Our Blogs

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.

Johnny Gannon thought he’d live happily ever after following his marriage to Jamaican national Patricia Chambers. The 57 year old charity worker was left heartbroken, however, when his new, 24 year old bride left him only 20 minutes after having arrived at his flat in Perth, Scotland. The couple met two years ago whilst Johnny was holidaying on the Caribbean island and a romantic relationship ensued. Johnny then made regular trips back to Jamaica and following Patricia having suggested marriage, they tied knot during a ceremony in her home country earlier this year. Upon returning to the UK, Johnny immediately began applying for a visa for his new wife, paying for her to fly to the UK following it having been granted. As soon as Patricia arrived at Johnny’s modest council flat, she immediately sent her husband out for groceries. He returned 20 minutes later only for Patricia to inform him she was leaving him before leaving the flat and attempting to flag down passing cars on the street. Johnny has since informed the Daily Mirror that he believes that Patricia fled to Bristol in order to meet up with a Jamaican boyfriend who had helped her organise the scam. Not only does Johnny have to deal with heartbreak, though, he also has to handle the fact that he will now be unable to divorce Patricia for at least two years. In accordance with Scottish law, an individual that wishes to divorce their spouse must prove that their marriage has irretrievably broken down. Now, considering that Johnny’s wife left him within 20 minutes after arriving at would have been the couple’s matrimonial home you may think this this criteria has already been fulfilled, unfortunately, this is not the case. You see, in Scotland an individual is required to prove that their marriage has broken down for one of five reasons: adultery, unreasonable behaviour, desertion or because the couple have been separated for a period of one or two years or more. Two and five year separation cannot be relied upon for obvious reasons – the couple having only recently separated – but it would still appear that any of the other three reasons could be relied upon and Johnny granted a divorce. This, owing to technicalities, is not the case. It would appear that adultery was suitable because Patricia fled in order to meet a Jamaican boyfriend. Such a claim would not succeed for a number of reasons, though. Firstly, in order for a divorce on the grounds of adultery to be granted, the respondent must admit to having had sexual intercourse with a person other than their spouse during their marriage. Most importantly of all, the respondent’s adultery must be the reason why the couple separated. As Johnny and Patricia actually separated as a result of Patricia choosing to leave, a divorce filed on the grounds of adultery would not succeed. Leaving your new spouse in such unceremonious circumstances certainly constitutes unreasonable conduct, but judges are notoriously pernickety when reviewing such reasons and it is therefore advisable that anyone applying for a divorce quotes at least four separate examples on their petition.  What’s more, any example of unreasonable behaviour quoted needs to have taken place during the marriage. As there only appears to be one instance of unreasonable behaviour, it is highly unlikely that Johnny would be granted a divorce if he filed on these grounds. Filing on the grounds of desertion is highly problematic and is rarely done as a result. It would also be necessary for Johnny to wait at least two years until he could file on these grounds meaning that, provide Patricia consented to a divorce, it would be quicker for him to file on the grounds of one year separation. Alternatively, if Patricia did not consent to the divorce, then Johnny could file on the grounds of two year separation and avoid the difficulty of having to prove that Patricia had deserted him. Even when the time comes when Johnny can file for a divorce, he will need to locate Patricia in order to serve her with the relevant documentation. This will inevitably lead to him needing to enlist the services of a private investigator, thus accruing further costs on top of £5,000 he is already reported to have spent on Patricia. All in all, then, Johnny is married to Patricia for at least one year whether he likes it or not and should Patricia attempt to gather further monies from him when he initiates divorce proceedings, may find himself subjected to financial as well as emotional hardship.

