Monday, October 24, 2011

Adoption & More: What Will It Cost You?

by Josie Raymond
 
When we discussed how much it costs to delay one's biological clock with egg freezing, lots of users wrote in with an assortment of follow-up questions. The most common thing you asked us to explore were options for adoption. You ask, we answer.

This is a topic close to our hearts. Among our staff, those of us who aren't already parents are looking forward to eventually having children, but we want to know our options.

Just like no two kids are the same, no two adoptions are the same. Adoptions range from no cost to more than $40,000, depending on everything from which country the baby comes from to whose womb he or she grew in. Whether or not adoption is actually in the cards for you, we're all about sparking debate and helping readers (and their uteruses) know their options. Here's a rundown of many different reproductive options:

Special Delivery

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service's Administration for Children & Families, almost all types of adoptions have universal costs, including home study by a social worker and court fees. It gets more complicated from there, depending on the type of adoption.

Foster Care Adoptions are Usually for Special Needs

Fees for adopting a child from foster care are usually kept to a minimum or waived because most public agencies only adopt out children with special needs—which can mean anything from disabilities to being slightly older to needing to be adopted with siblings. Costs for this typically run anywhere from nothing at all to $2,500. These children often bring with them government subsidy payments called adoption assistance, Supplemental Security Income (i.e. disability checks) or Medicaid coverage. That, and good karma; there are well over 100,000 children in the American foster care system ready to be adopted.

The Cost of American Adoptions Varies Widely

Adopting an American infant will run you $5,000 to $40,000, depending on the agency and the circumstances. Some agencies charge less if you find your own willing birth parent and some offer sliding scale fees for prospective parents who aren't wealthy.

International Adoptions Can Be a Bit More Complicated

Adopting internationally from a place like Russia or China could cost more or less. The estimated range is $7,000 to $30,000 and includes everything from immigration processing fees to donations to foreign orphanages. If you plan to travel to meet the child, tack on transportation costs and remember that you'll need to have plenty of vacation time saved up.

Subsidies for Adoption Costs

The price tag for any adoption can be daunting, but the expenses need not all be out of pocket. Prospective parents should explore federal and state tax credits, subsidies and reimbursements for certain children, and reimbursement from corporate workplaces. For the remaining balance, there are adoption loans and grants.

What You Should Know About Egg Freezing

The best candidates are cancer patients who may lose fertility during treatment and women who aren't quite ready for kids but face declining fertility. The total cost for the pre-procedure hormone injections, surgical extraction, storage, and then implantation of the eggs ranges from about $13,000 up to almost $20,000 … all with about a 30% success rate.

The Cycles of Motherhood

Similarly, in-vitro fertilization is not cheap. It costs about $12,000 per cycle (genetic testing can cost a few thousand more) and, of course, there's no guarantee of success. This price presumes that you're using your eggs and your partner's sperm. Donor sperm will bump the price to between $13,000 and $17,000, while donor eggs will make it $25,000 to $30,000. Talk to clinics about payment plans and even guaranteed refund programs if you don't have a viable pregnancy after three or more cycles. Additionally, some insurance companies may cover some costs, so check into your policy before you start down this path.

Hired Help

The cost of using a surrogate varies widely, like so much else. Above and beyond the cost of her in-vitro fertilization, a surrogacy agency will charge fees in the thousands for finding and screening potential surrogates and guiding prospective parents through the process. Once selected, the surrogate's fee is usually around $20,000, higher if it's a multiple birth or a C-section. Then there's her health care, life insurance, your legal fees, and extras like her lost wages and a maternity clothing stipend. It all adds up to between $60,000 and $80,000.

The Natural Way

Making your own child may be free, but having it certainly isn't. A typical pregnancy, even if you have insurance, costs between $6,000 and $10,000, more with a C-section. Use our preparing-for-baby checklist to get ready.

