Think about this statement: “The rise of cohabitating households with children (where parents aren’t married, just living together) is the largest unrecognized threat to the quality and stability of children’s lives in today’s families.”  That’s pretty strong stuff, but it’s exactly what a new research study concludes.  While divorce has been the leading cause of the breakdown of the family and marriage for the last 40 years, the study shows that divorce is no longer the leading cause.  The study shows that cohabitation is now the greatest threat to the welfare of children in the United States!

The August 2011 study was sponsored by the Center on Children and Families at Brookings and is entitled “The Marginalization of Marriage in Middle America”. It was written jointly by two family scholars, one a conservative (W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project) and one a liberal (Andrew J. Cherlin, professor at John Hopkins University).

The study found the following: in affluent neighborhoods where many college-educated Americans live, marriage is alive and well and divorce has declined to levels not seen since the “divorce revolution” of the 1960’s.  In contrast, marriage and family stability have both been in decline in the kinds of neighborhoods that we used to call working-class, where large numbers of young adults who have completed high school but not college reside.

Researchers discovered that the breakup rate for parents with children under 12 who are cohabitating is 170 percent higher than it is for married parents.  Approximately 24% of kids born to married parents will see their parents divorce or separate by age 12, while 42% of kids will experience a parental cohabitation by age 12.  Further, the study shows that children in cohabitating households are three (3) times more likely to be physically, sexually, or emotionally abused than children in intact biological married parent homes.  They are also significantly more likely to experience delinquency, drug use, and school failure.

What has caused Middle America to retreat from marriage over the last four decades?  Well, the study found that many realities are behind the shift.  First is the transformation of the U.S. economy.  As automation has increased and jobs have gone overseas, many moderately-educated Americans have been left with jobs that provide less stability and lower wages.  That has left moderately-educated young adults who don’t have great jobs to now view cohabitation as a viable living arrangement that requires less economic stability, less money to make it happen.  The study shows that these days cohabitation more often than not means a short-term relationship, simply because neither partner makes the same commitment as they would to a marriage.

The study also found that cultural causes are behind the devaluation of marriage by the moderately educated.  Changes in norms about sexual activity, the use of birth control, and the apparent fading of the stigma surrounding living together before marriage or of having a child outside of marriage have all greatly changed over the last 40 years.  Add to that the fact that family law has shifted away from the primacy of the marriage bond to the primacy of the parent-child relationship and to individual rights.  The rise of the “no-fault” divorce, like we have here in Ohio, and the increased push for unmarried fathers to, at least, support their children have also worked to chip away at the importance of marriage, the study found.

Finally, for the last 40 years, Middle America has moved away from organized religion.  Religious institutions used to foster higher-quality, stable relationships by providing norms, social networks and a sense of meaning.  The last four (4) decades has seen a much greater drop in church involvement among moderately-educated Americans than among the college-educated.  Taken together, all of these cultural and economic trends have made Middle Americans less likely to get and stay married.

After describing the problem, the authors of the study next listed the following six (6) ideas that might help strengthen marriage and family life in Middle America:  1.) Increase training for middle-skill jobs to assist moderately-educated young adults who would like to start families.  2.) In the same way that federal and state governments have conducted successful social marketing campaigns against smoking and drunk driving, government agencies to work to change cultural attitudes towards marriage and the family.  A campaign could be organized to encourage young adults to follow a “success sequence” characterized by finishing high school, getting a job, getting married, and then having children. 3.) Expanding the Child Tax Credit to $3000 per child and making it fully refundable.  4.) Expanding early childhood educational programs for the disadvantaged in order to seed long-term improvements in education and training.  5.) Consider reforming divorce laws (i.e. – mandatory one-year waiting period for couples with children, optional programs for couples who express an interest in reconciliation,  legal reforms that would allow judges to move away from “no fault” and factor in breaches of the marital contract in making determinations about child custody and property division).  6.) Reform the entire Earned Income Tax Credit benefit schedule to reduce/eliminate the loss of benefits for couples who marry.

Finally, the authors of Why Marriage Matters offer three conclusions about marriage and families today:

1. An intact marriage between biological parents remains the “Gold Standard” for family life in the United States, and children are most likely to thrive economically, socially, and psychologically in this family form.
2. Marriage is “an important public good” with a wide range of economic, health, educational and safety benefits that help local, state and federal governments serve the common good.
3. The benefits of marriage extend to poor, working class, and minority communities despite the fact that marriage has lost its value in these communities over the last four decades.

