Our Blogs

In 2003, accountancy firm Grant Thornton began an annual survey designed to gather information relating to divorce in the UK. Following this study’s inception, adultery was revealed, year after year, to be the main cause of divorce in the UK… until now.

Instead, the survey has revealed that the majority of couples are now filing for a divorce as a result of them having fallen out of love with one another, with 27% of divorcing couples having relied upon these grounds compared to 25% who filed on the grounds of marital infidelity.

The number of divorcees filing on the grounds of adultery is also at its lowest since the survey began, but where do these changes come from? I very much doubt that people are having fewer affairs. I have already noted in a previous post that research has shown that 22% of men and 14% of women will engage in an extramarital affair at some point during their lives. I also noted that there are now a plethora of online communities designed to help spouses seeking affairs to find their ‘partner in crime’. No, combine these facts with growing liberal attitudes and it’s highly unlikely that fewer people are having affairs (though they may be better at hiding them,) the most likely reason for this change lies in the declining value of property.

Following a spouse having discovered the other’s adultery, they then have six months to separate from their spouse. If the couple do not separate within this period then the courts assume that the couple have reconciled and will refuse to grant a divorce on these grounds. Most couples can actually be separated whilst living in the same property and can still file for a divorce whilst doing so. At least one spouse will, however, need to have vacated the matrimonial home before the divorce is finalised (which takes between three and five months if the divorce is uncontested) and with more and more people finding it harder to make ends meet financially as a result of the stagnant economy, would be divorcees will either need to sell the matrimonial home, or one spouse re-mortgage the property and buy the other out, in order to obtain the capital required to buy, or even rent, new properties. Due to falling house prices, however, the couple are unlikely to receive an offer that they find acceptable or, worse yet, find that they are unable to sell the property at all thus preventing them from moving on.

In the alternative scenario, with banks far more reluctant to lend money in the current climate, one spouse is also unlikely to be granted a re-mortgage on the back of their income alone, again forcing the couple to remain in the marital home. As a result, the couple conclude that it is not possible that at least one of them will be able to move out within the relevant timeframe, choose to spend time saving and delay their divorce. The couple in question then file for a divorce on the grounds of two-year separation at a later date. Well, that’s my theory, anyway.

In all honesty, it really isn’t possible to compile a definite reason for these changes and I doubt we’ll ever know why fewer coupled divorced on the grounds of adultery last year. We’d very much like to hear your opinions as to why these changes have come about though. Please leave a comment below, it’d be great to hear from you.

The Government’s plans to slash the country’s Legal Aid budget by £350 million and limit the number of no win, no fee arrangements offered by legal firms has been met with far less opposition than we at Quickie Divorce had initially expected. Whilst we – and any other number of other institutions that offer legal services via ‘non-traditional’ mediums – will be able to accommodate those who can no longer rely upon legal aid to fund their applications for uncontested divorces, cuts to other areas of law are certain to affect some of the UK’s most vulnerable citizens and the lack of opposition to these proposals is not just surprising; it is a real reason for concern. Critics have not only noted that these cuts will deny thousands upon thousands of less affluent individuals access to justice, but also draw attention to the fact that the resulting glut of applications filed by litigants in person will result in our courts becoming saturated with meritless claims. The influx of which will, they argue, severely hinder the efficiency of our legal system. This, in turn, will have an acute and negative impact on both legal professional and all individuals that utilise the courts in order to resolve civil disputes. Now, without statistics, these musing are inconsequential. Consider then, the fact that it has been estimated that as many as 650,000 people will be denied access to Legal Aid if these cutbacks are approved. That’s 650,000 fathers trying to gain access to their children, 650,000 wives desperate to prove that their avaricious husbands are hiding assets in an attempt to deceive courts during divorce proceedings and 650,000 victims left crippled because of botched diagnoses conducted by incompetent physicians. Whichever way you put it, 650,000 vulnerable and desperate people in urgent need of help will left out in the cold, all in the interest of austerity. Some may point to the hundreds of thousands of public sector workers made redundant as a result of our efforts to return to a state of financial permanence in an attempt to justify these reductions. True, the vast majority of the population are making sacrifices, but whilst finding new employment is an exceptionally difficult task in today’s climate, it is still far easier for an unemployed individual to find work than it is for a layperson to navigate Britain’s complex legal systems as a litigant in person which – with the exception of abandoning their pursuit of justice – will be the only option available to such individuals. What’s more – as the recent blighting of the public sector has shown – open the gates, and a flood will follow. Deny justice to the lower classes and, soon, you may just find that it’s inaccessible to all but the rich and powerful. Uncontested divorce is the only area of law within which reductions in Legal Aid are practicable. Cuts in other areas will result in little more than injustice and, ultimately civil courts crippled through strain. Implementing an efficient, effective – and above all else – fair austerity plan was ever going to be an easy task, but, then, official aren’t elected to do easy jobs. Back to the drawing board, Mr Clarke!

