6 ms·

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) p

by 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.
    - saiya-jin 4y ago
      Gun ownership can be done well, with most people being minimally restricted. I really don't see why psycho-tests and some minimal level of gun manipulation skills shouldn't be a prerequisite. I mean do you want to live around a person who can't pass that but bought yesterday AR-15 with ten 40-round magazines and 2000 bullets? But gun owners in US have this knee-jerk end-of-the-world reaction at any attempt to change anything, regardless of all the school shootings and overall ridiculously high murder rate. Tunnel vision that guns are the most important thing in the world and who doesn't restrict them is the best politician. I lean in my opinions more towards right but due to this I would never ever be republican if I were in the US. Voting for the same people as vast amounts of bible belt gun nuts whose wet dreams are mostly about their property being invaded by some thugs (or anybody really) so they can finally defend themselves with one of the 50 guns they have mostly for this purpose, and the spend significant amount of time and money on preparing exactly for this scenario... that would be insulting.
  - OmarAssadi 4y ago
    I really shouldn’t have clicked the article, honestly. I have become so desensitized to everything on the internet at this point, but something about parents always makes my heart ache so baddddd. I totally struggle to not to insert my own mom or dad. It’s just tragic. I really cannot comprehend why there is no punishment for things like that. Sure, was he at risk of the other person grabbing the gun? Probably. But why did he have to unnecessarily bring a firearm into a heated and emotional argument in the first place? What was supposed to happen? It feels so psychotic to me, like taunting someone with the intention to bait them into their death. Those kids lost their parent for no good reason :(
- watwut 4y ago
  That sounds like a case of somestic violence - it frequently escalates precisely as reaction to victim searching freedom.
jimz 4y ago
My decision to at least exclude family law, beyond the divorce of my parents when I was a teenager being fairly ugly (although now with a larger sample size I've observed, relatively tame), was cemented by sitting through a whole session where the only property that needed to be split were a pair of season tickets to my school's men's college basketball team. While the school's team is quite good, we've never won a championship, at the time of the proceedings we've only been AP #1 for a week and then was almost knocked out of the tourney by a 16 seed, and in open court both parties acknowledged that they don't go to all of the home games and are seeing other season ticket holders, meaning that neither party needed to have both sets of tickets just to go watch the games live. The only advantage is that the seats would be together, but I've been to a lot of games of just about every North American professional sport (yes, including Arena Football) and seat swapping is ubiquitous whether the place is sold out or a quarter full. I've litigated my own case in small claims court and can honestly say that there were cases far more consequential there than the acrimonious splitting of a pair of basketball season tickets. It's not exactly kafkaesque - the criminal justice system fits the bill better - but it's at least... Dadaist in an un-self-aware way? I've appeared in undergraduate musicals written by my classmates that were less cringeworthy than that. And I've practiced administrative law which, since they are not established under Article III of the Constitution, can be pretty cowboy and roughshod. I've also appeared in tribal court which seem to frequently take cues from TV courts. But they are not frivolous, not at all. Administrative hearings can and do determine the liberty of people every day. Same for tribal courts. There's something farcical about all 3 types of proceedings but family court just hits the perfect note of "legitimate", "important", and "farcical" to me, even though they are undoubtedly important. I can assure you that no immigration or NLRB hearings, the administrative courts in this country with teeth, sink into farce at a similar rate. At one point there were some half-joking talks about finding an agreeable local tribe to partner with us to open a startup that allow same-day in-app divorces. Sadly even with introductions and approaching tribes in several states they all ended up saying no. There's a free idea for y'all, business-wise, if you can pull it off.
pyuser583 4y ago
I just watched friends divorce. They brought a lot of unnecessary suffering in themselves. They didn’t want an app. The number one thing to know about divorce with kids is that you lose control. They couldn’t stand that. The idea that the other person was 100% in charge of the kids. They began making extremely vague allegations of how the other parent does unspecified “bad things” that need to be “reported.” They eventually ended up believing their own propaganda and are convinced the other parent is abusing the kids on their days. It’s a total mess.
- notch656a 4y ago
  Once you understand child support payments, and thus the ability to be jailed and eventually charged with a felony and have your civil rights revoked, are tied to custody you'll understand part of the reason for the high stakes. If you end up with <50% custody, you have to keep a job that pays at least as good as your current one for 18 years, pray a judge believes you when you have trouble with work, or expect to end up in a jail cell with your license, property, passport, and civil rights revoked. The only debtor's prison there is in the US is the one for people with <50% custody. Therefore if the other parent makes claims of abuse, it's imperative you have counterclaims to make sure the other parent is in just as bad light to make sure you won't be subject to imprisonment at the whim of a judge at any misfortune you have.
  - pyuser583 4y ago
    The sort of rational thinking you are describing was completely absent from this process. Neither party cared about child support or alimony. Or money, at all. Also, you’re not accurately describing how things turned out. One of the parents wound up having very little custody time, and very little child support.
    - notch656a 4y ago
      Accusations of abuse seem pretty rational to me in a custody battle. It's one of the best ways to get custody. Come up with some 'witnesses', trick the kid into testifying on your side. Have the attorney write up the sob story and blindside the other partner so they're left defenseless. Bonus points if you can get a restraining order in the process so custody is lost and continuity is maintained by continuing the custody terms of the restraining order -- also a good way to destroy means of defense as in some states a spouse has their firearm rights suspended during the order.
kmlx 4y ago
friends of mine divorced recently. they were on good terms, but were getting egged on by their lawyers. the lawyers very much preferred a long drawn-out divorce. luckily my friends were on good terms and they discussed about what their lawyers were telling them. which were mostly falsehoods. stuff like “are you sure the other party hasn’t hidden funds from you?”. so i’m sure there are horrible divorces, but i’m also sure there are horrible lawyers as well.
- civilized 4y ago
  Sounds like the lawyers know that getting couples to fight profitably is like shooting fish in a barrel.
giantg2 4y ago
"I hope that the new app will help divorcing couples to work through the divorce with less pain on both sides." It won't. The people who fight over used dish soap and other petty things will continue to have issues. The other part is people having an incorrect perception of what they are entitled to in a divorce. The app or a lawyer will be able to show them how wrong that perception is, but it won't dull the pain. What would actually help is forming a prenup while both parties are happy, before vengeance, winning, or whatever emerges from the failed marriage.
- thr0wawayf00 4y ago
  This. My ex-wife and I split amicably and without lawyers, it was a really easy process in my state. Not having any assets made things easier but we were mature enough to be adults about it all. The problem isn't the divorce process, it's the people involved, either the parties to the divorce or their attorneys.

