According to the website TMZ.com, Kenny G’s wife, Lyndie Benson-Gorelick filed for divorce last week in Los Angeles County Superior Court. In her petition, she cited the couple’s “irreconcilable differences” as the reason for her divorce request.

Together, the couple has produced two sons, so the divorce proceedings will likely include some wrangling over child custody.

And, in news that may not bode well for Kenny G (whose birth name is Kenneth Bruce Gorelick), sources indicate that the jazz star is worth upwards of $50 million, and his soon-to-be-ex-wife will likely win a large portion of that wealth in divorce court.

Sources suggest that the couple will not seek to quietly negotiate this divorce behind the scenes, as both parties have signed up with powerful celebrity divorce attorneys.

Lyndie Benson-Gorelick reportedly enlisted the services of Gary Fishbein, who has represented several other celebrities of moderate fame, including Gabriel Aubry and Nikki Sixx.

Not to be outdone, Kenny G has reportedly sought legal assistance from Laura Wasser, whose past clients include bona fide stars like Britney Spears, Kim Kardashian, and Angelina Jolie.

Of course, the fact that they have secured the aid of high-powered attorneys does not mean that the couple will engage in divorce warfare inside a courtroom.

Many celebrity couples prefer to agree to settlements behind the scenes, and these negotiations can be plenty intense, as well.

The celebrity preference for settlements reflects the fact that divorce court proceedings become available to the public after they occur. In contrast, settlements allow both parties to conceal the terms of the divorce from prying public eyes.

Still, settlements require some sort of cooperation on the part of both spouses, which is often a tall task for couples who have not split in an amicable fashion.

In the meantime, Kenny G will continue his reign as America’s foremost smooth jazz saxophonist. According to his website, he is the best-selling instrumental musician of the modern era, with total global sales of more than 75 million albums.

Kenny G’s wealth, however, comes not only from his musical talents, but also from savvy investing decisions. Sources indicate that the jazz legend was an early investor in the Starbucks coffee house chain, where coffee drinkers can occasionally hear his smooth jazz stylings pierce their unsuspecting ears.

The study, which gathered information over the course of several years on 416 children between the ages of four and 18, found that children experience behavioral problems after divorce only when their parents fail to handle their separation in a loving, mature manner.

The researchers observed 214 children whose parents had been divorced, and compared that group with a control group of 202 children whose parents were still married.

And, according to Priscila Comino, who led the study as part of her doctoral thesis at a European university, “[i]t is not divorce in itself that can lead to problems in children. It is the divorce linked to inter-parental conflict, a lack of co-parenting and an unsuitable family climate.”

So, according to the study, divorcing parents who have children should recognize their children do not have to face extra behavioral difficulties that are not faced by children of similar ages whose parents have not been divorced.

The key, it seems, is to eliminate negative factors from a divorce, particularly conflicts between parents and efforts by one parent to make the other look bad in front of their children.

While it can often be difficult for parents to approach divorce with a positive attitude, they must at least remain civil for the benefit of their children. After a divorce, parents don’t have to be best friends, but a bit of friendliness goes a long way, especially in the eyes of children.

In addition to minimizing conflicts, the study also warned parents to try to keep their children’s daily routines as steady as possible. Dramatic shifts in a child’s daily schedule can cause unwanted behavioral issues, according to the study.

And parents with their own psychological issues—even if they are only mild or if they are short-term symptoms of the divorce—should seek professional treatment in order to avoid having a negative impact on their kids.

Typically, only when parents fail to approach divorce in a health manner do children suffer an unfair burden during a divorce.

If your children exhibit symptoms like introversion, depression, attention problems, or delinquent behavior after a divorce, you and your ex-spouse may wish to seek counseling to help your children cope with their divorce-related issues.

While divorce courts can help parents sort out financial issues like child support and child custody, they cannot help families approach divorce in a psychologically healthy manner. This, of course, is solely up to the parents themselves.

So, the lesson from the study is that divorce doesn’t have to be psychologically damaging for children, but parents must treat themselves and their children with patience and respect after a separation.

