By John Clark

A bill circulating in the North Carolina Senate would force married couples to wait for two years before filing for divorce, according to a report this week from the Hickory Daily Record.

The proposed law, cleverly titled the “Healthy Marriage Act,” would extend the state’s mandatory waiting period before a divorce from one to two years, but it also adds several other layers designed to make divorce more difficult.

According to sources, the new divorce law would also force couples to attend counseling sessions and allow them to live together without suffering a penalty in order to work out their marital troubles.

To no one’s surprise, the bill has generated a fair amount of controversy in North Carolina, but its supporters swear by its potential efficacy.

Sen. Austin Allran, the bill’s sponsor, notes that his state has a “higher-than-average divorce rate,” but claims he doesn’t think that “residents of North Carolina are harder to get along with than people in other states.”

In other words, Allran believes the state’s relatively high divorce rate is a product of poor laws, not cultural trends, and he hopes the bill would change these statistics.

Sources say North Carolina has 3.8 divorces per 1,000 residents, a rate that is slightly above the national average of 3.4 divorces per 1,000 people.

In addition to the potential to reduce the state’s divorce rate, supporters of the bill also claim that it would help children, and it would also reduce the costs to the state that are often incurred as a result of divorce.

But opponents of the bill claim the proposal would set divorce laws back several decades, and note that such measures would be counterproductive at best.

According to Lisa Angel, a local divorce attorney, in 20 years of helping North Carolina clients, “I’ve never had a client ask for the waiting period to be longer.”

Angel also noted that “most clients have thought about this and agonized over this for years before they actually separate, so to extend that only causes more emotional and financial hardship for the family and children.”

Indeed, residents of North Carolina are already required to wait a year between their separation and a final divorce, in addition to meeting other regulatory hurdles that are common to family law disputes.

Opponents of the bill question whether the addition of an extra year to the waiting period would provide anything but headaches for families and courts alike.

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

By Mary Ann Pekara

It is no secret that women are their own worst critics and Dove’s latest ad campaign speaks directly to that.

Regardless of who you are, or where you’re at in your life – a teenager in your formative years, a married woman, a woman going through a divorce, a divorced woman, a mother of 2, a mother of 6, a widow or a grandmother – it doesn’t matter.

Dove wants you to know that you are beautiful, more beautiful than you give yourself credit for. So, how did they do this?

Dove hired criminal sketch artist, Gil Zamora, to sketch 7 women, one at a time.

Zamora does not see the women as he sketches them. With a curtain separating him from the particular woman he is working with, Zamora essentially interviews each woman about their facial features. He sketches based on the descriptions they provide him.

Elsewhere the women chat with strangers who later sit with the sketch artist, the same way the women previously did, and they have similar, interview style discussions in which Zamora asks them about the stranger’s appearance and features, as he sketches.

After both sketches are completed, they are hung side by side and the woman is invited back to view them.

The difference between how the women view themselves in comparison to how they are viewed by strangers is clearly evident and often elicits an emotional reaction.

See the ad video on YouTube – Dove Real Beauty Sketches.

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

March 27, 2013
By Mary Ann Pekara

Today the Supreme Court hears arguments relating to federal benefits for same-sex couples. The federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (DOMA) refers to marriage as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.”

The Supreme Court will meet to determine if how federal benefits are delegated under DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

The could rule in 3 ways:

• DOMA is Unconstitutional.
• DOMA is Constitutional.
• The Supreme Court is powerless to decide on this case.

If the Act is deemed unconstitutional, all 9 states that allow the same-sex marriage, plus the District of Columbia, will be able to provide married same-sex couples federal benefits, as well as subject them to over 1,000 federal laws and programs.

If the Act is deemed constitutional, nothing changes. If nothing changes, same-sex couples who are married continue to be denied federal benefits.

The there is the possibility that the Supreme Court rules that it lacks jurisdiction because the Obama administration and the plaintiff in this case agree that it is an unconstitutional law and House Republicans can’t defend it.