Following them having studied the drinking habits of 30,000 people across a period of between thirty and forty years, British thinktank Demos have concluded that children whose parents divorce are more likely to binge drink in later life.

I’ll openly admit that I became greatly concerned when I read one headline concerning the corresponding report. Not because of Demos’ findings, but because of the foolish and quite frankly irresponsible way in which one of our biggest newspapers chose to represent them. The Sunday Telegraph chose to convey the findings of Demos’ study under the headline ‘Children Whose Parents Divorce ‘More Likely’ to Become Binge Drinkers’. Having read the thinktank’s press release on the subject, however, I noted that the increased likelihood of children of divorce engaging in binge drinking was referred to only briefly; with the vast majority of the document instead referring to how parenting techniques can affect the chances of a child abusing alcohol in later life.

Why, then, did the paper’s Consumer Affairs Editor, James Hall, choose such a headline? I initially felt that the publication’s right-wing ethos had led them to print this misleading title. Their desire to condemn parents that have obtained or are seeking a divorce and promote the nuclear family taking precedence over objective reporting.

Whilst the news values of his employer certainly influenced his work, though, Halls’ headline is the result of more than just political pandering. Demos’ findings actually concluded that parents who fail to provide their children with emotional support, appropriate limits and boundaries or subject them to excessive discipline are likely to find that their children drink more in later life. The potentially negative effects of divorce were discussed only briefly and, when the study’s more meticulous findings are taken into account, it soon become apparent that good parenting can negate the negative effects of divorce and its potential association with binge drinking.  Mr Hall, however, knowing what his editors required from him, has chosen to conclude that single parents will struggle to provide children with these requirements.

Many would argue that this assumption is entirely fair. Single parents are likely to find it more difficult to offer their children all of the support they need as a result of patience and energy becoming strained. Still, I would conclude that such assumptions are not only crass, but offensive. Mr Hall has, ultimately expressed veiled opinion and printed it as news. Yes, the article placed far less emphasis on the negative effects of divorce, but the headline itself would better serve an editorial or column. It should not have been presented as news.

The all too apparent lack of objectivity present within Hall’s headline has potentially robbed divorced couples of the positive message that they could have gleamed from these findings: specifically that, in spite of their divorce, they can, through collaboration and cohesion, engage in effective parenting and negate a great deal of the negative effects that their divorce could have on their children.

The decision to divorce a partner is never easy. Spouses will lie awake at night contemplating their situations before choosing to take the plunge and end their marriage. Even once the decision has been made, however, an individual still has to break the news to their partner. In most instances, this process is relatively straightforward. The spouse in question is likely to be aware of their partner’s dissatisfaction and – a few beleaguered attempts at reconciliation aside – will probably consent to the divorce almost immediately. Occasionally though, a spouse can be blissfully unaware of matrimonial unhappiness or disharmony and a more subtle approach will be required. Conventional wisdom dictates that the recipient of this news is far less likely to become overly exacerbated if they are informed in a public place. This tends to hold true, but is no guarantee and, furthermore, can be insensitive. In our experience, the best place to tell your partner is at home. Make sure you’re alone and disclose the news in a calm, dispassionate manner. Your partner is likely to protest, but stand firm and remember that you’ve made your decision. In time, they will yield and consent to a divorce. Unfortunately, informing your partner is only the first step. If you have children, you need to inform them too. This can prove to be extremely difficult and whilst it is important that you do not inform your children in too hasty a manner, delaying matters will not help either. Consider precisely what you intend to tell your child and rehearse it remembering to take the child’s age into consideration – if you have more than one child and there is a significant age gap, it may be better to inform the children separately. During this conversation, it is important to inform the child that their parents still love them dearly and that they will see both parents regularly. You should also inform them that the separation is in no way their fault. You should not forget that however well a child reacts to this declaration, the news is certain to have hurt them and you should be prepared to spend additional tie comforting them over the next few weeks, or even months, as a result. Now, following you having spoken to both your partner and your children, the only people you need to inform are your friends and family. This can be difficult but it is an extremely important step. Divorce is a painful process and you will rely heavily upon family and close friends throughout the process. Informing them of your divorce is the first step towards establishing a support group that will care for you throughout the process. Choosing to divorce a spouse is difficult and informing others of your intentions is even harder. Nevertheless, if you are unhappy in your marriage and have concluded that a divorce is the only option, then you need to take action. Remember that whilst it may be difficult to follow through on your intentions, your hard work will result in a new and happier you and allow you. In short, the hard work will be worth it in the long run.