According to alleged divorce records uncovered by TMZ.com, Sanders’ wife, Pilar, has alleged that her husband committed numerous acts of adultery during their 12-year marriage, and that he subjected her to “physical, mental, and emotional abuse.”

In addition to these potentially damning allegations, Pilar Sanders also claims that her husband has “a narcissistic personality disorder” and that he is a “bully.”

In the divorce, Pilar Sanders is seeking full custody of the couple’s three children, and is also looking to have the court throw out their prenuptial agreement.

Wealthy people, particularly celebrities, often make their spouses sign prenuptial agreements before a marriage in order to reduce their potential financial losses in the event of a divorce. Some agreements, for example, will cap one partner’s potential alimony payments at a certain amount.

Prenuptial agreements are usually enforced by courts, as long as they were the product of an arm’s-length agreement, but if one of the parties acted in a particularly egregious manner during the marriage, a friendly court might set a prenuptial agreement aside.

In an interview earlier this month with a Dallas radio station, Sanders fervently denied his wife’s allegations, claiming that he and his wife remain “friends” and that the reports of hostility within the divorce proceedings were exaggerated.

Allegations of narcissism may not strike football fans as particularly surprising, given that Sanders and his larger-than-life character made him one of the most polarizing sports figures of the 1990s.

Sanders played football for both the Atlanta Falcons and the Dallas Cowboys, where he cemented his reputation as one of the greatest cornerbacks of all time. In addition to his football tenure, Sanders also played professional baseball for several years.

Sanders was perhaps the originator of the exaggerated “touchdown dance” and was known to strut triumphantly down the sideline with raised legs when he was in the open field.

Now, Sanders is a television personality and has also received some positive media attention for his work as a mentor with younger athletes.

The Sanders divorce raises some interesting issues of privacy amidst divorce. Divorcing couples should be warned that, if their divorce goes to court, the proceedings do become part of the public record.

Of course, non-celebrity couples need not worry about TMZ sifting through their court records, but because divorce often involves sensitive issues, some couples are reluctant to publicly air their dirty laundry.

Due to this concern, many couples opt instead for a divorce settlement outside of court. These settlements usually remain confidential, but they do require the cooperation of both parties and their divorce attorneys.

The couple released a joint statement this week that put an end to swirling rumors that their marriage was on the rocks. In their own words, “while we have enjoyed seven very loving, loyal and happy years of marriage, after much soul searching we have decided to separate.”

The couple also said, “we have had the deepest respect for one another throughout our relationship and continue to love each other very much, but we have grown apart.”

Alas, the couple has grown apart, and there’s little an adoring public can do to repair the union of the celebrity power couple, who wed in 2005 and have raised four children together, including Klum’s daughter from a prior relationship.

Klum and Seal won the admiration of many people in 2005, as they presented an odd, but emotionally touching partnership.

A childhood disease rendered Seal’s face and neck heavily scarred, and the supermodel’s relationship with him seemed to serve as a sort of inspiration to others with some disfigurement, or lesson about compassion, or perhaps nothing at all.

Regardless of the meaning behind their union, the public embraced their marriage, and Seal and Klum’s careers were both bolstered by their relationship.

And, at least publicly, they appeared to be very happy. Klum and Seal both starred in the music video “Secret,” they famously renewed their marital vows on each anniversary, and often made public appearance together, in which they were typically seen canoodling like happy lovers.

The two also hosted epic Halloween bashes each October when they would dress in famously bizarre outfits.

Adding a bit of saccharine to the obituary for the couple’s marriage, the website The Ledger observed that, in a 2007 interview with the Associated Press, Seal described his wife as his “best friend.”

Unfortunately, though, Seal’s “best friend” may have to do some physical remodeling, as she has a tattoo of his name on her arm, according to sources.

The divorce announcement comes at a strange time for the signer of “Kiss From a Rose,” as he also plans to release his newest album this week. The album, “Soul 2,” contains songs like “Love T.K.O,” “Let’s Stay Together” and “Love Don’t Live Here Anymore.”

The couple, however, hopes to have a peaceful divorce, and both appear prepared to handle the unique difficulties that arise when protecting children in divorce.

