Parenting Time During School Vacations

As children get older and start attending school, parents who are not living together will have to determine how/if they will amend their parenting plan to accommodate school vacations (if a provision for same has not already been included in a temporary order or judgment). There are many ways to divide vacation time between parents, and there is no "wrong" answer so long as the parents are doing what is in the children's best interest. Most parents will alternate school vacations each year, so that in odd years parent A takes the children from Monday through Friday while parent B takes the children in even years. Other parents may decide to split the vacation in half, so that  parent A has the children from the last day of school through mid-week, while parent B takes the children from mid-week through the Monday morning that school reconvenes.

For the most part, agreements or court orders made regarding vacations supersede the regular parenting schedule. So if during the school year parent A has the children every other weekend from Friday evening through Monday morning and for an overnight each Wednesday, but the parties have agreed to alternate school vacations each year, parent A may not have any vacation time with the minor child(ren) if it is not his or her vacation year.  While this may seem unfair at the time, it ends up working out over the years. However, if going so long without seeing a parent would be detrimental to the child(ren), the parents can agree to include a mid-week visit with the non-vacation parent, or to give that parent the weekend immediately following or preceding the vacation.

February school vacation is fast approaching, and it is best to reach an understanding of how the vacation week will look like as soon as possible. If the parties are unable to come to an agreement, a party can seek assistance from the court.


(c)2014 by Law Office of Leila J. Wons.  The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. In accordance with rules established by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this blog must be labeled "advertising."

When to use the Department of Revenue

When deciding on a child support amount, the parties must also determine whether or not they want to use the Department of Revenue (DOR) for collecting and distributing payments. While going through DOR may not work for everyone, I usually recommend it. DOR keeps track of every payment received, calculates interest, and can take necessary enforcement steps if the payor is not current on his/her payments. For example, DOR can have the payor's driver's license suspended, can intercept tax returns, can garnish wages, or can even have a passport revoked.

Having DOR involved also makes it easy to present to a judge a detailed report of every payment made, in the event that the parties return to court on a Complaint for Contempt or Modification. This is much easier than combing through bank statements and deposit slips to figure out the arrears amount. 

If you decide not to go through DOR initially, you can always request DOR's services at a later date, unless a court order specifically prevents you from doing so. As there are DOR offices in many courthouses throughout Massachusetts, it is fast and easy to obtain the necessary paperwork and submit it.

Go to the Department of Revenue-Child Support Enforcement website to learn more.

(c)2014 by Law Office of Leila J. Wons The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. In accordance with rules established by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this blog must be labeled "advertising."

Speaking to Children About Divorce

Speaking to your children about divorce can be an extremely difficult process. Parents often disagree on the amount of knowledge children should have about the divorce process and what his/her parents are going through. Some parents feel that the children should be fully informed regarding the status of the divorce (i.e. when the parents are going to court, what the issues are, etc.) while others believe that children don't need to know anything other than the existence of a pending divorce.  Depending on the child's age, it is advised that children not be given detailed information about the pending proceedings, as that will likely cause unnecessary stress and anxiety. Likewise, children should not be left in the dark about his/her parent's relationship. It is important to let children know that a divorce is taking place, but it is difficult to determine the right way to do it. Should the parents talk to the children individually? Should there be a family meeting? Is this something that is better handled in therapy or even with the assistance of a favorite teacher? There is no right answer, but fortunately there are some tools to help.

Sesame Street has recently released a series of videos and other tools to help children understand that they are not alone, and that it is OK to have and share certain feelings about the process. Showing children these videos may help prepare them for an open conversation about the pending divorce, or may help to follow-up with a conversation that has already taken place. You can find a link to these videos here.

In addition to the Sesame Street videos, there is a large amount of literature available to help parents address the divorce process with their children, as well as books specifically catered to children of divorce. Some of my recommendations include:

• Helping Your Kids Cope with Divorce the Sandcastles Way by M. Gary Neuman;
• Divorce is Not the End of the World: Zoe's and Evan's Coping Guide for Kids by Zoe and Evan Stern;
• Two Homes, by Claire Masurel

(c)2014 by Law Office of Leila J. Wons The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. In accordance with rules established by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this blog must be labeled "advertising."

Harassment Prevention Orders - What are they and How do I Qualify?

Harassment prevention orders are found under chapter 258E of the Massachusetts General Laws. This chapter was enacted as a response to inadequate protections for those being abused by acquaintances or strangers, as such protections are not available via Abuse Prevention Orders (aka Restraining Orders) found in chapter 209A.

A harassment prevention order can prevent the defendant (alleged assailant) from having contact with, abusing or harassing the plaintiff (alleged victim) and to remain away from the plaintiff’s residence and/or work.   The order can also provide compensation to the plaintiff for losses suffered as a result of the harassment.

In order to obtain the order, there must be showing of 3 or more truly threatening events that involve an intent to cause fear, intimidation, abuse or damage to property and that do actually cause fear, intimidation, abuse or damage to property.   Even if these individual events don’t each cause the requisite fear, a combination of all three events will suffice.   A harassment prevention order may also be obtained if the defendant engaged in an act that by force, threat or duress causes another to involuntarily engage in sexual relations, or that constitutes one of the following crimes:

-        Indecent assault and battery on a child under the age of 14, a mentally retarded person or    someone age 14 or older;

-        Rape, including rape and abuse of a child;

-        Assault with intent to commit rape;

-        Assault of a child, with intent to commit rape;

-        Kidnapping;

-        Stalking;

-        Criminal harassment; and

-        Drugging persons for sexual intercourse.

A harassment prevention order is initially temporary, and can last up to 10 days.  Thereafter, both parties must appear in court to present testimony and evidence as to why or why not the order should be extended.

