Remember that old rhyme from childhood, “First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes a baby in a baby carriage”? Some things are just part of life and are simply inevitable. People will fall in love. People will join together in relationships. These are all positive, great things. Unfortunately, people—whether gay or straight—all have struggles in life and relationships. Inevitably, when Minnesota granted same-sex couples the right to marry, it was inevitable that same-sex divorces would happen, just as opposite-sex divorces happen. Gay couples who married before marriage was legal in Minnesota—whether they became married in another state or, because Minnesota borders with Canada, often in another country—may now face the need to obtain a divorce. If a gay couple separates and does not intend to share their lives together going forward, they should strongly consider finalizing their separation by obtaining a legal divorce in Minnesota. I have run into Minnesota gay couples who had no idea that they are now legally married. This viewpoint may be especially common for those couples who married in Canada years ago and then separated long before marriage was legal in Minnesota. For better or worse (pun intended), those couples continue to be married and need to divorce in order to clear up the division of their marital assets and debts. If they have children in common by adoption they need to determine their rights and responsibilities as to those children.  Even if there is a non-joint child, which is common in same-sex marriages, the “non-parent” may be able to establish legally enforceable rights to visitation because of their significant connection with that child. Again, this is even though they are not legally “their” child.  Because marriage creates an interest in real property (houses, etc.), the residence that the couple lived in or any other land and any mortgages (and any other debts) need to be addressed in the divorce. Before same-sex marriage was legal in Minnesota, it was difficult for same-sex couples to form legally enforceable rights and responsibilities related to a committed relationship. Perhaps that is why some same-sex couples have a hard time believing that they now must use the legal system to fully end their marriage relationship. By the way, I understand that Brangelina (Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, for those who don’t follow popular culture!) had declared they wouldn’t get married until same sex couples everywhere could get married…but apparently they couldn’t wait, because they were recently married. Well, my theory is that they had to wait until Minnesota made same-sex marriage legal (it just took a year to plan the wedding)! Without getting divorced, a gay couple may find out later, to their surprise, that one of the pair is making a claim to part of the other’s retirement account or is holding up the sale or transfer of property that was owned during the marriage, because simply living separately doesn’t resolve all these issues. I expect that many same-sex couples will be unpleasantly surprised later in life that when they hear that they have to share their retirement with a partner from long ago that they never intended to share their retirement account with. Or, an inheritance may be held up–or never received as expected by a son or daughter–because of a claim for all or a share of the estate of a deceased same-sex spouse. These are topics that are addressed well in the Collaborative Process because they can be approached from a perspective of respect and honoring of the love that the couple previously shared, while laying a foundation for future separate lives. Now that same-sex marriage is legal Minnesota, same-sex couples may likely find that the Collaborative Divorce process provides the proper legal, financial and other professional supports needed for disentangling the various legal rights and responsibilities incident to ending their legal marriage.
A recent article, “For gay couples, divorce comes with extra costs” describes the difficulties some people have faced in getting a same-sex divorce. Some of the difficulties identified have been addressed in Minnesota’s recent same-sex civil marriage legislation and others are not unique to same-sex couples. Here are the problems identified in that article and my thoughts. Problem: Courts haven’t figured out how to handle these new same-sex marriage divorce cases. The recent legislation in Minnesota addresses this issue by making it clear that all existing laws dealing with “marriage” now apply to the new same-sex marriages. This includes all laws concerning divorce which have been in effect for decades. The courts in Minnesota will apply the same divorce rules and procedures for divorcing same-sex marriages. Problem: Location, location, location. Many couples travelled to a state recognizing same-sex marriages in order to be married but now reside elsewhere, in a state where same-sex marriages are not legal. States that don’t recognize same-sex marriages won’t grant a divorce to a couple whose marriage is viewed as unlawful. Can the couple return to the state where they married to get divorced? Most states have a residency requirement, typically residing for six months in that state, before a divorce proceeding may be initiated in that state. The Minnesota legislation addresses this problem. It allows a divorce action in Minnesota even if neither party resides in Minnesota if the civil marriage was performed in Minnesota and neither party resides in a state which recognizes same-sex marriage and allows divorce actions for such marriages. So, if a same-sex couple married in Minnesota and later moved to Wisconsin where same-sex marriages are not legal, they can be divorced in Minnesota. Problem: Time together: Reality vs. legality. Many same-sex couples lived together for years before being able to legally marry. During the years or decades before marriage, they acquired assets, bought homes together, shared expenses, acquired debt, and commingled their finances. Yet, under traditional divorce law, it is only assets and debts acquired during the marriage that are considered. This is also a problem for straight couples who live together for years before marrying or who never marry. When their relationships end and they need to divide their assets and debts, divorce laws don’t help them. Unless they entered into a prenuptial agreement addressing how these assets and debts acquired before the marriage would be divided, or if never married – a contract addressing these issues, they would have a difficult time finding an efficient legal remedy for their situation. Litigating these issues in court will be expensive. These issues can be addressed in the collaborative process, which is not limited to divorces, and where people with unique problems and issues not adequately addressed in traditional law forums can reach agreements. Once agreements have been reached, these agreements can be filed with the court and made into enforceable court orders.
