Michael Kelly is a lawyer at Kelly, Fernandez & Karney. He is a leading counsel on family law and divorce preparations, proceedings, and implications.
Friday, August 30, 2013
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Women and divorce: By the numbers
It may be a surprise to some, but it seems women file for divorce more often than men. A recent study highlighted that only one percent of women found themselves divorced in the 1920s, compared to 15 percent today.
As early as 1867, the numbers on divorce filing rates indicate that women are initiating divorce proceedings 62 percent of the time. This nationwide statistic peaked at 70 percent in the 60s. Smaller samples in 1969 showed that in Iowa, 80 percent of filers are women, and this trend of women as plaintiffs in divorce proceedings continues to hover over 60 percent until today.
In modern times, women’s desire to break away from their marriages may be psychologically rewarding, but not as practical. Although women are quicker than men in emotional recovery, they tend to suffer more from the economic strains of divorce. In fact, research indicates that divorced men enjoy income growth, while divorced women endure a significant drop in the cash flow at home. A woman's standard of living takes a 73 percent dip after divorce, while men take in a 42 percent increase.
This financial disparity is traced to child custody norms, which favor women. Men who are mandated to contribute to child support sometimes neglect the obligation. Figures show that the court is not where battles are won, as only 61 percent of those ordered to pay up actually do. The problem of inconsistent child support is persistent, but with the improving standard of wages in the country, it seems the trend of women ending their marriages will not cease. Equal opportunities for women may even push up the numbers, as the fairer sex can now secure better living standards for their children with better pay.
Divorce is a difficult process for both parties, but may put one at a greater disadvantage. Michael Kelly is a lawyer specializing in divorce and family law. Women in the Santa Monica, CA area can visit this website for information about how he and his firm handle divorce cases.
 |
| Image Source: www.myjewishlearning.com |
As early as 1867, the numbers on divorce filing rates indicate that women are initiating divorce proceedings 62 percent of the time. This nationwide statistic peaked at 70 percent in the 60s. Smaller samples in 1969 showed that in Iowa, 80 percent of filers are women, and this trend of women as plaintiffs in divorce proceedings continues to hover over 60 percent until today.
 |
| Image Source: www.i.huffpost.com |
In modern times, women’s desire to break away from their marriages may be psychologically rewarding, but not as practical. Although women are quicker than men in emotional recovery, they tend to suffer more from the economic strains of divorce. In fact, research indicates that divorced men enjoy income growth, while divorced women endure a significant drop in the cash flow at home. A woman's standard of living takes a 73 percent dip after divorce, while men take in a 42 percent increase.
 |
| Image Source: www.b-i.forbesimg.com |
This financial disparity is traced to child custody norms, which favor women. Men who are mandated to contribute to child support sometimes neglect the obligation. Figures show that the court is not where battles are won, as only 61 percent of those ordered to pay up actually do. The problem of inconsistent child support is persistent, but with the improving standard of wages in the country, it seems the trend of women ending their marriages will not cease. Equal opportunities for women may even push up the numbers, as the fairer sex can now secure better living standards for their children with better pay.
Divorce is a difficult process for both parties, but may put one at a greater disadvantage. Michael Kelly is a lawyer specializing in divorce and family law. Women in the Santa Monica, CA area can visit this website for information about how he and his firm handle divorce cases.
Sunday, August 11, 2013
"Party planners and manufacturers of party supplies are raking it in selling everything from “decapitated groom” cake toppers to black “just divorced” sashes to nights on the town complete with VIP club entrance and limo transportation."— TIME, The Booming Business of “Divorce Parties”
Friday, July 26, 2013
REPOST: Breadwinning Wives and Nervous Husbands
Richard Thaler’s article discusses the links between traditional gender views and the risk for divorce:
Atty. Michael Kelly is the current head of Kelly, Fernandez, and Karney, the oldest and largest family law firm in Santa Monica, California. Visit this website to learn how the firm manages clients’ divorce cases to ensure peaceable outcomes.
 |
| Image Source: nytimes.com |
GIRLS are generally outperforming boys in high school, and then proceeding in greater numbers to attend and graduate from college. And as women take the helm as chief executives of more major corporations, including Hewlett-Packard, I.B.M. and PepsiCo, there are hints that the glass ceiling may be at least cracking, if not breaking.
Such developments should encourage aspiring young women to believe that social norms are changing, and that barriers to success are dropping. But a new study reveals that women’s gains on the economic front may be contributing to a decline in the formation and stability of marriages.
One reason for this decline may be that women with greater earning power have greater economic security that allows them to leave bad marriages. Yet another possibility is that many men seem to be clinging to a social norm from the “Mad Men” days: that the husband should be the primary earner in a family.
