The “Helping Children Succeed After Divorce” program was created in 1991 through the concerted efforts of the Children’s Hospital Guidance Centers Divorce Services, the Franklin County Domestic Relations Court, and the Family Law Committee of the Columbus (Ohio) Bar Association. The three (3) hour seminar was designed to provide parents with information to help them better understand their children’s reaction to the divorce process and to adjust to the inevitable changes that divorce brings to the family unit.
In Montgomery County, Ohio, attendance at the “Helping Children Succeed After Divorce” seminar, hereinafter sometimes referred to as “Helping Children” is not an option for divorcing parents but a requirement of the Domestic Relations Court. If a parent fails to attend the seminar, the assigned Judge can deny “parenting time” or “visitation” to that parent or refuse to file the Final Decree of Divorce or Dissolution. The program is taught by Galen Curry, Manager of the Parent Education Department of the Court, or by Margaret Leger (Beth) of the same Department. The program is offered during morning hours (9 a.m. to noon), afternoon hours (2 p.m. to 5 p.m.), and evening hours (6 p.m. to 9 p.m.) to accommodate the scheduling needs … Read More... “Two Thumbs Up for the “Helping Children Succeed After Divorce” Seminar!”
Last month, Justice Souter of the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in the case of Kennedy v. Plan Administrator for DuPont Savings and Investment Plan. A dispute had arisen between husband’s estate and his ex-wife over receipt of his Savings and Investment Plan proceeds. A SIP is an “employee pension benefit plan” similar to a 401(K) plan subject to federal ERISA laws. Early on in the marriage, husband had named his wife as the beneficiary to his employer’s SIP plan. The parties divorced and the divorce decree language said that the wife was “divested of all right, title, interest, and claim in and to . . . any and all sums . . . the proceeds [from], and any other rights related to . . . retirement plan, pension plan, or like benefit program existing by reason of [the husband’s] past, present or future employment.” However, the husband never executed a form to remove the wife as his beneficiary of the plan nor did he submit a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) to the employer covering the SIP. He did, however, submit a QDRO covering his pension.
Many individuals first think about estate planning when they get married. They realize that, at a minimum, they should have a will, general power of attorney and power of attorney for health care. They may later amend these documents due to life changes or changes in their financial position. However, one might be surprised to know that a recent survey by PNC Wealth Management disclosed that 30% of adults with financial assets of $500,000 or more did not have a will! A recent Harris Interactive survey of the general population found that 58% of all adults had no will. One might be even more surprised that if he or she had a will and became divorced, he or she may be no better off than if he or she had no will.
Growing up in a small and rural community in Southwestern Pennsylvania, I was truly fortunate to be reared by a hard-working Father and a loving “stay-at-home” Mother. She taught the four of us so many things by example and by so many proverbs. One of her favorites was “You get what you pay for!” To her, that meant that you purchased fewer items of high quality personal goods or articles of clothing rather than more items of lesser quality or durability.
Valentine’s Day is the start of the busy season for Dayton divorce lawyers. Many couples wait until after the holidays and it gives them time to file their taxes “jointly” and receive a larger refund. It also can be a reckoning day when people decide that they deserve better.
An Ontario, Canada, Superior Court Judge issued a thorough well-reasoned but very unusual decision on January 16, 2009, changing custody of three (3) girls, ages 15, 11 and 9, from their primary caregiving mother to the father based upon evidence of a long pattern of parental alienation. In fact, Mother had denied Father, a vascular surgeon, any contact with the girls for about two (2) years before these proceedings.
Ohio Revised Code Section 3109.051(A) provides, in part, that, “Whenever possible, the order or decree permitting the parenting time shall ensure the opportunity for both parents to have frequent and continuing contact with the child, unless frequent and continuing contact by either parent with the child would not be in the best interest of the child.” In 2006, a bill was introduced in the Ohio Senate to allow Juvenile or Domestic Relations Courts to grant a reasonable amount of “electronic communication” between a parent and a child so long as the electronic communication was in the child’s best interest and the equipment was readily available. In Senate Bill 341, electronic communications was defined as “communication facilitated by the use of methods of communication such as the telephone, electronic mail, instant messaging, video conferencing, or other wired or wireless technologies via the internet, or another medium of communication that allows a party who has been granted parenting time, companionship, or visitation rights to communicate with a child during times in which the child is not physically present with the party.” While …