The UK Supreme Court has taken a major affirmation toward fully recognizing prenuptial agreements, the Chicago Tribune reports.

Traditionally, the United Kingdom has refused to recognize prenuptial agreements as valid binding agreements.  But on October 20^th the court ruled “in favor of a German heiress seeking to protect her considerable fortune from her ex-husband.”

With a strong 8-1 vote, the Supreme Court, lead by Nicholas Phillips (president of the Supreme Court), allowed an Appeals Court ruling to stand which upheld the legality of the prenuptial agreement.

The case was full of potential international law problems.  Katrin Radmacher, 40, a paper industry heiress with at least $86.5 million U.S. dollars, is from Germany.  Her ex-husband, Nicolas Granatino, 39 is a former investment banker from France.  He was attempting to receive a larger portion of Radmacher’s fortune than was prescribed for in the prenuptial agreement.

The prenuptial agreement was signed in Germany, but since the marriage was under English law, the couple lived in England, and the divorce was filed there, the courts were able to apply English law and not rely on complex international law.

Radmacher’s lawyer sees this case as setting a precedent for all prenuptial agreements in the United Kingdom.  Shortly after the judges verdict her lawyer, Simon Bruce, said that this, “means pre-nups are binding as long as they are fair.

Others aren’t as sure that this case will be as major a change.  Sharon Bennett, a family law expert at a North London firm, thinks that the law is unlikely to change as a whole as a result of this one case.

Granatino still received 1 million British Pounds from the divorce, roughly 1.57 million U.S. dollars.  And early on in the marriage, Granatino was earning a full 300,000 pounds, or approximately $471,000 U.S., a year as an investment banker.  In 2003, Granatino left his job to attain a doctorate in biotechnology at Oxford University, and now is only making a faction of his former salary.

The current ambiguous law about prenuptial agreements is going to be reviewed by Britain’s Law Commission.  The catch is, the review isn’t going to happen until 2012.

Until the review of the law, a dangerous level of ambiguity will continue to surround the status of prenuptial agreements in Great Britain.  It is pretty astonishing that in a country like the United Kingdom, the law would be so confusing over such an important topic to many people.

It seems like it should be central to most modern laws to allow private parties to contract to agreements.  Especially when these agreements would aid the courts in reducing cases.  If the United Kingdom does allow for prenuptial agreements, like most countries, then the court will no longer be put in the position of having to decide who gets what property. These decisions can be left to the parties to determine early on.

Copyright © 2010 TotalDivorce, LLC. (as licensee). All rights reserved.

Kelsey Grammer has had a very public divorce from his wife Camille Grammer. Now Camille Grammer one of the new members of Bravo’s “Real Housewives” franchise, and she says the show has helped her move on, according to the Chicago Tribune.

The couple, once a power couple in Hollywood, had been married for 13 years. The pair also have two children, 9-year-old daughter Mason and 6-year-old son Jude.

Camille, a 42-year-old former Playboy model, said that she is “glad that I decided to do the show because it’s been a diversion… I have these wonderful, fine very strong successful women right there supporting me through this.”

Part of the reason that the divorce gained so many headlines was the lack of a prenuptial agreement between the two. This allows Camille to try and receive portions of the money Kelsey received during his star role on the popular television show Frasier.

Adding to the drama was the fact that shortly after the divorce proceedings began, Kelsey began to move on. In the middle of the divorce, Kelsey moved in with his new love, a 29-year-old Virgin Atlantic employee.

Camille said that, at the time the divorce started, she had no idea the divorce was on the horizon. It was a surprise to her.

During the first episode of the “Real Housewives” season, the two were together, and when Camille watched it she said “I was hard for me. It definitely brought a tear to my eye… I think I give him a kiss (goodbye) and say ‘I love him.’ I was supposed to move in that summer.”

This isn’t the first time that there has been an emotional rollercoaster being shown on “Real Housewives”. But that it is a positive aspect to see it as a healing period for the people involved in the separation.

When we watch celebrity divorces and marriages, it’s easy to forget that they are real people and the relationship are real. The pain felt by a famous person is no different that the pain we all feel in tough situations.

It is becoming increasingly difficult to separate celebrities’ personal lives from their public lives. With the 24-hour news cycle and the intense spotlight on celebrities, we feel like their whole lives are around to entertain us. If we see a couple getting together, and we don’t think it’s going to work out, it’s easy to be cynical.

But just because many people expected a celebrity couple to divorce doesn’t mean that the pain the two feel is any less. When celebrities have little or no distinction between their public and private lives, we begin to take the moments that shape their lives as entertainment for ours.

Copyright © 2010 TotalDivorce, LLC. (as licensee). All rights reserved.

One of the more commonly known marital statistics is that people without college degrees were more likely to be, or have been, married by their 30s than those with college degrees. This was true in the 1990s, but apparently is no longer the case.

A recent article in the Chicago Tribune outlines a recent study done by the Pew Research Center analysis of census which showed that, among 30-year-olds, 75 percent with a bachelor’s degree were or had been married, and 69 percent of people without a bachelor’s degree either were or had been married.

Part of the increase is attributed to unmarried couples living together. This trend seems to be more focused in the couples that are not college educated, but is rising across the board.

Richard Fry, a senior researcher at Pew, was responsible for writing the report and explains that, “the labor market has not been kind to young, less educated workers… College used to delay marriage. Now, not completing college delays marriage.”

