Social Networking Linked to Divorce+More...When a Bitch Really IS a Bitch........

If you are a prude or ultra conservative, our apologies; but this T shirt on the girl wearing it (below) pretty much explains in plain English,  the definition of a bitch, and we don't mean the canine type.

Unfortunately in Family Law litigation--- we do see this from time to time, but certainly not in all cases.  In litigation, we only get so many minutes to argue our motions on the Law and Motion calendar.  While clients at the counsel table do not normally argue (since attorney is doing that) once in awhile, clients are called upon to speak on certain questions. Attorney has seen some women get up and run out of the Courtroom.

 Unknown to most people, Family Law cases CAN create the worst scenarios for many people, where we see Jerry Springer type action, because emotions run high  but Family Law attorneys become used to this.  However, also unknown to most people, is fact that Family law cases pretty much became the reason for the scanners at the entrance to courthouses. Attorneys and Judges have either been shot at, or killed by court participants who are losing their cases. And it is this attorney's belief that most of the defendants that used violence against attorneys and judges, were males who lost in Court---maybe
not all were family law cases, but certainly some of them were in California.

There has been bias against males in Family Law cases for quite some time, However, that has changed somewhat since more dads are seeking joint or shared custody, which is a good thing for the kids.

In what may be of little surprise to avid readers of FacebookCheating.com, a new study found a correlation between social media use and divorce rates in the United States.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101819591

The study, published in the journal Computers in Human Behavior by researchers from Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile and Boston University, compared state-by-state divorce rates to per-capita Facebook accounts. In a separate analysis, they also used data from a 2011-2012 survey that asked individuals about marriage quality and social media use.   

Abstract

This study explores the relationship between using social networks sites (SNS), marriage satisfaction and divorce rates using survey data of married individuals and state-level data from the United States. Results show that using SNS is negatively correlated with marriage quality and happiness, and positively correlated with experiencing a troubled relationship and thinking about divorce. These correlations hold after a variety of economic, demographic, and psychological variables related to marriage well-being are taken into account. 

Further, the findings of this individual-level analysis are consistent with a state-level analysis of the most popular SNS to date: across the U.S., the diffusion of Facebook between 2008 and 2010 is positively correlated with increasing divorce rates during the same time period after controlling for all time-invariant factors of each state (fixed effects), and continues to hold when time-varying economic and socio-demographic factors that might affect divorce rates are also controlled. Possible explanations for these associations are discussed, particularly in the context of pro- and anti-social perspectives towards SNS and Facebook in particular.

Their study found a link between social media use and decreased marriage quality in every model they analyzed. They said their research did not prove that social media might be to blame for troubled marriages, but suggested such a link may be proven in subsequent studies.

-----------------------------------------

Attorney's perspective:  It is a known fact that many people like to use Facebook and some of them cannot live without it. Because FB is a socializing medium, it is not considered a source for much else, except sharing-- often bad sharing.

It is not like people go to a site for Information, or actual learning.......it's more like a free-for-all where people gossip, talk bad about anyone and everyone, play bad games on others and in general, Facebook may have started out as a simplistic sharing platform, but has become more like the scum bucket for those who are not happy.

Because of this trend, and because of "everyone is doing it" mindset, Facebook is NOT in your child's best interest, or in anyone's interest (those who really do have a life outside of the computer.)

It is more likely that people in bad relationships already, simply go online and look for some company. They may go to a singles site (which FB has) or they may use FB because their friends tell them to use it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Legal professionals usually use FB to get dirt on others in a case, and employers use it for finding out the truth about people. Juries get on FB and they are not supposed to be there; no juror is supposed to look up anything online. Judges have gotten in trouble for trying to "friend" participants in lawsuits; attorneys have gotten in trouble for trying to change their clients FB pages and erasing them.  FB is best avoided in total.  There really is no need for it and if you cannot live without it, you may live to regret it down the line, depending on how bad you feel.  In today's world, people no longer understand the word privacy and it seems most people CRAVE both notoriety, attention, and bad behavior. Very sad indeed.

What Type of Attorney do You Really Need? Do You Want to Win? You Don't Care?