I feel that I should start with an apology. Owing to a week’s holiday, this blog has not been updated for the past week – sorry about that! Anyway, whilst on holiday, I engaged in one of my greatest indulgences and consumed the contents of several newspapers each day and found – albeit unsurprisingly – that editorials were rife with commentary and analysis about the recent riots that devastated large parts of some of Britain’s largest cities. The articles raised several questions concerning cause, prevention and morality, though none offered anything that I believed to be a satisfying explanation as to why so many of our citizens threw sanity to the wind. Not that I am in any position to criticise. If I – or anyone else for that matter – was able to answer such questions then we would be quickly whisked off to Westminster and handed ministerial positions faster than a ‘youth’ could break into a retailer of electrical goods. Some of the arguments put forward in an attempt to explain the reasons behind the riots were truly preposterous, however, and served no genuine purpose as a result. The lack of male teachers in primary schools was put forward by one observer. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I didn’t see many four to eleven year olds smashing windows and setting fires in any of our major cities. If any dwarves are convicted over the next few weeks, however, then we can safely assume that these individuals have been framed and that parents nationwide should have taken action when their children mysteriously obtained a new pair of designer trainers and a fifty inch flat screen TV. OK, I realise that the individual in question was actually arguing that a lack of male influence during rioters’ early lives had led them to deviate from acceptable behaviour, but this presumption is so laughable that it only seems appropriate to respond to it in a facetious manner. Another laughable argument revolved around the UK’s high divorce rate and the dissolution of the traditional nuclear family. A proposal which further exemplifies the lack of sufficient thought that has been ascribed to these undeniably important events. Yes, a great deal of research has shown that children of divorce can be disadvantaged when compared to those that do not experience their parent’s marital breakdown, but I have yet to come across any research that shows that a child of divorce is more likely to engage in criminal activity. The way we are raised certainly has a significant influence over how we behave as adults, but any suggestion that a single parent is less capable of teaching a child how to distinguish between right and wrong is both a hasty and imprudent conclusion; there were almost certainly several other social and economic factors that influenced Britain’s temporary descent into anarchy. Let us not forget that we live in a society that is more avaricious than ever before. Also that many of Britain’s most successful individuals and those that sit in our corridors of power have engaged in less than virtuous behaviour in recent times. Irresponsible lending may have brought about a deflated economy that has hurt many millions of families worldwide, yet bankers continue to receive gargantuan bonuses and whilst the majority of politicians confessed to fiddling their expenses, many escaped meaningful punishment and remain in positions that afford them considerable influence. Ultimately, I doubt that we will every full understand Britain’s brief though appalling descent into anarchy but, in my opinion, commentators should pay less attention to single parents and give greater consideration to the irreverent behaviour of our so called ‘great and good’.