As a 67-year-old Family Law practice, the attorneys at Holzfaster, Cecil, McKnight & Mues have witnessed, firsthand, just how the devaluation of marriage has adversely affected the welfare of children, parents, and our community as a whole. Unfortunately, we often see the cycle repeating itself from generation to generation.  What do you think is the solution?

Driving these days can be very challenging. In addition, technological advances provide their own distractions, leaving drivers trying to split their attention between the road and the gadgets. Many experts believe that driving while texting, or “intextication”, is worse than driving drunk. In fact, studies show that 97.5% of people cannot drive safely while using cell phones. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) statistics show that roughly 16 people are killed every day in auto accidents involving a distracted driver, with over 1,300 more injured. In 2008, almost 6,000 people were killed and a half million more were injured by distracted drivers. It was a surprise to me to read a study this month that showed the American teenagers on average send 115 text messages per day. It is no wonder that authorities claim that the significant increases in texting volumes have resulted in thousands of additional road fatalities in the United States!

Thirty (30) states, including D.C. and Guam, ban text messaging while driving. Within the next few years, more and more states will enact laws banning “texting” when driving. While many cities in Ohio (including Cincinnati, Columbus and Toledo) have banned texting while driving, the State has yet to do so. The Ohio Legislature is considering at least two bills targeting distracted drivers.  Senate Bill 35 was introduced on February 1, 2011 and would prohibit any use of handheld communications while driving.  House Bill 99 was introduced on February 15, 2011, and is a ban on texting while driving.  While there is much controversy about the scope of exactly what cell phone use should be prohibited, it is probable that Ohio will join the list of States banning ‘intextication” in 2011. We will keep you posted on developments.

Clearly, there are many ways a driver can be distracted – talking to passengers, changing the radio station, grooming, using a cell phone, eating – text messaging is particularly dangerous as it involves all three types of distraction. To prevent yourself from becoming a statistic in this unfortunate trend, you should strongly consider eliminating cell phone use while driving. At the very least, utilize a “hands-free” cell phone device and quit texting while driving all together! In our personal injury practice, we have unfortunately seen many serious injuries and deaths caused by distracted drivers choosing cell phone communication over safe and careful driving.

The National Runaway Switchboard reports that between 1.6 and 2.8 million youth run away each year. It also reports that there has been “a significant increase in the number of crisis calls identifying abuse or neglect as a reason for the call, with abuse calls up 33 percent and neglect calls up 54 percent between 2005-2008″ (National Runaway Switchboard Crisis Caller Trends, 2009, p. 2).

Youth in out-of-home care often choose conduct that does not ensure their own safety. They elope from foster homes, group homes, or other residential settings at an unknown rate. When children are known risks for eloping a court may find that it is the legal duty of the caregiver to take all prudent means to take appropriate preventative measures.

Instinctively, we are aware of the links between youths running away in general and youths eloping from out-of-home care. Social science research has made significant progress in describing runaway youth in general (Martinez, 2006; Sanchez, Waller, & Greene, 2006), but has made minimal inroads in accurately describing the phenomenon of youth eloping from out-of-home care.  Similarly, while federal laws and conventions exist to address runaways and missing children, scant legislative attention has been paid to youth eloping from out-of-home care.

Because of this relative dearth of data there exists no consensus concerning fundamental definitions regarding this population. For purposes of this article, a working definition of “elopement” is any unauthorized absence from within or outside of a youth’s assigned location: i.e., when a youth can not be accounted for or when there is reasonable suspicion to believe the youth has absconded. Such situations include, but are not limited to, failing to return at a designated time from an approved leave or the unauthorized departure from a foster home or facility.

Between the time of elopement and the time a youth returns or is apprehended, their safety is in jeopardy. Should harm befall the youth, liability against the agency may result under a negligence theory.  The four essential elements of negligence are:

• The defendant had a duty to the plaintiff.
• The defendant failed to perform that duty.
• As a result of the defendant’s violation of that duty, the plaintiff was injured.
• The plaintiff suffered damage as a proximate result of the breach of the defendant’s duty.