Do you have a case where you want to win, or need to win your case?
Do you have the winning facts?  Do you know what law would or would not support your position? Do you want or need an actual litigator for your case?

Hiring an advocate (attorney litigator) is not the same as hiring collaborative attorneys. Also, mediating* a case with only one attorney means ...The mediator helps people talk the issues through, supposedly helping to "settle" the dispute themselves. In this attorney's opinion, it would not be recommended in most cases, because typically the overbearing spouse simply bulldozes the other spouse.

*[Mediation for visitation is not the same thing as mediation of an entire divorce case. Mediation for visitation/custody is required by law when there is no agreement.]


There are many pitfalls that can arise in divorce; many of them involve financial transactions that one spouse had no knowledge of; assets that one spouse did not know about; children that were conceived outside the marriage and spouse never knew other spouse was paying; secret business dealings that was predicated on all cash; illegal actions by one spouse implicating the other spouse who had no knowledge; large debts racked up by one spouse, without the other spouse even knowing such debt existed; one spouse signing the other spouse's name for a credit card, then ruining the other spouse's credit.... NONE of these things, in this attorney's opinion, should be addressed in either mediation or collaborative law scenario.
That is because there was a huge breach of fiduciary duty that has serious consequences to the guilty spouse. That should be done in court since the guilty spouse should have to pay for wrongdoing. (Of course if you are too afraid because your spouse might try and kill you then you better go get help right away.)
                                             

Especially if you have issues in the 3 lines below, which happened BEFORE the case finalized---- you should never hire anyone except an advocate litigator. Aggressive at that. Plus, there are huge time barriers to trying to set aside any of this!

Fraud, Duress
Mistake, Coercion,
Failure to Exchange Declarations (Assets Debts)

We live in a society where people often want what they want, and when clients hire attorneys to get something done, especially in family law, it's often because one SIDE tried to take advantage of the other side.  If you have a family law case where both of you AGREE on everything then of course you don't really need an attorney, except perhaps to create a settlement agreement.

HOWEVER, the vast majority of most divorces and break ups, is because the couple cannot agree on a lot of things, including (just an example....) post judgment orders.........

• How to raise the kids-- too lenient?  too strict?
• How to spend income from employment or inheritance
• How to train kids  to have moral values
• How to get along with other family members that don't live with you
• How to avoid too much tv, too much bad influence, too much Facebook?
• What to do with a lazy spouse that refuses to help out--with anything?
• What to do with spouse that is either dangerous, aggressive, drinks too much
• How to get out of supervised visits?? You have an ex spouse also?
• Spouse drinks, smokes, gambles, does drugs, shops too much? Hoarding?
• Spouse AND kids do nothing but stay on Facebook and phone 24/7?? 
• Your kids are not only lazy, they are spoiled rotten and you blame the spouse?
• Your spouse is bipolar and can't be controlled?

Of all the problems attorney has seen over several decades, the problems around children tend to generate the worst issues, followed by physical harm, financial issues, and alcohol or drug use.

And remarkably, attorney has seen clients REFUSE to take what he/she is entitled to, and then SETTLE a case by using an attorney who ONLY settles cases--- in other words, the attorney is not a litigator. That is absurd.

If you are entitled to something, why would you pay someone to settle a case when you could have settled it without help????   Collaborative law and mediation means if you don't settle the case using whomever you hired, those attorney cannot represent you in court anyway. You THEN have to hire new attorneys!!   While mediation and collaborative may be good for some cases (which means you are settling case by paying people to settle it without court)-- it is essentially negotiation. Judges are not involved. If you work something out and then don't like it later--- what you have is a problem.

              Some of the down sides of  collaborative law (which includes hiring people like accountants and other experts) and makes it costly:

The Expense; Impact of termination and cost of new counsel; No advocacy for one or both parties; directed conversation between parties, power imbalances, difficult issues might remain secret (such as domestic violence, addictions, drugs, gambling, infidelities,etc.); Possible inadequate information collection, potentially less support for views of children.

Basically, in mediation there is no advocate for YOU.  In collaborative law, BOTH sides work on issues, but NO ONE is an advocate for YOUR side.  The collaborative view is to work out issues, not really take sides as an advocate----a true advocate is there to represent YOU, not the spouse.  This is part of the reason that most people in a divorce WANT an advocate, and need a litigator --- because they are being taken advantage of, steamrolled, or being misled or manipulated.