No matter how a child comes into your life, it's a blessing, and one that's going to cost you. Find out just how much by using the child rearing calculator.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Thursday, October 20, 2011

JK Rowling & single mothers: from a family lawyer’s perspective

JK Rowling makes a very sympathetic case in The Times for the plight of lone parent families living on benefits.  If she wasn't known to be such a great friend and supporter of the Labour Party and the Browns, one might be wholly, instead of partially, convinced by her arguments. Yesterday I was invited by the Yorkshire Post, as one of 40 Yorkshire people, to meet Gordon Brown. The invitation came at very short notice so I couldn't make it. I couldn't turn my clients away, even for the Prime Minister! But had it been possible, this topic would have been on my agenda.

I have written before on a similar subject: the Every Family Matters report prepared for the Conservative Party last summer, by Iain Duncan Smith's 'Centre for Social Justice' think tank. I have a client who is a prominent member of the Conservative Party and I was recently told that my views are well known to them. (This information was delivered with a disapproving look.) I came straight back with all my arguments. I intend to pose them again now, in the context of Ms Rowling's commentary.

I believe in families: families of all types, single, married, divorcing, cohabiting. They all deserve consideration and recognition, rather than approbation. Every one of us belongs to a family, and none of us should ever feel entitled to criticise another family of whom we disapprove.

The one-parent family is a very sensitive, difficult topic. It often encompasses the concept of lone parenting itself and the poverty trap, together with the financial impact and the emotional fallout of children growing up without two parents living in the same home, with one parent struggling to provide all for the most part – and not always successfully.

Not every lone parent on state benefits has the genius to write worldwide bestsellers. Many lone parents on benefits are permanently caught in the poverty trap from which – with or without increased state benefits, better education, better health, better job opportunities – it is a sad fact of life that they will never, ever escape. No government, however much money it throws at the problem or however much it criticises the conduct of girls who have children to gain an income and housing, has the power to permanently remove a certain section of lone parents from state benefits. King Canute couldn't turn back the tide and no government can alter this situation. It is cruel to expect differently and turn on lone parents who cannot help themselves.

I am reluctant to criticise any lone parent living on benefits, however much their moral conduct may be criticised by others. Most people caught in a poverty trap would, of course, seek to escape from it if they could and knew how. But they don't and they can't.  For them, there isn't an immediately obvious or even viable route out. Ms Rowling praises the state benefit system at length, but it has only produced one vastly wealthy millionairess author that I'm aware of: Ms Rowling herself. Some others escape, doing not quite so well as her (who does?)  but they aren't the majority and we know that in many cases, the cycle repeats itself. It won't change. It never does, no matter how many platitudes are uttered by our politicians.

As for the concept of lone parenting, I am also pragmatic. I accepting what clearly cannot and will not ever be changed. There will always be single parent families, however the situation has come about, and it is wrong to denigrate them. I agree that such setups can be far from ideal for the children. But family breakdown happens and as society continues to move away from the 1950s-type family of mother, father and two children, it will continue to happen. The marriage rate is falling. People are choosing not to marry but to live instead in cohabitant arrangements. Families today, married and cohabiting, in their numerous forms will be scarcely recognisable to a typical 1950s family. Children frequently come into a relationship before marriage, if marriage comes at all. If the relationship breaks down, single parenting occurs.

Instead of criticising lone parents, I believe that political parties should adopt a pragmatic approach and do what they can to help these individuals. Helping them, rather than ignoring or criticising them, won't increase the problem – but it will certainly help to level the playing field.

Firstly, burdening the State with yet more lone parents and children is not the answer. I suspect that all parties would agree with that. Instead we should look to the parents themselves for proper financial assistance. There are some parents who will live on the poverty line and they are unable to do much except contribute to their children's upbringing out of meagre wages, channelled via the child support system.  But there are parents who currently escape liability. These parents could and should be doing more, to alleviate the financial plight of the family and of the children in particular.

Thus I am back on my well-worn soap box. We should not be distinguishing between "married" and "non-married" families. We should be making far less distinction between them and encouraging more responsibility from parents in all families, irrespective of marital status.

We may never be able to end the poverty trap. However we can and should be doing something to ensure that individuals who walk out on their families and can afford to help do so, and do not throw yet more families onto the welfare state.