If a court determines that a facility neglected a vulnerable child by failing to adopt reasonable preventative measures, liability may attach.  Of course, constitutional due process will not require that an agency’s elopement policies be drafted to address every conceivable elopement scenario. That is to say, an agency is likely not going to be subject to a strict liability standard; i.e., legal responsibility for an injury that can be imposed on the defendant without proof of carelessness or fault. Rather, courts are most apt to use a reasonableness standard, requiring that agencies make reasonable efforts to properly supervise its residents. It follows that a defendant caregiver that assumes responsibility for a vulnerable child should know the general capacities of that child and should exercise care to prevent foreseeable harm to the child.

Examples of preventative measures that caregivers may be expected to take include:

• Adequate supervision, monitoring, and record keeping;
• Hiring and training staff in accordance with the minimum requirements established by state law and the agency’s own policies;
• The existence of or sufficiency of an elopement prevention policy, especially if there is evidence indicating that there had been previous elopements (whether or not they resulted in harm);
• The need to properly assess a youth for elopement;
• The use of available and reasonable technology (alarms, GPS transponder technology);
• The need to adequately respond once a youth has eloped.

As the licensor of many out-of-home facilities from which children elope, departments of human services may want to further investigate their own responsibilities and potential liability in this area.

Daniel Pollack is a professor at Yeshiva University’s School of Social Work in New York City and a frequent expert witness in child welfare lawsuits.  Click here to read his biography. Dr. Pollack can be reached at dpollack@yu.edu

Reprinted by permission of the author. This article was originally published in Policy & Practice, December 2010, 68(6), 13.

I am pleased that Donna Ferber, a psychotherapist and a frequent contributor to the Ohio Family Law Blog has agreed to co-author this article with me! Our goal is to present both the legal and emotional perspectives of a trend that we are seeing in our professional practices: long term marriages ending by divorce when the wife has come to the conclusion that she has just “had enough” and that the husband is seemingly caught “blindsided” by the situation. The intent of the article is not a male versus female point and counterpoint, but rather a collaborative discourse that can provide insight into the complexity of the issues.

My legal analysis is in regular black font and Donna’s perspective as a psychotherapist is in blue italics…

Having been a divorce lawyer for over 30 years, I see recurring themes in many of my cases.  Statistics show that there will be about a million divorces in the United States this year.  About 75% are filed by women.  More of my male clients are telling me that they are completely “blind-sided” by the divorce situation.  These are individuals in long-term marriages who have honored their wedding vows, are not abusers, and had not been separated.  This scenario is becoming so common that some lawyers and psychologists have given it a name: “Sudden Divorce Syndrome.”

While it is true that women may file more often than men, it does not necessarily follow that they WANT a divorce. They simply have surrendered the hope that the marital relationship can change. It is only after years of feeling ignored, devalued, invisible and unheard, do women finally pull the plug and file for divorce. The term, “Sudden Divorce Syndrome,” implies that women throw out their marriage as impulsively as they change shoes. A man may be shocked by the news that his wife wants “out” but that doesn’t mean she hasn’t given plenty of warning. It usually means he wasn’t listening. “Sudden Divorce Syndrome” assumes impulsive behavior on the part of the woman. Nothing is further from the truth.  Perhaps a better term would be “Shocked Divorce Syndrome.” That certainly is an accurate description of these men who find themselves blindsided.

I have represented both the man and woman in these situations.  Here are my impressions of what I am seeing.  Men and women think and react very differently.  Often, the woman will monitor the relationship for a period, and will by nature attempt to fix it.  The man may perceive this as nagging or complaining.  The man then may become more distant and withdrawn.  As time passes, without counseling, neither party is happy and their needs become unmet.  The wife may suppress her feelings for a period in hopes that the situation will change.  Ultimately, the wife concludes that her only choice for happiness is to separate and to file for divorce.  The man is caught unaware of the situation, and even if he offers to change, he has missed that opportunity.  The woman says that she has become tired of “talking to the wall.”  When I inquire of her what is wrong she will answer, “Everything.”

As a psychotherapist in private practice for 25 years I see this happen with regularity. The struggle and ambivalence women experience about leaving their marriage cannot be overstated. And often they struggle for a really long time. When I ask women “how long have you been unhappy?” I find that most respond with a time line that represents roughly half the life of the marriage. In other words, a woman who is married for 20 years will often say she has been unhappy for 10 years. Again, there is nothing sudden about these decisions. Women don’t leave on a whim. On the contrary, many of them stay too long.