Prop 64 Calif Legalizes Adult Recreational Use of Marijuana

Note: all parents and patients should keep mindful that simply because a new law was passed allowing recreational use of herb for adults, it does not mean that because it is legal that a parent can just do whatever he/she wants without regard for the kids.

Though that should not have to be stated, it is common sense and from this attorney's view generally, many people are lacking in common sense. Getting rid of Obama was a start, since Obama has made people think everyone is entitled to everything. No one is entitled to much in this world. That is a fact. The dumb- down of the USA in past years,  with Trump now pulling in as the winner indicates--- not everyone is stupid. Thank God for small miracles.

https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_64,_Marijuana_Legalization_(2016)
(See site for all references)

Who can use marijuana?  

Proposition 64 legalized the recreational use of marijuana for adults aged 21 years or older. Smoking was permitted in a private home or at a business licensed for on-site marijuana consumption. Smoking remains illegal while driving a vehicle, anywhere smoking tobacco is, and in all public places. Up to 28.5 grams of marijuana and 8 grams of concentrated marijuana are legal to possess. However, possession on the grounds of a school, day care center, or youth center while children are present remains illegal. An individual is permitted to grow up to six plants within a private home, as long as the area is locked and not visible from a public place.^[8]

Who can sell marijuana?

To sell marijuana for recreational use, businesses need to acquire a state license. Local governments can also require them to obtain a local license. Businesses are not be authorized to sell within 600 feet of a school, day care center, or youth center.^[8] The initiative also prevents licenses for large-scale marijuana businesses for five years in order to prevent "unlawful monopoly power."^[13]

Who will regulate marijuana?

The Bureau of Medical Cannabis Regulation was renamed the Bureau of Marijuana Control. It is responsible for regulating and licensing marijuana businesses.^[8]

Counties and municipalities have been empowered to restrict where marijuana businesses could be located. Local governments can also completely ban the sale of marijuana from their jurisdictions.

How will marijuana be taxed?

Proposition 64 created two new excise taxes on marijuana. One is be a cultivation tax of $9.25 per ounce for flowers and $2.75 per ounce for leaves, with exceptions for certain medical marijuana sales and cultivation. The second is a 15 percent tax on the retail price of marijuana. Taxes will be adjusted for inflation starting in 2020.^[1]

Local governments have been authorized to levy taxes on marijuana as well.

Where will revenue be spent?

Revenue from the two taxes will be deposited in a new California Marijuana Tax Fund. First, the revenue will be used to cover costs of administrating and enforcing the measure. Next, it will be distributed to drug research, treatment, and enforcement, including:^[1]

• $2 million per year to the UC San Diego Center for Medical Cannabis Research to study medical marijuana.
• $10 million per year for 11 years for public California universities to research and evaluate the implementation and impact of Proposition 64. Researchers would make policy-change recommendations to the California Legislature and California Governor.
• $3 million annually for five years to the Department of the California Highway Patrol for developing protocols to determine whether a vehicle driver is impaired due to marijuana consumption.
• $10 million, increasing each year by $10 million until settling at $50 million in 2022, for grants to local health departments and community-based nonprofits supporting "job placement, mental health treatment, substance use disorder treatment, system navigation services, legal services to address barriers to reentry, and linkages to medical care for communities disproportionately affected by past federal and state drug policies."

The remaining revenue will be distributed as follows:^[1]

• 60 percent to youth programs, including drug education, prevention, and treatment.
• 20 percent to prevent and alleviate environmental damage from illegal marijuana producers.
• 20 percent to programs designed to reduce driving under the influence of marijuana and a grant program designed to reduce negative impacts on health or safety resulting from the proposition.

What will penalties be?

Individuals under age 18 convicted of marijuana use or possession are required to attend drug education or a counseling program and complete community service. Selling marijuana without a license is punishable by up to six months in a county jail, a fine up to $500, or both.^[8]

With Proposition 64's approval, individuals serving criminal sentences for activities made legal under the measure are eligible for resentencing.