Parents who walk out of a married relationship have liabilities on divorce. Parents who walk out of a cohabiting relationship have virtually none. I have written previously of how the children of cohabiting couples are condemned as second class citizens. Legally, married couples cannot divorce before arrangements for any children are first agreed. Yet tens of thousands of children never come before the court because their estranged parents were never married.

My recommendation? Cohabitation legislation.

In our modern-day, right-thinking society, we cannot and should not let outdated, inappropriate Victorian morals rule us. Victoriana belongs where we left it: in 1901.

This is 2010. Families – all families – deserve our support. The country will do better. Families will do better.

Mr Brown and Mr Cameron, are you taking note?
 
By Marilyn Stowe
For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Outdated will can lead to added legal issues

By Terry McBride,
 

If you die with an out-ofdate will, your estate could end up going to the wrong people, taking years to settle and incurring extra legal fees.

The good news is that 85 per cent of Canadian boomers, age 45 years and older with property of more than $500,000, do have a will in place, according to a study released in September by BMO Financial Group.

The bad news is that almost half of them have not re-visited or updated their wills in 10 years, potentially leaving their original legacy goals in a precarious state.

EXECUTOR PREDECEASED

What if your appointed executor has died or become mentally incapacitated? Who would manage your estate? Your relatives might squabble for months until they can agree on who should apply to the court to administer your estate.

What if your executor is no longer a Canadian resident? Although faxes, couriers and emails make distance almost irrelevant these days, your non-resident executor may be asked to post an administration bond before the court would grant permission to manage your estate.

MARRIAGE

Your will is automatically revoked after you marry or remarry. Without a valid will your estate would be divided by strict formula among your next of kin. Each province sets out a different formula.

Any bequests to your own children or your favourite charity would be ignored once your will becomes invalid.

Did you know that in Saskatchewan, your will is automatically revoked after you have lived common-law with someone for two years?

JOINT OWNERSHIP

Have you registered ownership of real property or your bank account in joint names with someone with right of survivorship?

Have you named adult children as RRIF beneficiaries? You may have done so deliberately to reduce probate costs by arranging for the property to pass outside of your will.

However, joint ownership and beneficiary designations can too easily make will bequests obsolete.

When property bypasses your estate, any income-splitting testamentary trusts that you established through your will may never be funded.

INCREASED WEALTH

Has your net worth greatly increased because you received an inheritance or exercised some stock options? If you are lucky, you can stop worrying about outliving your retirement savings and start planning how to leave a legacy.

Your lawyer or financial adviser may ask if you want to leave any money to your favourite charity.

BIRTH IN THE FAMILY

The birth of your first child should motivate you to book an appointment with your lawyer to draw up a will. Appoint a guardian to look after your baby in case both parents die in a car accident, for example.

Then, you could also name a trustee to manage the money from your life insurance death benefit and selling your house.

Years later, the birth of your first grandchild could inspire you to revise your will to include trusts for a whole new generation.

You should also consider the possibility that your child could predecease you, leaving minor grandchildren to inherit.

BENEFICIARY DIED

If one of your children has predeceased you, would you inadvertently disinherit orphaned grandchildren if your will says that only surviving children can inherit?

What if you had bequeathed a special heirloom or the family cottage to a particular child who is now deceased?

How easily would the surviving heirs agree on how to divide your estate property?

BENEFICIARY'S MARITAL STATUS

What if there is a breakdown in the relationship between your child and partner? Will your child's inheritance be split when family property is divided?

It depends on the provincial statutes.

Call your lawyer to make an appointment to review your will.

Having an up-to-date will can make things easier, quicker and less expensive for your heirs.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.



Monday, October 17, 2011

Yuli Ofer's son seeks injunction on will

Late billionaire left behind two wills: First divides his financial empire equally between son Doron, daughter Liora; second, drawn up after he experienced health complications, names daughter sole beneficiary of family's holding company. Doron Ofer goes to court to try to revoke subsequent will.

The plot of the estate of billionaire Yuli Ofer, who died last month, thickens: Ofer left behind two inconsistent wills – the first distributes his stake in Ofer Investments equally between son Doron and daughter Liora. The second, subsequent will disinherits Doron by naming Liora sole beneficiary of his stake in the company.

