney, so the goalposts were moved more times than I can count. I begged my attorney to go to the judge to just put a stop to it and get a decree under any circumstance but was told repeatedly what a terrible idea that was, and so it went on, and on, and on. And of course, every time they threw another turd on the fire, both attorneys got paid.

It does not surprise me that you are in "family law" and have such contempt for your clients. I'm sure you have lots of stories to pass around at happy hour. Obviously, people like me "deserve" to be fleeced like the childish, stupid people that we must be to find ourselves in such a circumstance as to need a lawyer for the first time in our lives.

My J&D is over 50 pages long. It works out to $4000.00 per page in legal costs. There is almost nothing in it that I didn't offer my ex within 30 days after she filed. It is hugely generous, because I knew the real danger was in racking up big legal fees and destroying what we had.

It made no difference. The retirement is gone. The college fund is gone. It went to the lawyers, because they knew it was there and they knew they could get it because my ex was anxious and unstable and could be manipulated. Once they had it, it was remarkable how quickly they finished their work. Of course, it was easy since I had supplied the settlement for them nearly two years prior.

And that's the way "family law" works.

What do you do for a living, if I may ask?

I am a pilot. But I'll be a hotel van driver or a greeter at Walmart when I am forced to retire in a few years.

...and to some extent criminal law. Some that are in the business of family law see the need for reform, but most simply want to maintain the status quo because they know there's plenty of money in maintaining the status quo. You are exactly correct. For a man when children are involved and the woman wants to use the legal system for revenge, your choices are either to pay the lawyers or almost never see your kids again. The sad part is contested judgements are pretty much all predetermined based on earnings and asset formulas and any family lawyer worth their salt can tell you exactly what's going to happen, yet still it can drag through the system until you inevitably run out of money. The idea that the attorneys are just innocent bystanders that have to suffer through all the whining is a complete joke. Some have integrity and are honest with their clients. Some are perfectly content to bleed you dry and will never lose a nights sleep over it.

Is what my lawyer used to charge me for court appearances 14 years ago. For a full day. Along with the other 4-8 clients he had those days. Maybe I should charge all my customers a full days labor for every vehicle waiting out in the lot. Maybe then I could afford to retire sometime before 80.

other clients paying the same rate I was. ($200 per hour)

$200/hour * 5 hours * 6 clients = $6000 for 5 hours "work".

We waited in the courthouse, called my name, went up in front of the judge for about 5 minutes, my lawyer spoke for about 15 seconds, we were done! $1000 down the toilet.

Are you saying you waited for 4 hours and 55 minutes and then saw the judge for approximately 5 minutes. Lawyers can charge for waiting for your case, but not charge 30 hours of work for 5 actual hours. I have never and would never charge our client's like that. I am not certain but I am pretty sure that is against the law.

Most domestic clients don't pay. You have to get the money up front. What did he deserve as pay for his time?

Having your profession writing laws is every bit as profitable as the 1% believes it is.

Most lawyers are not any closer to that 1% as the rest of the 99%.

Fraudulent billing is not the standard.

Either way, you have all the credibility that profession projects.

I'm worse than a lawyer, I set up back end billing and financial systems for some of the largest and most profitable law firms in the nation. Doing the financials in particular, I had a front row seat for the obscenities that you would like us to believe is simply being paid for your work.

I say socialize the entire field of law. The very nature of the concept of justice precludes a sliding scale determined by one's ability to pay.

Edit: let me clarify. My lawyer called me without prompting and not by my request. He called me on his own volition.

even if they didn't ask you to call. What a scam.

If I am working on their case and I have questions I need answered and I call them to get the information you don't think I should charge them for my time?

I am sure you signed a retainer. Did you read it? If I am working on your case, I could be doing research, calling you, the court, the judge, opposing attorney, writing motions, whatever it is, I am working on your case and should be paid for it. This is not a scam and if you weren't so blinded by your own bitterness you should be able to understand that.

Like so many other things in America, the concept of justice has been usurped by the parasites.

That is always allowed.

But then they don't hate lawyers. My point is you do, so represent yourself. That's allowed. No one to pay. And you know better than lawyers what to do, right?

Everyone knows the court system is a racket. Not just family law.

By representing yourself (no matter how much knowledge I have) is a legal death sentence, because judges and lawyers have set the system up to be so.

1. Fraudulent billing or
2. Legal death.

Don't know what you propose to make it better.

Maybe there should just be no lawyers? I'm sure you don't think the law requires advanced degrees or exams or anything like that. You understand justice as well as the average lawyer, don't you?

