Other far-right groups, such as Concerned Women for America, portrayed the decision as a betrayal of California voters who had passed a referendum (but not a constitutional amendment) on same-sex marriage in 2000. Supporters of Proposition 22 that year sought to close what they saw as a legal loophole that might permit state recognition of same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. Even so, prior to the California court's new ruling, the state already recognized legal "domestic partnerships." In addition, California lawmakers twice have passed measures legalizing marriage for same-sex couples, but the govenor has vetoed both measures.

Today on April 10th, 2008, I welcome the Official Web Site of Me, CaraReynolds.com into the world. Firstly, I would like to thank Marine Boudeau for all the work and time she put into creating this fantastical place and making it more than I ever expected. It has been a long journey, but we did it!

What is CaraReynolds.com all about you may be wondering? It is about me wanting to have a space for my photography that goes beyond Flickr, a place that not only showcases my photos, but my life as well. I think this site turned out amazing. It is as I say ALL the time, AWESOME!

So, sit back and enjoy the show… and remember, just like me, CaraReynolds.com will continually evolve, so come back sometime and see me again.

- Cara

-------------------------------------------------------

Between 1980 and 2004, meat production in the developing world tripled, today amounting to well over half of the world’s output. Dense concentrations of corralled industrial livestock, which create vast quantities of manure, now skirt the edges of major cities in Asia and Latin America, causing severe environmental damages.

A marital settlement agreement is a contractual agreement entered into by a husband and wife prior to their divorce. The settlement reached can be much more detailed and individualized than a judge's ruling and can include provisions that a judge would not legally be allowed to include. The parties can work with their attorneys to make sure that their individual needs are accounted for while providing a fair division of the parties' assets and debts.

A marital settlement agreement can also be used by parties who want to have a trial separation, but also be certain of how a divorce will proceed if they are unable to save their marriage. Clients will often want to file for a legal separation in order to preserve their rights while still being able to stay on the other spouse's health insurance. Rather than going thorough that process, they can sign a marital settlement agreement and wait to file for divorce until the health insurance issue can be rectified.

A court is not required to approve the parties' marital settlement agreement. A court will almost always approve the agreement provided that the agreement is fair and that both parties knew what they were agreeing to. In order for the parties to be as secure as possible that the agreement will be approved by the court they must disclose truthfully all of their financial information to the other spouse, must actually abide by the terms of the agreement during the time between signing the agreement and filing for divorce, and they must actually get divorced in a reasonable period of time. If, for instance, the parties wait many years to divorce, a court would be less likely to approve the agreement.

With the passage of the new domestic partnership legislation in Oregon, domestic partners may be able to use marital settlement agreements to formalize issues prior to dissolving their domestic partnership.

In conclusion, martial settlement agreements provide a great way for clients to divorce in an amicable and mutually beneficial manner.

Conservatives had been shocked to see the bill known as SB51 pass the House Commerce and Labor subcommittee #2 last Thursday - - especially since three Republicans who usually support pro-family legislation voted with the majority.

On Friday, Family Policy Network (FPN) began spearheading an effort to reverse the votes of three lawmakers before the bill was to be considered by the full Commerce and Labor Committee today.

With the help of local pro-family activists in Virginia, pro-family citizens were encouraged to express their concerns to targeted lawmakers and House Speaker Bill Howell. Today's vote to defeat SB51 included reversals by all three legislators targeted by FPN's grassroots opposition since Friday.

FPN President Joe Glover hailed today's vote, but credited grassroots conservatives for holding the delegates accountable. He said, "We're certainly glad the committee did the right thing, but pro-family citizens all over this Commonwealth deserve the credit for keeping these lawmakers from stumbling. They're really the ones who saved the day."

The bill, known as "Senate Bill 51" [SB51], was introduced by liberal Democrat Mary Whipple. Language like that contained in Whipple's bill is often referred to as so-called "reciprocal beneficiary" arrangements. Under the guise of "fairness," it would authorize some localities to give away insurance benefits to any persons designated by any local government employee. This may seem fair, but it would create an undue burden on healthy taxpayers and employees who would have to foot the bill for people who make unhealthy lifestyle choices.

