21 ms·

New divorce app to help couples split assets in New York without lawyers

• gruez 4y ago
  The site doesn't seem to be proofreaded very well. For instance the text under the "Marital Property" section is identical to the text for "Separate Property".
  • nickMMM 4y ago
    Thank you for that spot! :)
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• cato_the_elder 4y ago
  • CoastalCoder 4y ago
    I think that's a bit off topic for the article. This is about how to handle divorce logistics, not whether or not to get divorced.
    • cato_the_elder 4y ago
      • CoastalCoder 4y ago
        That's a fair point. I hadn't considered that tie-in. You might have more luck with a comment that explains that more explicitly.
      • Dracophoenix 4y ago
        Divorce is a legal process for ending a civil marriage. It should be easy to accomplish for those interested in doing so. There's no point in instituting roadblocks for the sake of preserving a union, especially when its constituents despise each other.
        • XorNot 4y ago
          More importantly it's not the state's business to override the desires of citizens to end a domestic partnership. For some reason Americans in particular who won't shut up about "my freedoms" completely forget about it when the opportunity to play relationship counselling at gunpoint comes up.
          • cato_the_elder 4y ago
            > More importantly it's not the state's business to override the desires of citizens to end a domestic partnership. That's just the liberal view. There are alternatives. > For some reason Americans in particular who won't shut up about "my freedoms" completely forget about it when the opportunity to play relationship counselling at gunpoint comes up. Well, they also don't shut up about family values. You can value more than one thing.
          • skissane 4y ago
            > More importantly it's not the state's business to override the desires of citizens to end a domestic partnership. There is significant evidence that divorce frequently has long-term (indeed, life-long) negative impacts on children. A recent meta-analysis [0] concluded that: > A significant association between parental divorce and every aspect of mental health was found with the following pooled ORs (95% CIs): Depression 1.29 (1.23–1.35), anxiety 1.12 (1.04–1.12), suicide attempt 1.35 (1.26–1.44), suicidal ideation 1.48 (1.43–1.54), distress 1.48 (1.37–1.6), alcohol 1.43 (1.34–1.53), smoking 1.64 (1.57–1.72) and drugs 1.45 (1.44–1.46) could be estimated... The results of the meta-analysis show a consistent direction of influence regarding the long-term effect of parental divorce on their children. Individuals affected by parental divorce have a higher risk of developing a variety of mental health conditions... Another study on this topic (of which there are numerous) [1] says: > Controlling for age, race/ethnicity, gender, and childhood socioeconomic position, respondents who recalled a parental divorce during childhood had increased risk of mortality compared to those with no separation. The association was stronger for premature mortality and deaths due to cardiovascular disease. Divorce in childhood was also associated with lowered adult education, fewer social network ties, more depression, and worse health practices... Parental divorce in childhood is associated with lowered well-being in adulthood and long-term survival... Given the well-established reality of the potential life-long negative impacts of divorce on children–which, as a child of divorce myself, I see as not just something established by research, but also supported by my own life experiences–why doesn't the state have a legitimate interest in discouraging couples with children from pursuing divorce for insufficiently weighty reasons? [0] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022395619304510?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00223... [1] https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0373-x https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00038-012-0373-x
• kosyblysk666 4y ago
• nickMMM 4y ago
  We just launched Resolvy. It helps anyone going through a divorce understand what portion of the assets they can keep, and what portion is to be divided with their spouse. Deals with child support and alimony too. Currently only works in New York. Free to use. Can save Anyone going through a divorce in New York on legal fees.
  • candiddevmike 4y ago
    Have you ever been through a divorce? Splitting assets equally is an after thought for most folks. They (or the one that filled) just want to get the thing over with, quickly, and a lawyer makes that happen.
    • nickMMM 4y ago
      I have not personally (still happily) married. My cofounder went through a divorce. He is a divorce lawyer (and his wife at the time a lawyer too). They divided everything smoothly - sounded like it was quite clinical and unemotional from what he told me. Say if you brought assets into the relationship, a house, retirement fund fund, an inheritance. I’m sure you don’t want your ex-partner to get half of that. You’re entitled to keep a larger portion of it (as you get a credit for it). So our app helps people understand that better. Some people who split everything equally may be giving more away than they should. This is our version one. I have no idea how it will evolve. But yes, if you want it done quickly - a lawyer is better at this stage. May I ask if you went through a divorce?
