A child’s voice in the courtroom

Until recently, the law regarding a child’s ability to address the court in his or her parents’ custody case has been restrictive.  Rarely is a child granted the opportunity to testify. Typically, a child’s voice regarding living with Mom or Dad is provided to the court through reports, or from third parties, such as the court-appointed mediator’s office.

The California legislature recently approved changes to the process by which children’s views about the custody arrangements are shared with the court.  Under the new law, which goes into effect January 1, 2012, the rules are significantly changed.  The changes give children a greater voice in their custody preferences.  New procedures will be put into place that require a court to allow a child to address the court directly regarding his or her preferences, if a child is age 14 or older and so wishes, unless the court determines that doing so is not in the child’s best interests.  The new law clarifies that the court can take into account a child’s preferences for both orders of child custody and visitation.

I am not sure how I feel about the new law.  Giving children some say about where they live and how often they see their parents should be a good thing.  Many, if not most, children feel somehow responsible for their parent’s divorce.  It is not unusual for children to feel responsible for taking care of one, or both of their parents.

 

Just saying…..

This quote is from the California Court of Appeal in a published family law opinion:

Family lawyers do not get the respect they deserve. In terms of the potential breadth and complexity of issues which they face, family practitioners work in one of the most, and perhaps the most, exacting and demanding areas of concentration in the law. Under California’s community property laws, every item of marital property presents a host of challenging issues. Not only must the family practitioner worry about the characterization and valuation of each asset, he or she often must consider future tax consequences involved in various items of community property. On top of that, support and custody issues involve different considerations, in which a human relationship–as distinct from a discrete event–is the subject of the litigation. 

D’Elia v. D’Elia (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 415, 68 Cal.Rptr.2d 324

Tooting My Own Horn…

I am not generally one to toot my own horn…. But, now that I have a blog, I might as well.  Below is a Yelp review I received from a client of mine:

Going through a divorce is strenuous enough.   Not having the right attorney can turn the whole process into a real nightmare.  

I was able to witness this first hand.   My ex fired her first attorney and hired an attorney who only told her what she wanted to hear…. and then charged my ex as many billable hours as possible.   Her attorney was unethical and continually tried to mislead the court.  I on the other hand had found Kate… who did not tell me everything I wanted to hear but was spot on with how she thought my case would go and the outcome on each issue.  She was honest and to the point with the court (which was clear to the court and viewed favorably for me).    

Kate has incredible foresight and negotiated most of our difficult issues with what I needed long term.  With children in the picture, it was important for me to have a knowledgable assertive attorney guiding me through the legal process.  Kate excelled here.

If you want to get through your divorce quickly, efficiently, and with the best possible outcome, you need to hire Kate. She knows the law, and is well respected by each of the Judges and every family law attorney in Marin.  She will give it to you straight, and let you make the final decision how you want to proceed, but she will give you the guidance you need to make the best choices.

I must say, this review came from a “dream” client.  He is organized, responsive, realistic, and reasonable.  Thank you, George.

Communicating by Email

We live in an age where much of our communication is by email.  I had a frustrating experience yesterday which was created by four people (me being one of those four people) using email to communicate.  We are all working together to update my website.  My friend, Anne Doyle, a terrific graphic artist, had emailed all of the new “pages” for my website to the company I have hired to help optimize my website.  We had emailed them three times over the past two weeks and given them all of the new pages and pictures for the new site.  We didn’t get a response to even one of our emails.  Yesterday, I sent a polite email to the web company asking for an update.  The response was that two emails had been sent to Anne and that she hadn’t responded.  So, now I am irritated with Anne and I email her.  She responds to me and says that she didn’t receive any emails from the website company.  Now I am on the phone with the website guy and just lose it (which is not my “norm”).  Apparently, after sending several “test” emails to me, we determine that there is a problem with outgoing emails on their end.  After numerous phone calls between me and the website guy, then me and Anne, Anne and the website guy, Anne and the website designer, and then me and the website guy again, it looks like we are back on track.  I am not sure what the moral of the story is?  The process would have been much more efficient if the four of us were actually communicating by email.  Instead, we ended up communicating with each other the old fashion way.  I call one person.  That person calls the other person.  While I am talking to the first person, the second person leaves me a voice mail message.  I call her back and she is talking to one of the other two people.  As I am leaving her a message, I get another message.  And so it goes….

Doing good

For me, being a family law attorney is often about “doing good.”  Righting a wrong.  I have to do “good” within a system that is less than perfect.  It is slow.  And, most of the people working within the system are overworked.  They, the people we defer to within the court system, don’t always have the time it takes to see the whole picture (at least the picture as I see it).  Yesterday, I asked the judge to make emergency orders which would allow my client to see her children – children that she hasn’t even been able to speak with on the telephone.  The last time she saw them was on May 11th.  When asking the judge to make these types of emergency orders, the judge doesn’t have time to read the entire file and sift through the “he said,” “she said.”  In the case yesterday, the judge ruled that my client could purchase cell phones and talk to her 13 and 15 year old boys on those phones – that she and the children could make their own arrangements to see each other.  This is a good, temporary solution assuming the boy’s father doesn’t continue his abusive, controlling behavior.   We don’t go back to court until June 28th so I am keeping my fingers crossed on this quest to do good.