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

March 26, 2013
By Mary Ann Pekara

Today the Supreme Court hears arguments on California’s Ban on Same-Sex Marriage and whether it violates the Constitution. Proposition 8 which states that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California” was passed in November 2008.

Prior to that passing, same-sex couples had the Constitutional right to marry in California per In re Marriage Cases stating “California legislative and initiative measures limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violate the state Constitutional rights of same-sex couples and may not be used to preclude same-sex couples from marrying.”

A ruling, which likely will not come until June, can go in one of three ways:

1. The court could uphold Proposition 8. This would allow states to either allow or ban same-sex marriage as they choose.
2. The court could strike down Proposition 8 on several grounds (see below).
3. The court could decide supporters of Proposition 8 lack standing to appeal.

Grounds to Strike Proposition 8 Down?

• Banning same-sex marriage is a violation of the Constitution.
• California could not withhold the designation of “marriage” from same-sex couples while providing all of the benefits and burdens of marriage through a civil union.
• After the California Supreme Court established the right to same-sex marriage, California was not entitled to withdraw the right.

There are currently 38 states banning same-sex marriage and 8 states allowing “everything-but-marriage” civil unions. (5 of those 8 states fall into both categories.)

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

By John Clark

Lawmakers in Iowa are bucking a modern trend and seeking to eliminate “no-fault” divorces, which have become an integral party of state family laws, according to a report this week from Radio Iowa.

According to sources, seven Republicans in the Iowa House of Representatives are looking to pass a bill that would restrict the ability of parents with minor children to file for a “no-fault” divorce, which does not require the parties to place the blame on one spouse or the other.

Traditionally, courts required couples to provide a reasonable reason for a divorce, which often led to more costly legal separations.

Today, however, all 50 states allow parties to file for divorce for reasons as simple as “irreconcilable differences.” Such faultless divorces are often cheaper, less contentious, and take a shorter period of time.

Several prominent lawmakers in Iowa, however, are worried that the potential effects of divorce on children should make divorce more difficult for couples with minor children.

According to Tedd Gassman, a Republican from Scarville, Iowa, courts should “look out for the children instead of constantly worrying about adults.”

One of Gassman’s constituents, Daren Clark, told reporters that “no-fault” divorces have “damaged thousands of families and their children” because they have created a “do what’s best for me” attitude among parents.

Under the terms of the proposed law, parents with minor children would have to prove that one spouse had committed adultery, been convicted of a felony, or had abused a family member in order to obtain a divorce.

Of course, this proposal, which goes against the trend of family law reform that has blossomed over the last 40 years, has been heavily criticized by many family law experts.

Many critics, for example, have noted that forcing a couple to stay together despite vast differences could ultimately be more harmful to the children, who would be forced to live in a contentious environment at home.

Indeed, other observers note that lowering obstacles to divorce can lead to more relaxed separations, which allow former spouses to craft child custody agreements in the spirit of cooperation, which is often better for children.

According to Rachel Scott, a member of the Iowa Coalition Against Domestic Violence, divorces in which fault must be determined often “escalate tension and conflict between two individuals.”

Nevertheless, Gassman and his colleagues remain convinced that “no-fault” divorces are a negative development, and they seem determined to push their bill through the Iowa House.

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

Think traditional marriage has brought on some interesting partnerships? People have married themselves, inanimate objects, and even pets.

The legal aspects of these unusual marriages contain many unknowns, like what happens when you and your cat want to file for divorce? In this infographic, we’ll look at some of the strangest marriages in our recent history.

Embed the infographic above with the HTML below

<a href=”http://www.totaldivorce.com/blog/2013/03/04/the-worlds-strangest-marriages-jzbdg/” target=”_blank” title=”The World’s Strangest Marriages”><img title=”world’s weirdest marriages” src=”http://assets.totaldivorce.com/infographics/worlds-strangest-marriages.png” border=”0″ alt=”world’s oddest marriages”></a> from <a href=”http://www.totaldivorce.com/” target=”_blank” title=”www.totaldivorce.com”>Total Divorce</a>

*Please use the above code unaltered or include a citation of this site as the original source.