Prenuptial agreements – “What’s Love Got to Do With It?” For people planning their wedding, the thought of entering into a prenuptial agreement may seem unromantic and pessimistic. It addresses what would happen if your marriage doesn’t work out. But a well thought out prenuptial agreement can give you and your spouse control over the terms of your divorce, if that should happen, helping you avoid future litigation, and it also can be a process for discovering your expectations and views about financial issues. In Minnesota, to enter into a valid and enforceable prenuptial agreement, you must sign a written agreement before two witnesses and a notary public before you are married. The agreement must include a full disclosure of each person’s income and property and a statement that each has had an opportunity to consult with legal counsel of their choice before signing the agreement. The better practice is to enter into such an agreement well before the wedding date so each of you has an opportunity to consult with their own attorney. The issues which are most often addressed in prenuptial agreements are deciding how property and debts existing at the time of marriage and acquired during the marriage will be divided in the event of divorce. Some agreements address whether there will be spousal support (alimony) awarded in a divorce and how much will be awarded. These agreements are generally enforced by Minnesota courts unless there are extreme inequities resulting from enforcement at the time of the divorce. Agreements on child custody and child support are not enforceable as part of prenuptial agreements in Minnesota. The court in a divorce examines the best interests of the children at the time of the divorce in deciding who should have custody, what the parenting time should be, and how much child support should be paid. Couples who have acquired substantial assets before the marriage, who have been married before and have children, or who want to preserve their estate plans for their adult children from previous marriages, enter into prenuptial agreements to ensure that their goals and financial expectations are followed in the event of a divorce. These are not the only couples who may need prenuptial agreements. For example, with the recent legalization of same-sex marriages in Minnesota, some-same sex couples contemplating marriage may need to consult with legal counsel to learn the differences in how their income and property will be treated once married under Minnesota law and whether a prenuptial agreement may be appropriate. Professionals are available for consultations on these issues. The collaborative process gives couples (not the court) the power to shape their future financial destiny. The collaborative process also ensures that the needs and interests of each person are addressed, with full disclosure of financial information, advocacy for each person and neutral professional financial and other advice. Making sure each of you have the information you need is what love has to do with it.
Kids at zebra crossingAngelina Jolie has been a news-maker lately for her courageous decision to disclose her personal health care response to having a breast cancer gene. You may have noticed in her media interviews how often she has referred to “my partner, Brad Pitt.” Jolie and Pitt are among many parents raising children and creating lives together without being married. Some couples do this by choice and others by historic exclusion from the opportunity to get married (an inequitable situation that has changed with the recent passage of marriage equality legislation in Minnesota).

What support options exist for these families when parents make the difficult decision to break up? And what support options exist for parents who never formed a permanent relationship but intend to co-parent? What might Collaborative Team Practice have to offer these parents and families?

Collaborative Team Practice can provide a very stable container for parents seeking to end their partnership in a dignified and respectful way, and to create a road map for future co-parenting. Depending on the legal, financial and parenting issues to be resolved, parents can select a team of professionals specifically tailored to their circumstances and needs. As a neutral child specialist, I have been privileged to work with many non-married couples and non-coupled parents to create developmentally responsive parenting plans to guide co-parenting. These are clients who take to heart the notion that kids deserve the best safe parenting they can get from both parents. The future for these children feels brighter, more hopeful and more coherent.

