Our Blogs

Couples in Mexico City could soon be able to forgo the divorce process if they choose to end their marriage within its first two years according to reports.

The bill’s creator, Lizbeth Rosas Montero, has claimed that this would allow couples to sample living together before making a lifetime commitment, adding that she believed that these changes, if agreed, would result in a reduction in the city’s divorce rates. It’s an interesting idea, but it’s also completely unnecessary.

Research from the Office for National Statistics has revealed that more and more couples are now living together before marriage and, in turn, fewer and fewer marriages are now ending in divorce. This research may have been conducted in the UK, but its findings are relevant on a global scale. In fact, the findings contained within the report led me to conclude that if we genuinely want to see fewer marriages end in divorce, then we must encourage couples to live together before making the decision to walk down the aisle.

Critics of cohabitation may continue to argue that the institution of marriage has been damaged as a result of it now being socially acceptable for couples to live together before marriage, but as the aforementioned study has shown, this is simply not the case. Also, what would be more debilitating to this institution; cheapening marriage by turning it into a trial period or simply allowing couples to live together and ensure that they’re compatible before marrying? I think it’s a no brainer.

So, the logical way to reduce the divorce rate is to not only allow, but to encourage couples to live together before they marry; the first step being the introduction of new laws that protect their interests.

A firm of solicitors located in the south west of England are utilising unusual methods in order attract new customers; offer them a free divorce. Follett Stock Solicitors, who have offices in Devon and Cornwall, have advertised their free divorce service – available to all customers who sign up before the 30th June – on flyers, its website and twitter. Predictably, religious leaders have heavily criticised the firm’s actions with Father Robin Eastoe, rector of the Heavitree team of churches in Exeter and Devon, arguing that the offer and its deadline is encouraging more couples to separate. Father Eastoe told the Daily Mail: “It [divorce] should be a couple's own decision made at their own pace. Saying 'come on do it quickly as it's free' puts an awful lot of pressure on people at a sensitive time when they are hurting. Putting a time limit on it is definitely putting pressure on people to make a snap decision. In the interests of society, we should put as much effort as possible to strengthening marriage.” The firm’s associate partner, Rebecca Gurgul, defended Follett Stock’s actions stating that the offer of a free divorce was designed to assist people in need, specifically those who wanted to divorce their spouse but could not afford to do so. Miss Gurgul further stated: “We don't think marriage is insignificant but a lot of people going through a divorce struggle with the cost of it all”. The free service that Follett Stock is offering is limited, however, and it does not include provisions offered by online competitors such as courier collection and delivery of important documents, enhanced customer support and dedicated case managers. Remember, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is! style="border:0;" />

Research conducted by Cambridge based think tank, the Jubilee Centre, has shown that cohabiting couples are six times more likely to separate before their first child reaches five when compared to their married counterparts. The study, which saw researchers analyse data from more than 14,000 households and 22,265 adults, revealed that 37 per cent of parents who were cohabiting when their child was born will separate before the child’s fifth birthday. In comparison, only 6 per cent of couples who were married when the child was born had separated. 66 per cent of all cohabiting couples had separated before the child reached 16, compared with only 16 per cent of married couples – a fourfold increase. Iain Duncan Smith, Secretary of Work and Pensions, warned last year that children from broken homes are nine times more likely to commit a crime than those from stable families. Dr John Hayward, director of the think-tank, said: “All the evidence suggests that families headed by married, biological parents who have not previously lived together provide the best environment for both the individuals involved and their children. “This has huge personal, social, economic and political consequences for us all.”

People are susceptible to moral panics and nothing seems to inspire dread quite as much as the discovery of a new or mutated strain of a disease – the sort of bug that can turn your bones into jelly and ravage your brain’s frontal lobes leaving you a limp, salivating shadow of your former self. And now, a new and highly contagious infection has been identified by academics at the prestigious Brown University – with researchers claiming that divorcing couples’ desires spread amongst other couples within their social circle in much the same way as a disease is passed from one person to another; the ‘Divorce Virus’, if you will.

The study concluded that close friends of a divorcing couple were 147 per cent more likely to divorce their spouse, the work colleague of an individual going through a divorce 55 per cent more likely to leave their partner whilst friends of friends were 33 per cent more likely to pursue a divorce. Additionally, couples whose siblings divorced were 22 per cent more likely to then divorce themselves.

Experts have reasoned that the phenomenon – which they have termed ‘divorce clustering’ – is largely attributable to individuals feeling that divorce is more acceptable and less stigmatised following them having been informed that a friend or colleague is divorcing their partner.