Study after study has concluded that married heterosexual couples are statistically healthier, and enjoy longer lifespans than the general population. Thus, one of the benefits of marriage has always been to reward married couples with shared insurance benefits as a way to encourage more people to marry and enjoy better health and longevity.

The financial costs resulting from the health consequences associated with "alternative lifestyles" are skyrocketing, which is one of the reasons homosexual activists are fighting to gain access to this and other benefits of marriage. Unfortunately, when they gain these benefits, the price for their bad behavior is shifted to people who are wise enough to abstain from it.

Source: Family Policy Council email.

Study after study has concluded that married heterosexual couples are statistically healthier, and enjoy longer lifespans than the general population. Thus, one of the benefits of marriage has always been to reward married couples with shared insurance benefits as a way to encourage more people to marry and enjoy better health and longevity.

The financial costs resulting from the health consequences associated with "alternative lifestyles" are skyrocketing, which is one of the reasons homosexual activists are fighting to gain access to this and other benefits of marriage. Unfortunately when they gain these benefits, the price for their bad behavior is shifted to people who know better than to participate.

While liberal lawmakers would like to cast this issue and others like it as a matter of "fairness," the fact is that it shifts the burden of bad behaviors onto people who are wise enough to abstain from them.

Perhaps the most discouraging news to report on this matter is the fact that a couple of solid conservatives flip-flopped and supported this anti-family legislation. Chris Saxman (R-Staunton) and Frank Hargrove (R-Hanover) both switched their votes, siding with liberal lobbyists from pro-homosexual groups who testified before the subcommittee hearing on last Tuesday night.

For more information, visit the Family Foundation of Virginia blog.

“The government should promote and encourage strong families consisting of a married mom and dad. The state’s marriage amendment does that; the Moscow policy does not,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Brian Raum. “ADF commends Attorney General Wasden for seeing through this attempt to bypass the state constitution. Marriage is under attack because certain special interest groups are trying to reduce it to nothing more than a benefits system for emotionally attached couples.”

In November 2006, Idaho voters overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment affirming marriage. On Dec. 17, the city of Moscow passed a resolution extending health benefits to “domestic partners,” individuals in temporary live-in relationships. At the request of Idaho Senator Russell Fulcher, the state attorneys general’s office was asked to look into the constitutionality of the resolution.

Let’s start with what seems like the easy part: what are domestic partnerships? Under OFFA, same-sex couples over 18 may register as partners. However, heterosexual couples may not register as partners (primarily because they already have the ability to receive these benefits through marriage). Because the Oregon Constitution limits marriage to heterosexual couples, a separate mechanism for uniting families was required. (Check out the Basic Rights Oregon website for a wonderful guide to the legislation.)

But what are these automatic rights married couples get that unmarried and unregistered domestic partners don’t have?

Some rights are obvious: for example, to make medical decisions for a partner when the partner is unable to make those decisions him or herself or to automatically inherit property if a partner dies without a will. Others aren't as obvious, like the ability to claim wrongful death benefits or crime victim survivor benefits if a partner is killed.

Some rights are provided by the state, like the automatic inheritance of a partner or how custody would be determined in a partnership dissolution, because inheritance and family laws are set by the state. Other rights are federal, like the ability to file jointly on federal income taxes. Oregon’s domestic partnership law can only affect state-provided rights. Subsection 9 of the legislation provides that "any privilege, immunity, right or ben3efit granted by statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other law to an individual because the individual is or was married....is granted on equivalent terms, substantive and procedural, to an individual because the individual is or was in a domestic partnership..."

It doesn't get more equal than that in Oregon, save in name alone. Additionally, registered partners also have all the same responsibilities as married couples!