Harassment is extremely serious and should be addressed, especially in situations involving more than 3 instances of harassment.   Safety is paramount, and you should speak on an attorney or law enforcement immediately following an instance of abuse.

(c)2014 by Law Office of Leila J. Wons The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. In accordance with rules established by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this blog must be labeled "advertising."

Marriage after civil unions

On July 26, 2012, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued an opinion in the matter of Elia-Warnken v. Elia. This case involved a same-sex couple who was in the midst of divorce litigation. The issue brought before the SJC was "Whether or not a Vermont civil union must be dissolved before either party to that civil union can enter into a valid marriage in Massachusetts to a third party." (link to opinion here) 

Elia-Warnken had entered into a Vermont civil union that he never dissolved. Thereafter, he married Elia, who argued that the marriage was void due to polygamy. Here's the tough part:  Vermont eventually went on to recognize same-sex marriage, but specifically stated that civil unions then existing would not automatically convert to marriage. Since Massachusetts expressly refused to create civil unions in lieu of marriage, wouldn't it make sense that a Vermont civil union be treated differently from a Massachusetts marriage?

The Court looked at the language behind Vermont's civil unions to determine that they, at the time created, were meant to provide the same protections and advantages to same-sex couples as marriage, defined as "the voluntary union of two persons as spouses, to the exclusion of all others." Under the principles of comity, a state must give "respect and deference to the legislative enactments and public policy pronouncements of other jurisdictions," including out-of-state marriages. As such, Massachusetts views Vermont civil unions as the equivalent of an out-of-state  marriage.

The Justices further pointed out that allowing both the Massachusetts marriage and the Vermont civil union to remain intact would result in Elia-Warnken having similar obligations to two different people (his former partner and Elia), causing great confusion. Both parties could request child or spousal support from him, plus other benefits afforded under the law.

Bottom line:  Although this case applies to Vermont civil unions, it could easily apply to civil unions/domestic partnerships of other jurisdictions and countries, given the language used.  As such, couples looking to wed in Massachusetts should ensure that their out-of-state civil unions have been dissolved prior to getting married.

(c)2014 by Law Office of Leila J. Wons The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. In accordance with rules established by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this blog must be labeled "advertising."

A Few Words of Advice from a Minnesota Judge

Judge Michael Haas of Cass County Minnesota retired in 2002 after 26 years of service as a Judge. The following 200 words issued by him (we are not certain whether they were stated on or off the record) have been referenced in multiple appellate court decisions and in Lawyer's Weekly. Judge Haas put into very simple terms a concept that so many people fail to grasp, and that are crucial for parents to understand when they are going through a break-up.

"Your children have come into this world because of the two of you. Perhaps you two made lousy choices as to whom you decided to be the other parent. If so, that is YOUR problem and YOUR fault.

"No matter what you think of the other party -- or what your family thinks of the other party -- these children are one-half of each of you. Remember that, because every time you tell your child what an 'idiot' his father is, or what a 'fool' his mother is, or how bad the absent parent is, or what terrible things that person has done, you are telling the child half of HIM is bad.

"That is an unforgivable thing to do to a child. That is not love! That is possession. If you do that to your children, you will destroy them as surely as if you had cut them into pieces, because that is what you are doing to their emotions.

"I sincerely hope that you do not do that to your children. Think more about your children and less about yourselves, and make yours a selfless kind of love, not foolish or selfish, or your children will suffer."

(c)2014 by Law Office of Leila J. Wons The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. In accordance with rules established by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this blog must be labeled "advertising."

Parental Alienation

One of the most difficult cases I work on are those dealing with parental alienation.  Parental alienation often occurs during or following divorce, and is characterized by a child expressing unreasonable, unjustified and strong dislike or even hatred for a parent. Most often, alienation occurs against the non-custodial parent, though it often takes place in situations where parents share physical custody of their child.

There are several things that can trigger alienation, though the most common appears to be the result of repeated negative remarks and ideas expressed by one parent against or about the alienated parent. As children are very intuitive and hear much more than we think, they are easily influenced by negative conversations or remarks they may hear about one parent. In additon, as divorce is a very difficult event in a child's life, he may turn to scapegoating as a coping mechanism, thus unreasonably blaming one parent for the breakdown of the family unit.

It is important to take action as soon as possible if it appears that alienation is taking place or being attempted. The longer a child is exposed to negative comments about one parent, and the longer she is allowed to act on these unreasonable feelings by refusing to attend visitation or by not following that parent's rules, the harder it will be to undo the damage and re-establish a healthy parent/child relationship. 

On June 8, 2012, a judgment was issued in the matter of Hendren v. Lee out of the Middlesex Probate and Family Court. This Judgment of Modification transferred sole legal and physical custody of the parties' son to the mother, the alienated parent. The judgment included a provision that the mother and child attend weekly reunification therapy and that the Father, his family, his friends and the son's siblings cease all contact with son for 90 days in order to effectuate said reunification. Unfortunately, the parties' older children were by this time beyond the jurisdiction of the court and could not be made to attend therapy with their Mother.  As such, it is very possible that, due to the one parent's repeated alienation, this mother will never have a relationship with her older children. The children will likely never be able to attend holiday meals together at their mother's home, or take family vacations with their mother.  As the court noted, this sort of alienation is not a child's best interest.  Further, studies show that children succeed more in life if they have healthy, loving relationships with both parents.

In sum, parental alienation is a tragic yet common occurence that can be prevented by seeking assistance from the court at the earliest sign that parental alienation being attempted.




(c) 2014 by Law Office of Leila J. Wons. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. In accordance with rules established by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, this blog must be labeled "advertising."