Isn't the law simply what is right? And what is right is what you think should be done in the case?

Blood-sucking leech vs. automatic guilt

How are lawyers stop being blood-sucking leeches?

Doing away with them?

I notice a broad brush against lawyers is OK, would you have similar broad brushes for races, sex, etc?

One, it would not work. Two, I bet you called him and kept him on the phone with every problem in your universe and why it should mean the court should give you exactly what you want and no less.

I had one lady call up and ramble for 5 full minutes (a long time when you are listening to pointless rambling) before I asked her to just get to the point. I thought I'd see just how long she would go on before she had the slightest respect for my time. But it was going to be an hour for sure, so I stopped her.

Maybe you're a good one, but I'd say the same to you as I do to the good cops I know (and am related to). If you don't work every day to get the bad ones you know of, out, you are the problem.

Of course the worst thing you can do to any professional is to call them on their commercial hypocrisy.

For whatever it is you do.

That would be nice.

"You" in the generic sense, of course. But it seems an awful big chunk of the time, divorce lawyers are like Pentagon contractors.

Then spell it out in the contract. Tell the lawyer only to do what you want and not what the lawyers think needed.

...if I'm also a lawyer.

Have some knowledge of value? Because if they don't, I'm not getting why people aren't willing to represent themselves. Pro Se litigants get a lot of leeway on technical rules, too.

People should not be allowed to hire private layers for representation, only legal advice.

They write the rules and the rules always say "the lawyers win, no matter what."

Makes sure of that.

like this. We have bought my grandson all kinds of Angry Bird toys because he loves them. He took them over to his dad's house on a visit (anywhere he goes, he has two plastic bags full of Angry Birds and cars), no his father has them and won't give them back to "get even" with the stepdaughter. It pisses me off to know end how idiots will use kids as a weapon.

I left for good reason and divorced for good reason but I never lost sight of the fact that he'd been a good guy, better drunk than most men are sober.

If his second wife hadn't forbidden it, we'd likely still be writing and remaining long distance friends.

I understand he's now free from #4. I hope there is a #5 and she recognizes what I did a long time ago.

First, you have to decide what to do with the house, generally the biggest financial asset that has locked into it years of income. One person gets it... but what happens to the other person and his/her years of income that are in it?

Then you have to move. Where do you work? Where does the ex work? How far away is it? What are the hours?

You're the primary income earner; your spouse was a stay-at-home parent. Now, your spouse needs to get a job. But it's 200 miles away; there's nothing local around.

So now what? Who moves where? You have a job that pays well and you have years of seniority, so you don't want to follow the spouse around letting him/her drag you all over the country.

Then your spouse and/or your ex begin dating somebody. Maybe that somebody is an ass. Maybe that somebody has kids from a previous relationship. Maybe the kids are older, or younger, or both. Maybe one of them is a bully, or mentally or physically handicapped, or a "problem child".

Maybe your kid starts having problems dealing with the stress and the new people. Do you let your ex tell you who you can or cannot date? Does your ex let you tell him or her who they can or cannot date?


My ex and I separated in 2005. Amicably. We both moved to the Twin Cities area to escape her parents, who were pulling bad shit when they found out we were separating. We let things ride for a while, but after she showed up pregnant from her new BF, we both filed for divorce. We had already divided everything up when we left the state, and didn't have a house to fight over, so it was clean.

For 5 years afterwards, I worked and had our kid every weekend. She stayed at home and leeched off of her new BF, and eventually wound up popping out two more kids. We were flexible with care of our common kid; she took him to visit relatives on an infrequent but regular basis, and I did the same. No lawyers were involved, just "hey, next week I'm going to spend a week with my parents". "Okay, no problem."

At some point she and her 2nd hubby wound up moving over 150 miles away, and every Saturday I drove down to pick him up and bring him back, and every Monday I drove back down to drop him off. It was a long but peaceful and easy drive. No lawyers involved there, either.

We never fought about alimony (none) or child support ($350 a month). Lawyers didn't get involved until she left hubby #2 and decided to stay with a Canadian trucker 20 years her senior. So, I wound up bringing our common kid to my parents house in Connecticut and telling her "he's staying with me".

I enrolled him in kindergarten that very fall, and we've been here, in my parent's house, ever since. She's up in Canada, living there illegally, I believe, with her BF and her two other kids, and the issue has been dormant every since.

People really show themselves in these cases. Some people play as many games as they can. Others show they are adults and avoid that and attempt to be amicable and compromise.