Other experts have claimed that many married individuals will not consider leaving their spouse as a result of their relationship problems alone. This changes, however, when an individual is experiencing problems in their marriage and becomes aware that a friend or colleague is divorcing their partner as they realise that a divorce is pursuable and could, potentially, solve their problems.

Now, we at Quickie Divorce know that the foundations of a solid and stable marriage are unlikely to crumble due to the inadvertent influence of a close friend, but what about couples who find themselves on the brink of separating; is it possible that such an event could persuade them to give up on a marriage that could be saved? Considering the lures of singledom, it seems entirely possible.

Relationships are difficult, marriages are downright complex. When comparing the former to the latter, commitment and tolerance are required in far greater quantities than they had been previously and, what’s more, any sense of freedom that an individual previously enjoyed is likely to come under significant threat following marriage.

The need to reach compromises that suit both parties is unavoidable when you begin to cohabit and share a bank account. Unfortunately, no matter how compatible a couple are, they will, following marriage, experience bickering, quarrelling and outright arguing in a manner that they had previously believed to be unthinkable. Occasionally, these disputes escalate bringing about great stress and fear which lead people to question the success of their marriage and the wisdom of their decision to wed in the first place.

Taking these factors into consideration, it is entirely understandable that a stressed spouse will begin to give the possibility of divorce more serious consideration following someone close to them having informed them of their decision to divorce their spouse. Worse yet, they may envy the sense of liberation expressed by this individual and conclude that the only means of rectifying the problems they have been experiencing and regaining happiness lies in a fresh start without their partner. In turn, this individual may then tell their spouse that they wish to separate without having sufficiently thought their situation through. Such actions could condemn a marriage that could well have been worth saving to the doldrums of disappointment and failure. Even if a couple were to rectify their differences following such a statement having been made, the rejected spouse is likely to harbour feelings of resentment for quite some time.

What we at Quickie Divorce are trying to communicate is that a decision to divorce or separate is never one that should be taken lightly. Yes, it may well seem that the grass is indeed greener on the other side, but remember that your situation is unique to you, and the decisions of others should have no bearing on whether or not you choose to divorce your spouse.

Before even considering uttering the D word in the presence of your partner, consider your situation. Is there a realistic chance that you and your partner can improve your situation? If there is, then you owe it yourself – and indeed your spouse – to do everything you can to try and resolve your differences. If, on the other hand, you conclude that your relationship is not only in disrepair, but that you are grossly unhappy, cannot see yourself being happy whilst married to this individual and that this will not change, then it may well be time to cut ties to your spouse and proceed with your divorce.

In a nutshell, don’t initiate divorce proceedings because of what those around you are doing, do it because – following heartfelt, considered and extensive analysis – you have decided it’s what’s best for you.

Children and finances are widely regarded as the most common causes of an acrimonious divorce but research conducted by the Co-operative has revealed a new cause of significant dispute during such proceedings: the family pet. The study revealed that a significant number of cases involving animals are prompting contested divorces, with 20 per cent of all cases involving pets resulting in court hearings concerning custody of their pets. Another 10 per cent of couples have enlisted professional mediation in order to determine who their four-legged companions should live with. Lee Mooney, head of pet insurance at the Co-operative, stated that custody of a family pet is now one of the main factors behind upset and conflict when married couples choose to divorce. Mooney also noted that the survey revealed how highly people regard their pets. Money also added that couples may soon prepare prenuptial agreements before purchasing a pet in order to avoid arguments in the event of a separation. The Co-operative’s research further supports a study undertaken by financial consultancy, Grant Thornton, in 2007 which highlighted the growing number of legal battles concerning the custody of pets, a spokesperson for the consultancy saying: “While many have never heard of custody battles over pets, or may ridicule those who fight over them, in many cases the pet is considered to be part of the family.” In UK law, pets are viewed as personal possessions that are to be divided between separating couples. The U.S. has long recognised how commonplace battles over family pets are during divorce proceedings, however, and over 90 universities currently offer their students courses which address the issue of pet custody. Previous high profile cases have seen actors Jake Gyllenhaal and Kirsten Dunst battle over custody of their German shepherd Atticus. Similarly, Hollywood actress Drew Barrymore fought for custody of Labrador, Flossie, when divorcing her comedian husband Tom Green. The Co-operatives findings also revealed that pets can be immensely beneficial to separating couples with half of the 20 per cent of couples who got back together having stated that their decision to resume their relationship came about as a result of their pet. Some couples also claimed that their pet becoming ill or even dying forced them to discuss matters with one another, resulting in them resolving their differences and resurrecting their relationship.