      • AmericanChopper 4y ago
        • yreg 4y ago
          Man, what are you on about. It's crystal clear what "I'm still happily married" means.
• awillen 4y ago
  The issue with this seems to me to be that if you're having an amicable divorce, you don't need to spend a lot on lawyers anyway, so this doesn't really help. If you're having a contentious divorce, the other side's going to get a lawyer, so you need to get a lawyer too. There's some language on your site that suggests that this can help you understand how your various assets will be treated in a divorce, which could be good if it's contentious, but if you have a lot of assets you're still going to want a lawyer. I guess what I'm wondering is who your target audience is, as well as how you'd plan to monetize this?
  • nickMMM 4y ago
    We want to target people who are amicable (to start with). Definitely not anyone who is contentious. Hoping to expand to contentious divorces in the future of course (and help people actually negotiate without a lawyer). I would love the system to give prompts to people on whether they're asking for too much or if they're in the ballpark. If you're amicable, there is still a lot of benefit in checking whether what you've agreed to divide with your spouse is fair from a legal perspective. You could be giving too much away. Eg. If you had a retirement/pension fund before the marriage, do you want to split that equally down the middle - no. You'll be entitled to keep a bigger slice of that (but you may have to give some away of course). Same with any other assets you had before the marriage, or inheritance you received during the marriage, or if you’ve used pre-marital funds to buy assets during the marriage. All these things could move it away from a 50/50 split. Monetising will be the next step. We just want to figure out if this is useful for people first. We have a few ideas, eg once Resolvy gives you the information (or prepares the divorce documents) we can advertise attorneys who can check everything for you to make sure it’s correct. We'll try keep it a free service for as long as we can (and figure out revenue models from businesses)
    • awillen 4y ago
      Thanks for the reply - this all makes sense, though I might considering changing the way you message it a bit. If you pitch it as a tool to check whether what you've already agreed upon is fair, then you potentially cause conflict if your assessment says the agreement isn't fair. Rather, it might be better as a starting point - if you don't know how to divide your assets, this tool will tell you what the law would default to, and then you can adjust from there. Just two cents from a random guy on the internet!
• mensetmanusman 4y ago
  Maybe someday everyone will take a picture of everything they own and a computer will divide the pieces exactly: https://www.cnn.com/style/amp/barbara-iweins-photo-series-katalog-arles/index.html https://www.cnn.com/style/amp/barbara-iweins-photo-series-ka...
• Mandatum 4y ago
  Why isn't this a Launch HN?
  • missedthecue 4y ago
    Isn't Launch HN reserved for ycomb startups? (Asking, i'm not sure) Maybe Show HN.
  • tptacek 4y ago
    It's not a YC company. "Launch HN's" are one of a couple of perks reserved for YC companies. "Show HN's" are open to all comers, but only if you have an app people can play with right away (this is more of a landing page), and they're not ranked the same way normal posts are --- this post is doing great on its own, so their choice not to do a "Show HN" has paid off.
• cafard 4y ago
  In one of his books, Gerald Weinberg said that his sister decided that it was time to give up divorce work when one of her clients (or the client's adversary) produced a list of goods for partition including a partly used container of dish soap under the sink. And my brother (a lawyer) told me of an attorney in the Mountain West who gave up divorce work as too stressful and went on to defending clients on capital charges. I hope that the new app will help divorcing couples to work through the divorce with less pain on both sides. But is what every party thinks that he or she wants?
  • nickMMM 4y ago
    thank you - I hope so too. When people are separating and fighting over kids, that can get intense too. This tragic story has stuck me for a long timehttps://nypost.com/2021/11/26/texas-man-shoots-partners-ex-amid-child-custody-battle-video https://nypost.com/2021/11/26/texas-man-shoots-partners-ex-a.... If people understand their rights better, they can avoid taking things into their own hands.
    • lazide 4y ago
      In my experience, it’s less about knowledge and more about emotional regulation - lack of it is often why it happens, and why it is so hard to deal with overall.
    • throwaway_4ever 4y ago
      Sheesh Texas let that guy shoot and kill an unarmed man, outside of the house, with no charges? Insert a gun into a frustrating situation for no reason. What an a-hole.