My weekends have felt strangely empty over the last two months. Not that I haven’t been busy – the traditional British summer barbecues have, as ever, been a permanent feature, as has lounging in beer gardens. I also recently acquired a rather delightful and gregarious Bichon Frise puppy called Bowie and, goodness knows, he’s kept me quite busy over the last few weeks! Despite me having been able to fill my free time effectively and having greatly enjoyed the summer, however, a weekend just doesn’t feel like a weekend without one of my greatest passions: football. I’ve done everything I reasonably could in order to fend off my withdrawal symptoms. I watched Wimbledon whenever I got the chance, visited the BBC’s football website dutifully in order to keep up on the latest multi-million pound transfers and even tried watching cricket. Nothing, though, could quite fill the gaping hole left by the absence of competitive football. That all changed this weekend with the commencement of The Football League, and I now have another 10 months of sporting action to look forward to. I am not alone in my love of what is often referred to as ‘the beautiful game’. Millions – if not billions – of men worldwide share exactly the same passion and it is far from uncommon for disgruntled wives to seek divorces because of their husband’s sporting addictions. Fortunately, my girlfriend has always been tolerant of my somewhat ‘unhealthy’ obsession – yes, she may ‘switch off’ when I attempt to discuss different formations or Cardiff City’s newest signing, but she’s never prevented me from watching a game, has stomached the inappropriate moodiness that came about following defeats and even attempted watching a game or two with me. Why then do so many relationships crumble as a result of men’s’ fixation with sport? The answer to this question is relatively straightforward: a lot of men put sport before their wives, their girlfriends, their families and their friends, following their chosen teams with the sort of devotion and fervour as that shown by religious fanatics. I genuinely believe that my girlfriend does not take issue with my love of football because she knows that she – and now Bowie – are far more important to me than any sport. In essence, whilst many men would refuse to go to lunch in order to celebrate the mother-in-law’s birthday in order to watch the ‘big game’, any man with a smidgeon of devotion and decency will take a free lunch and – like I did – excuse yourself every half hour or so to check the score (god bless the iPhone). As a result of my ability to prioritise, every few weeks I am given 90 minutes to shout at the television in a nonsensical manner, communicate through grunting only and, if necessary, sulk like a four year old child when things don’t go my way. On occasion, I’m even allowed to watch a game of football! As with all successful relationships then, men need to learn to compromise. It’s a hobby, not a way of life and putting anything before your partner or family is certain to end in separation or divorce. On a lighter note, Quickie Divorce has compiled its all-star divorced 11 – a team compiled solely of footballers who were divorced or divorced their partners in celebration of the new football season. Enjoy: Goalkeeper – David Seaman Seaman played over 400 games for Arsenal and was also capped by the English national team 75 times – earning the nickname ‘safe hands’ in the process. He’s also been divorced twice, most recently following an affair with former Dancing on Ice star Frankie Poultney. Seems he was just as susceptible to adultery as he was to long, lofted shots at goal then. Right Back – Sean Bean Ok, technically not a footballer, but the Lord of the Rings actor did play a professional player in ‘When Saturday Comes’. He’s also a lifelong fan of Sheffield United and having been divorced on no less than four occasions, he’s more than qualified to take his place in our dream team. We’re sure he’s more than capable of some ‘Sharpe’ gamesmanship. Left Back – Ashley Cole Who else could be chosen at left back but everyone’s favourite philanderer? Cole Married Cherly, one of the world’s most desired women, in 2006 and, seven allegations of infidelity later, the couple divorced in 2010. This ‘paragon of virtue’ also once claimed that an offer of £55,000 per week had left him trembling with anger, attempted to claim that a police officer’s speed gun was faulty when caught doing over 100 mph in a 50mph zone and also once shot a 21 year old student with an air rifle. Centre Half – Tony Adams Former England Captain Adams initiated divorce proceedings against his former wife, Jane, in 1996 following her having been treated for drug addiction. The Arsenal man – who served a two month prison sentence for drink driving offences in 1990 – later enjoyed a relationship with former model Caprice. This relationship didn’t last though, not least because Adams resembles the sort of thing you might see in a bad episode of Doctor Who. Right Midfield – Paul Merson Merson was an exceptionally gifted played. Unfortunately, he was also an alcoholic with a penchant for narcotics and gambling. His first wife, Lorraine, initiated divorce proceedings after discovering that her then husband had bet £10,000 on one game of snooker. His second wife, Louise, also filed for divorce as a result of his excessive gambling. Left Midfield – Rhodri Giggs Rhodri enjoyed a brief career with Torquay United as a youngster before disappearing into obscurity. He also filed for a divorce earlier this year when he discovered that his wife Natasha had been engaged in an 8 year affair with his older brother and Britain’s most decorated footballer, Ryan Giggs. Talk about sibling rivalry. Centre Midfield – Ray Parlour Not the most talented of players, Parlour was nevertheless a steady and reliable player who was capped by England ten times. Parlour’s divorce from wife Karen, however, was ground-breaking with the courts awarding the former Mrs Parlour over a third of all his future earnings. At least you’ll be remembered for something, Ray. Centre Midfield – Paul Gascoigne Gascoigne married his childhood sweetheart Sheryl in 1996 and was divorced – having previously admitted to beating her continuously for two years – in 1998. Gascoigne has since undergone treatment for bulimia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bipolar disorder and alcoholism and was dropped from ITV’s ‘I’m a Celebrity … Get Me out of Here!’ in 2009 following him having failed a psychiatric test before filming began. Forward – Diego Maradona Still regarded by many as the greatest football player of all time, the diminutive Argentine’s divorce from wife Claudia was finalised in 2004, following which he admitted to having fathered a love child whilst the couple were still together. The pair had exchanged vows in 1989 and survived Maradona’s relationship with both the Italian mafia and cocaine prior to separating as a result of their marriage having irretrievably broken down. Forward Thierry Henry No one has scored more goals for Arsenal or the French national team than Henry. Unfortunately, his marriage to English model, Claire Merry, wasn’t quite as successful. The Couple married in 2003 before Merry filed for divorce in 2007 when she found what were later described as ‘racy texts’ to another woman on Henry’s phone. Merry was later awarded an £8 million pound settlement when the couple’s divorce was finalised in 2008. Sacre bleu! Forward – Gary Lineker Widely regards as football’s ‘Mr Nice, Lineker married Michelle Cockayne in 1986 before the couple filed for an amicable divorce in 2006. Unsurprisingly for a man that still helped his parents on their fruit and veg stall whilst at the height of his powers; the couple’s divorce was perfectly serene and went by without a hitch. Lineker did agree to a £3 million settlemtn, however, and now needs to appear in crisp adverts for the rest of his life as a result.