Prior to seeking a divorce, they frequently show up in my office on the referral of their family physician. They have headaches, digestive problems, insomnia, depression or anxiety. These can be symptoms of living in an untenable relationship for years. These physical ailments are manifestations of what happens when we live our lives in a way that goes against our value system. It puts us “ill at ease” or in “dis-ease” and when we make change to remedy the situation, these ailments often abate. I have heard countless women exclaim, “I had no idea how much stress I was living with, until I ended my marriage.”

According to an article, Sudden Divorce Syndrome, written by John Sedgwick in BestLife Magazine, one in four men who were divorced in the previous year said they “never saw it coming. These statistics are supported by an AARP poll.  Only 14 percent of divorced women said they experienced the same unexpected shock. Dr Lori Buckley says, “The warning signs are usually there, but the male mind is simply not very adept at recognizing them.  When women make up their mind that the relationship is over, they stop talking about the relationship.  Men interpret a woman’s lack of complaining as satisfaction.  But more often, it’s because she’s simply given up.”  And just because a man has been married for a long time and has been a good financial provider, there is no reason to assume all is well.  That is exactly when divorce statistics swell.  Many women, as they approach age 40, believe it’s now or never for getting their life back on track.  It’s the same phenomenon as older wealthy men trading in their long-time partners for trophy wives, only it’s the women who are dropping their men. To read more of Mr. Sedgwick’s opinions on this topic and how he believes that men pay a premium in emotional cost in divorce, click here.

I can’t agree more that men interpret a lack of complaining as satisfaction. However, if we examine those statistics they are, in fact, not very different. One in four is actually 25% which is not so dramatically different than 14%! In truth, women are as likely to overlook their husband’s dissatisfaction. Frequently men feel ignored and replaced by their wife’s dedication to children. The women is then blindsided when the man decides to divorce or she discovers an affair. Men and women often take each other for granted, minimize problems, over focus on career, money issues or child- rearing. It is well documented and obvious to the casual observer that most couples spend more time watching television or on the internet than engaging in dialogue. Both sexes hold responsibility for this lapse in connection.

Dr. Ned Hostein, MD., a Harvard-trained public health specialist and the Board Chairman of Fathers and Families, explains that there is a physical toll from divorce brought on by excess stress.  He notes: “The top 5 causes of human stress are: 1) the death of a child 2) the loss of a spouse 3) the loss of a home 4) serious financial woes and 5) losing a relationship with a child…Four of these five are involved when someone goes through a divorce…  According to a study done by the American Journal of Psychiatry, blood pressure and cholesterol levels rise and the risk of heart disease and coronary failure increases sharply.  Other problems associated with Sudden Divorce Syndrome include diabetes and cirrhosis of the liver, in part because distraught people may turn to unhealthy behaviors, like drinking, after a break up.  Statistically, divorced men are nine times more likely to commit suicide than divorced women!”

I question the above statistics. If Sudden Divorce Syndrome is not even a recognized diagnosis then how can we attribute diabetes or cirrhosis to its existence? Diabetes is clearly related to obesity and poor diet choices and cirrhosis often occurs after years of abusing alcohol.

I also would like to provide another resource regarding life stressors. According to Answers.com, the top 10 stress situations are:

Death of spouse
Divorce
Marital separation
Jail term or death of close family member
Personal injury or illness
Marriage
Loss of job due to termination
Marital reconciliation or retirement
Pregnancy
Change in financial state

While divorce is stressful, I think we do a disservice to all involved when we skew the information. All parties feel badly enough without frightening them with distorted statistics. Furthermore, if you look at the above list, you will see that stress also results from “happy” occasions. Stress is a part of life. We cannot avoid it, but we can learn to deal with it in healthier ways. Excess food and abuse of alcohol are examples of unhealthy coping choices.  Let’s be clear- people have choices in their behavior. It is not a foregone conclusion that everyone who divorces gets cirrhosis or diabetes! Let’s not paint pictures of victims of divorce. Let’s encourage healthy choices and support empowerment and resilience.

Typically, the husband will often believe it is fundamentally unfair that the wife should receive half their married property and retirement account, and often spousal support.  His entire plan for “enjoying retirement” is dramatically altered.  These cases are very difficult for the abandoned spouse.