In their own words, “[t]his is an amicable process and protecting the well-being of our children remains our top priority, especially during this time of transition. We thank our family, friends, and fans for their kind words of support. And for our children’s sake, we appreciate you respecting our privacy.”

In Illinois, child custody is usually determined by taking a fixed percentage of the income of the parent who doesn’t have physical custody of the children. This percentage is raised by a few points for each child that is involved in the divorce.

Typically, a state court will calculate the necessary amount of money that will go to the custodial parent each year, and this is either garnished from the non-custodial parent’s wages or paid in a less invasive manner.

And, while this system has remained in place for years and resembles child custody norms across the country, it is not without its flaws.

First, it is simply too inflexible for a number of different situations that might occur. For example, if the parent who is paying child support still has custody of the children on some occasions (say, during the weekends), that parent may be paying too much support overall.

If the paying parent is providing food and shelter for his or her children during the weekend, that parent may effectively be paying double for the children’s care.

Unfortunately, current child custody laws do not always allow for such a complex child care arrangement, and seem to be operating under the assumption that child custody is a zero-sum game, in which one parent is solely responsible for raising the children, and the other is solely responsible for providing funds.

In addition to this problem, the editorial board at the Chicago Tribune also observed that the current system fails to adequately address the issue of who pays when the custodial parent earns much more income than the other parent.

Under the current system, non-custodial parents with relatively small incomes may be facing an unfair burden when it comes to child support payments.

Due to these difficulties, legislators in Illinois are proposing that the state follow the lead of 38 other states and dramatically reform its child support laws.

Specifically, legislators have proposed an “income shares” system based on a simple premise: parents will share the financial burden of raising their children in a proportional manner.

So, under this system, a parent that makes more money, even if he or she has physical custody of the children, will have to bear a larger financial burden.

Advocates for this measure argue that the new system will still allow children to have the same quality of life that they did in a two-parent household, but that the system will treat former spouses more equitably and that it will recognize the shifting financial realities of the modern American marriage.

The column urges children to help their elderly parents make the most of their Social Security entitlements, including taking advantage of higher payments after a divorce filing.

According to the Journal, if a woman has been divorced or has married more than once, or even if her husband delayed receiving his Social Security money, she may be able to receive larger payments, which can make a huge difference for older women on fixed or limited incomes.

Typically, women will receive news about the Social Security effects of their divorce from their divorce attorny, but this may not be true for women who filed for divorce several years ago, or did not seek the aid of an attorney.

And, it should be noted, the rule listed below apply to men, as well, but since women typically earn less than men, especially amongst older populations, the rules more often apply to women.

First, senior citizens should know that a person can collect Social Security payments based on his or her own earning history, or receive 50% of a spouse’s benefit, if it is greater than the other spouse’s income.

Divorce, of course, complicates things a bit. In brief, a divorced woman can receive benefits from her ex-spouse if the marriage lasted for more than ten years and the woman remains unmarried when she collects the benefits.

The marriage limitation, though, does not apply if the woman seeking to receive benefits linked to her ex-spouse gets married after 60 (this seems an odd exemption, and it may reveal some cultural and age bias within Social Security laws).

In addition to these rules, a senior citizen need not have any relationship with her ex-spouse; if she is entitled to receive these benefits, her prior marriage is the only proof she will need. In addition, her ability to collect extra benefits does not hinge on whether her former husband remarried—this simply does not matter in most cases.

Of course, while these rules are intended to help women on fixed incomes who were once divorced, some women are reluctant to attempt to collect extra benefits for a variety of cultural and ethical reasons.

Women, however, should know that applying for benefits based on an ex-spouse’s past earnings is a perfectly legitimate step, and they should not hesitate to ask a financial professional or attorney about the potential benefits of such a decision.

The laws allowing the receipt of these benefits were created because they were seen to serve an important public policy, so divorced woman should feel at ease when applying for the benefits.

According to reports from several outlets, including tireless celebrity watcher TMZ, the 32-year-old star of the film “American Beauty” cited “irreconcilable differences” as the reason for her split from Sestito, who is a member of the dubious brotherhood of national concert promoters.