      • sofixa 4y ago
        > Insert a gun into a frustrating situation for no reason IMHO that's the main reason everyone having a gun with zero training is one of the stupidest things ever. People are dumb, people are brash, people make mistakes, people argue over everything. Why introduce a lethal component to every confrontation and bar fight? Because a piece of paper written 200 years ago says that it will be needed to protect the country doesn't really sound like a good enough reason for all the useless deaths.
• tus666 4y ago
  LOL and the most prominent copy on the front page: > Divorce almost never ends with a 50/50 split of everything you own with your ex-partner. Yeah maybe that why lawyers typically get invovled.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• Thorentis 4y ago
  Nice, there's now an app to facilitate marital breakdown. This is peak "there's an app for that".
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • lazide 4y ago
    Pretty sure you’re not running across the app until it’s solidly in that direction anyway.
  • meepmorp 4y ago
    If you're looking for an app to divide your assets, your marriage has already broken down.
• endisneigh 4y ago
  This is great - ideally it would evolve to a more generic mediation app. One thing surprising to some folks is that most people, including lawyers actually don't like litigation. Most things are settled out of court, and even more are mediated before a settlement. Helping people realize the cost ineffectiveness of litigation is honestly a good thing. Obviously for corporations and businesses the logic is different but I believe for most we should be discouraging using courts. Good work!
  • btilly 4y ago
    There is a simple reason it isn't cost effective. A split achieved with litigation is necessarily a split of the assets left after the cost of said litigation. Even a horribly unfair split without litigation often leaves you with more than "winning" litigation! The is tied to the old question, "Would you accept a million dollars knowing that your worst enemy will get 2 million?" If you're so inclined to cut off your nose to spite your face as to turn down the million, maybe litigation makes sense to you. But it doesn't to me!
    • teeray 4y ago
      My dad knew a contractor once who said “you get everything, but I keep my truck, tools, and the clothes on my back.” Years later, “everything” became practically nothing on his ex’s side, yet he had restored his former standard of living. She dragged him back to court for more and after the judge looked over the original settlement, he threw the case out.
  • 12ian34 4y ago
    Initially read "mediation" as "meditation" and genuinely thought it'd be a good idea! I speculate that if more people meditated more frequently, we might have fewer divorces!
• ourmandave 4y ago
  To late! I had the sense to download the prenup app first.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• ourmandave 4y ago
  So many questions... Is this ad supported with discount codes for services I'm probably going to need, like dating sites (get back out there champ!) or cheap single dad studio apartments? Is there a premium version that ties into my calendar so I know what weekends I get the kids? What about a recipes page to stretch the ramen noodles to several meals?
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• optimiz3 4y ago
  Separately, as advice to potential couples: get a pre-nup. Resolves any awkward beliefs about money up front. Discloses assets and liabilities so no financial skeletons in the closet. Establishes who has what before the nuptials and frankly fast forwards your relationship to see if it is strong enough to handle a "difficult" conversation and negotiation. Lets you establish what claims your spouse will have to your future earnings, and how you will resolve paying for joint assets. Money is one of the top things couples inevitably have disagreements about and resolving this up front saves a lot of future angst. Ounce of prevention is a pound of cure as they say.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • nickMMM 4y ago
    completely agree!
  • notyourwork 4y ago
    This is generally easier said than done for most couples. Like most things, hindsight is 20:20.
  • lazide 4y ago
    Definitely agree - also, couples that can do that tend to not be the ones who keep the divorce industry busy.
  • notch656a 4y ago
    I mean this is a decent point, but I have to point out the following: >Lets you establish what claims your spouse will have to your future earnings A pre-nup can't really cover this base. For the typical working class folk the way future earnings after divorce are extracted are through child support, which in its current incarnation functions as back-door alimony and can't be cancelled through a pre-nup.
  • hd4 4y ago
    I'll do one better, just don't marry. Pre-nups are routinely thrown out by divorce courts. Unless the guy is extremely poor and marrying a high net-worth woman, there is just no point in marrying, you gain absolutely nothing (except for pithy tax benefits in some cases).
