Supreme Court Decision Leaves Gay Divorce Questions Unanswered

The recent Supreme Court rulings regarding gay marriage sent shockwaves through the family law world earlier this week. The overturning of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was especially influential and will lead to massive changes in the way gay couples receive federal benefits and pay federal taxes.

One thing that will not change for the better for same sex couples is the process of divorce. In fact, legal experts say neither the DOMA ruling nor the Prop 8 case will make the process of divorce easier for gay couples. Because the Supreme Court did not rule more broadly, making same-sex marriage legal nationwide, then those married couples who do not currently reside in a state that recognizes gay marriage will have to seek a divorce in a state that does.

This back and forth means that gay divorces will remain lengthier and costlier than heterosexual splits. This is especially the case because most states have a residency requirement for divorce, meaning at least one spouse needs to establish residency in that state for a requisite period of time before the courts will agree to hear a divorce petition. For instance, in California one party must reside in the state for a period of at least six months before the family law courts will hear a divorce claim. Thankfully, there are some exceptions to that rule though, including Washington, D.C. which allows divorce without residency for couples whose marriage is not recognized in their home state.

Issues revolving around child custody will also remain complicated for same-sex couples, especially in cases where both parents have not jointly adopted the child. For instance, a non-biological parent may not receive automatic visitation rights in many states if they have not formally adopted the child, despite acting as the parent for a number of years. It is for this reason that joint adoption is so critical, as it would be heartbreaking for one parent to discover in the midst of a divorce that they have no rights to spend time with a child they love.

If you find yourself facing the prospect of complicated divorce and have questions about your rights and options, contact an experienced Ohio family law attorney who can help guide you through the difficult process. Count on the expertise of Twinsburg family law attorney Carol Lee Stephan.

Source: “Supreme Court simplifies gay divorce,” by Quentin Fottrell, published at MarketWatch.com.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Family Law Fails to Keep Pace With Modern Families

Mom and Dad (and Mom): Florida Judge Approves Unconventional Family

Morality Clause In Texas Divorce Case Stops Lesbian Couple From Cohabitating

A Texas judge recently issued a surprising ruling saying that a lesbian would not be permitted to continue living in the same house due to a morality clause found in the divorce papers of one of the two women.

Such morality clauses are common not only in Texas, but even seen in some Ohio divorce cases where the parents are worried about exposing children to new romantic partners. The clauses are meant to ensure that parents are legally prevented from bringing future boyfriends or girlfriends over to spend the night while the children are present.

In most instances, the way to bypass this provision is to go ahead and get married to your partner. This works because morality clauses cannot prevent anyone from cohabitating with a spouse. The problem here is that in Texas marriage is not an option for gay couples so the lesbian partners have no way around the strict language contained in the divorce decree.

Judge John Roach heard the dispute regarding the 2011 divorce signed by Carolyn Compton and ordered Carolyn and her female partner, Page Price, to move out of their shared home. The issue was that the two women lived together in a home along with Comptons’ two daughters, something that led Compton’s ex-husband to take the matter to court. Compton’s ex husband argued that the morality clause found in their divorce decree was gender-neutral and said it should be enforced for the benefit of the children.

Compton’s attorney tried to argue that the morality clause was unconstitutional not only for gay couples, but straight divorcees as well. The attorney claimed that the law unreasonably limits parents’ abilities to make decisions for their own lives.

On the surface, the idea behind a morality clause is a good one: to protect children in an Ohio child custody case from a revolving door of romantic partners. It goes without saying that this would be detrimental to the children, though exactly how damaging is difficult to understand.

However, the problem with such morality clauses is that there are far too many loopholes in even the best drafted documents. Further, they cannot stop the children from being introduced to new significant others in a parent’s life, only stop them from spending the night. Finally, the clauses allow yet another intrusion into the lives of a couple who have likely already had intimate details paraded before a room full of strangers.

If you find yourself facing the prospect of complicated divorce and have questions about your rights and options, contact an experienced Ohio family law attorney who can help guide you through the difficult process. Count on the expertise of Twinsburg family law attorney Carol L. Stephan.

Source: “Texas judge says lesbian couple can’t cohabitate, cites morality clause in divorce papers,” by The Associated Press, WashingtonPost.com.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Ohio Child Support Arrearages Resemble Modern Day Debtors Prison

Online Actions Land Two Wisconsin Men In Hot Water

California Legislature Considers Allowing Multiple Parents

California, a state grappling with a wide array of legal issues surrounding alternative families, has added one more to the mix. A recent bill, SB1476, would allow children to be legally given more than two parents.

