This idea of an "in-house separation" makes sense in tough economic times.  Many couples cannot afford two leases or mortgages.  But, they don't want to wait forever to be eligible for divorce. 

The problem is that in North Carolina, in almost all cases, the parties have to be physically separated for 12 continuous months before they can even ask for a divorce.  (There are some rare exceptions to this rule, but they are beyond the scope of this post).

In North Carolina, legal separation means living in separate dwellings.  No matter how "separate" your lives, you have to live in separate dwellings to actually start the 12 month separation period in North Carolina.

Other states, notably Virginia, may allow in-house separations.  But, North Carolina does not. 

Each case is different, and everyone should consult an attorney about their specific case and situation before making decisions.  But, at least to date, North Carolina does not recognize in-house separation.

The goal is to protect assets that the parties have worked their whole lives to build and to prevent legal wrangling if the marriage ends in divorce.  And, given that the odds of a divorce go up with each subsequent marriage, it is worth considering.

Each state has different requirements for prenups, so you need to consult an attorney in your area to have a prenup drafted and to fully understand the pros and cons of these agreements. 

The article addresses some of the most common issues involved in a gray divorce; decisions about the house, retirement accounts, cash flow and debt payments.  But, an issue that many gray divorce clients have not thought about is how their divorce will affect their retirement  planning. 

In many gray divorces, at least one of the couples is less than ten years away from retirement.  Therefore, the financial planning involved in dissolving the marriage is an integral part of retirement planning.  The financial arrangements of a divorce set the stage for the parties' financial futures.  If the next stage of a party's financial future is retirement, then the financial portion of the divorce will have an enormous impact on whether, when and how a party can retire.

In many ways gray divorces are identical to any other divorce.  However, the impending retirement of the parties to a gray divorce makes proper handling of the financial issues even more crucial.

The good news is that if this article resonates with you, you're not alone.  And, recognizing what is causing your angst may help you avoid any unnecessary negative consequences, like divorce.

Most lawyers will readily tell their client what the law "is" by explaining the effect of the laws.  However, they often neglect to inform their clients about the role of the law.

In short, in family cases, the law is the set of rules that the community has chosen to resolve family disputes when the parties cannot find a better way to resolve their issues.  It is Plan B, a fallback option, a parachute, the rules you will play by when all else fails.  It is not the be all, end all of family law cases.

You certainly can choose to resolve your case by using the law as your standard.  But, you don't have to. And in the opinion of many wise and experienced family lawyers, you should at least look for better options before you choose to let the law determine the outcomes of your issues.

Obviously, some family laws have to be followed (e.g. all separation agreements in North Carolina have to be in writing with a notarized signature of each party) And you should consult with an attorney about which laws are mandatory and which ones are optional.  But most of the laws that determine the cash flow, property division and co-parenting issues in a divorce are elective.  That means that you can choose to follow the law when resolving these issues, or come up with a better solution that fits your family. 

The law is useful, important and worthy of respect.  It serves as as very useful comparison for any solution that you are considering in resolving your issues.  But, the law is not necessarily the best standard to use in resolving your family law issues.  In the end, the law is simply the set of rules you will play by if you can't agree to do something better. 

But, there are many other "hidden" costs.  These costs are part of the collateral damage of an adversarial divorce.  These are the losses and negative consequences that are not obvious except to those that have been through it.

One of these losses is frequently the loss of a good therapist.  Sometimes the therapist is working with one of the parties.  Sometimes the therapist is working with a child.  Sometimes the therapist has been working with the whole family.

Either way, high conflict divorces frequently cause families to lose these invaluable therapeutic relationships.  A recent example of a local therapist serves as a cautionary tale.

This therapist spent two years in therapy with the children of a couple in a rocky marriage.  In that two years the therapist developed a strong relationship of trust and openness with the children.  This therapist was the only buffer between the conflict in the home and the kids.  That relationship allowed the kids to open up with their therapist.  The result was that the therapist was able to really help the kids with important emotional and psychological issues at the hardest time of their lives.  The therapist even worked with the parents at times to benefit the family.

Then the divorce hit.  The parents ignored the warnings from the therapist about choosing an ugly divorce.  A high conflict divorce ensued.  The attorneys, doing what they'd been hired to do, started sending subpoenas to the the therapist for the therapy notes of the last two years.  Each attorney  trying to "protect" their client by digging up any possible dirt on the other parent in the therapy notes.