Each partner actually experiences two divorces. One is the legal divorce and the other is the emotional divorce. While the couple experience the legal divorce on the same time line, the emotional divorce happens on individual time lines. So, the woman who says” I am done” is emotionally divorced before she begins the legal process.  She may present as logical, cool and “all business”. Her husband may see her as unfeeling and heartless.  Her detachment indicates she is emotionally divorced. He may, on the other hand, not even have begun to work on the emotional process of divorce. I have seen this in reverse as well. The man has emotionally “moved on” and the woman doesn’t know what has hit her. The chasm created by the gap in their emotional process can often play out in the legal area. In short, the further apart a couple is in their emotional uncoupling process, the more likely an acrimonious legal divorce

The best advice I can offer is to seek the services of an excellent marriage counselor as early as possible if you have any suspicion that your spouse has become disenchanted or withdrawn.  Discuss it candidly, and with professional help you may be able to work through the issue. If your wife is bringing up the same recurring marital issues, you had better pay attention. And my advice to men is to stop living in a fantasy world.  The complaints may or may not be valid, however they are real to your wife, and you’re going to have some major problems if you ignore them. Don’t wait until the process server slaps a divorce complaint in your hand!

Over the years in my practice I have heard “Marriage counseling doesn’t work”. The problem is not that it doesn’t work, but that marriage therapy is not a miracle cure. If you have physical symptoms, the sooner you seek medical help, the less drastic, prolonged, painful and costly your treatment will be. The same is true for a marriage showing symptoms of distress. The sooner you address the problem, the more likely the marriage can be saved. One final piece of advice, if your partner says he/she is having a problem, just because you don’t think there is a problem, doesn’t mean you should ignore the situation. In a marriage if one person is unhappy, then something is wrong and help from a professional should be sought out as soon as possible. Don’t wait until you are dragging the corpse of your marriage into a therapist’s office.

Donna F. Ferber, LPC, LADC, is a licensed psychotherapist in Connecticut and the author of From Ex-Wife to Exceptional Life: A Woman’s Journey through Divorce, which won an Honorable Mention Award by the Independent Publishers Association. To read more about the author and her work, please visit www.donnaferber.com

In a recent analysis of census data, the Pew Research Center found that the institution of marriage has undergone significant changes in recent decades as women have outpaced men in education and earnings growth. The study examined American’s 30 to 44 years old, a stage of life when typical adults have completed their education, have gone to work and gotten married. “Men now are increasingly likely to marry wives with more education and income than they have, and the reverse is true for women,” said Paul Fucito, spokesman for the Pew Center. “In recent decades, with the rise of well-paid working wives, the economic gains of marriage have been a greater benefit for men.” Clearly, these unequal gains have been accompanied by gender role reversals in both the spousal characteristics and the economic benefits of marriage.

I personally enjoy reviewing statistics. For those that don’t, be sure at least to read my conclusion at the end of this piece, especially if you are a woman contemplating entering into a marriage.
Here are some of the significant findings in the study, clearly demonstrating the new economics of today’s marriage:

• In 1970, 28% of wives had husbands who were better educated than they were, outnumbering the 20% whose husbands had less education. By 2007, these patterns had reversed: 19% of wives had husbands with more education, versus 28% whose husbands had less education.
• Only 4% of husbands had wives who brought home more income than they did in 1970, a figure that rose to 22% in 2007.
• The national economic downturn has hurt employment of men more than that of women. The income gap has grown even more in the latest recession, when men held about three in four of the jobs that were lost. Women are moving toward a new milestone in which they constitute half of all the employed. Their share increased from 46.5% in December 2007 to 47.4% in December 2009.
• Women now are the majority of college graduates. Their earnings grew 44% from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6% growth for men. That sharper growth has enabled women to narrow, but not close, the earnings gap with men. Median earnings of full-year female workers in 2007 were 71% of earnings of comparable men, compared with 52% in 1970.
• Unmarried men’s household incomes fared worse than those of women. Unmarried women in 2007 had higher household incomes than their 1970 counterparts at each level of education. But unmarried men without any post-secondary education lost ground because their real earnings decreased, and they did not have a wife’s wages to buffer that decline. Unmarried men who did not complete high school or who had only a high school diploma had lower household incomes in 2007 than their 1970 counterparts did.
• There is an important exception to the rule that married adults have fared better than unmarried adults from 1970 to 2007. Married women without a high school diploma did not make the same gains as more educated women: Their household incomes slipped 2% from 1970 to 2007, while those of their unmarried counterparts grew 9%. The stagnant incomes of married women without high school diplomas reflect the poor job prospects of less educated men in their pool of marriage partners. These less-educated married women now are far less likely, than in the past, to have a spouse who works — 77% did in 2007, compared with 92% in 1970.
• Among college-educated adults, married men are markedly more likely to have a wife who is college educated — only 37% did in 1970, compared with 71% in 2007. College-educated married women, though, are somewhat less likely to have a college-educated husband — 70% did in 1970 and 64% did in 2007.
• Americans are more likely than in the past to cohabit, divorce, marry late in life or not marry at all. There has been a marked decline in the share of Americans who are currently married. Among U.S.-born 30- to 44-year-olds, 60% were married in 2007, compared with 84% in 1970.