There is an obvious disconnect here. Those men who spent their teenage years goofing off and their college years drinking beer shouldn’t be surprised that women who consistently received higher grades and continued further in school might now be earning more money as well. But the evidence suggests that while men tend to applaud their spouses when they help to bring home the bacon, husbands aren’t always as enthusiastic when women start bringing home the filet mignon. And it’s especially troubling that these old-fashioned social norms about gender identity appear to be adversely affecting family formation and stability.
This is the finding of an interesting new paper by Marianne Bertrand, Emir Kamenica and Jessica Pan, three economists who are colleagues of mine at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business. They found that traditional views of gender identity, particularly the view that the right and proper role of the husband is to make more money than the wife, are affecting choices of whom to marry, how much to work, and even whether to stay married.
Suppose that both men and women are happier — all else being equal — the more money their spouse makes. In such a world, couples wouldn’t care whether the man or woman earns more, so the population of couples would have what we call a “normal distribution,” and would be captured in a bell-shaped curve. But that’s not what we see in the real-world data.
Instead, there is a sharp drop in the number of male-female couples at exactly the point where the woman starts to earn more than half of household income.
This finding supports earlier research from speed-dating sessions, which found that while women prefer men to be intelligent and ambitious, men have these preferences for women only to the point where women threaten to earn more than they do. These preferences appear to be reflected in whom people choose to marry and in how much women choose to work outside the home.
Women’s earnings have been rising relative to men’s over the past 40 years — though, on average, women’s pay still lags behind. One sign of change is seen in a recent study from Pew Research, which finds that mothers are providing more than half the income in 15 percent of married households with children at home, up from 3.5 percent in 1960. Given such trends, it’s logical that problems would arise if men kept their desire to be the primary breadwinners.
This may be one of many reasons that the share of young adults in marriages decreased 30 to 50 percent across various racial and ethnic groups from 1970 to 2008. Clearly, a choice to marry later in life explains part of this decline, but Ms. Bertrand and her co-authors estimate that the trend in the percentage of women making more than men explains almost one-fourth of the marriage rate’s decline in the 40 years ended in 2010.
What happens when a man marries a woman who has the education and skills to earn more than him? The couple can avoid violating the “man earns more” social norm if the woman works part time or leaves the labor force altogether. The authors found evidence of both choices. But what if the woman stays in the labor force and does earn more than her spouse? How does this affect the marriage? The findings here are striking. In such couples, surveys show, both wife and husband generally report being less happy about the marriage.
Given these findings, it isn’t surprising that when a wife earns more than her husband, the risk of divorce rises, too. To study this, the authors used a survey conducted in two waves, 1987-88 and 1992-93. (There were no more recent data available for this particular test.) Then they investigated the likelihood of a divorce in the five-year interval. For this sample, some 12 percent of all couples were divorced during this period — a sobering fact about the stability of marriages in general. But the divorce rate rose by half, to about 18 percent, for couples in which the wife earned more than the husband.
How to explain the jump? Some people might think that a wife who earns more will do fewer household chores than her tradition-bound mate expects. Regardless of your opinion about men who harbor such feelings, the facts rule out that explanation: women who earn more than their husbands actually do a greater share of household chores, compared with couples in which the wife works but earns less.
The paper’s findings support the anecdotal complaints of many highly educated, high-earning women who say they can’t find suitable husbands. And as women continue to outperform men in school, these problems are likely to grow. Perhaps over time, men will catch on to this new world and accept the fact that hard-working girls may well turn into highly paid women.
Until that realization sinks in, problems arising from tradition-bound notions of gender identity will keep taking a toll on our economy and our families. Employers, however, may have opportunities to help.
v For a variety of reasons, including the stubbornly persistent norm that women assume more than half the responsibility for raising children, many highly educated women would like to work part-time at a level commensurate with their skills. Businesses, however, have been slow to adapt, even as technology makes it much easier to do some or all of one’s work from home. I believe that there are substantial economic opportunities for companies that find ways to hire the millions of talented but underemployed mothers in our economy.
But now back to the notion of couples’ contentment: Is there any way to tell whether it’s the wife or the husband who becomes unhappy when the wife earns more? Does he think that she is threatening his manliness, or does she think that he’s a slacker?
That may be impossible to answer, partly because of something I learned long ago from Alvin E. Roth, a Nobel laureate in economics last year. I call it Roth’s rule: In equilibrium, it’s impossible for you to be happier than your spouse.
