An aspect of separation and divorce that is rarely talked about with any level of seriousness is what happens to the family pets? As anyone with a cat, dog, turtle, axolotl or miniature elephant will know, pets are more than secondary to a family life, in fact they form part of a family's dynamics and may even be viewed as another family member. For children, pets can be constant and anchoring presences who keep confidences while offering unconditional love and affection at a time when they may question their parents' love for them. In short, family pets may offer comfort and companionship during a tumultuous time in a way that no human can.
The recent decision from the Court of appeal, which upheld the original judgement by Judge Tolson QC, has created a huge amount of uncertainty for those seeking a divorce. Judge Tolson's original decision to dismiss Tini Owens’ petition for a divorce effectively said to Mrs Owens' that her husband's alleged behaviour was not so severe that she could not be 'reasonably expected to live with [him]'.
The Court of Appeal judgement contained some of the details of the examples used by Mrs Owens in her divorce petition, as well as her later amended petition. What was surprising about the examples was that they were spread over a wide span of time. In some incidents, the alleged behaviour had occurred years previously. The standard legal approach would be to cite an example from the last 6 months of the couple living together as husband and wife, and then to include a dated specific example that demonstrates the effect of the alleged behaviour on the petitioner. This effectively, and to use the words in the CoA judgment, is a good way of 'beefing up' the petition.
There is a distinct feeling, shared among many divorce lawyers, lawmakers, religious organisations and indeed general members of the public, that the introduction of "digital divorce" would somehow trivialise the vows and institution of marriage.
It is easy to understand this point of view, to believe that to make divorce cheaper, more accessible and, ultimately, more attainable would only serve to undermine one of society's most traditional and sanctified of contracts. In short, they suggest, it would represent little more than another lurch down the slippery slope to eventual social Armageddon.
Post Brangelina split, there appears to be a lot of media coverage surrounding the parties decision to divorce.
How different is the process for a celeb than for a ordinary person? It always seems that celebs manage to obtain a “fast-track” divorce often cited as being completed not long after the news of a split.
Spending too much time online is not necessarily a good thing for any relationship. However, the lure of those glowing screens can provide a distraction for many, providing people with countless ways to avoid having a face-to-face conversation with their spouse.
A big portion of online activity revolves around social media sites – which, despite being invented to bring us closer together, may ironically be a key culprit in driving partners apart. These sites can be damaging, presenting couples with false representations of their friends' perfect relationships, which will inevitably be compared to the flawed reality of their own.