It takes courage and mindfulness to co-parent after a break up, or if parents have never been in a committed relationship. But we know that effective co-parenting is a cornerstone of health and resilience for children. Parents deserve all the support they can get, and Collaborative Team Practice can help provide that support.

Image courtesy of arztsamui/
Image courtesy of arztsamui/
While much of the focus of the new law legalizing same-sex marriage in Minnesota is focused on the upcoming weddings, the new law also paves the way for same-sex couples to legally divorce once the law goes into effect on August 1, 2013. This has a significant impact on Minnesota same-sex couples who were legally married in other states or countries and have since split up. Minnesota’s current law declared that same-sex marriages from other states were void and no rights were enforceable in Minnesota. For example, suppose you have Bill and Bob, a gay couple who legally married in Vermont in 2001, and then moved to Minnesota. Bill and Bob adopted a son, and Bob decided to stay at home to care for their son while Bill worked.  After 12 years of marriage, they decide to end the marriage. Minnesota law treated this couple as if they had never been married, and they would not have been able to bring a proceeding for divorce. They could have brought custody and child support issues in a legal proceeding, but the law would have treated them like unmarried parents and would not have been able to handle property division or spousal maintenance. But now, the new law signed by Governor Dayton allows Minnesota family courts to recognize marriages performed in other states or countries.  So same-sex couples will now have the ability to pursue a legal divorce just like an opposite-sex couple.  Depending on the facts, Bob might have a claim for spousal maintenance, and the couple’s marital property accumulated during the 11 years of marriage would be subject to an equitable division by the family court. One thing the new Minnesota law cannot fix is the tax implications on property divisions in same-sex divorce. Because of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), the federal government does not recognize same-sex marriage for tax purposes. And that means same-sex couples who are dividing assets in a divorce, such as retirement accounts, are treated differently by the IRS than opposite-sex couples.  All of that could change in the next couple months when the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of DOMA. With the new law and the impending decision by the Supreme Court,  family lawyers are facing new territory.  This makes the collaborative divorce process an attractive option for same-sex couples. The collaborative divorce process allows for a couple to honor their relationship and craft customized solutions to handle the changes to the law. Bill and Bob can have a respectful divorce, work together as effective co-parents, and remarry when they find new love in the future.
Now that Minnesota has passed the Same-Sex Marriage Bill, there is much to figure out with regard to how laws will apply to same-sex couples and how laws will need to be amended to include same-sex couples.  Now that same-sex couples can marry, they will also be subject to the laws for dissolving the marriage.  The costs to the couples for going through the process might change because there will be a legal structure in place that now answers questions about division of assets and liabilities, as well as custody and parenting issue.  As noted in the article in CNN Money about the cost of same-sex divorce, the cost for a “divorce” in states that have not recognized same-sex marriage has proven to be higher than states where same-sex marriage is recognized. The article notes that, “For an out-of-court settlement in states where same-sex marriage isn’t recognized, a same-sex divorce typically costs around $20,000, versus $10,000 for an opposite-sex couple, said Randall Kessler, a partner at Kessler & Solomiany Family Law Attorneys in Atlanta.” When children are involved, it further states that,  “Same-sex couples who negotiate property division on their own but bring the custody issue to court are usually looking at $40,000, compared to $20,000 for opposite-sex couples, Kessler said. And a long, drawn-out court battle over custody could lead costs to jump to $100,000 or more for a same-sex couple, twice what it costs for an opposite-sex couple.” In my Collaborative practice, I have previously worked with same-sex couples dissolving their relationship with children.  We did have to navigate the legal system with some creativity to address the issues of property division and parenting issues because they did not fit into the opposite-sex dissolution system.  But the Collaborative process allowed them to be treated as a family system and reach a settlement that worked for everyone involved and it was less expensive than if it had been done through traditional legal system.  Now that we have legalized same-sex marriage in Minnesota, we will have a system in place that will provide answers to the legal questions that arise in same-sex divorce.  And the Collaborative Process will continue to be a responsive process to help manage costs, keep the decision making power within the family, and enable healthy transitions.