 

Calcalist has learned that both wills were notarized by family lawyer Zvi Ephrat of Gornitzki &Co. Sources with knowledge of the developments say that the drafting of the second will about a year ago was witnessed by Attorney Ephrat and a doctor who determined that Ofer was of sound mind when writing the will; this information, however, was not formally corroborated.

 

A legal source estimated that if indeed a doctor witnessed the signing of the will, there must have been speculations that the new will would lead to an inheritance dispute. The wills were drawn within several months of each other during which Yuli Ofer experienced serious health problems.

 

Doron Ofer not privy to new will

Doron Ofer hired attorney Alex Hartman and is planning to launch legal action, in which he will likely demand the invalidation of the second will. To begin with, Doron Ofer will likely file for an injunction on the transferring of Yuli Ofer's Ofer Investments stake to his sister Liora.

 

According to sources close to the issue, the court will be asked to probe the circumstances under which the second will was drawn up. In the meantime, an application for the appointment of temporary trustee to Yuli Ofer's estate was filed at the Tel Aviv Family Court.

 

Sources with knowledge of the affair told Calcalist that Liora was privy to the second will and knew of the changes in the will's provisions which were brought to her brother's attention only at a later stage.

 

According to the sources, Yuli Ofer wished to make amends with his daughter having put her brother at the forefront of his business activity and transferring him considerable assets while still alive. In the latter years of Yuli Ofer's life, Liora took over the management of his business with considerable success due to which Yuli Ofer changed his entire approach on the backdrop of his fallout with Doron.

 

The core asset in Yuli Ofer's estate is a 36.7% stake in Ofer Investments, which controls commercial property management firm Melisron and Bank Mizrahi Tefahot.

 

Ofer Investment holds a 19.7% stake in the bank and the family as a whole holds 25.44% of the bank's shares which are worth NIS 1.4 billion ($380 million), in addition to direct holdings through L.I.N. Holdings. Ofer Investments holds 71.5% of Melisron which are worth NIS 1.6 billion ($440 million).

 

So far, Ofer Investments holdings were distributed between father Yuli (36.7%) and each of his children – Doron and Liora (15% each). The remainder of the shares was held by Eyal Ofer, the son of Yuli's late brother Sammy.

 

As per the first will, Yuli's shares were to be divided in equal portions between Doron and Liora leaving each with 33.35% of the shares. The second will leaves all of the shares to Liora whereas Doron receives none. This would leave Liora with a 51.7% stake in the company while Doron remains with his previously held 15%.

 

Doron walked out – Liora stepped in

Yuli Ofer has always seen Doron as his successor to his business empire which is why Doron received considerable assets throughout the years, unlike his sister, including 33% of Ofer Shipping which he later sold to his cousin Idan Ofer and former brother-in-law Udi Angel.

 

Sources close to the family claim that Yuli was not able to witness his daughter's business skills as her ex-husband Udi Angel usually stood at the forefront of their business during their marriage.

 

However, in recent years the tables turned when in 2003, just before the Ofer brothers split their holdings, Doron Ofer stepped down from the management of Ofer Holdings, focusing instead on the management of his own real estate business.

 

Sources close to the family claimed at the time that Doron left the company on the backdrop of a fallout between him and his father; some sources even claimed that Yuli was upset over his son's less than satisfactory results which he covered up and decided to oust him from his position. Others claim it was Doron that decided to venture into his own independent business.

 

Following Doron's resignation, Liora took the reins of the family outfit in which she never held an executive position until that point. Liora is regarded as a more accomplished manager than her brother. One of her greatest successes is Melisron which under her management as vice chairwomen in her father's company, became one of Israel's leading commercial property management firm.

 

Not on speaking terms

While the personnel shuffle was underway, relations between the father and son and between the two siblings became strained. Doron and Liora are said not to be on speaking terms with each other despite living in close proximity.

 

On the backdrop of the fallout between the two, Yuli Ofer's funeral was held for only a small number of relatives and acquaintances and was closed to the press.

 

Two years ago, the dispute between the family members deepened when Doron objected to his sister's initiative to acquire Africa-Israel holdings in the Ramat Aviv and the Savyonim malls.