For example, my older brothers are always in some war with the mothers of their children over stupid reasons, and the kids suffer as a result. I stay out of these battles for my own sanity. I chose not to have kids, and they may have had something to do it. I agree with you, I don't understand this nonsense, but I hear about it at every family get together, and wonder what is wrong with them.

I didn't see that in the article.

From the article:

"I'm like he couldn't have gotten a worse result," Elam says. "He could have gone in there with a monkey and gotten a better result. What did I do that my client has over paid over visited and is now paying 3 thousand dollars in attorney fees and is going to jail for 6 months."

When did he over visit and over pay? I'm not following.

ETA: okay, I've read up a bit more. The article also states that the judge claims he walked out of court on her, and that's why he's in contempt and being jailed. That's completely different than claiming that he "overpaid and overvisited".

I was just answering your question.

I appreciate the answer.

He only walked out because she sentenced him to the jail time now was it the right reaction no but I can understand his actions and probably have the same reaction

it didn't say he had actually over-paid. Some months he paid more and some he paid less.

And since he wasn't paying regularly, his ex had every right to get her attorney's fees paid.

"Where does it say that he "overpays his child support and visits his son too much"?

I posted the quote. That's all.

I'm not making an argument. I'm not taking sides. I honestly don't give a fuck.

several years ago. He was paying his regular child support, no problem. No arrears, everything on time. All of a sudden we get this notification in the mail that another $1,000 a month was added 10 MONTHS PREVIOUSLY so we were instantly $10,000 in arrears and had no idea. We didn't have $10,000 so we made arrangements to pay the modified amount plus $500.00 a month. We finally got all caught up. THEN, several years later, husband gets pulled over for some minor traffic infraction and they hauled his ass into jail for being behind in his child support payments. HE WAS FINISHED. The kids were over 18 and we paid back the arrears several years before. I had to bail his ass out of jail. We had to get a lawyer and fight it -- another $5,000. We FINALLY got it all straightened out but christalmighty was it expensive! And he was one of the good guys.

So yes, boys and girls, this IS possible.

lol. I thought that was pretty funny especially "hearing" you say it.

even after his deadbeat ex-wife who one day just didn't show up to pickup their child after a visitation had been thrown in prison in another state. He was nearly arrested for child abduction and delinquency several times. He felt like he had to get a printout from the Nevada Department of Corrections Inmate Locator website printed on matching t-shirts.

My ex represented disadvantaged men in family law cases pro-bono and lobbied in for Father's Rights in California. The stories she could tell about men getting fucked over by an indifferent and fundamentally ridiculous system are unbelievable.

is that they screw over the good guys. Why? A couple of reasons: 1) they can find them and 2) they have employment and can pay. Doesn't seem to have any affect on the deadbeat parents who just continue not to pay.

My brother is in this battle with his ex. She's had several DUIs, he pays the insurance, the clothing, food, adores his son. She has "friends" pick him up and yet still drags my brother into to court every freaking 6 months. Always trying to get money. They have 50/50 custody (it should be 100 percent my brother) but she does it to screw with him.

My ex had fought me for a year to extort more money during the divorce, filed a motion to modify (hoping she'd win by default because she thought I couldn't get a lawyer) which she never followed-up on (no mediation, didn't show up to hearings, refused to answer discovery questions and meanwhile I'm out $3000), had me arrested on false pretenses (case thrown out with laughter by the county prosecutor), withholding the children illegally, calling CPS on me several times, filing bogus ex-partes on me to prejudice the court. She's a woman that uses my love for my children as a weapon. She's the lowest of the low.

or some here might tell you that evvverything is jussst fine. Trust them.

I would love to put them in a room with my ex, if they want to see what misogyny and somebody who genuinely hates feminists (and just other women in general) actually looks like.

I'm on an island here.

...that fathers are lying.

At least, when you're trying to get something straightened out, you're treated with skepticism, barely reined-in scorn, etc.

The system is set up to assume all dads are trying to pull "fast ones," and should be generally viewed as criminal, unless proven otherwise (i.e., you're guilty first...)

once, when I was in a jobless period, and modestly behind on payments, I had my account frozen, right as the weekend started, and my sons were coming over. I asked, "how does it help these kids if I can't buy them groceries?"

There was no particular answer for that.

In any case, much paperwork later, that got more or less straightened out. Still, it's really shitty to be a father who loves your kids, facing a sea of bureaucrats, when these things come up, who always smirkingly assume the opposite...

that the system is very just and that we just don't know how to deal with the law. (See below.)