Man Marries Himself

• Chinese man named Liu Ye married a cardboard cutout of himself in 2007.
• The wedding honored all Chinese traditions.
• The cardboard cutout wore the traditional red wedding dress of a Chinese bride.

Woman Marries Herself

• Artist Jennifer Hoes married herself to celebrate her 30th birthday.
• The wedding was to help her embrace her own life.

Woman Marries the Eiffel Tower

• A woman named Erika married the Eiffel Tower in 2008.
• She changed her surname to “La Tour Eiffel.”
• She suffers from Objectum-Sexuality: an emotional and often romantic attraction to inanimate objects.

Woman Marries the Berlin Wall

• A woman named Eija-Riitta married the Berlin Wall in 1979.
• She changed her surname to Berliner-Mauer (translates to “Berlin Wall” in German).
• She suffers from Objectum-Sexuality.
• She was distraught when the wall was torn down.
• Now keeps replica models in her home.
• Says the Great Wall of China is not as “sexy” as her husband.

Woman Marries Fairground Ride

• A woman named Amy Wolfe married a fairground ride in 2008.
• She suffers from Objectum-Sexuality.
• Claims to have had sexual and mental attraction to the ride since she first saw it when she was 13.

Man Marries Game Character

• A Japanese man who calls himself “Sal9000” married a video game character in 2009.
• He married Nene Anegasaki from the Nintendo DS game Love Plus.
• The wedding was broadcast on Nico Nico Douga, a Japanese video sharing website.

Man Marries His Cat

• German postman Uwe Mitzscherlich married his cat in 2006.
• He decided to marry her after learning she was sick and would die soon.
• Held a formal wedding.
• He wore a tux.
• She wore a special bride’s gown.

Woman Marries a Dolphin

• Sharon Tendler married her dolphin friend Cindy in 2006.
• The ceremony takes place in Israel.
• She becomes the first one to marry a dolphin.
• She knew Cindy for 15 years before marrying him.
• She used to think she might marry a human.
• She has since decided that she will stay married to her dolphin.

Man Marries a Goat

• Sudan law says a man caught sleeping with a woman must marry her immediately.
• A man caught having sex with a goat was required to follow the law.
• He married the goat in 2006.
• He had to pay the owner a dowry as a part of his public humiliation punishment.

Man Marries His Pillow

• Korean man Lee Jin-gyu married his pillow in 2010.
• The pillow is large and features an image of Fate Testarossa.
• She is a character from the anime series Mahou Shoujo Lyrical Nanoha.
• The pillow was fitted with a wedding dress.
• The ceremony was officiated by a local priest.

Man Marries His Doll

• A man named Davecat married his love doll in 2000.
• Featured on TLC’s My Strange Addiction.
• Has not dated a real woman since he married the doll.
• Says the doll has qualities “hard to find in an organic woman.”

This infographic was brought to you by Total Divorce.

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

By John Clark

In a landmark decision, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals ruled this week that a marriage conducted over the phone can be terminated by the same method, according to a report from the Washington Post.

The unique divorce case centered on the saga of Noel Tshiani, who was living in Africa in 1993 when he married his wife, Marie-Louise Tshiani, in a ceremony that was held over the phone.

During the ceremony, which took place in Maryland, Noel Tshiani’s cousin stood in for the absent groom, while Noel answered questions and listened to the priest’s instructions over the phone.

Sources say the wedding involved a large exchange of gifts, including a goat, money, and clothes, between the two families, and the wife soon flew to Africa to join her husband, who works for the World Bank.

But a few years ago, Marie-Louise decided to file for divorce, claiming that her husband was abusive, but her efforts were thwarted when her husband claimed that he did not know he was ever married.