 

Sources close to the family claimed that Doron's objection deepened the chasm between Doron and his father who was in favor of the deal.

 

"Liora always made it a point to keep her father up to date on her business moves and to receive his approval in advance so Doron's opposition was blocked," a family acquaintance told Calcalist.

 

The day Yuli Ofer passed away, another family feud broke out after Doron refused to sign the formula for the separation of Ofer Investments' real and financial holdings.

 

"All in all, in dying, Yuli gave his daughter what he gave his son when alive, this is not a case of disinheritance," said a source with knowledge of the developments in recent days.


for additional information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.



Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Friday, October 14, 2011

Criminal Prosecution and International Child Abduction

Criminal Prosecution and International Child Abduction

Criminal prosecution can play a significant role in international child abduction cases. However, it can be a double-edged sword. Some courts use the possibility of criminal prosecution against an abducting parent as a reason not to order a child's return.

Interpol Notices

One of Interpol's most important functions is to help police in member countries share critical crime-related information using the organization's system of international notices. 

Notices can be issued in cases of international child kidnapping.

The notices include:

notice

Extradition Treaties Interpretation Act of 1998

18 USC § 3181 

SEC. 202. FINDINGS.

Congress finds that—

(1) each year, several hundred children are kidnapped by a parent in violation of law, court order, or legally binding agreement and brought to, or taken from, the United States;

(2) until the mid-1970's, parental abduction generally was not considered a criminal offense in the United States;

(3) since the mid-1970's, United States criminal law has evolved such that parental abduction is now a criminal offense in each of the 50 States and the District of Columbia;

(4) in enacting the International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act of 1993 (Public Law 103–173; 107 Stat. 1998; 18 U.S.C. 1204), Congress recognized the need to combat parental abduction by making the act of international parental kidnapping a Federal criminal offense;

(5) many of the extradition treaties to which the United States is a party specifically list the offenses that are extraditable and use the word 'kidnapping', but it has been the practice of the United States not to consider the term to include parental abduction because these treaties were negotiated by the United States prior to the development in United States criminal law described in paragraphs (3) and (4);

(6) the more modern extradition treaties to which the United States is a party contain dual criminality provisions, which provide for extradition where both parties make the offense a felony, and therefore it is the practice of the United States to consider such treaties to include parental abduction if the other foreign state party also considers the act of parental abduction to be a criminal offense; and

(7) this circumstance has resulted in a disparity in United States extradition law which should be rectified to better protect the interests of children and their parents.

SEC. 203. INTERPRETATION OF EXTRADITION TREATIES.

For purposes of any extradition treaty to which the United States is a party, Congress authorizes the interpretation of the terms 'kidnaping' and 'kidnapping' to include parental kidnapping.

Office of Children's Issues, U.S. Department of State:

The Possibility of Extradition 

The United States Department of Justice, not the United States Department of State, is responsible for pursuing extradition of wanted persons. Through INTERPOL and other international links, national law enforcement authorities in many countries regularly cooperate in the location and apprehension of international fugitives.

Extradition, the surrender of a fugitive or prisoner by one jurisdiction for criminal prosecution or service of a sentence in another jurisdiction, is rarely a viable approach in international child abduction cases. Extradition is utilized only for criminal justice purposes in cases that prosecutors believe can be successfully prosecuted due to the sufficiency of the evidence. Prosecutors may decide not to proceed with a request for extradition for a number of different reasons. Moreover, it must be remembered that extradition does not apply to the abducted or wrongfully retained child, but only to the abductor. There is no guarantee that the child will be returned by foreign authorities in connection with extradition of the alleged wrongdoer. Threatened with impending extradition, abducting parents may hide the child or children with a friend or relative in the foreign country.

Another reason that extradition may not be useful in a given case is that the offenses of parental child abduction or custodial interference are sometimes not included in the U.S. Government's extradition relationships with some foreign countries. The United States now has extradition treaties now in force at this point with over 120 foreign countries. Some of these are "dual criminality" treaties while others are "list" treaties. In each case, in order for conduct to be an extraditable offense under a particular treaty, the conduct in question must be (1) be extraditable under a given treaty, the conduct in question must be considered a crime in both countries, and (2) and also included as an extraditable offense under the treaty. In this respect, the United States Government has two kinds of extradition treaties, "dual criminality" and "list" treaties.