• no_wizard 4y ago
  Does this handle potential alimony? That’s the thing that scares me about getting divorced. A friend of mine confided in me that their partner hasn’t worked since they been married and is afraid that ending the relationship would put them in a deep alimony situation. Unfortunate side effect of living in a high cost are sure but I understand their frustration
  • nickMMM 4y ago
    Yep it calculates alimony payments (called spousal maintenance in NY). It's based on income, length of relationship etc. In NY, you can actually negotiate out of alimony (eg trade it for some more assets).
  • chrsig 4y ago
    It shouldn't be that scary. I've been married coming up on 10 years in January. I've been the sole income provider for a large majority of the marriage. I wouldn't be able to make the income that I do without the contributions my wife has made to making my life easier, and in general keeping the more administrative aspects of life under control. I'm in a marriage with her because I love her and respect her. Part of that is recognizing that it is our income. Part of that is recognizing that even if our marriage were to decay to the point of divorce that I would still care enough about her as a person to want her to be able to establish a new life. I'd advise the friend of yours to create a relationship their spouse wants to be in. That's how you prevent the downsides of alimony.
    • lazide 4y ago
      That is good advice. Unfortunately, it also requires both parties to be working towards that goal - which doesn't always happen. If that doesn't happen, yes alimony can get very, very expensive.
    • philliphaydon 4y ago
      You don’t have to answer but I would like to ask. > I wouldn't be able to make the income that I do without the contributions my wife has made to making my life easier, and in general keeping the more administrative aspects of life under control. If you were to divorce would you find it reasonable for her to get 50%? Because I would seem as tho she gave up (willingly in support of you) a career for you. And after divorce wouldn’t be able to maintain any sort of lifestyle as a result of having no career or work experience?
• valleyer 4y ago
  Feedback about your web site: there are still plenty of people out there using browsers that don't support WebP. None of your images load for me (Safari 15.5 on macOS Catalina). You should use (or at least fall back to) wider-supported formats.
  • nickMMM 4y ago
    Didn't even think of that. Thank you! I'll get that fixed
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• jollybean 4y ago
  The government should provide the model for this: enter data, here you go and here are the justifications for it. Want to pay, you can see a judge at your own cost. You walk into the lawyers office, they just sign off.
  • notyourwork 4y ago
    The government should start with taxes not divorce.
    • jollybean 4y ago
      That too!
  • leobg 4y ago
    The government should maybe replace much of its inefficient court system with self-serve computers, and use the savings to cut taxes. But I hear that’s not the kind of thing governments do.
• sytelus 4y ago
  The huge problem in many US states is that nothing is well defined in family courts. Virtually all answers from lawyers is “court can do anything”. For example, there is a good definition of separate property but it still doesn’t mean that court isn’t going to dip into that to give more assets to opposing party. Except for few US states, there is no real law except some hand wavy guidelines like “need and ability” for community division and maintenance. I don’t know why law makers don’t get their shit together and make things predictable. Apps like this is good start to get neutral picture.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• IncRnd 4y ago
  I've gone through a divorce that went through the courts. I've also gone through mediation that was required by that court. For unrelated matters, I've gone through mediation, court proceedings, expert witness testimony, etc. My first advice is to never go through a court proceeding when it can be avoided. My second advice is to speak to a lawyer - early - to preserve your rights and those of your children. That's non-negotiable. Always preserve your rights and those of your children. Those two advices can often contradict each other, so consider and take them how you will. Until the dust settles, you won't know which will cost more, a lawyer or not contacting one.
  • xbar 4y ago
    Good advice about talking to a lawyer and not going through a court proceeding. I suspect you will never know which cost more, but you can reduce the cost of any single path by finishing it as quickly, and with as few twists and turns, as possible.
    • IncRnd 4y ago
      I absolutely agree. Nobody goes into a divorce thinking they want it to take a long time. Just get it over with, and keep as much trust as possible. That goes double when children are involved. It's not the kids' fault their parents are getting divorced, but they are the ones most impacted.
      • SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
        I would like to propose a caveat: some people go into a divorce with the intention to ruin the other person. This can make divorces long and ugly, because the purpose isn’t to get it over with but to right some perceived injustice by punishment.
        • IncRnd 4y ago
          Thank you. That's a good point.