It’s the root of all evil, doesn’t grow on trees and can’t buy you happiness. Like it or not, the sway of money is all pervading and a constant cause of discord and disagreement. Such disputes are more than capable of driving a wedge between otherwise happy couples and, as a result, many people avoid discussing fiscal matters with their partners. Successful couples discuss everything, however, and on a day where the world’s media is rife with stories of impending financial peril, now seems as appropriate a time as any to discuss how talking about and managing your money can play a big part in maintaining a happy and healthy relationship and preventing separation or divorce. The first thing that any couple needs to do is accept disparity in both their incomes and outlooks. In every married couple that I know one spouse earns more than the other. What’s more, one spouse always seems to be an Ebenezer Scrooge-esque miser whilst the other could quite easily squander the national budget of say, Uruguay, on a weekday morning. Nevertheless, these differences should not bring about conflict. If one person earns more than the other, the lesser earning partner needs to ensure that they do not allow their income to determine their sense of self-worth. Many people’s self-esteem is intrinsically linked to their paycheque but such individuals would do well to swallow their pride and remember that their bank balance is by no means the only thing that shapes their contribution to society or their relationship. If an individual has low self-esteem because they are unable to contribute equally to household bills, then they can compensate for this by doing additional tasks around the home. Doing the washing up or a bit of dusting costs nothing, after all, and can help people feel that they are making a stable and useful contribution to the relationship. On the other hand, if an individual earns more than their partner, it would be advisable that they do their best to remain sensitive to the fact that this can affect their confidence and do all they can to remind their partner that they are, in the context of their relationship, equals. Praising a partner for the other things that they bring to the relationship will also go a long way towards helping them to maintain their self-confidence. Before a couple begin cohabitation, it is extremely important that they each sit down with one another, discuss their personal finances in a manner that is completely transparent and then decide who will pay for what. It is extremely important, however, that monetary responsibility is shared. This will allow a sense of equality and will also ensure that one half of the relationship does not feel overburdened. A joint account for household essentials and bills is a good idea, also, but separate accounts for disposable income, coupled with an agreement that each individual is entitled to spend their money in any way they see fit, will prevent unnecessary arguments and potential resentment whilst also ensuring that each individual still maintains a sense of financial independence. Ultimately, maintaining regular, healthy and honest communication with your partner on all matters, not just money, is imperative to the success of a relationship. Ignoring problems in the hope of avoiding an argument is little more than a short term fix and separate or divorce will soon follow.