To read the full study, which includes many more findings along with excellent graphs and charts, click here.

CONCLUSION:

In my practice, I am seeing these “gender reversal” situations almost every day. It is not at all uncommon for divorced women to be ordered to pay spousal support to their ex-husbands. Also, men’s previous reluctance years ago to “accept” spousal support has seemed to have changed as well. I don’t hear, “I am a man and I don’t need any woman to support me”, like I once did. Yes, perhaps it is a good time for a reprise of Bob Dylan’s “The Times They are a-Changin”!

Another trend is that more women contemplating marriage are recognizing the benefits and importance of obtaining a well-written prenuptial agreement before they “tie-the-knot”. As many men had been doing for decades, we now see these successful women trying to protect themselves and their assets in the event of a subsequent divorce.

To learn more about Prenuptial Agreements, click here. I had the pleasure of being interviewed by “Big George” on BBC London radio in July 2009, to discuss the use of Prenuptial Agreements in America. It was lots of fun! Click here if you want to check that out!

I am also in the process of writing a follow-up article indicating how the local statistics in the Dayton area support the results of this Pew Research Center study. Keep an eye out for it!

A large body of research overwhelmingly suggests children do best when they have both a mother and a father involved in their lives. Specifically, children whose fathers participate in raising them do better in school, are less likely to get into trouble with the law, and are more likely to be better parents themselves. While more fathers are being awarded legal custody of their children, the statistics seem to indicate that the majority (between 75 and 85 percent) are awarded to mothers. Today, nearly 20 million children live in a home without a father (2002 U.S. Bureau of the Census). Recent Census Bureau child-custody statistics indicate that nearly 40% of non-custodial fathers have no access or visitation rights whatsoever with their children.  A very troubling statistic, indeed! Of those that do have visitation rights, what percentage are actually seeing their children regularly? The statistics in the studies vary greatly. But it seems clear that frequently the amount of contact the children have with their fathers diminishes over time.  A recent study published in the Journal of Marriage and Family finds that children born outside of marriage are less likely to be visited by their father when the mother is involved in a new romantic relationship. It also finds that the mother’s social decisions typically have a direct affect on the contact between a father and his child. However, like most studies which I have read, it concludes that non-residential fathers SHOULD continue visitation despite the inherent complications when mother starts dating as it is in the long term best interests of the child.

A review of the research that I have seen also makes it clear that children, especially daughters, benefit considerably when the parent they are not living with nevertheless does everyday things with the child, from shopping, reading, visiting, doing homework, watching TV together, to spending holidays together.  For a school-age daughter, doing everyday-type things together with the parent she is not living with is the strongest predictor of psychological well-being.

Don’t Let Geographical Distance Deter You!

Perseverance may no doubt be required, but Dads need to press on to be as involved as much as they can with their children. I recently concluded representation of a father who has fought in a rural Ohio juvenile court for the last 4 years to expand his parenting time and to ultimately obtain an order of Shared Parenting for his 5-year-old daughter, despite his living in North Carolina. His perseverance was incredible as were the efforts of a dedicated Guardian ad Litem who flew two times to father’s home in North Carolina to evaluate firsthand their strong and developing father-daughter bond. This wise father had allowed his relationship with his daughter to grow naturally and gradually over the years. As much as he wanted her with him, he elected not to force any extended out-of-state visitation beyond his daughter’s comfort zone. What has occurred is that his daughter wants to spend as much time with him as possible. This child will have a much better chance to grow to become a very healthy adult because of Dad’s efforts despite a very contentious court battle. The child will be attending school in Ohio, but father has court-ordered parenting time both in Ohio and North Carolina as well as utilizing virtual visitation online to supplement his "in-person" contact. Dad continues to read books to her at night online with the use of a web camera.