But since this is a legal blog, we're mostly concerned about the juicy bits – those rights dealing with estate planning, wrongful death claims, adoptions, custody, and, of course, dissolution of the partnership.

But first, a little history. Some readers might be surprised to learn that domestic partnerships in family law courts aren’t new in Oregon. In fact, Oregon family law courts have dissolved an increasing number of heterosexual domestic partnerships. In doing so, the court would look back and determine whether or not the parties actually intended to form a domestic partnership: even though these are relationship dissolutions, frequently one party argues it was not a partnership (usually the party with assets) and the other argues that it was (usually the party with fewer assets). To find out what the parties intended, the court uses a test usually used in the context of business partnerships – did the parties intend to pool resources and share liabilities? If the answer is yes, then the court tries to find an equitable way to divvy up the parties’ resources. If no, then the parties keep their separate property.

Sounds easy, right? But it’s not. The court can’t order spousal support. Custody of children is very complex, because for a non-biological parent to receive custody or visitation, another action must be filed (although in fairness, it may be joined to the dissolution of domestic partnership action). Basically, in the absence of a clear statute, the family law court exercises its equity powers -- basically, whatever the court thinks is fair on that day. This means results can vary even more widely than they can with the assistance of statutes.

What OFFA does for same-sex couples is give the court all of the well-developed tools the legislature has enacted over the years for the dissolution of marriage cases, as well as providing more options for determining custody of children in a partnership dissolution. (If you want to know just how busy the legislature has been in developing and honing those family laws, take a gander at ORS 107 and ORS 109!)

We hope domestic partnerships thrive. However, if you have registered a partnership and wish to dissolve it, think carefully about your next steps and consult with an attorney well versed in dissolution of marriage procedures. Due to the sensitivity of the subject matter, don't be shy about asking your attorney what he or she thinks of your lifestyle. It does matter. It's important that there be an open and trusting atmosphere in your dealings with your dissolution attorney.

*Although states are supposed to give each other’s laws “full faith and credit” under the US Constitution – and this includes honoring marriages – states do not have to do so when another state’s laws violate public policy in that state. This was, generally, the way the law was practiced before the enaction of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (or DOMA) in 1996, but it’s now the law of the land. So, for example, if a couple marries at the age of 14, and that is legal in the state in which they reside, but is illegal in another state, the question of the marriage’s validity in the second state is up for grabs, depending on the policy implication of 14 year olds marrying. If thinking about this makes your head hurt, you’re not alone: the topic of marriages alone took up weeks in my Conflicts of Law class.

Other than giving a boost to Oregon's diamond and wedding supply retailers, what was the legislature's intent with this bill? What are the rights of married people that a registered same-sex couple now also possesses?  What is the difference between a same-sex domestic partnership and a heterosexual domestic partnership?  What happens when same-sex or heterosexual domestic partnerships break up?  If children are involved, how exactly would a court determine custody?

In the following posts, we'll examine these questions and explain the differences between types of domestic partnerships.  We'll look at the rights married people receive automatically at the time of marriage, and how an unmarried couple (of any configuration) can duplicate those rights using other legal means.

Having a trial is a way, but not the only way to resolve your case. There are many tools available for resolving your case other than a trial. Good family law lawyers are problem solvers, and the good ones recommend that their clients try to resolve their disputes outside the courtroom. Many jurisdictions have mandatory mediation (without lawyers) for parenting time and custody issues. Many good lawyers recommend their clients use private (for a fee) attorney guided mediation for property and custody and parenting time issues. Many participate in judicial settlement conferences where a judge attempts to guide the parties towards a cooperative resolution. If successful, the benefit of these tools to the client is usually lower cost, less conflict, and an agreement they chose, rather than having a judge tell them what the result is.

Some specially trained lawyers are using a new process called "Collaborative Divorce" designed to keep clients out of the courthouse from the beginning. Collaborative Divorce is a non-litigious party based settlement process in which a husband and wife or domestic partners work together to dissolve their relationship. The process can result in less cost, stress and judicial involvement than a litigated divorce or domestic partnership dissolution. The main idea is for the parties to work together to end their relationship in a manner which allows for each party to be self-sustaining financially and that serves the best interest of their child.