I despise Big Brother. The sight of individuals pandering to the public in the hope of finding or re-establishing fame turns my stomach. Following Channel 4 having cancelled this abomination last year, I believed that I would never be subjected to such sights again – I was wrong! Channel 5 has recently resurrected the show and whilst I can avoid their nightly broadcasts, I cannot open a newspaper or log onto the internet without being bombarded with the latest goings on in the house. Extremely frustrating when you have no interest in the actions of failed pop stars, surgically enhanced photographers or those sheep that X Factor executives cloned a few years ago in the hope of peddling their wares to infants nationwide.

Stories concerning one of these so called ‘celebrities’ have caught my eye, however, and have also raised some interesting questions concerning the role that political opinion plays in relationships, marriages, separations and, indeed, divorce.

Sally Bercow – the wife of John Bercow, speaker of the House of Commons – entered the house last week and despite the fact that I find her no more interesting than the other vapid individuals now inhabiting this property, it is interesting that her and her husband’s political leanings could not, on the face of things, be more opposed. Mr Bercow served as a Conservative MP prior to him having ascended to the position of speaker, whilst Mrs Bercow not only actively campaigned for Tony Blair during the early days of New Labour but also previously stood as a Labour candidate. This would suggest that a relationship can not only survive but actually prosper in spite of a distinct divide in political and administrative opinion. But is this really the case?

The majority of people subscribe solely to very mild, wavering political opinion and would not consider their partner’s political persuasions to be terribly important as a result. To some, though, their political opinions and outlook are intrinsically linked to how they perceive and evaluate themselves. Individuals such as this will almost certainly seek a partner with similar views – and I think it’s safe to say that Mr and Mrs Bercow fall into this category. Again, this would suggest that differences of opinions regarding such matters will not bring about a divorce, but there are other factors which really need to be considered before we can draw such a conclusion.

Whilst serving as a Conservative MP, Mr Bercow was a member of the party’s now infamous Monday Club – a group widely described as belonging to the far-right by many journalists and social commentators. Following his marriage to Sally, however, he began to add his support to far more liberal political ethos, defying the then Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith by voting for unmarried homosexual and heterosexual couples to be allowed to adopt children and later defied another Conservative leader, Michael Howard, expressing liberal/leftist views when discussing controversial issues such as taxes, immigration and the Iraq war. All of which suggest that having a wife who prescribed to more leftist ideology influenced Mr Bercow’s own political outlook.

Alternatively, perhaps Mr Bercow made a conscious effort to change in order to maintain a happy marriage and prevent divorce. Either way the ideological changes that have been exhibited by Mr Bercow are vast.

From a personal perspective, whilst I believe that sharing similar values with your spouse is important, differences in opinion need not result in divorce or separation, rather, differences in opinion and debate can contribute to a happy, healthy relationship provided each spouse is able to respect the other’s viewpoints. Opposites can attract after all. Provided a couple are not completely polarised politically, that is. Whilst respect and compromise can go a long way towards alleviating the potential damage that political divide can cause, however, there is no doubt that is more than capable of ending marriages.

Opinions change over time and, as a result, once happy couples can find that they are now incompatible. This is a shame, but if differences of opinion lead to a couple being unhappy in their marriage, then divorce really is the best option.

An American billionaire’s attempts to deny his wife a substantial divorce settlement failed yesterday. His argument – he’s an ‘innate genius’. Henry Silverman, 68, from New York, claimed that he amassed his vast fortune as a result of his superior intellect and that his wife, Nancy, had not contributed to his success and attempted to submit three affidavits from psychologists in support of his argument. State Supreme Court judge Laura Drager refused to consider this evidence, however, stating that whilst there was no doubt that Henry – who earns a reported $50 million per annum – possessed great acumen and skill which could be directly attributed to the success of his business, his wife had effectively administered the couple’s domestic and social life and raised their daughter, Casey – all actions which, she claimed, aided Henry’s success. The couple’s 30 year marriage came to an end in 2008, following Henry leaving Nancy for yoga instructor Karen Hader to whom he is now engaged.