I would like to share a quote by George Bernard Shaw which seems apropos:

"People are always blaming their circumstances for what they are. I don’t believe in circumstances. The people who get on in this world are the people who get up and look for the circumstances they want, and, if they can’t find them, make them."

If that one doesn’t work for you, here is one that I am sure my client would especially enjoy since it is from one of his heroes, Erin Brokovich:

"Take It From Me: Life’s a Struggle but You Can Win.”

Think outside the box. In this day and age, staying connected with a child is possible regardless of geographical distances, acrimonious litigation, work schedules or other obstacles. An excellent resource for helping parents dealing with these issues is the Separated Parenting Access and Resource Center (SPARC), a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting the best interests of children involved in custody and divorce proceedings. Click here to go to SPARC’s website. Also, you might be interested in reading my prior articles about Virtual Visitation. Click here to read the first about Utilizing Technology to Supplement Parenting Time. Click here to read the second about The Legal aspects of Virtual Visitation.

The Pentagon reported the divorce rate among military members increased again in the past year and is now a full percentage point higher than it was around the time of the September 11, 2001, attacks.  According to their figures, the divorce rate of about 3.6 percent for fiscal year 2009 increased from the reported 2001 rate of 2.6 percent.  Women in uniform continued to have a much higher divorce rate than their male counterparts – 7.7% in 2009 compared with only 3% for men.  Air Force Maj. April Cunningham, a Defense Department spokeswoman, said the latest year-to-year change was relatively small because the services have made available programs focused on strengthening and enriching family bonds among couples.  “We believe these programs are instrumental in mitigating the stresses deployment places on marriages,” said Cunningham.

The actual data for the Afghanistan study indicated that the Army is trying to increase the number of mental health providers for the 68,000 US troops having problems such as acute stress, depression, and anxiety from the current number of 43 to roughly 103.  Seemingly, a very low number of counselors in my opinion!

“Every marriage has controllable and uncontrollable factors,” said Joe Davis, spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars.  “But when you interject eight years of war, preparing for war, being at war, coming home and having to think about going back to war again – and when you have children – it just has a tremendous impact on the family unit. . . . Still at the end of the day, it’s that one mother or father who has to go home and close the door and be home alone with their children. There’s nothing you can do that will end the stress of having a loved one at war until the war ends,” said Davis.

The Pentagon acknowledges that their figures do not count veterans, who divorce after leaving the services, or reflect other possible wartime consequences on families, such as increases in alcoholism or the toll on orphaned or emotionally stressed children of troops.  Also, the figures do not speak to troubled but only intact marriages.  In an Army battlefield survey taken in Iraq in the spring, nearly 22 percent of young combat soldiers who were questioned said they planned to get a divorce or separation, compared to 12.4 percent in a survey conducted in 2003.

Regardless of how accurate the statistics are, the negative impact for military families and children by the two ongoing wars and repeated deployments continues to fracture military families.  Or, as a military’s spokesperson spins it, “In both theaters of operation, soldiers continued to face stress resulting from multiple deployments, but report feeling more prepared for the stress.”  Despite being “more prepared for the stress,” even the military acknowledges that troops in their third or fourth deployment reported significantly more acute stress and other psychological problems, and married soldiers among them reported significantly more marital problems compared to soldiers on their first or second deployment.

As a divorce lawyer, I can tell you how important it is for individuals living in their hometown in a relatively “stable” situation to have access to mental health counselors, therapists and support groups.  I can’t fathom the pain and burden of trying to fight a war abroad while being separated from a spouse and children and all the accompanying anxiety and stress. We certainly owe a huge debt of gratitude to each and every one of them!

For more information about this story, click here.

According to figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, there are 2.1 million adopted children and 4.4 million stepchildren of householders as estimated from the Census 2000 sample. Together, these children represented approximately 8 percent of the 84 million sons and daughters of householders in 2000.

It is a fact, based upon several recent surveys, that children in adoptive households are treated better than children in homes with two biological parents!  Adoptive parents were more likely to enrich their children’s lives to compensate for the lack of biological ties and invest more effort recognizing that adopted children needed more help to succeed. Nigel Barber, Ph.D., author of Kindness in a Cruel World, wrote a fascinating article in Psychology Today Blogs on June 1, 2009, about the subject (click here to read).  He analyzed two recent studies, both of which have findings that are inconsistent with the fairy-tale claim that parents cannot treat genetically unrelated children as well as their own kin.