The implications from the article are unclear, but it is an interesting trend to watch. What is also unclear is how this is exactly related to the increase in individuals gaining a college education.

There were several other finds from the study:

• Over 90 percent of U.S. adults marry sometime in their life. This means Americans marry at higher levels than most other Western countries.
• Adults with less education are more likely to divorce. Around 2.9 percent of adults between the ages of 35 and 39 without college degrees, as compared to 1.6 percent with college degrees, saw their first marriage end in divorce last year.
• Married adults seem to make more money. In one earner households, the median income of a married adult was $63,000, while unmarried adults in one earner households were significantly less, earning a median salary of $53,000.

These types of census studies can give valuable insight into what is happening in our country. What these studies cannot do is fully explain why things are happening. This study shows several general trends, but we cannot make the cognitive leap and claim to know exactly why it is that statistically, a higher percentage of people with bachelor’s degrees will be married than people without bachelor’s degrees.

This study seems to set up an interesting follow up study. We know that the percentage of people without college educations who are married is less than those that are married, it would be interesting to see how those numbers match up to the increase in overall education. It seems that there are two trends working here, and the interplay between them hasn’t yet been worked out, but could lead to interesting results.

Copyright © 2010 TotalDivorce, LLC. (as licensee). All rights reserved.

We all know someone who was raised by divorced parents who didn’t get along with each other; in fact, many of us had that as a reality for our childhood. Now, there is a bitter debate among the American Psychiatric Association about whether parental alienation should be classified as an official disorder.

Parental alienation occurs when a child’s relationship with one estranged parent is poisoned by the other parent. According to the Associated Press, there is a generally agreement that this does occur, and is usually triggered during the child-custody dispute of a divorce.

But experts disagree on whether or not to officially classify this as a disease.

Dr. Darrel Regier, vice chair of the task force which is drafting the manual says that they have, “gotten an enormous amount of mail – more than any other issue. The passions on both sides of this are exceptional.”

Feminists are the driving side which would rather not have parental alienation as a disorder. This is because, as advocates for battered women, they feel if this is categorized as a syndrome, abusive men could use it to deflect attention from their abusive behavior.

Essentially, it would allow men who, based on their actions, would be disliked by their children, to claim that it is the woman’s fault.
Joan Meier, a professor at the George Washington University Law School and expert on domestic violence and child custody says that parental alienation “is a fabricated notion – there’s no science to support it.”

Many oppose this view point, however. The people who want this categorized as a disorder say that “recognition of parental alienation in the psychiatrists’ manual would lead to fairer outcomes in family courts and enable more children of divorce to get treatment so they could reconcile with an estranged parent.”

Parental alienation has begun to enter the legal realm as well. It is often used when a male is attempting to gain custody of a child when the child is reluctant to go with him. This was put in the public eye during the infamous divorce between Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger.

During the divorce, Baldwin received sharp criticism from feminist groups for citing parental alienation syndrome as the course of his estrangement with his daughter.

It is a difficult legal maneuver to succeed with. Since the disorder isn’t currently recognized, it is difficult to prove that it is happening. Furthermore, it is a new concept to court rooms, so the weight to assign to it, and how to establish that the wife caused the poisoning is very difficult.

As the debate unfolds, the ramifications for the legal as well as psychiatric circle will be flushed out.

Copyright © 2010 TotalDivorce, LLC. (as licensee). All rights reserved.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford seems to have rebounded well from his famous divorce.

Governor Sanford made headlines in June 2009 when he disappeared for six days in Argentina with his mistress. Now, Mr. Sanford is on the verge of ending his time as governor with some of the highest approval ratings in the country for governors.

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal describes Mr. Sanford as “divorced, enjoying high approval ratings and ready to embark on a private life when his second term ends in four months.” 

Mr. Sanford’s private life will likely involve Maria Belen Chapur, the Argentinean woman with whom he had his scandalous affair, to at least some degree. Mr. Sanford has admitted to seeing Chapur for a long weekend in May, and according to a close friend, the two also saw each other in New York.

When asked if he ever intended to run for office again, Mr. Sanford responded with “Never say never,” leaving the door open to speculations.

The governor’s current status is a long way away from where he was when he finally returned from his unannounced absence. After Mr. Sanford disappeared, under the guise of a fishing trip, for six days, without contact with his family or security personnel, people were a little peeved.

When he returned, he was pressured by many lawmakers in his state to resign. But Mr. Sanford decided not to. This caused the state to censure him for bringing the state, “ridicule, dishonor, disgrace, and shame.”

It was less than a year after his return that he and his then wife, Jenny, went through a high-profile divorce which wrapped up in March of 2010. 

Now, Mr. Sanford says he has had more time to focus on his work as governor. According to the article, “[w]hile no one was watching, or perhaps because of it, [Mr. Sanford] got more accomplished in his last legislative term than in any other of his eight years as governor.”

Mr. Sanford’s current plans for his post-political life? To move back to the scenic town of Charleston, where his ex-wife is living with their three children. His oldest son is currently a freshman at the University of Virginia.

Mr. Sanford is a former real-estate broker, and says that he is planning to do work in the private sector. He has not elaborated on what that specifically means however.

The governor says that he is ready to leave the office, but he isn’t too happy about leaving it in the middle of budget crisis. But that is the position that most states are in, and there is no telling just how long Mr. Sanford would have to remain governor if he wanted to see the state all the way through the recession.

Copyright © 2010 TotalDivorce, LLC. (as licensee). All rights reserved.