Eventually, the therapist is subpoenaed to testify at a hearing in court.  One or both parties disagrees with the therapist's evaluation of the family.  The therapist instantly becomes a target.  The attorneys attack the therapist in order to attack the therapist's opinions (which they themselves asked for). 

The result?  The therapist gets tired of being attacked and manipulated in the divorce.  The therapist spends hours and hours on the case that will not be compensated.  So, the therapist terminates the relationship with the kids to get out of the parents' cross hairs. 

The impact? The kids lost a therapeutic relationship with the one person that was truly helping them cope with the divorce.  The kids may or may not even try to establish that kind of relationship again.  So, the kids suffer because the parents wanted to fight. 

This happens frequently.  Almost every therapist has a story like this.  Most therapists have already sworn off involvement in these kinds of families.  But, most parents do not consider this kind of collateral damage when choosing what kind of divorce they want to experience.  However, if divorcing parents truly care about their kids, these collateral effects need to be considered before electing to divorce the hard way.  Whatever the parents are trying to accomplish in a hotly contested divorce is rarely worth the loss of a child's therapist. 

Then, she got divorced.  And the wisdom of Collaborative Divorce became apparent.  Ms. DeMeo's hard won wisdom is well worth contemplating when making a decision about how to handle your own divorce.    

I have volunteered as a father to underprivileged campers (through my sister who is a social worker) at the camp for the last 7 or 8 years.  The current men's and women's UNC basketball players serve as camp counselors. It is very cool to see kids meet the guys and girls that they watch on television.

As you can see from this story, it's a great event and a very worthy cause.  The back story of the camp is even better.  Eric formed a friendship with Jason Clark while he was playing for UNC.  Jason was a terminally ill patient at the Childrens' Hospital at the time.  Jason eventually passed away, but Eric and Jason's family teamed up to create the camp to raise funds for the hospital. 

The camp has raised close to $1,000,000 so far for projects that the hospital's budget does not cover.  It is a privilege to be involved in the camp in a small way.

On a more personal note, the young man that I have "parented" the last few years recently found out that he had a tumor on his spine.  It was thought to be cancerous.  He's 13.  Fortunately, the tumor was removed successfully, and was not cancerous.  Huge relief for everybody that knows him.  And a reason to be thankful for all the good things in life. 

To learn more about the Montross Camp or make a donation, click here.

So, we let conflict have negative effects in our lives.  We avoid or cut out people and relationships from our lives because of some real or perceived conflict with them.  We do this to friends and even family members.  We even avoid people we don't have a conflict with if there is some chance that it will involve someone that we do have a conflict with.  This happens when a parent avoids his or her children simply because they cannot deal with the conflict with the other parent.  There is some logic to this reaction:  Avoid the person, avoid the conflict and thus avoid the unpleasantness of it all.

The problem is that losing the relationship with the other person is not a good solution to the conflict.  First, a potentially rewarding relationship is lost.  Second, avoidance is just stalling.  Avoidance does not actually resolve the conflict, it just perpetuates it.

The good news is that conflict has an upside.  When handled correctly, conflict presents a tremendous opportunity to repair and even strengthen relationships.  Conflict often brings to light issues that need to be resolved. And conflict is a force that can propel us forward.

In fact, conflict is not a bad thing at all, it is neutral.  Conflict is made a good or bad thing by how you respond to it.  If you address it maturely and productively, then conflict is a catalyst for healing, personal growth and peace of mind.  If you address is by avoidance, accusations, fighting and arguing, then it is a catalyst for depression, anxiety, violence and long term misery. 

In family law matters, conflict is omnipresent.  I have seen couples use that conflict to destroy their lives, children and finances.  I have also seen clients use conflict to resolve longstanding grudges and set the stage for peaceful and happy futures.  The difference between those clients was how they chose to deal with their conflicts.  Alternative dispute resolutions processes such as Collaborative Divorce and mediation offer ways to turn conflict into a catalyst for positive changes in the lives of divorcing couples and their families. 

Suze Orman is the Queen of smart money.  She knows a smart financial move when she sees one.  And she knows that Collaborative Divorce is a smart financial move.

While you have to give her credit for recognizing the wisdom of Collaborative Divorce, she does get one of the details wrong.  Suze states that Collaborative Divorce involves a mediator.  In fact, it does not.  That is an important distinction between Collaborative Divorce and mediation.  Collaborative Divorce does involve a combination of lawyers, divorce coaches, child specialists and financial experts to help a couple through the process. 

Nonetheless, Orman's and Oprah's recommendation should encourage all divorcing couples to consider Collaborative Process.