The growth of secularisation has seen religion's influence wane significantly in recent times. Malta recently became the last European nation to legalise divorce despite steadfast opposition from the influential Roman Catholic Church. The Filipino government also recently announced their intentions to discuss reintroducing divorce legislation to the country – a proposal that has been met with significant opposition from religious leaders – and should these discussions prove successful, then the Philippines will become the last major nation to recognise divorce. Whilst religion’s influence on everyday life has lessened, however, religion still exerts significant influence on the world of divorce and individuals who follow any religious doctrines should be aware that, in many instances, they will be required to obtain a religious divorce as well as a civil one. Most denominations of Christianity are tolerant of and allow divorce, but the Catholic Church will not allow a divorcee to remarry unless they have had their marriage annulled internally. This form of annulment is granted solely by the Catholic Church and a couple requesting an annulment will be required to attend a tribunal ran by the church during which the couple’s eligibility for religious annulment will be decided. Should the couple be granted an annulment, their marriage will have ended in the eyes of the church only and the couple will remain legally married until they obtain either a civil annulment or divorce. Divorce is permitted in Islam – though it is widely frowned upon – and is regarded as the legal means of dissolving what is viewed as a legal contract. In order to divorce legally, followers of Islam that live in the UK will still be required to obtain a divorce via the UK courts. They will also have to engage in separate procedures governed by Sharia law in order for their divorce to be recognised by Islam and allow them to remarry within this religion, however. These procedures differ as a result of both the applicants’ sex and to which Islamic denomination they belong. Husbands are required to inform their spouses of their intentions to divorce them (Shi'ite Muslims must do this in the presence of two witnesses) and then wait for a period of three months before the divorce is validated. The couple can reconcile during these three months, but the divorce will be granted if the husband indicates that he still wishes to divorce his wife following this the period having ended. Alternatively, if a wife wishes to divorce her husband, then she is required to wait for a period of one month before her application is placed before a Sharia judge who will then declare whether or not a divorce should be granted. Critics of Sharia law often argue that these laws are in need of reform as they unjustly favour male applicants. The Council of Islamic Ideology recommended that these procedures be reformed in November 2008, but these plans were shelved when the Council’s proposals were severely criticised by Islamic traditionalists. Judaism takes a somewhat lenient approach to divorce and recognises that it is ultimately better for a couple to separate and dissolve their marriage than live together in matrimonial disharmony. Like other religions, though, a civil divorce alone will not be recognised by Jewish law and divorcing couples are required to adhere to certain procedures in order to obtain a Jewish divorce. In accordance with Jewish law, a husband must instruct a religious scribe to prepare a document, known as a get, which states that the couple are now divorced. Once the husband presents this document to his wife and she, in turn, accepts the document, the couple are, in the eyes of Jewish law, divorced and allowed to remarry. Should the wife refuse to accept the get, then the divorce will not go ahead. The husband can, however, seek permission to remarry provided that he receives the approval of one hundred rabbis. Unfortunately, a wife whose husband refuses to issue a get is afforded no such recourse and she will remain married to her husband until a get is issued. Jewish feminists have pointed out that many husbands use this to demand money or other items from their wives before issuing gets, liking such behaviour to ransom. Other religions, including Hinduism and Sikhism, allow divorce under certain circumstances and will allow remarriage provided that one of the acceptable reasons for divorce – outlined within the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 – have been satisfied. Buddhists view marriages as entirely secular and a Buddhist can remarry within the religion provided they have obtained a civil divorce prior to remarrying. If one spouse does not agree to assist their partner in obtaining a religious divorce, then they can – provided they have also filed for a civil divorce – make use of the Divorce (Religious Marriages) Act 2002. This act allows the courts to postpone the production of a decreed absolute until it is satisfied that religious aspect of the divorce has been finalised.  In order to file for such assistance, the applicant will need to file an affidavit with the court following their decree nisi having been granted. It is strongly advised that any individual that intends to make such an application seek legal advice before doing so.

The need for divorcing couples to arrive at amicable arrangements concerning childcare and contact often breeds conflict. Many parents have conflicting ideas on what is best for their children and, with emotions running high, mothers and fathers often forget that the needs of their children are, ultimately, what should come first. In an attempt to redress this problem, the majority of divorcing parents in the US are required to attend parental education programmes designed to assist them in managing their relationship during and after divorce and increase their awareness of the effect that their actions can have on their children. These classes have seen their fair share of criticism, however, with the programmes’ detractors claiming that there is little evidence to show their effectiveness and that public funds could be put to better use as a result. A recent study centred on a programme based in San Francisco entitled ‘Kids Turn’ – which has been operating since 1988 and requires divorcing parents and the children affected by the divorce to attend six separate sessions – sheds some light on the benefits of the programme. In order to gather the information required to undertake their study, researchers asked their subjects to provide feedback on their mental health, relationship with their children/parents and on co-parenting conflict both before and after the course. Their outcomes showed that the additional education did indeed benefit those who attended. Following completion of the programme, parents reported significantly less conflict with their partners as well as reduced parental alienation. Reduced levels of stress and depression amongst both parents and children were also highlighted. These results indicate that parents who attended this course are less likely to argue with one another during their divorce and that they are more likely to engage in positive communication with their children, both of which are certain to be highly beneficial to children of divorce. The report noted that there was no change in parent-children relationships following the programmes completion, but this does not detract from the study’s other positive findings. What do you think? Would the UK benefit from the introduction if such programmes? Please leave a comment below.