Dual Criminality Treaties: U.S. Government's Most modern extradition treaties (i.e., generally those concluded after 1980) usually include a "dual criminality" provision. This means that persons generally may be extradited under the treaty if their conduct is a crime punishable by more than one year imprisonment in both countries.

As a result, if the illegal conduct involved in a particular parental child abduction or custodial interference case is a crime punishable by more than one year imprisonment in both the United States and the foreign jurisdiction country concerned, then that conduct would be considered an extraditable offense under most extradition treaties that are based on "dual criminality" extradition treaties. (A small number of the U.S. Government's dual criminality treaties use periods other than one year as the measure for extraditable offenses.)

If the conduct is not criminalized a crime in either the United States or the foreign country, then it will not be an extraditable offense.even if our treaty with that country is a modern "dual criminality" treaty.

List Treaties: The U.S. Government's older extradition treaties (generally those concluded before 1980) typically contain a list of covered offenses that are extraditable under the treaty. In this respect, nearly all of these older treaties include the word "kidnapping" in their list of covered extraditable offenses. The Extradition Treaties Interpretation Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-323) makes clear that the word "kidnapping" as used in these older treaties can encompass parental kidnapping. If, however, the conduct is not a crime criminalized in the United States or the foreign country, then it will not be an extraditable offense even if the word "kidnapping" is included in the relevant list treaty.

Despite the fact that parental child abduction may be covered by certain extradition treaties, you should be aware of potential difficulties in utilizing them. Apart from the possible counterproductive effects already discussed, specifically, most all civil law countries (in contrast with common law countries like the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia) refuse to extradite their own nationals. Nearly all the nations of Latin America and Europe are civil law countries. Whatever the terms of any applicable extradition treaty, experience has also shown that foreign governments are generally reluctant (and often simply unwilling) to extradite anyone (their own citizens, United States citizens, or third country nationals) for parental child abduction.

For extradition to be possible, therefore:

· The local and/or federal prosecutor must decide to file charges and pursue the case, and you should be prepared to testify in any criminal trial; 

· There must be an extradition treaty in force between the United States and the country in question;

· The treaty must cover parental child abduction or custodial interference; 

· If the person sought is a national of the country in question, that country must be willing to extradite its own nationals; and, 

· The country in question must be willing to extradite persons for parental child abduction /custodial interference (i.e., not refuse to do so for "humanitarian" or other policy reasons).

International Parental Kidnapping Act

The International Parental Kidnapping Act (18 USCA 1204), enacted in 1993, is an important component of the international family lawyer's arsenal.

It makes it an offense to remove or attempt to remove a child who has been in the United States from the United States , or retain a child outside the United States, with the intent to obstruct the lawful exercise of parental rights. The offense is punishable by a fine under Title 18, imprisonment for not more than three years, or both.

The statutory language is as follows:

18 U.S.C. § 1204. International parental kidnapping

(a) Whoever removes a child from the United States, or attempts to do so, or retains a child (who has been in the United States) outside the United States with intent to obstruct the lawful exercise of parental rights shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.

(b) As used in this section—

(1) the term "child" means a person who has not attained the age of 16 years; and

(2) the term "parental rights", with respect to a child, means the right to physical custody of the child—

(A) whether joint or sole (and includes visiting rights); and

(B) whether arising by operation of law, court order, or legally binding agreement of the parties.

(c) It shall be an affirmative defense under this section that—

(1) the defendant acted within the provisions of a valid court order granting the defendant legal custody or visitation rights and that order was obtained pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act or the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act and was in effect at the time of the offense;

(2) the defendant was fleeing an incidence or pattern of domestic violence; or

(3) the defendant had physical custody of the child pursuant to a court order granting legal custody or visitation rights and failed to return the child as a result of circumstances beyond the defendant's control, and the defendant notified or made reasonable attempts to notify the other parent or lawful custodian of the child of such circumstances within 24 hours after the visitation period had expired and returned the child as soon as possible.