  • 4y ago
• verandaguy 4y ago
  I once worked for a Candian startup whose main product was (at least initially) an app that did the same thing. Slick UI, PDF parsing, the whole thing was fairly polished, and if the press releases were to be believed, our product had captured something like 10% of the province's whole amicable divorce market. Unfortunately, the product ended up not being viable. The company pivoted around the end of my short time there. Hope this one has more luck.
  • schappim 4y ago
    The rate of repeat business would be pretty low, at least one would hope!
    • verandaguy 4y ago
      You could probably get away with a subscription model if you market it to the rich, the famous, and politicians.
  • moneywoes 4y ago
    was there no pmf?
• benreesman 4y ago
  This is slightly tangential, but I went through a no-prenup divorce. My intentions were good in not wanting a pre-nup, but I’ve changed my advice for a reason that surprises a lot of people. The reason I now advise folks to do a pre-nup is that when things are getting tense, everyone feeling insecure about their future actually increases the pressure and therefore the possibility of a divorce. Write your pre-nup however you want, but save yourself the possibility of huge additional and unnecessary stress/uncertainty at a time when the relationship can least afford it.
  • vasco 4y ago
    Simpler option is to avoid marriage, greatly reducing the pressure on getting a divorce.
    • 4ad 4y ago
      Then you have to pay more in taxes, having kids is more challenging, getting a mortgage becomes more expensive, immigration becomes impossible, and in some countries even travel becomes difficult.
      • vasco 4y ago
        We might be thinking of very different countries. Taxes are largely the same in most developed countries for couples or singles. Couples just have double the allowances. I'm not sure if you meant emigration, but I've lived in 3 countries while single, and I never heard this being easier married. And for sure I was never asked about my marital status for traveling.
        • 4ad 4y ago
          > I'm not sure if you meant emigration, but I've lived in 3 countries while single, and I never heard this being easier married. If you have partner who you are not married with, you can't bring them in whatever country you are emigrating to. > And for sure I was never asked about my marital status for traveling. Then you have not traveled to muslim countries with your partner.
• cheriot 4y ago
  I watch my parents spend more money on lawyers than either of them stood to gain from winning. Is it possible to have a prenump that declares a fair method of splitting assets and prevents the lawsuits?
  • romanovcode 4y ago
    Yes, it's called postnup. You do a prenup and after marriage do a postnup. This pretty much binds contract in stone since partner accepted the terms even after the marriage contract was in motion. All in all marriage seems like a lot of contracts for no good benefit.
    • spoonjim 4y ago
      The difficulty of unwinding it is what makes it a valuable signal of commitment.
      • daniel_reetz 4y ago
        Interesting way to think about it. It's also interesting to think about how many institutions and businesses exist to facilitate a marriage, and how few exist to end one. Easy in, hard out.
    • 55555 4y ago
      > This pretty much binds contract in stone since partner accepted the terms even after the marriage contract was in motion. Can you explain why this means more than just getting a prenup? I really don’t get it. If you agree to a prenup then you agreed to the prenup, no?
• godmode2019 4y ago
  If you had a wedding planning app you could use it as lead generation ;)
• dijonman2 4y ago
  Useless. A friend of mine mediated and agreed on a specific division of assets in a NY divorce. His ex wife talked to a friend who encouraged that she could get more. She hired a lawyer, nullified the previous agreement, and demanded cash payment half of his net worth. He lost, had to pay, and got fucked. Courts heavily favor women in divorce. Time to fix this, and bring equality to men. They had no kids.
• adesanmi 4y ago
  How does this differ from the free mediation already offered by the state of New York? https://ww2.nycourts.gov/ip/adr/divorcemediation.shtml https://ww2.nycourts.gov/ip/adr/divorcemediation.shtml
• leobg 4y ago
  Harry Browne had a technique for splitting up assets: One partner does the splitting. And the other partner gets to choose who gets which pile. (He also has a more elaborate one, where the partners do a virtual auction of all items among themselves, to account for cases where particular items are worth a lot more to one of them. I believe it’s in his book “How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World”).
  • cinntaile 4y ago
    The first one is a very common technique among siblings too, let one of them split a cake and the other one gets to pick the piece. Applied game theory.
    • will5421 4y ago
      Do you happen to know what this is called in game theory? I’d like to read about it.
      • dhsysusbsjsi 4y ago
        "You cut I choose"
        • zach_garwood 4y ago
          My grandma called it "part and pick."