News Corporation and many of its employees have seen their reputations tarnished and their careers left in tatters as a result of the recent phone hacking scandal. One group has, however, avoided becoming embroiled in the media frenzy despite them having been very much involved, however: private investigators. This isn’t terribly surprising. Private investigators are regarded, after all, as masters of deceit capable of gathering sensitive information without causing commotion or arousing suspicion. As a result of these covert methods, however, very few of us know anything about private investigators – least of all when we may need to hire one. Unsurprisingly, potential divorcees provide private investigators with a significant amount of business. What is surprising is the number of individuals that hire such individuals. In 2007, the Guardian reported that half of all divorces in the UK in 2006 were filed after one party had hired a private investigator to check on their spouse. Owing to the reduction in peoples’ disposable incomes, this figure is likely to have fallen somewhat in recent years, but as it still may be necessary for those considering divorce to employee a private investigator, it’s important that people know when they may need such an individual as well as where to find one that is both reliable and reputable. Many people that hire private detectives do so because they expect infidelity on the part of their spouse. Divorce petitions that rely upon adultery will become contested unless the respondent spouse admits to the adultery. If the respondent is unwilling to admit to any wrongdoing, then the divorce will become contested and the petitioner will need to obtain proof of adultery. A private investigator could choose to visit their client’s partner directly in order to obtain this information, or they may choose to observe them in secret, making a note of where they go, where they sleep and so on. Alternatively, they could gather other pieces of evidence such as letters, diaries or photographs in order to prove that the respondent is being unfaithful. Individuals filing for a divorce on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour may also require a private investigator to prove the accuracy of their allegations if the respondent contests the application. Unreasonable behaviour which may need to be proven could include alcoholism, extra marital sexual activity that does not constitute adultery and domestic abuse but this is by no means a complete list. A private investigator will gather the evidence required in order to prove the accuracy of any allegations of unreasonable behaviour that may have been put forward. Even if the reasons for divorce are straightforward and the respondent’s consent is not required, it may be necessary to locate an estranged spouse as their residential address is required in order to file for divorce and a private detective can assist with this. Many people also hire private investigators in order to ensure that their spouses have fully disclosed all information about their assets prior to commencing divorce proceedings, that they have no prior convictions or to ensure that a resident parent is adequately caring for a couple’s children following divorce. Any individual that is considering hiring a private investigator should remember that these individuals are not regulated by any external body, however, and that many will utilise illegal methods in order to obtain the required information. More worrying still is the fact that whilst there are over 10,000 private investigators working within the UK, only 1,200 appear on the data protection register. Fortunately, a large number of private investigators that operate within the UK are members of The Association of British Investigators. Established in 1913, the ABI are endorsed by the Law Society of England and Wales and insist that its members are honest transparent and law abiding at all times. Any investigator that does not adhere to these rules will simply not be granted membership of the association. A list of investigators with ABI accreditation at the association’s website: www.theabi.org.uk. Any individual that is considering hiring a private investigator – whether it be for a divorce or any other matter – should request that the investigator outline precisely how they will go about obtaining the required information before opting to enlist their services in order to ensure that they will act in both an appropriate and ethical manner. It is possible to investigate matters unassisted, but it would be worth remembering that being directly involved in the situation can distort your findings. If your investigations concern a divorce, then engaging in investigations can also bring about significant emotional discomfort or maybe even grief. Combine these with the fact that a private investigator will be able to gather the information that you require far quicker than a layperson and it becomes clear that, in some instances, hiring a private investigator is the best option.

It is now easier to obtain a divorce than a driving license senior judge, Sir Paul Coleridge, claimed during an interview with the BBC yesterday. Part of me can’t help but feel that his comments have been misinterpreted somewhat. Obtaining my full driving license was a laborious and unforgiving task – it took me no less than four attempts. Procuring my provisional license, in comparison, was a doddle. I contacted the DVLA and in less than one week, I was the proud owner of a green plastic card emblazoned with a less than flattering picture of my 17 year old self. Still, regardless of Mr Justice Coleridge’s true intentions, it cannot be denied that his comments were both crass and offensive. Irrespective of the teenage frustration that came with discovering that I had once again failed in my attempts to turn my green license into its more desirable pink version, not even my questionable teenage judgement led me to believe that my emotional turmoil was in any way comparable to that which my parents had suffered during their divorce – finalised 15 years before I had so much as turned a wheel in anger. Lambasting the divorce process utilised within the UK, Coleridge claimed that securing a divorce involved little more than filing forms and asked for the government to reform laws in order to protect the institution of family and bring about a close to social ills such as truancy, drug addiction, child abuse, and bad behaviour in schools - failing to consider the fact that other social, economic and historical factors almost certainly also create such problems. What reformations would Coleridge like, exactly? His comments suggest that he would like all would-be divorcees to undertake tests before they’re afforded the right to divorce. A standard written theory test, followed by a more practical examination where an individual visits your home, observes you and your spouse interacting with one another and then determines whether or your situation is dire enough to warrant divorce, perhaps? I can imagine it now: “sorry sir but I can’t grant you a divorce today. You’re clearly trapped in a loveless marriage, but that’s only a minor according to my marking criteria. Better luck next time.” All in all, what Coleridge (who has been married for 38 years and never experienced divorce himself) seems to have forgotten is that no process which brings about such a glut of negative emotion can ever be considered simple. Furthermore, it is all too easy for a man of aristocratic stock and expensive education to deem a legal process to be simple; few laypeople that attempted to navigate the murky waters of divorce unassisted would agree with his assessment. So, rather than spend vast amounts of taxpayers money on commissions charged with the task of reforming family law in the UK, why not employ scientists to develop glasses lenses that allow an individual to see the world in black and white. That way, the government saves money and Coleridge can pretend it’s still the 1950s – everybody wins!