If you and your spouse both understand that rule, you’re both likely to be happier — regardless of how much money either of you make.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
Five of the most expensive celebrity divorces of all time
Divorce has become somewhat of a normal occurrence in Hollywood. Although the occasional split will shock audiences, celebrity break-ups are generally unsurprising – if not already expected. The real story comes when the settlement amounts are revealed. Here are some of Hollywood’s priciest splits so far:
Madonna and Guy Ritchie – $90 million
Madonna, then 53, and Guy Ritchie, who was 43, made headlines with their split after eight solid years of marriage– an eternity in modern Hollywood. Madonna opened up eventually, saying the relationship lost its flame and left her wondering if true love even existed.
Neil Diamond and Marcia Murphey – $150 million
The pair was wed long before Neil Diamond’s hit records were even produced. After a marriage that lasted a quarter of a century, Murphey walked away in 1995 with the rough equivalent of $6 million for each year the two spent together.
Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver – $250-375 million
This celebrity split requires no introduction, though it may not be on this list in a few months’ time. As of recent reports, the two are working on reconciling and are in "no rush" to finalize their divorce after Schwarzenegger was forced to admit he had an affair with the couple’s housekeeper, resulting in a public scandal and a half-brother for his four children.
Mel and Robyn Gibson – $425 million
After one daughter, six sons, and 31 years of marriage, the actor and filmmaker split his hard-earned $850 million in half to end a five-year settlement battle. The couple cited "irreconcilable differences," but Gibson admits the separation began after his arrests for alcohol-related behavior.
Rupert and Anna Murdoch – $1.7 billion
Though not celebrities per se, this couple makes the list for breaking through the 10-figure ceiling with their gargantuan settlement. It was widely known that Anna wanted her husband to retire, but it seemed Rupert would sooner give the marriage up than his time with News Corp.
Even though they are highly publicized, celebrity divorce cases receive no special treatment under the law. Michael Kelly, an attorney, specializes in family law and litigation for clients across a range of industries and visibility levels. Read more about his work on this website.
Madonna and Guy Ritchie – $90 million
 |
| Image Source: brisbanetimes.com.au |
Madonna, then 53, and Guy Ritchie, who was 43, made headlines with their split after eight solid years of marriage– an eternity in modern Hollywood. Madonna opened up eventually, saying the relationship lost its flame and left her wondering if true love even existed.
Neil Diamond and Marcia Murphey – $150 million
 |
| Image Source: unterhaltung.de.msn.com |
The pair was wed long before Neil Diamond’s hit records were even produced. After a marriage that lasted a quarter of a century, Murphey walked away in 1995 with the rough equivalent of $6 million for each year the two spent together.
Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver – $250-375 million
 |
| Image Source: irishcentral.com |
This celebrity split requires no introduction, though it may not be on this list in a few months’ time. As of recent reports, the two are working on reconciling and are in "no rush" to finalize their divorce after Schwarzenegger was forced to admit he had an affair with the couple’s housekeeper, resulting in a public scandal and a half-brother for his four children.
Mel and Robyn Gibson – $425 million
 |
| Image Source: celebritynetworth.com |
After one daughter, six sons, and 31 years of marriage, the actor and filmmaker split his hard-earned $850 million in half to end a five-year settlement battle. The couple cited "irreconcilable differences," but Gibson admits the separation began after his arrests for alcohol-related behavior.
Rupert and Anna Murdoch – $1.7 billion
 |
| Image Source: thestreet.com |
Though not celebrities per se, this couple makes the list for breaking through the 10-figure ceiling with their gargantuan settlement. It was widely known that Anna wanted her husband to retire, but it seemed Rupert would sooner give the marriage up than his time with News Corp.
Even though they are highly publicized, celebrity divorce cases receive no special treatment under the law. Michael Kelly, an attorney, specializes in family law and litigation for clients across a range of industries and visibility levels. Read more about his work on this website.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
REPOST: Australia's divorce rates: the real statistics
This article from The Guardian reveals the real deal on the current divorce rates in Australia.
New figures show a big increase in people divorcing after 20 years or more of marriage. But it's not as big as some would have you believe.
New figures from the Australian Institute of Family Studies have shown a big increase in people divorcing after 20 years or more of marriage. However, it's not exactly as big as some media outlets would lead you to believe as most publications got the numbers wrong.
'Rate of divorce after 20 years of marriage doubles', according to one story. And 'Parents wait until children go, then do the same thing' from another.
The headline statistic is that people are waiting longer to divorce. This is based on an analysis of the proportion of marriages lasting 20 years or over before ending in divorce. A media release from the AIFS put this figure at 13% in 1990 and 28% in 2011, which many people erroneously reported.