      • ecnahc515 4y ago
        Seems like a subset of the prisoners dilemma.
  • sour-taste 4y ago
    This is how my mom avoided fights about the fair sharing of cakes and pies between me and my siblings :D It works well!
  • laGrenouille 4y ago
• xWJkCDrVQ2 4y ago
  My parents divorced recently. Watching two of the most important people in my life gradually grow to resent each other to the point where they can't stand each other's presence was hard for me even as a thirty year old. I can't imagine what this experience would have done to me as a child, so I'm thankful that they stuck together for as long as they did. In the end I was actually the one who suggested that they should separate, and I'm almost certain that if I didn't they'd still be together today. But in hindsight I'm glad I did, even though I felt immensely guilty about it at the time, and going through the whole separation process with them brought me to the brink of depression. They're a lot happier today than when they were together. This whole experience has really left its scar on me. I shudder at even the thought of ever getting into any kind of romantic relationship myself, let alone marriage, due to fear of having to go through something like this myself, which statistically speaking is much more likely than I'm willing to risk. Even putting aside statistics, the truth is I see enough of both of them in myself that I can easily see myself playing either part in a similar situation down the line. Thankfully I'm an introvert who actually enjoys being alone with my own thoughts, I have several close friends, money, hobbies, and had a fulfilling career up to this point and have recently embarked on a new journey bootstrapping my own business that deeply excites me. So I have little reasons to doubt that I can find plenty of enjoyment and fulfillment through other means in life. I haven't told either of them though, because I know it will break their hearts. So far I've been evading the topic whenever it comes up, since at this stage in my life I have plenty of plausible excuses. I don't know how long I can keep this up though. I know both of them want to see grandkids, and I still dread the day when I have to tell them it's probably never going to happen. The best I can do at that point is probably to make up some other reason why, instead of telling them the real reason: them. I know they're not going to take it well regardless, and if we get into some heated argument I can totally see myself losing control and letting the real reason slip out, and that truly terrifies me to my core. Thank you for reading up to this point. I'm not expecting anyone to hand me a solution, or for a solution to even exist. But just writing this out and putting it out there has been really cathartic for me, so I hope reading this might be helpful to someone else in some way.
  • andrecarini 4y ago
    Hi! Thanks for opening up and sharing it with us. I'm going to refrain myself from sharing my opinion (only you really know the full context of what you have gone through and how it makes you feel). But if I could champion one advice it would be this: please give psychotherapy a try. There are different types of psychotherapy and different kinds of professionals, but if you find one that clicks with you it could be life changing. I know it's expensive (depending where you live) and it's more often than not a painful process. But for many people that stick with it, getting to go to a good psychologist/psychiatrist is like having your mind, feelings and ego dumped and analysed by a thorough debugger.
• mercy_dude 4y ago
  Divorce as a service. We already have marriage as a service in the form of “open relationships” one can argue. How about child bearing as a service? Perhaps in the form of surrogate or finding willing donors/carriers? And then child care as a service under the umbrella of adoption as a service, child rearing/daycare as a service (for example an app that allows each party to sign up when and how they would split the time spent with the children. I think this model in western society has a long way to go in each of the above areas open for disruption some form or other.
  • feet 4y ago
    I'm not sure I understand your perspective. How is an open relationship "marriage as a service"?
    • mercy_dude 4y ago
      “As a service” has a subscription or on demand expiry concept embedded to it - it was meant in that sense.
  • nixass 4y ago
    Just add a subscription based model for those services and we're set.
• nsonha 4y ago
  The supreme court should ban apps like this because it encourages divorces
  • tenebrisalietum 4y ago
    Marriage and divorce aren't mentioned in the Constitution (at least not yet). Is it impiled like that right to privacy that was recently redefined? A freedom loving state should also love the freedom to end marriages.
    • nsonha 4y ago
      I was being sarcastic
• crikeyjoe 4y ago
• 5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
  wow, technology actually CAN make the world a better place
• lizardactivist 4y ago
  "Lawyers hate this app!" It seems overly complicated to divorce in parts of the US, and I can imagine lawyers make a lot of money on the whole drawn-out process.
• psyfi 4y ago
  Wow In my culture, each spouse has their own custody and assets, it's never the "household"'s assets Western legal frameworks sounds harmful on the long run