Suvari filed for divorce in a court in Los Angeles last week and sources indicate that the actress has asked the judge to bar her husband from receiving alimony payments, which does not come as a large surprise due to Suvari’s likely status as the wealthier of the two partners.

Still, despite her request for exemption from alimony payments, she may still have to pay some money to her ex-husband, provided that he wants it.

Modern alimony laws have shifted from the traditional norm (which dictated that money typically flowed from the husband to the wife after a divorce), and judges are now more likely to make wives pay their former husbands if the partners’ incomes are widely different.

Of course, there is no guarantee that the judge in Suvari’s case will honor or ignore her request, and only time will tell whether Sestito will gain financially from the separation.

The divorce comes as a bit of a surprise, as the couple was wed in 2010 in an opulent ceremony inside Vatican City, Italy, which is also famous for housing a man with a giant white hat. Sources do not indicate whether the pope presided over the Hollywood couple’s nuptials.

To be fair, sources indicate that the couple picked Italy for their ceremony because of its proximity to several of Sestito’s relatives.

This represents the second divorce for Suvari, who previously split from her first husband, cinematographer Robert Brinkmann, in May of 2005.

The marriage between Suvari and Sestito, who was seven years younger than his famous wife, lasted only 18 months before Suvari determined that she needed to end the arrangement.

The couple had met at the Toronto Film Festival in 2007 while Suvari was promoting her movie “Stuck” and, according to Sestito, the two “just understood each other.”Sestito proposed to his bride in 2008, while the couple was vacationing on the beaches of Jamaica.

Of course, while the marriage did not last particularly long, it seemed to be an average duration for a celebrity marriage, which aren’t necessarily more tumultuous than the average American marriage, but tend to garner more public attention.

And, even though celebrities have much-publicized divorces, they must also deal with the same mundane and taxing legal challenges that are inherent in any modern divorce. Suvari’s case will likely be no different.

Several years ago, 44-year-old Todd Remis filed a lawsuit against H&H Photography, claiming that the New York studio should pay for Remis and his bride to recreate their wedding because the initial round of photos were subpar.

Among his several complaints, Remis alleged that the photography did not stay for all the important wedding events, and that the studio refused to abide by their promise to touch-up the photos after the wedding, according to a report from the Associated Press.

The lawsuit quickly gained national attention, as television anchors and newspapers mocked the groom for his perceived oversensitivity to the wedding photos, which were taken as part of a wedding that cost roughly $50,000.

To make matters more bizarre, Remis has continued to demand that the studio pay to recreate his wedding, despite the sad truth that Remis and his ex-wife, a younger Latvian woman named Milena Grzibovska, filed for divorce in 2008.

The couple’s divorce was finalized in 2010, and Remis believes that his former spouse has moved back to her native Latvia.

Nevertheless, in a recent deposition, Remis still said, “I need to have the wedding recreated exactly as it was so the remaining 15 percent of the wedding that was not shot can be shot.” And, under his reasoning, “we would need to recreate everything to complete that.”

Of course, it would seem that “everything” would include the now-departed bride, who would probably not be keen on flying halfway around the world to reenact a wedding with her former spouse.

Despite the obvious hurdles Remis faces in the reenactment of his wedding, he also faces long odds in court, as several letters to the judge provide convincing evidence in favor of H&H Photography.

As the co-founder of the studio put it in a letter to the court, the subsequent divorce “renders the further demands for photos, etc., ridiculous.”

Indeed, the demand does seem ridiculous, but it may be motivated more by money than sentiment. Sources indicate that Remis initially failed to pay more than $1,000 in fees demanded by the studio, which threatened to send the bill to a collection agency if Remis failed to pay.

Shortly after this threat, Remis filed his lawsuit, which contains numerous allegations of shoddy photography and unprofessional conduct by employees of the studio.

The tone of reports on the matter suggest that Remis will likely not win the case outright, although it appears that both sides may be open to settling.

In the future, one hopes that Remis will attempt to recover from the emotion pain of his divorce by using less litigious strategies.