In a study of homes having one natural child and one adopted child using records provided by an adoption agency for over 22 years, anthropologist, Kyle Gibson, concluded that adopted children were more likely to attend preschool and to receive private tutoring than biological children.  Adoptees had a better likelihood of receiving cars and personal loans, and their parents spent more time at the adoptees’ sports events.  According to Gibson’s study, the likely reason that parents invested more in their adopted children was not that they favored them or loved them more than their biological children, but that they recognized that adopted children had more significant problems such as drug or alcohol addiction, delinquency problems, and were more likely to receive welfare.  So, to avoid that result, parents of adopted children compensate and provide more involvement to their adopted children.

Laura Hamilton of Indiana University has written a thorough analysis about a 2007 study, which was published in the February edition of The American Sociological Review, with similar findings and conclusions.  She found that adoptive parents enrich their children’s lives to compensate for the lack of biological ties and the extra challenges of adoption.  To read the study, click here.

Other studies have also concluded that adopted teens scored better than their non-adopted siblings in:

• Connectedness – Having three or more friends and having access to two or more non-parent adults for advice.
• Caring – Placing a high value on helping other people.
• Social Competency – Friendship making and assertiveness skills.
• Optimism – Expecting to be happy in 10 years and expecting to be successful as an adult.

Click here to read more about these conclusions from a study conducted by the Search Institute in Minneapolis.

Many adopted adults are quite successful and famous. Here is a list of adults who had been adopted as children:

• Halle Berry (actress)
• Robert Byrd (U.S. senator)
• Peter and Kitty Caruthers (figure skaters)
• Eric Dickerson (football player)
• President Gerald Ford
• Melissa Gilbert (actress)
• Scott Hamilton (Olympic gold medalist skater)
• Debbie Harry (singer, a.k.a. Blondie)
• Faith Hill (singer)
• Steve Jobs (co-founder of Apple Computers)
• Bo Diddley (musician)
• Jim Palmer (professional baseball player)
• Nancy Reagan (former First Lady)
• Les Brown (Motivational Speaker)
• Dave Thomas (Founder of Wendy’s)
• Edward Albee (playwrite)
• Ingrid Bergman (actress)

For more information about adoption, click here to link to the National Council for Adoption website, whose mission is to promote the well-being of children, birth parents, and adoptive families by advocating for the positive option of adoption.

I came across an interesting survey last month in the Gordon Poll Youth Survey published by the Wilmington Institute Network. Dr. Robert Gordon is the founder and director of the Wilmington Institute of Trial and Settlement Sciences. He is a past president of the Texas Psychological Association and is author of “On the Witness Stand.” He is both a clinical psychologist and a lawyer. The work of Dr. Gordon and the institute team has been featured on the MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour, ABC, Nightline, CNN, Fox News, Larry King Live, Good Morning America and USA Today.

The Gordon Poll Youth Survey focuses on family life issues. It is conducted for the benefit of parents, educators and members of the legal and mental health professions. The May 2009 survey was compiled from a sample size of 1,000 children between ages 14-18, and they are from a self-selected national sample that includes all 50 states.

Here are a few selected comments from participants who indicated that each parent should pay the same:

“Yes, one parent may earn more, or one may not have custody, but both parents are equally, biologically responsible for their child. Just because someone earns more doesn’t make it their job to pay more.”

Here are some selected comments from participants who indicated that the parent who earns more should pay more:

Here are selected comments from participants who indicated that the parent who doesn’t live with the kid should pay more:

And, these selected comments are from participants who indicated that the parent who wanted the divorce should pay more:

Click here to read more comments from the survey participants. I will be bringing you more USA Youth Survey results in the future!

A recent study correlating divorce rates among parents with ADHD children was recently conducted by Brian T. Wymbs and William E. Pelham, Jr., at the University of Buffalo, and published in the October, 2008, issue of the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. The conclusions included that raising ADHD children can place a strain on any marriage. The results showed that 22.7% of couples with an ADHD child became divorced by the child’s 8th birthday, as contrasted with 12.6% in the control group whose child had not been diagnosed with ADHD. Interestingly, after the child reached the age of 8 years old, there was not a significant statistical difference in the divorce rates between couples with or without an ADHD child. For more information about the study, including the characteristics which may impact the likelihood of a divorce, click here.