by cafard 4y ago

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.
  - saiya-jin 4y ago
    Gun ownership can be done well, with most people being minimally restricted. I really don't see why psycho-tests and some minimal level of gun manipulation skills shouldn't be a prerequisite. I mean do you want to live around a person who can't pass that but bought yesterday AR-15 with ten 40-round magazines and 2000 bullets? But gun owners in US have this knee-jerk end-of-the-world reaction at any attempt to change anything, regardless of all the school shootings and overall ridiculously high murder rate. Tunnel vision that guns are the most important thing in the world and who doesn't restrict them is the best politician. I lean in my opinions more towards right but due to this I would never ever be republican if I were in the US. Voting for the same people as vast amounts of bible belt gun nuts whose wet dreams are mostly about their property being invaded by some thugs (or anybody really) so they can finally defend themselves with one of the 50 guns they have mostly for this purpose, and the spend significant amount of time and money on preparing exactly for this scenario... that would be insulting.
- OmarAssadi 4y ago
  I really shouldn’t have clicked the article, honestly. I have become so desensitized to everything on the internet at this point, but something about parents always makes my heart ache so baddddd. I totally struggle to not to insert my own mom or dad. It’s just tragic. I really cannot comprehend why there is no punishment for things like that. Sure, was he at risk of the other person grabbing the gun? Probably. But why did he have to unnecessarily bring a firearm into a heated and emotional argument in the first place? What was supposed to happen? It feels so psychotic to me, like taunting someone with the intention to bait them into their death. Those kids lost their parent for no good reason :(
watwut 4y ago
That sounds like a case of somestic violence - it frequently escalates precisely as reaction to victim searching freedom.

