Divorce Court is not a laundromat

Posted on January 24, 2013 by Sandy Durst

When a client first comes in for a consultation, a significnat amount of time is consumed by them telling me what an awful person their sooon to be former-spouse is. Early in my career i would try to quickly steer the client away from this line of thought. Inevitably, my efforts would fail. With time. I learned that this venting process was an important step in the divorce process. Whether is was intended to convince me or the client, I am not sure; but they need to villify the spouse was great.

Once the allegations were aired, it was then my responsibility to explain to the client that under New Jersey law, marital fault was of little, if any, relevance to the financial determinations that would eventually be made.This reality was a bitter pill for many to swallow.

I have no doubt that many people suffer greatly during their marriage. Genuine abuse, whether physical, verbal, or emotional is never acceptable. That being said, in many divorces, genuine abuse is not present.

In recognition of the fact that it is often difficult to assign responsibility for the breakdown of the marriage to one party over the other both the alimony and equitable distribution statutes do not have marital fault as a factor. Therefore, there is no need to fill legal pleasdings with all the dirty laundry.

Posted in Durst Firm News | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Divorce Court is not a laundromat

Respond or React: Keeping your emotions in check during your divorce.

Posted on December 12, 2012 by Sandy Durst

Divorce is a time of emotional upheaval.  It is all but certain that as you work your way through the process that situations will arise that will cause anger, resentment, confusion, and hostility.  Some of these situations are unavoidable and par for the course.  Others may arise in an effort to provoke a response or a reaction.  Whether you respond or react (for they are two very different approaches) can have a significant impact on the ultimare resolution of your divorce.

So, what is the differnce between a response and a reaction? And why are those differences important?  In my view, everty action that is taken during a divorce case must be designed to furhter the goal of realizing the best possible outcome for a client.  A response is a measured, deliberate, and constructive measure.  In contrast, a reaction is often a knee-jerk, emotionally charged impulse. 

When situations develop in your case, rely on your attorney to make the appropriate response.  Take time to digest what is happening so as to avoid making a counterporductive reaction .

Posted in Durst Firm News, Durst on Divorce, Uncategorized | Comments Off on Respond or React: Keeping your emotions in check during your divorce.

Doctors required to report child abuse even if evidence is less than conclusive

Posted on December 7, 2012 by Sandy Durst

In a case which is designed to protect children in NJ from abuse, the Appellate Court now requires doctors treating children to report abuse  if the physician has a “reasonable cause to believe that a child has been subjected to child abuse.”  The decision in L.A. v New Jersey Division of Youth and family Services, the appellate panel reasoned that if the medical exam of the child or the necessary treatment gives the doctor “reasonable cause to believe that there has been abuse” then the duty to report is triggered.  The doctor must be able to make a probable inference that the child’s conditioon  is the result of child abuse.  While clearly well intentioned, imposing such a standard of care on doctors requires them to make potentially life altering reports for the child and the parents even if the suspicion of abuse is not the most probable cause of the injuries sustained by the child.  The required level of belief lies somewhere below abuse being the most probable cause and slightly more compelling than a mere suspicion or speculation.

Posted in Durst Firm News, Durst on Divorce | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Doctors required to report child abuse even if evidence is less than conclusive

Were your custodial rights impacted by false claims of sexual abuse? Noted Psychologist has license revoked.

Posted on December 6, 2012 by Sandy Durst

In the most recent  turn of events in a saga that  is tragic on many levels, psychologist Marsha Kleinman has had her license revoked after it was determined that she she coaxed at least one child into making false allegations of sexual abuse against her father and purposely misleading the court.  Sexual abuse of a child is perhaps the most serious charge that can be levied against a parent during divorce and custody proceedings.  False reports lead to life altering consequences for the accused parent and the child who was manipulated into making the false claims.  False claims can destroy parent-child relationships, put employment at risk, clog the overly burdened judicial system with what are baseless claims and undermine the legitimate claims that are brought.  In contested custody cases where allegations of abuse are made, the court relied heavily on the findings and testimony of experts such as Ms. Kleinman.  Expert testimony is supposed to be neutral, objective and of assistance to the court.  What happened here fails to meet any of those criteria.  While it is reassuring to know that Ms. Kleinman will not be involved with NJ families going forward, it is impossible to tell the full extent of he actions and it is impossible to fully repair the damage false claims cause.

If you were a parent whose custody or parenting time rights were impacted by Ms. Kleinman’s reports or testimony you should contact an attorney immediately to determine what recourse you may have.

PSYCHOLOGIST WHO COAXED CHILD TO MAKE FALSE SEX-ABUSE CHARGES LOSES LICENSE
The state has revoked the license of a court-appointed psychologist found to have coaxed a 3-year-old girl into accusing her father of sexual abuse and to have misled the family court judge. The revocation took effect Wednesday, a day after the Board of Psychological Examiners ruled that Marsha Kleinman, of Highland Park, engaged in gross and repeated malpractice and other misconduct that endangered the girl’s welfare and threatened her relationship with her father. Kleinman, an acknowledged expert on domestic and child abuse, often lectured judges and state workers on those topics and was frequently appointed as an expert by family court during her 25 years of practice.

Posted in Durst Firm News, Durst on Divorce | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Were your custodial rights impacted by false claims of sexual abuse? Noted Psychologist has license revoked.

Parent committed child abuse by making false claims of sexual abuse

Posted on December 5, 2012 by Sandy Durst

Parties going through a divorce often seek out any advantage they belief will give them the upper hand and increase their chances of realizing a favorable outcome.   When dealing with the emotional issue of child support and custody, parents often feel compelled to exaggerate or even fabricate allegations which would render the other parent unfit.  Recently, the New Jersey delivered a stern warning to ay parent who may decide to fabricate allegations of sexual molestation or abuse by the other parent.  In the case of DYFS v. C.O., A2387-11, the mother not only lodged false claims against the father, she also coached the daughter on how to corroborate the false claims.  As a result, the child was required to submit to physical and psychological exams as part of the sexual abuse investigation.  By forcing the child to play a key role in her deception, the Court found that the mother showed a reckless disregard for the child’s well being.  Such conduct on the part of the mother constituted child abuse.

Posted in Durst on Divorce | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Parent committed child abuse by making false claims of sexual abuse