The judge, however, refused to buy this claim, especially since the couple had recently renewed their vows, filed joint tax return, and gone through the process of obtaining green cards thanks to their married status.

As a result, the trial judge granted the wife’s request for a divorce, and ordered Noel Tshiani to pay $6,000 per month in child support, alimony, and other expenses.

This week, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals affirmed the validity of this decision, saying that a marriage in which “one party participates by proxy” is still valid, and thus the dissolution of the marriage over the phone was also a lawful action.

The court also noted that recent research on “distant marriages” shows that it sometimes “may be a couple’s only option,” particularly when one party is a member of the military or works in a different state.

Sources indicate that this court’s decision mirrors findings made by courts in other states that have upheld the validity of marriages forged under unique circumstances.

According to Marie Louise’s divorce attorney, the court’s opinion “makes it clear that the public policy of Maryland is very much to be in support of marriage, regardless of how it’s done.”

Indeed, family laws across the country are designed to make marriage more appealing to couples. And recent changes to divorce law have attempted to make it easier for married couples to split up, as well.

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

By John Clark

Women in the United States often lose their health insurance after getting a divorce, but the Affordable Care Act may help remedy this troubling trend, according to a recent report from U.S. News & World Report.

Roughly 115,000 women lose their private health insurance after separating from their spouses, according to a study conducted by researchers at the University of Michigan.

And while many of these women quickly find new health insurance, their overall rate of coverage remains relatively low for more than 24 months after a divorce, according to sources.

Bridget Lavelle, the lead author of the study, said that the impact of this trend is “quite substantial,” given the fact that “approximately 1 million divorces occur each year in the U.S., and that many women get health coverage through their husbands.”

But before women in struggling marriages decide to hold off on calling a divorce attorney, the researchers cautioned that the Affordable Care Act could offer some relief for women looking for health insurance after a divorce.

According to the authors of the study, women in “moderate-income families face the greatest loss of insurance coverage” because they are “more likely than higher-income women to lose private coverage and they have less access than lower-income women to public safety-net insurance programs.”

But the new health care law aims to extend health insurance coverage to both low- and middle-income Americans, particularly those who cannot otherwise afford insurance.

Lavelle said it is too early to tell “how effective the Affordable Care Act will be in remedying the problems of insurance loss after divorce,” but she also believes that “the law has provisions that may help substantially.”

Judging from the numbers, thousands of Americans hope Lavelle is correct. Sources say that 65,000 women in the United States lose all of their health insurance, including private and public coverage, in the months after a divorce.

Many of these women previously counted as dependents in their husband’s insurance plans, and cannot afford private health insurance of their own right after a divorce.

Sources note that roughly 25 percent of women who received health insurance through their spouses’ work plans are completely uninsured six months after a divorce.

In addition, some women who have their own employer-based insurance during a marriage may not be able to afford to pay their share after a divorce.

This study certainly represents a troubling trend for women in the United States, but observers are optimistic that the new health care law will begin to address this health insurance disparity.

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

Over 50% of marriages end in divorce, and nearly half of all children experience their parents separating before they turn 16. Handling the first holiday after divorce is one of the greatest challenges any newly divorced parent will face.

Follow these tips to create a safe, stress-free holiday for everyone.

Embed the infographic above with the HTML below

<a href=”http://www.totaldivorce.com/blog/2012/11/20/newly-divorced-parents-holiday-guide/” target=”_blank” title=”Newly Divorced Parents Holiday Guide”><img title=”holiday guide for newly divorced parents and children” src=”http://assets.totaldivorce.com/infographics/a-holiday-guide-for-newly-divorced-parents.png” border=”0″ alt=”newly divorced parents holiday guide”></a> from <a href=”http://www.totaldivorce.com” target=”_blank” title=”www.totaldivorce.com”>Total Divorce</a>

*Please use the above code unaltered or include a citation of this site as the original source.