In a Collaborative Divorce case, the parties use a team of professionals to work on specific areas of their case. For example, if a child is involved, then the parties would have a child specialist on their team. In all cases, a financial specialist trained specifically in divorce finance and a mental health practitioner will be used. One benefit of the collaborative divorce process is that it can produce much more creative methods of property division and spousal/child support than a judge in a litigated case would order.

At the beginning of the case, the parties sign a collaborative practice agreement or participation agreement, which outlines the essential principles of the collaborative process. The agreement limits the parties’ attorney-client confidentiality and sets forth the rule that if the collaborative process is unsuccessful, then all of the professionals involved in the case, including both parties’ lawyers, will no longer work on the case. In addition, any materials or information produced in the process will not be admissible in court.

This process is very popular in Canada, Australia, and in some states in the US. It has not taken off yet in Oregon at a substantial level. There are, however, a number of collaboratively trained lawyers and team professionals in the Portland area. This is a growing field, and something to seriously consider if both you and your spouse wish to avoid the expense, stress, and frustration of traditional, adversarial litigation. Our office maintains a list of family law lawyers trained in the collaborative process.

If you are married, the Courts, at least in Arizona, will kindly assist you in dividing assets in the divorce process.  The Courts will also decide if one person needs some financial support at the end of a relationship (spousal maintenance or alimony) and make amends for community waste (one party destroying, wasting or hiding assets).  Further, the Courts may allocate the cost of litigation where there is a disparity in income or where one person has taken unreasonable positions.  Finally, the Courts will protect people going through a divorce from such things as harassment and the destruction of property by issuing a Preliminary Injunction, prohibiting such conduct. 

What do you do if you were not married and you cannot agree on how to divide assets?  You can file a civil action to partition property in both owner's names.  You can also file an action or contact the police to try to recover your separate property that your former partner took, if you can prove ownership. 

Or, you can go to mediation.   Mediation is a non-adversarial process where people experiencing conflict can resolve their disputes with the aid of a neutral mediator, trained in conflict resolution.  In mediation, the parties enter an agreement to discuss their issues in a confidential setting.  The mediator works with the parties to arrive at mutually acceptable solutions.  The parties are not restricted to solutions that may be available in Court.  For example, unmarried parties could agree to a payment from one party to the other, to help that party get back on his/her feet.  

The mediator can work with the unique dynamics of a particular relationship.  For example, some people may feel better sitting in separate rooms while discussing assets.  Others may succeed sitting all together with the mediator.  Some people want to complete the mediation at one sitting.  Others want to take time and complete the mediation over a number of sessions.  Experts can also be used to provide information, such as information about the value or most advantageous division of property.

Any agreement reached at the end of the mediation can be binding, if the parties want it to be.  The mediator can help the parties reduce the agreement to writing and give it the same legal effect as any other contract between parties. 

Mediation is highly successful (some quote a 90 percent success rate), empowering, confidential, and often quicker and less costly than other options.  Mediation is a good option for almost any type of conflict, and it may well be the only option for some domestic disputes. 

Alona M. Gottfried is a mediator and family law attorney in Arizona.  She can be reached at: 480-994-8824 or agottfried@urme.net.  You can learn more about Ms. Gottfried and mediation at www.urme.net. 

This Article is designed to be of general interest and should not be considered legal advice. The specific information discussed may not apply to you. Before acting on any matter contained herein, you should consult with your personal legal adviser.

Law Firm of JP McClelland  New Georgia Living Will   The history of the Georgia living will intersects with my family. In 1989 Allison McClelland, my 17 year old sister, introduced the legislation for Georgia's first living will in a school competition.  Since then, thousands of Georgians have benefited from this law.  However, the vast majority of Georgians still do not have a living will. You have made decisions about your own life for along time.  But when you are unconscious or can't communicate, why should your life and death decisions be made by someone else?  The new Georgia Living Will allows you to make this choice and many others. Call our office to set up a meeting to draft your living will so that you can be sure to make your own decisions.