However, the actual report shows 20.2% in 1990 to 27.6% in 2011. The same figure for 'final separation' is 13% to 18.3%. They've mixed up the separation and divorce numbers. There's actually a much more mild 7.4% increase between 1990 and 2011. So we are seeing an increase in the duration of marriages that end in divorce, just not quite as much as all that.
So, what are the other trends coming out of this new report?
You're more likely to get divorced when you're younger.
And of younger people who are married, women are more likely to experience divorce than men. In fact the rates of divorce are higher for women than men up until the 40-44 age bracket, where men then have higher rates up to 65 and over, likely due to an overall tendency for men in marriages to be older, and women younger. The AIFS report also suggests older men have a higher tendency to remarry than older women.
Divorce is down, and has been for a while.
From 2007-2011 the rate per 1000 people has stayed around 2.2 and 2.3. This is down from 2.9 in 1996, and very far down from the biggest peak of 4.9 in 1976 after the Family Law Act 1975 came into effect.
The age that people get divorced has increased dramatically.
The median age of divorce for men is at the highest its been since 1970, with 44.5 in 2011. Women are similarly high at 41.7. This is up from a historical low of 35 and 33 for men and women respectively in 1980.
Divorces that involve children are decreasing too, which the AIFS suggests means people actually are staying together for the sake of the kids. This fits with the increase in the proportion of longer marriages ending in divorce we saw above.
The report also highlights the relative instability of people who are unmarried, but living together, versus married couples. Citing numbers from the Growing Up In Australia report - for infants who were living with married parents in 2004, 12% were with only one parent by 2010. The same figure for unmarried couples cohabiting is 27%, suggesting unmarried couples are more than twice as likely to break up.
Atty. Michael Kelly currently heads Kelly, Fernandez and Karney, the largest family law firm in Santa Monica, California. Visit this website to learn more about divorce.
New figures show a big increase in people divorcing after 20 years or more of marriage. But it's not as big as some would have you believe.
New figures from the Australian Institute of Family Studies have shown a big increase in people divorcing after 20 years or more of marriage. However, it's not exactly as big as some media outlets would lead you to believe as most publications got the numbers wrong.
'Rate of divorce after 20 years of marriage doubles', according to one story. And 'Parents wait until children go, then do the same thing' from another.
The headline statistic is that people are waiting longer to divorce. This is based on an analysis of the proportion of marriages lasting 20 years or over before ending in divorce. A media release from the AIFS put this figure at 13% in 1990 and 28% in 2011, which many people erroneously reported.
However, the actual report shows 20.2% in 1990 to 27.6% in 2011. The same figure for 'final separation' is 13% to 18.3%. They've mixed up the separation and divorce numbers. There's actually a much more mild 7.4% increase between 1990 and 2011. So we are seeing an increase in the duration of marriages that end in divorce, just not quite as much as all that.
 |
| Image Source: guardian.co.uk |
So, what are the other trends coming out of this new report?
You're more likely to get divorced when you're younger.
 |
| Image Source: guardian.co.uk
|
Divorce is down, and has been for a while.
 |
| Image Source: guardian.co.uk
|
The age that people get divorced has increased dramatically.
 |
| Image Source: guardian.co.uk |
The median age of divorce for men is at the highest its been since 1970, with 44.5 in 2011. Women are similarly high at 41.7. This is up from a historical low of 35 and 33 for men and women respectively in 1980.
Divorces that involve children are decreasing too, which the AIFS suggests means people actually are staying together for the sake of the kids. This fits with the increase in the proportion of longer marriages ending in divorce we saw above.
 |
| Image Source: guardian.co.uk
|
Atty. Michael Kelly currently heads Kelly, Fernandez and Karney, the largest family law firm in Santa Monica, California. Visit this website to learn more about divorce.
Monday, May 6, 2013
Secret assets and divorce
 |
| Image source: telegraph.co.uk |
Upon marriage, both husband and wife are required by law to reveal the extent and value of their properties, especially if they are combining their assets. But not everyone complies with the rules. In some instances, one or both parties use tricks to lie about the real value of their properties.
 |
| Image source: heartdoctorblog.com |
The practice breaks the oath represented by the Financial Affidavit signed during marriage. A person proved to have falsely disclosed assets may face punishment during the divorce. The punishment can range from being required to shoulder the other party’s legal fees to being incarcerated. Needless to say, the punishment will depend on which state the offence was committed.
 |
| Image source: eHowCDN.com |
The adage that proclaims honesty as the best policy will never get old because of practices like this. Siding with the law is best, especially in matters involving finance, as illegal practices that promise gains may actually yield nothing but losses.
Michael Kelly is an attorney based in California. He heads Kelly, Fernandez & Karney, a firm composed of experts in divorce and family law. The firm’s official website offers information about how its lawyers can help you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)