jimz 4y ago

My decision to at least exclude family law, beyond the divorce of my parents when I was a teenager being fairly ugly (although now with a larger sample size I've observed, relatively tame), was cemented by sitting through a whole session where the only property that needed to be split were a pair of season tickets to my school's men's college basketball team. While the school's team is quite good, we've never won a championship, at the time of the proceedings we've only been AP #1 for a week and then was almost knocked out of the tourney by a 16 seed, and in open court both parties acknowledged that they don't go to all of the home games and are seeing other season ticket holders, meaning that neither party needed to have both sets of tickets just to go watch the games live. The only advantage is that the seats would be together, but I've been to a lot of games of just about every North American professional sport (yes, including Arena Football) and seat swapping is ubiquitous whether the place is sold out or a quarter full. I've litigated my own case in small claims court and can honestly say that there were cases far more consequential there than the acrimonious splitting of a pair of basketball season tickets. It's not exactly kafkaesque - the criminal justice system fits the bill better - but it's at least... Dadaist in an un-self-aware way? I've appeared in undergraduate musicals written by my classmates that were less cringeworthy than that. And I've practiced administrative law which, since they are not established under Article III of the Constitution, can be pretty cowboy and roughshod. I've also appeared in tribal court which seem to frequently take cues from TV courts. But they are not frivolous, not at all. Administrative hearings can and do determine the liberty of people every day. Same for tribal courts. There's something farcical about all 3 types of proceedings but family court just hits the perfect note of "legitimate", "important", and "farcical" to me, even though they are undoubtedly important. I can assure you that no immigration or NLRB hearings, the administrative courts in this country with teeth, sink into farce at a similar rate. At one point there were some half-joking talks about finding an agreeable local tribe to partner with us to open a startup that allow same-day in-app divorces. Sadly even with introductions and approaching tribes in several states they all ended up saying no. There's a free idea for y'all, business-wise, if you can pull it off.

pyuser583 4y ago

I just watched friends divorce. They brought a lot of unnecessary suffering in themselves. They didn’t want an app. The number one thing to know about divorce with kids is that you lose control. They couldn’t stand that. The idea that the other person was 100% in charge of the kids. They began making extremely vague allegations of how the other parent does unspecified “bad things” that need to be “reported.” They eventually ended up believing their own propaganda and are convinced the other parent is abusing the kids on their days. It’s a total mess.

notch656a 4y ago
Once you understand child support payments, and thus the ability to be jailed and eventually charged with a felony and have your civil rights revoked, are tied to custody you'll understand part of the reason for the high stakes. If you end up with <50% custody, you have to keep a job that pays at least as good as your current one for 18 years, pray a judge believes you when you have trouble with work, or expect to end up in a jail cell with your license, property, passport, and civil rights revoked. The only debtor's prison there is in the US is the one for people with <50% custody. Therefore if the other parent makes claims of abuse, it's imperative you have counterclaims to make sure the other parent is in just as bad light to make sure you won't be subject to imprisonment at the whim of a judge at any misfortune you have.
- pyuser583 4y ago
  The sort of rational thinking you are describing was completely absent from this process. Neither party cared about child support or alimony. Or money, at all. Also, you’re not accurately describing how things turned out. One of the parents wound up having very little custody time, and very little child support.
  - notch656a 4y ago
    Accusations of abuse seem pretty rational to me in a custody battle. It's one of the best ways to get custody. Come up with some 'witnesses', trick the kid into testifying on your side. Have the attorney write up the sob story and blindside the other partner so they're left defenseless. Bonus points if you can get a restraining order in the process so custody is lost and continuity is maintained by continuing the custody terms of the restraining order -- also a good way to destroy means of defense as in some states a spouse has their firearm rights suspended during the order.

kmlx 4y ago

friends of mine divorced recently. they were on good terms, but were getting egged on by their lawyers. the lawyers very much preferred a long drawn-out divorce. luckily my friends were on good terms and they discussed about what their lawyers were telling them. which were mostly falsehoods. stuff like “are you sure the other party hasn’t hidden funds from you?”. so i’m sure there are horrible divorces, but i’m also sure there are horrible lawyers as well.

civilized 4y ago
Sounds like the lawyers know that getting couples to fight profitably is like shooting fish in a barrel.

giantg2 4y ago

"I hope that the new app will help divorcing couples to work through the divorce with less pain on both sides." It won't. The people who fight over used dish soap and other petty things will continue to have issues. The other part is people having an incorrect perception of what they are entitled to in a divorce. The app or a lawyer will be able to show them how wrong that perception is, but it won't dull the pain. What would actually help is forming a prenup while both parties are happy, before vengeance, winning, or whatever emerges from the failed marriage.

thr0wawayf00 4y ago
This. My ex-wife and I split amicably and without lawyers, it was a really easy process in my state. Not having any assets made things easier but we were mature enough to be adults about it all. The problem isn't the divorce process, it's the people involved, either the parties to the divorce or their attorneys.