Women who lose their virginity before the age of 16 are more likely to become divorced in later life according to research conducted by the University of Iowa. The study, undertaken by associate sociology professor Anthony Paik, examined the responses that 3,793 married and divorced woman had supplied during the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth and revealed that 31 per cent of women that had their first sexual experience before the age of 18 divorced within five years of marriage whilst 47 per cent divorced within 10 years. In comparison, only 15 per cent of women who were 18 or over when they lost their virginity divorced within five years whilst 27 per cent divorced following 10 years. The research also showed, however, that the likelihood of a woman becoming divorced in later life was unaffected if their first sexual experience was entirely wanted and they were over 16. If sex took place before the woman was 16, then the increased chance of divorce still applied even if the experience was wanted. Of the women surveyed only one per cent stated that they were certain that they wanted to lose their virginity at 13 or younger, five per cent at the age of 14 or 15 and 10 per cent at age 16 or 17. Despite his findings, Paik proposes that sex itself does not increase the prospect of divorce stating that “The results are consistent with the argument that there are down sides to adolescent sexuality, including the increased likelihood of divorce. But there's also support for the "more sex positive" view, because if a teen delays sex to late adolescence and it is wanted, that choice in itself doesn't necessarily lead to increased risk of divorce”. Paik further theorised other explanations, suggesting that women who had sex as adolescents were predisposed to divorce. Paik also submitted a more casual explanation, positing that early sexual experiences could lead to individuals developing behaviour that was conducive to divorce. “'If the sex was not completely wanted or occurred in a traumatic context, it's easy to imagine how that could have a negative impact on how women might feel about relationships, or on relationship skills.”

So your divorce has finally been finalised, you’ve received your decree absolute and you’re now legally single again. You’d assume that everything’s now been finalised and that you can breathe a sigh of relief. But wait, you’ve forgotten to file a Clean Break Order and now you’re former spouse can pursue you for your future earnings whenever they see fit. Recent news of Michael Douglas’ ex-wife’s attempts to obtain a share of money that the actor has earned following their divorce in 2000 has highlighted the importance of such orders. As does the story of Kevin Halstead who won the lottery just four months after his divorce was finalised. You see, without a Clean Break Order, you could be pursued for any future earnings. And whilst you’re unlikely to find yourself starring in a Hollywood blockbuster or celebrating a lottery win anytime soon, your former partner could still pursue you for any money you inherit or if you finally get that well-paid job. It is far, far easier to overturn an informal agreement than a financial order that has been approved by a District Judge and, in order to ensure peace of mind; a Clean Break Order is certainly an investment worth making.

With children tending to reside with their mothers following divorce, making arrangements for Father’s Day can be a problematic task for a divorced couple. In fact, for many dads, the prospect of spending Father’s Day without their children is a very real and, indeed, harrowing possibility. Unfortunately, sometimes, this is unavoidable. Divorced couples often relocate and this can make it difficult to make the required arrangements. Nevertheless, every effort should be made to allow children to spend the day with their father. In the event that suitable arrangements cannot be made, then make sure that your children send their dad a card - if they are too young; write the card on their behalf. A phone call or, better yet, a conversation over a web cam, would not go amiss either. It may be difficult to bring yourself to do this, but you should try and wish your former partner a happy Father’s day – this will go a long way towards developing or maintaining an amicable and cordial rapport with your former spouse. Feelings of resentment and bitterness are common following a divorce, and many women deny their former husbands access to their children as a result. True, many fathers disappear into the ether following divorce, but for every dad that makes no effort to see his children, there is another struggling to enjoy contact with his estranged children. Experts are in agreement that it is beneficial for children to enjoy contact with both parents yet – depending upon which study you believe – between thirty five and fifty per cent of fathers lose contact with their children following separations; effectively meaning that three quarters of a million children in the UK are left fatherless following their parents having divorced. More worrying are the results of numerous studies which have revealed that children with absent fathers are more likely to develop drug problems, leave school early, become teenage mothers and display a range of behavioural and psychological problems. So, irrespective of how acrimonious your separation may have been, denying your ex contact with your children is severely detrimental to not only the individual that hurt you, but also the people that you love the most. If your husband isn’t currently enjoying contact with his children, then Father’s Day could be the perfect excuse for you to contact him and work towards an amicable arrangement. Remember, it’s in everyone’s best interests and no parent should be discouraged from playing an active part in their child’s life.