Summer holidays are a British institution. For a week or fortnight each year, thousands upon thousands of couples and families will leave these dreary shores for sunnier climes, laze on beaches, eat good food and escape the stress and strains of everyday life. We are currently at the height of the holiday season, however, many newly separated or divorced parents are facing the prospect of a holiday within which they will be the only adult member of their family – a daunting prospect that is more than capable of either preventing or ruining what should be an enjoyable time. What’s more, that first holiday without the other parent can be a testing time for children – particularly if they are still young and unable to fully understand their new situation – and should they find themselves in a hotel populated by traditional nuclear families, they are only likely to be  reminded of the fact that one parent isn’t there.   What’s more, being the only single parent at a resort is certain to bring about nervousness and discomfiture and, once again, could quite easily ruin your holiday. This is a great shame! A holiday is a perfect way of relaxing and forgetting about the problems and distress brought about by marital breakdown, a few weeks in the sun can also be very beneficial to children of divorce.  But how, exactly, does a recently divorced parent overcome the problems highlighted above? Quickie Divorce thinks it may have found a solution. Small Families Holidays was setup in 2001, after co-owner Allen Miller discovered that large tour operators refused to accommodate single parents’ specific needs, and so offers holiday packages designed exclusively for single parents. “Many newly divorced or single parents are apprehensive about travelling alone with their children as many hotels and holiday operators don’t meet the needs of their new family dynamics” says Miller.  “Small Families Holidays ensures that all individuals are supported.  A member of staff escorts each holiday and is always available to offer assistance and support and to get the group to ‘gel’ and socialise”. Amongst the holiday packages on offer at Small Families Holidays are tours to Ecuador, the Galapagos islands and Kenya, though Miller notes that trips to Tunisia and Majorca tend to be the most popular trips available throughout the summer months. The company also offer Christmas trips to Lapland, Caribbean cruises and winter breaks to Morocco along with a plethora of other packages including activity and skiing holidays. “Many single parents are apprehensive about booking a holiday for the first time following their separation” says Miller, “but we would always advise any such person that is considering getting away to get in touch with us. We are happy to talk and can always find a package that suits any circumstances and are also able to ensure that your children holiday with other children of the same age to ensure that they are able to make friends and enjoy the activities on offer.   This, in our experience, is extremely important as happy children makes for both a happy parent and, indeed, a happy holiday. So, put your apprehensions aside, pack your holiday gear and jet off. You’ll be glad you did. Small Families is owned by Allen Miller and Carole Cooper and is located in Sandy, Bedfordshire. Their website address is http://www.singleparent.travel/ and they can be contacted on 0845 9000 895.

Divorce is now legal in all European countries following Maltese parliament having approved new laws.

Parliament made the announcement on Monday following the bill having been approved by 52 votes to 11.

The parliamentary discussion came about as a result of a non-binding referendum which saw 53% of voters support introducing divorce legislation to the island. The bill has been subjected to protests throughout proceedings, with Prime Minister, Lawrence Gonzi, having voted against it during parliamentary discussions claiming that the introduction of divorce would damage traditional family structures – an act which saw him accused of hypocrisy and even despotism.

Despite Gonzi’s staunch opposition to the introduction of divorce, though, 19 members of the Nationalist party went against their party’s official stance and approved the legislation. The new laws are now expected to come into effect in October when the president signs the relevant documentation.

The tiny Mediterranean nation has been the only European country without divorce legislation for the past 15 years following the Republic of Ireland having legalised divorce in 1996.

A divorce settlement between a Russian mogul and his estranged wife was finalised today in the high court with reports suggesting that the figure is the biggest in British history. 65 year old Boris Berezovsky had previously agreed to provide his estranged wife, Galina, with the payment which, whilst unspecified, has been described as very substantial. Other sources have suggested that the settlement was worth between £165 and £220 million. During the brief hearing, Judge Eleanor King praised the couple: “It does not matter whether the awards are thousands of pounds or hundreds of millions of pounds. “At the end of the day if the husband and wife can reach agreement they can both live with, it bodes much better for their future welfare and for the children of the family and to continue working for the benefit of all of them. It is completely appropriate for me to approve this order and I am very happy to do so, and my congratulations to all concerned,” She added. Berezovsky made his fortune through purchasing what had previously been state owned assets at significantly reduced prices following the collapse of the Soviet Union and has owned several major companies including Sibneft Oil and Russian Television channel ORT. John Charman’s divorce from wife Beverley produced Britain’s previous record settlement with the insurance broker being ordered to provide his wife with £48 million in August 2006. Paul McCartney’s divorce from Heather Mills comes in at third following the former Beatle having been ordered to pay £24.3 million following the dissolution of their four year marriage.