(d) This section does not detract from The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Parental Child Abduction, done at The Hague on October 25, 1980.




Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Thursday, October 13, 2011

Arbitration: Another Alternative Dispute Resolution Method to Consider in Family Law Cases

Posted by 

These days, many couples are searching for what they hope is an easier, cheaper approach to divorce (and resolution of other disputes too). Different practitioners each tout their own preferred methodology.

One such available methodology that gets less attention than some others is arbitration. Arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution option, in that it aims to avoid lengthy family court litigation (paper motions and multiple legal and/or evidentiary hearings) that culminates in a divorce court trial before a family court judge in a family court courtroom.

Compared to mediation, another alternative dispute resolution methodology, arbitration is still fairly trial-like. So what is arbitration, and why would someone consider using arbitration?

In a nutshell, arbitration is generally faster, more private, less expensive and less formal than conventional litigation.

An arbitrator, a privately engaged professional, often a former judge, presides over proceedings as an ultimate decision-maker, much like a judge. But in arbitration, the parties get to choose their arbitrator for themselves.

An arbitrator hears testimony and also considers other, nontestimonial evidence in arriving at an award, much like a judge.

Typically, an arbitrator's decision in a binding arbitration is final (although there are certain narrow exceptions).

The arbitration process is generally leaner and more streamlined than typical family court proceedings. Most hearings before the ultimate hearing are eliminated, and development of evidence from the opponent and third parties is normally reduced. This saves parties money as well as time.

And the "main event" is not held in a public courtroom.

Of course, like almost anything else, arbitration can be misused and abused so as to erode its good features and advantages.

Arbitration has not gained great traction in Florida family law yet, but it is finding favor in Canada and other countries already.

Read more in this appellate opinion and this American Bar Association Litigation News Article: Protecting the Natural Cost Advantages of Arbitration

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.



Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"


Wednesday, October 12, 2011

True Happiness in Relationships

The great mythical romances and love songs of our culture have conditioned us to believe that we must have a romantic partner in order to be happy. According to this mythology, we can never be truly happy until we have found our 'soul mate.' In reality there are several problems with this line of thinking. If you are depending on someone else for your happiness, what happens when that person goes away? If you are depending on someone else for your happiness, how long will it be before they get tired of bearing the responsibility for your emotional wellbeing? If you are depending on someone else for your happiness, how will you ever learn to be responsible for your own happiness?

It has been said that before you can love another, you must first learn to love yourself. You cannot force anyone else to be happy; likewise, nobody else can be responsible for your own happiness. True happiness must come from within.

If you are relying on another for your emotional wellbeing, yet you haven't learned to love yourself first, a cycle is set up that can destroy the relationship. The thought process of this cycle goes something like this:

"My partner says he/she loves me, but I don't love myself. How can my partner love me when I can't even love myself? If my partner cannot see that I am unlovable, then there must be something wrong with my partner. Why should I be in a relationship with a flawed partner?"

Groucho Marx once said that he wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would have him as a member. This is the same dynamic that is at work in relationships where you haven't yet learned to love yourself. Another way to look at it is, "Why should anybody else love me if I'm not willing to love myself?"

How do you learn to love yourself? The first step is in learning to be non-judgmental with yourself. The power of forgiveness is a very powerful thing, but it is often true that the most difficult person to
forgive is yourself. If there are things you'd like to change about yourself, first start by accepting that these things are a part of you, and that's okay. One of the paradoxes of change is that the more we accept ourselves as we are, the easier it becomes to change ourselves.

Once you have completed the journey to loving yourself, then and only then will you be ready to share that love and happiness with another person.

So the ideal relationship is not one in which two people come together to make each other happy. The ideal relationship is one in which two people who have learned to find their own inner happiness come together to share that joy with each other. 


For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305 548 5020.





Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Got a traffic ticket in Miami -Dade? go now to www.miamionlinetrafficattorney.com

Bankruptcy | Sports Law | All Criminal Cases | Traffic | DUI Defense | Family Law



CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including attachments, if any, is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and /or attorney-client privileged material. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. If you are the intended recipient but do not wish to receive communications through this medium, please so advise the sender immediately.