As written, the bill would apply equally to men and women, regardless of whether they were in homosexual or heterosexual relationships. The bill’s sponsor, State Senator Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, says that the bill is about bringing the state into the 21^st century and recognizing that complicated family situations exist. He says the state must recognize that “there are more than ‘Ozzie and Harriet’ families today.” The bill has already passed the state Senate and now awaits a vote in the state Assembly.

Senator Leno said he first noticed a problem with the legal system back in 2011 when he read about an appellate court placing a girl in foster care after her legally married lesbian parents were unable to care for her. The child was taken into state custody after one of her mother’s was put in prison and the other was hospitalized. The court was not allowed to appoint the girl’s biological father, with whom she had a relationship, as a legal parent. Something that Leno believes would have greatly benefited the welfare of the child.  

The law would require that parents qualify under all legal standards and agree on custody, visitation and child support before a judge could divide up responsibilities. If California passes such a law it won’t be alone, already Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maine and the District of Columbia have laws on the books recognizing more than two parents.

The bill certainly has its detractors. Glenn T. Stanton, from the group Focus on the Family, argues that though the bill appears to advocate for children, it is actually a tool to allow adults to create what he calls “radical families.” He says that children are best cared for by one mother and one father and “this bill would only take us farther down the trail of more ‘experimental families’ that fulfill adult desires, but consistently fail our children.”

Senator Leno argues that a new law would address more than just same-sex families, including situations where a man raises a non-biological child with a woman, but the child also maintains a relationship with the biological father. Other examples include a lesbian couple who might want a male friend who provided the sperm for their child to serve as a legal parent. Leno says it is in the best interest of the child to have multiple parents capable of providing financial support, health insurance and important benefits.

Some legal experts in California caution that the law could have an unforeseen impact on an array of issues such as wrongful death suits (which parents are able to file a claim) and tax deductions.

If you find yourself facing the prospect of divorce, contact an experienced Ohio family law attorney who can help guide you through the difficult process. Count on the expertise of Twinsburg family law attorney Carol L. Gasper.

Source: “My Three Daddies: California Eyes Multiple Parenting Law,” by Susan James, published at Yahoo.com.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

How Divorced Ohio Parents Can Claim Dependent Children

Move over gay marriage, the newest controversy involves gay divorce

Move over gay marriage, the newest controversy involves gay divorce

Posted on: May 25, 2012

Gay marriage is without a doubt a heated topic of conversation across the country these days. Between the recent remarks by President Obama and the decision by the voters of North Carolina, the controversial issue has been plastered across the front page for weeks now. It’s surprising then that the current controversy in Ohio’s legal community involves the prospect of gay divorce.

Like any other relationships, gay marriages can sometimes sour. Although gay marriage is not recognized in the vast majority of states, courts across the country are finding themselves forced to grapple with what to do when a legally married gay couple no longer wants to remain together. The issue presented itself very recently in Ohio when one judge decided to allow gay divorce in a state that doesn’t recognize gay marriage.

The two men, Jonathan Baize and Stephen Wissman, both from Columbus, Ohio, were granted a divorce in mid-March by a judge in the Franklin County Domestic Relations Court. Though gay divorce carries important, perhaps landmark, implications for the state one attorney who was present at the hearing described the proceeding as utterly “unremarkable.” No histrionics, just paperwork.

The men were married not long ago, on September 1, 2011, at a small ceremony in New York. They then returned home to Ohio to resume their life but soon decided that their marriage was not meant to last, a decision that might have important implications for Ohio law. In 2004, voters in the state approved a constitutional amendment that prohibited gay marriage. Backers of the 2004 amendment have argued that by authorizing a gay divorce, the Franklin County judge tacitly acknowledged the validity of the gay marriage.

Supporters of the judge turn to the language of the amendment and point out that current state law refers only to homosexual marriage and is silent with regard to same-sex divorce. The family court judge obviously agreed that the letter of the law did not prohibit his decision and thus decided to dissolve the men’s relationship.

While this instance of gay divorce may be among the first of its kind, it certainly won’t be the last time Ohio courts are forced to confront the issue. Legal questions surrounding the status of same-sex couples abound and will only grow more complicated as the gap between states that have approved gay marriage and those that have outlawed it continues to grow.

If you find yourself facing the prospect of divorce, it’s best to contact an experienced Ohio family law attorney who can help guide you through the difficult process. Count on the expertise of Twinsburg family law attorney Carol L. Gasper.

Source: “Married in New York, gay couple gets divorced in Columbus,” by Alan Johnson, published at Dispatch.com.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Ohio Supreme Court Hears Same Sex Parenting Case ~ In re Lucy Mullen

Throw Away the X Label