Give Me Your Comments - Poll
I have been in law for approximately 20 years now, most of which have been in family law as well as criminal law. I am still amazed at how people react and do things when they go through a divorce. Unfortunately, it seems the children are the ones that suffer because one or both parents are mad at the other. I don not do much family law any more so I thought I would take some situations that my clients have been through and get ccomments from the public. I want to know if my thinking as a lawyer is similar to the general public. Please feel free to post your comments to the following situations. Please refer to the number you are responding about. Thank you in advance for your comments (and, please, keep your comments clean or I will not be able to post them).
1. Husband leaves mother and two children; does not provide any child support for about 3 months; wife and children move to different area of the state in order to have steady income (move made with husband's approval); approximately 3-4 months later husband leaves good paying job to take a job for his brother in another part of the state; this new job reduces husband's income by approximately $30,000.00 with no benefits, not even insurance; Husband knows he has two children to provide insurance for and to provide child support but takes job aanyway; Husband tells wife he is going to stop providing insurance on the children so she provides it; husband reduces the amount of child support he pays for the two children to $150.00 per month (no court order yet); husband may or may not provide one/half the cost of the children's medical bills or other large expenses (he picks and chooses what he wants to pay). Is the husband thinking about the children or just trying to get back at wife? Should husband be allowed to reduce his income so significantly? Would your opinion change if you knew husband had another child by previous marriage that he paid $300 per month for child support, health insurance costs and all medical bills, and also provided money towards clothing, school expenses, etc.? Husband stopped paying these items when child turned about 24 years old, graduated from a masters program, and took job in St. Louis. The younger children are now 16 and 10. Make a difference in your opinion?
2. Couple are divorcing; husband blaming wife for marriage dissolving even though he is the one who walked out; husband accuses wife of cheating on him but has no proof; wife denies cheating; previously during the marriage, after 3 years of husband not doing anything about his impotency (other than telling wife it is her fault), and husband continually taking his anger out on one child, wife tells husband she wants divorce; husband talks her into staying together and trying to make it work for the sake of the children, husband promises he will get help for his problems; wife agrees to stay in marriage and work on things; husband manages to treat the one child better for a while but then goes back to the same treatment as before; things do not get better between husband and wife; in fact, things get worse and there is a lot of fighting between the two; child starts asking why her dad dislikes her so much. Should the couple have stayed together for the sake of the children? Is the husband's impotency (and not doing anything about it) grounds for wife to want a divorce? (Gentlemen, please do not take offense at this question. I understand that sometimes there are sexual problems in a marriage which can occur on either side. What I'm questioning is the decision not to work on the problem and see if there is something that could help the situation.) Should the wife have left when she first asked for a divorce?
3. Parents of child never married and now separated; child is a girl; girl tells mother that dad was doing some things to her private area; mother questions dad and he denies anything inappropriate happened; mother takes child to a counselor who says that she believes child has had something inappropriate happen to her by dad; mother tries to stop the visitation through the court; after a while supervised visits are scheduled with dad's parents supervising; mother doesn't believe dad's parents are protecting the child and wants the visits to stop; in the mother's eyes the court system isn't working to protect her child. Question - should mother or someone close to her and the child take the matter into their own hands to stop the abuse as they perceive it? If you thought someone was sexually abusing your child/grandchild and the court wasn't stopping the visits, what would you do?
4. Divorced parents have joint custody of child; child comes back from staying at mom's with bruises on body on several occasions; child says mom did it; mom denies hitting child; police investigate and end up charging mom with the abuse but later the prosecuting attorney's office defers prosecution under a plea agreement when she agrees to get help and promises that it wouldn't happen again (never admits she did anything wrong); bruises still appear on child when he comes back from mom's house; child starts displaying signs of sexual abuse - wetting his pants after potty training, soiling the bed and playing in his feces; displaying inappropriate touching and knowledge; says his private area (behind) hurts, etc. Father goes to court to try to stop the unsupervised visits; court allows her mother to supervise; father learns that the supervision consists of mother and/or step-dad supervising the visits by allowing the child's mother to be in other parts of the house or outside with the child and not under direct sight of those supposed to be supervising; child again comes back with bruises and states that he was with the person(s) who sexually abused him and whom the court ordered the child not to be around. What would you do in the father's situation? Could you believe a mother would physically abuse her own child?
5. A parent is diagnosed with cancer of the lung, liver and brain; parent doesn't recognize some of her children due to brain swelling; parent placed in the hospital for care and is not able to pay bills; one child takes over parent's accounts to pay bills, etc. and learns that there is several thousand dollars missing from the accounts; that child asks another child if he knew what had happened to the money and the other child denies knowledge; when parent capable of talking and knowing what is going on, child asks parent what happened to the money and is told that the other child has it in an account with parent; other child gets angry at the one child because of questioning the parent about the money; the one child ends up taking 24 hour care of parent; the one child has just started a business and cannot keep taking care of parent without working or taking some of parent's money to help pay bills; the one child asks another sibling what to do - put parent in nursing home or use some of the money to pay the bills and pay the money back when able to work again; sibling says to use the money and keep parent at home with child; during the final period of time when parent is capable of thought and taking care of some things for herself, the one child tells parent of the money and the parent says not to pay back since cared for parent; the other child (the one with the account) becomes mad and says the one child stole the money; unbeknownst to siblings the other child has parent sign documents giving him power of attorney over parent (this was done at a time when parent was not in her right mind - trying to pick things off the ceiling and no notary was present for the signature); siblings do not know about the power of attorney until parent put into the hospital for the last time and the one child starts questioning the signature supposed to be the parent's on some of the forms; siblings start taking sides; the other child decides to bring parent home from the hospital to die at parent's house; parent in a lot of pain from the cancer and the other child is instructed on what needs to be done to keep parent in peace; due to fighting within the family the one child stays away from the parent's house and the other child; after a couple of days the other child and another sibling come to the one child's house to beg for the one child to go see the parent (parent has been calling out for the one child); the one child agrees to go under certain conditions such as no fighting, etc; upon seeing parent learns that the other child and sibling have not given parent a bath or cleaned parent up from bowel movements, etc. and they have not given parent any pain medicine (said parent didn't want it - parent wasn't capable of making any decisions at that time); the one child and another sibling had to ground up pain medicine and put in dropper and force open parent's mouth to get the pain medicine in; parent in so much pain her jaws were clenched shut; the visiting nurse for hospice called to bring pain medicine to be placed in parent's shunt; the other child refuses to push the button that will allow morphine to go into the shunt; the one child has to stay there and take turns with other sibling to do this and keep parent cleaned; after 1 1/2 days the parent dies; fighting still within the family; about 3 months after parent dies, the other child finishes remodeling his house (which had not been anywhere near completion before parent sick because other child did not have the money). Question - what would you have done in this situation - would you have sued the other child for the money that was contained in the account that other child lied about, would you have sued the other child for obtaining the powers of attorney over the parent at a time when there was no way the parent had the capacity to sign, would you have sued the notary public who stated that the parent signed the powers of attorney before her (turned out to be other child's wife's sister who worked for a law firm), would you have sued the one child for the money used to pay bills while the one child cared for the parent, would you have sued both?
Let me know what you think about the above situations. I'm interested in hearing your comments to see if your opinions go along with the results that were or were not obtained.