Act in Their Best Interest

The most important rule you need to remember: It’s no longer about you. The choices you’re making and the arrangements you’re proposing should always be in the best interest of your children.

Decide what’s best:

• Sharing the kids between holiday events.
• Choosing one home or the other where the kids can celebrate.
• Sitting down to Thanksgiving dinner with your co-parent and anyone new in their life.

Don’t forget to set up rules for your extended family. Talk to the grandparents and make sure they know what you and your ex have decided – and make sure they’re on board.

Create New Rituals

• Start Fresh: Build new traditions and rituals to create new memories instead of holding onto old hurts.
• Involve the children in the decision-making and make them an important part of the holiday. This will give them a sense of control and help with their stress.

Make Plans

Ease holiday paralysis by making plans ahead of time.

• Having the stability of knowing what’s coming will make things easier for you and your kids.
• Staying occupied will help everyone keep moving forward.

Be flexible and open to spontaneity. Plans can be altered.

Listen to Your Children

• Don’t panic and don’t minimize what your child is feeling. Let them talk. Listen.
• Never get into the blame game in front of your kids.
• Even if you no longer get along with your former partner, for your child, that’s still mom or dad.

Avoid the Guilt Trip

• Kids know when you’re trying to “buy”their affection.
• Lay off the expensive guilt gifts and focus on tending to your child’s emotional needs.
• Set up your boundaries – with your co-parent – and stick to them.

Don’t Compete, Cooperate

• If your holidays involve gift-giving, think twice about springing for a big ticket item without talking to your ex. This is no time to play “Who Loves You Most”.
• Call a truce! Many adult children of divorced parents say that if their parents are still bickering and fighting, they’d rather not spend the holidays with either of them.

Be Realistic and Accept Imperfections

• You won’t be perfect 100% of the time.
• Holidays are tough. At some point, you will feel overwhelmed and out of control. When that happens, take a deep breath, take some time and forgive yourself. Then let it go and keep moving forward.

This infographic has been brought to you by Total Divorce.

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

By John Clark

A 38-year-old Texas man has allegedly been married to two different women for the last three years, according to police in Fort Worth.

Both of Germaine Gardea’s wives have apparently been unaware of each other’s existence, despite the fact that they live less than 17 miles apart, according to an ABC News report.

In the state of Texas, like many other states, bigamy is a serious crime. The Lone Star State takes it very seriously, as it treats bigamy as a third degree felony, according to sources.

This case, however, is not a simple case of one man living double lives. Sources note that Gardea did make a passing effort to file for divorce from his first wife, but that the filing was not completed due to his own negligence.

On October 16, 2009, Gardea filed for divorce from his first wife, who lives in Arlington. Remarkably, on that same day, he married his second wife.

Of course, the divorce process takes longer than a few seconds, so at best, it was foolhardy for Gardea to get married on the day of his divorce filing. At worst, it was a criminal offense.

In addition, Gardea failed to show up at his initial divorce hearing, which voided the filing altogether. And, to make matters worse, local police officers told reporters that Gardea’s first wife may still be unaware of her husband’s attempted divorce filing.

Moreover, Gardea’s second wife believes “that her husband has been divorced from the first wife since 2009,” according to Forth Worth Police Public Information Officer Sgt. Pedro Criado.

It’s fairly remarkably that Gardea was able to keep his double life hidden for so many months, and it’s a testament to his criminal ingenuity.

The rouse, however, was exposed this May, when Gardea’s first wife received a surprise call from his second wife, who had somehow discovered that her husband had been paying bills at two different homes.

When the second wife revealed the con to the first wife, Gardea’s original spouse, with whom he has a child, immediately called the Fort Worth police, who promptly arrested Gardea on one third degree felony count of bigamy.

The man is no longer in prison, after being released from jail on a $2,000 bail, although his options for a place to stay have likely been trimmed by two.

Sources also note that the first wife has officially filed for divorce, and a hearing has been set for later this year.

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