Kate Moss will be signing a prenuptial agreement before marrying boyfriend Jamie Hince according to reports. The 37 year old model plans to marry the Kills guitarist, 42, in a ceremony later this year and a source recently told newspaper the Daily Star that “Kate and Jamie are definitely going to sign a pre-nup to ensure Kate’s money and estate are both protected in the event of a divorce,” going on to add that ““This is something Jamie wants as much as Kate”. Moss, who has amassed an estimated £48 million since beginning her modelling career in 1988, was previously been embroiled in controversies relating to her use of illegal drugs and relationship with Pete Doherty. Hince’s band the Kills released their fourth LP ‘Blood Pressures’ on the 4th April and its leading single ‘Future Starts Slow’ was recently used to promote television show True Blood in America.

Spending more than forty five minutes commuting each day can significantly increase the likelihood of divorce according to a new study. The research, which was conducted by Erika Sandow of the Umeå University in Sweden, revealed that couples were forty per cent more likely to separate if one spouse engaged in a lengthy daily commute. Experts added that an individual is likely to be too tired to contribute to housework after travelling and that this can cause conflict within relationships. Men were far more likely to engage in long distance commutes and Sandow commented that this could potentially reinforce traditional, negative gender stereotypes such as breadwinners and housewives. Her research also showed that the chances of a couple separating were unaffected by whether it was the husband or wife engaging in the daily commute, however. The risk of divorce is far greater during the first few years of marriage, with couple’s concepts of an idyllic marriage giving way to day to day life during this period. Sandow also noted that many couples are successfully managing their situations, however, suggesting that “those who are managing have worked out a strategy of how to divide the household and organize their day in a way that works out for both partners. You have to create strategies on how to manage daily and remember the commute is not only affecting the commuter but those who stay at home.” Figures from the Office for National statistics show that seventy five per cent of workers within the UK could reach their places of work in less than thirty minutes with that figure dropping to forty four per cent for employees travelling to London.

Domestic violence is on the rise. Figures released by the Crown Prosecution Service have revealed that the number of spouses prosecuted for acts of domestic violence has more than doubled in the past five years. Men remain the main perpetrators with 55,000 successfully convicted in 2010 compared with 28,000 in 2005. Far fewer women have been prosecuted for acts of domestic violence, but the number of females convicted more than doubled with the relevant figure rising from 1,500 in 2005 to 4,000 in 2010. There can be no denying that, in the majority of circumstances, victims of domestic violence would be best advised to leave their partners and, should they be married to the perpetrator, commence divorce proceedings without hesitation. Unfortunately, whilst the myth that victims of domestic violence can leave their partner at any time is still frequently disseminated, leaving an abusive partner is often extremely dangerous and when the risk of physical harm is combined with the possibility of financial problems and concerns for children, many people find it difficult to find the courage to walk away from an abusive relationship. Before doing anything else, a person needs to recognise that they are the victim of domestic violence. It is important to point out that domestic violence is not only physical and that physiological abuse can be just as, if not more, damaging to an individual’s wellbeing. If you are unsure of whether or not your partner’s behaviour constitutes domestic abuse, then you can find a list of questions and advice on determining this at the Women’s Aid website. Once domestic violence has been established, you must understand that you are not to blame for the actions of your partner. Many victims of domestic violence have a tendency to blame themselves; you must reject such notions and realise that domestic abuse is inexcusable before you can even begin to plan escaping from your violent household. Finally – the most important step of all – get help. Contact your local police station and inform them of your situation, they will be more than happy to advise you on what options are available to you. You should also contact independent organisations such as the National Domestic Violence Helpline. Don’t forget to seek support from your friends, family and even your employers. Knowing that you have the help of these people and institutions can make a big difference in the long run. All in all, escaping from an abusive marriage is no easy task. Nevertheless, finding the courage and will to separate from and divorce an abusive partner will leave you free to once again enjoy life and pursue a rewarding and loving relationship.

Liz Hurley is set to be granted a quickie divorce from her husband, Arun Nayar. It has been reported that the model and actress has filed for divorce on the grounds of Indian textile millionaire Nayar’s unreasonable behaviour and she is set to be granted a decree nisi by District Judge Penny Cushing today. Neither Hurley nor Nayar are likely to attend the brief hearing which is due to take place in the family division of London’s High Court. Hurley announced that the couple had separated on social networking site Twitter in December of last year following her having been photographed kissing former international cricket star Shane Warne in a London hotel. Both Warne and Hurley have stated that they have no plans to marry anytime in hear future.