Law Firm of JP McClelland
PO Box 170099
Atlanta, Georgia 30317  (404) 725-0930 

www.jpmclaw.com

The Georgia Living Will is a crutial legal document for every adult to have. Everyone over 18 should have one.  Why?  Don't you make your own decision?  Why give up that right when you can't communicate what someone knows you want? Don't with a living will.

The Georgia Living Will allows you to control your medical treatment when you can not speak for yourself.  Under Georgia Law, you can make your own medical decisions, generally, as long as you can communicate your desires.  What happens when you are in a comma?  Or you have no chance of recovery?  Do others know what you want them to do?  Tell them with your living will, and control your own future.

Also, your boyfriend or girlfriend may not be able to visit you in emergency care.  A living will is especially important for couples without a legal relationship like boyfriends and girlfriends.  Living wills are especially important for people in civil unions or domestic partners, as well.

The Georgia living will also contains provisions regarding your choice of burial or cremation.  In addition, organ donations can be made by you thru your health care agent.  Why add to the devastation of your family by causing them to make these difficult decisions.

It is important to consult with an experienced attorney.  Small issues to you, can lead to big issues for a judge.  Unless you are a professional, and even then, let someone else view your needs, and help you achieve them.

To get a living will, just give us a call and come into the office. 

Call JP at (404) 835-8430 or email to jpmclaw@aol.com.

www.jpmclaw.com
 

(If you feel a little nervous, you’re not alone. This may be the first time you’re meeting with an attorney, and you’re not doing it under the best of circumstances. We understand.)

Each attorney has a unique way of conducting a first meeting, but generally, the attorney is interested in getting the history of your relationship and what has happened during the marriage. Many will email you or mail you documents they’d like for you to fill out ahead of time, so they can scan the important information quickly – when you were married, your kids, their ages, your income and that of your spouse, the property you own, and so on. It’s a great idea to get this back to the attorney before your meeting, if possible, because it’ll make your time together that much more productive.

Before your meeting, you may want to make a list of the questions you’d like answered during this interview -- and don’t be afraid to check the list while you’re in there.

During the meeting, listen to your gut -- don’t be afraid to not hire the attorney on the spot if something feels “off.” The first interview doesn’t obligate you to hire a particular attorney, and if you have a feeling that something isn’t right, it probably isn’t. The attorney you hire for your divorce is going to help determine the outcome of the division of property, the potential for spousal support and child support, and child custody and parenting time, if you have minor children. It’s a big decision, and not one to make on the spur of the moment. (It may also be telling to see how the attorney reacts when you say you’re not ready to make a decision.)

These are some factors you might want to think about before you make a decision:

• Does the attorney talk more or listen more in this meeting?
• Attorneys have different approaches: do you want a bulldog who’ll fight every step of the way or someone who will work with the other side to reach an agreement? Ask about approaches and make sure the attorney matches what you want.
• Is the attorney upfront with you about fees and costs? How does the attorney bill?
• Do you feel you can be completely open with the attorney? It’s absolutely critical you trust your attorney and that your attorney trusts you. An attorney can’t do the best job representing you without knowing all of the facts, and you won’t be happy with the representation if you don’t feel comfortable enough to provide all the facts.
• Ask how the attorney will keep in contact with you. If you’d prefer email to regular mail, ask if that’s a possibility.

Something you should also think about is the cost of an initial meeting. This depends on the attorney. Some attorneys bill their hourly rate and if the meeting goes for two hours, you’ll pay for two hours of the attorney’s time. Some attorneys set a fixed price for an initial interview. Don’t be afraid to ask about how the meeting pricing works ahead of time.

(In case you’re wondering, Stephens Family Law offers a free telephone consultation and initial meetings are a flat $100 fee.)