According to a recent report in the Detroit Free Press, a study conducted by the University of Arizona found that divorced adults have a higher risk of early death than adults who are married.

The study was essentially a review of more than 30 other studies that had been conducted on the matter, as the researchers in Arizona merged the various findings together in an empirically sound manner.

The researchers found that adults who have been divorced were 23 percent more likely to die an early death than similar adults who were married. Shockingly, the researchers found that divorce may be just as dangerous as smoking, drinking heavily, being overweight, or failing to exercise.

Of course, despite these staggering statistics, researchers warned that their work did not conclusively find a link between poor health and divorce, and cautioned that their work did have some flaws.

For example, the various studies followed divorced and married couples for only 11 years, which may not offer a long enough time period to draw such conclusions. In addition, only a limited amount of people were surveyed, which does minimize the results of the study a bit.

In response, though, supporters of the study will observe that the researchers tracked several million people in 11 different countries, which supports their claim that an adequate number of people were tracked, despite the limited geographic scope of the studies.

The study, which is deemed “meta-analysis,’ or the study of studies, examined existing evidence culled over the course of three decades to draw its broader conclusions about divorce and poor health.

The researchers also cautioned that, despite the apparent risk of poor health, many people who obtain a divorce end up happier than they were before the separation.

According to the survey, most divorced people report high levels of satisfaction after their divorces and almost 75 percent end up remarrying.

However, despite the high rate of success, roughly 10 percent of people who file for divorce report that they struggle with serious health issues, perhaps due to depression or other forms of mental anguish.

Researchers believe that these unhappy divorced people account for a significant portion of the people who experience serious health problems after a divorce.

Finally, the researchers also cautioned that divorce seemed to have a disproportionate impact on men, as 31 percent of men has an increased risk for early death after divorce, compared with only 18 percent of women.

Recently, the editors at Investing Answers, Inc. created a list of the six most expensive divorces for celebrity athletes, and the list contains a few surprising residents.

The leaders, though, will not come as surprising. Topping the list of most expensive celebrity divorces are Kobe Bryant and his wife, Vanessa Bryant, who divorced late last year, despite Kobe’s efforts to keep his spouse in the form of a $4 million diamond ring.

The ring, alas, was not enough to convince Vanessa to remain in the marriage, and experts expect that she could receive upwards of $75 million in the divorce, which is partially a result of Bryant’s failure to include a prenuptial agreement in their initial marriage agreement.

Sources also indicate that Vanessa Bryant could receive alimony for the rest of her life under California’s friendly divorce laws.

Next on the list of most expensive athlete divorces are Tiger Woods and his embattled wife Elin Nordegren, who were the subject of constant media attention after a bizarre incident in which Tiger ran his SUV into a fire hydrant and his wife allegedly freed him from the car by bashing it with a golf club.

After this incident, it was revealed that the famous golfer had engaged in numerous affairs, which led Nordegren to promptly file for divorce from her philandering husband.

Some experts believe that Woods got a good deal in the divorce settlement, as he only paid Nordegren a reported $100 million, which represents a relatively small portion of his total net worth, which is estimated to be between $500 and $600 million.

Third on the list of athlete divorces is baseball player Alex Rodriguez, who divorced Cynthia Scurtis after he was photographed with an exotic dancer and rumored to be romantically involved with pop star Madonna.

The couple did sign a prenuptial agreement, which may have minimized Rodriguez’s losses, as he reportedly gave her tens of millions of dollars, as well as the couple’s $12 million mansion in Florida.

Next on the list is basketball star Michael Jordan, who divorced his wife Juanita Vanoy after more than two decades of marriage. The divorce reportedly cost Jordan $168 million, which, at the time, represented the largest athlete divorce settlement ever.

Rounding out the list are golfer Greg Norman and cyclist Lance Armstrong, whose divorces cost them roughly $103 million and $14 million, respectively.

The lesson here, as always, is that if you are going to marry a wildly successful athlete, you would be well advised to sign a prenuptial agreement at the beginning of the union, to help minimize divorce costs down the road.