If you are the primary wage earner in the middle of a divorce, you are likely the victim of a hidden trap that you may never become aware of even when the divorce is finally over.

Having a divorce devour the past 3.5 years of my life and run up hundreds of thousands of dollars of legal bills before it would be finalized in the family court, and having to hire a succession of six different attorneys before I found some sort of legal relief, I learned a few things.

The hidden “quid pro quo” (something that is given or taken in return for something else) in divorce is that the attorney who represents the party that earns the money in the family will be covertly doing things to transfer funds to the non-income earning party so they can pay their attorney.  Essentially, your attorney is working for the other side.

This hidden agreement in divorce proceedings changes sides depending upon which party an attorney represents.  And if a divorce attorney doesn’t play along and gets ten clients in a row who aren’t the primary wage earner, he/she may have no way to get paid other than hoping they can file for a lien on community property, if it exists.

Time to buy old US gold coins

After interviewing a number of men (who are usually the primary wage earner in divorce), I discovered this tacit agreement between divorce attorneys can result in attorneys agreeing to allow one party to even commit crimes with impunity, such as moving assets in the middle of a divorce, running up credit-card bills, which is forbidden in family court, even committing grand theft, credit card and banking fraud. Donu2019t Divorce: Pow... Diane Medved Best Price: $2.42 Buy New $25.99 (as of 06:45 UTC - Details)

Attorneys may petition the family court for back spousal support even if the wage-earning party doesn’t have the funds and threaten him with contempt of court and a night in jail if the money doesn’t materialize.

Beware the private judge

When divorce attorneys suggest a private judge to speed things along, you should suspect the judge is in on this ugly divorce game.  As long as he plays along, attorneys keep recommending him to their clients.  Be wary of private judges to settle your divorce.

Forging your signature

What I learned is that during the writing of stipulations (agreements between parties) or testimony in depositions, both attorneys may collude to alter the record, even forge your signature on these papers, to coerce you to pay up or face legal consequences.

At some point your anger over this ordeal may get the best of you, but you can’t quite put your finger on why your spouse is winning every claim for money in the courtroom.  Some men had to pay spousal support even when their ex-wife was still living at home and fully able to work.  It’s no wonder many men have heart attacks in the middle of a divorce.

A presumption is you are hiding money and if your finances are destroyed to the point of insolvency, the attorneys may now find hidden caches of more money they can lay their hands on.

One man did as ordered, produced all of his banking, tax and financial records as ordered by the court.  His ex-wife refused to do the same.  The attorneys on both sides didn’t seem to care.  The man couldn’t afford to subpoena the banking records at that time.  When the divorce was finalized and he finally did regain solvency and subpoenaed his spouse’s banking records, he found she had applied for over a dozen credit cards and had run them up to their maximum to pay her legal bills.  Ironically, the credit standing that qualified her for the cards was her husband’s income. The Case Against Divor... Diane Medved Best Price: $0.99 Buy New $4.79 (as of 11:00 UTC - Details)

Attorneys are going to look the other way as long as both sides are getting paid.  This game continues until the wage-earning party is plundered of all of his money and assets.  An angry female spouse often wants to strike back at her ex and the attorneys on both sides take advantage and allow it all to happen, to their selfish gain.

One man filed a complaint with the State Bar over the forging of his signature on stipulations.  The accused attorney simply claimed he was an irrational and argumentative client and the State Bar sided dismissed the complaint.

There is no recourse before the judge.  You can’t speak in court and only can respond to questions the attorneys ask you.  You can’t speak directly to the judge and complain about the bad and unethical behavior of the attorneys.

Let the divorce games begin

Outside-the-court divorce games attorneys play are now a common experience.

One man who ran out of money at one point during his divorce could not afford legal representation and had to represent himself in court, what is called being in “pro per.”  Now the opposing attorney had a clear shot at him and wrote him demeaning letters saying he was a bad father and even more horrible husband, baiting the man to reach a point of anger and to respond inappropriately.  There was no way to bring this unethical behavior to the attention of the judge.

In another case I heard about, while living for a year in the same home during the first year of divorce, a retired-attorney friend of the wife was brought in to live in the home and act as a her divorce director and the man had no legal recourse whatsoever to expel her from the home. How to Do Your Own Div... Sherman, Ed Best Price: $34.78 Buy New $110.72 (as of 12:10 UTC - Details)

This retired attorney coached the woman to call the police for contrived reasons, attempted to rile up the man by calling him a liar in front of his child, and instructed his spouse to dress up like she was going out on a date with another man and parade herself leaving the house for dinner every Sunday night just to rile up her husband into a state of jealousy.  Friends spotted her and said she was just sitting by herself in a restaurant and informed the man.

In another instance a request for restraining orders was filed based upon a contrived event where it was claimed a man in divorce physically threatened his spouse and child in a public park.  After three hearings, the attorney who filed, abandoned his petition.  He didn’t show up for the 2^nd hearing because he claimed he had a bad back, nor did he show up for the final hearing because he withdrew the petition by telephone, leaving the defendant husband with $6000 of legal bills to pay.

It’s just all part of the games being played in divorce.  The attorneys are behind it all to keep the billable hours going and Family Court is derelict if not complicit, acting as if it hadn’t ever seen any of these contrived events before.

Disagreement interpreted as harassment

In the family court, a male who disagrees with his spouse on any issue is often considered to be harassing his ex.  An attorney for a woman can make the claim she is being stalked by her ex and the court may forbid any direct communication, as happened in my case.  The attorneys collude to submit a request for orders to the judge that forbids any and all direct communication between parties, even telephone or email.  Now to communicate with your ex you must go through attorneys @$500/hour.  Under the guise of protecting the female, the self-serving attorneys just cut themselves into your income in a big way.

What I found out is if the wife succeeds in tricking the husband into reacting so as to even appear to be engaged in domestic abuse (verbal or physical), then the Family Court often issues an immediate restraining order ousting the man from his own home and preventing him from having any visitation rights with his own children. And in Family Court credibility is invariably given to the wife, not the husband. Amazon.com $50 Gift Ca... Check Amazon for Pricing.

At one point in my case I could only see my son for an hour every other week.  After many weeks the family court eventually corrected this problem but there were no apologies from the bench or attorneys for depriving a child from seeing his father, nor was any make-up time offered.

Don’t be in a room alone with your ex

If you are embroiled in a contentious divorce, you may want to avoid being in a room alone with your ex.

A local police officer advised I keep my fingernails short as women in divorce are often coached to provoke an argument with their spouse, then run their fingernails down the front of their face and call the police. How does a man defend himself when there is photographic evidence?

That same police officer advised me to be wary of a female in divorce who suddenly wants to get amorous, dresses in a see-through negligee to entice you, and when you touch her she tears her bedroom clothing, calls the police and alleges attempted rape.

Advice

What advice do I have to offer?  If you are the primary wage-earning party in divorce: (1) do not accept a private judge; (2) make copies of all documents or stipulations your attorney asks you to sign and do not agree to electronic signatures on any documents; (3) recognize both attorneys have knowledge of all of your funds and assets and may attempt to keep the divorce going until all funds are plundered and depleted; (4) many of the outside-the-court divorce games being played emanate from the attorneys who coach their clients.  In one instance, a man found the attorney for his spouse conducted practice hearings where she was supposed to cry at a certain time and gain sympathy of the judge; (5) if in a highly contentious divorce, don’t put yourself in a room alone with an angry ex; (6) be aware, your attorneys will warn you the judge may order this or that.  It often isn’t the judge who is issuing orders, it is the attorneys who file a “request for orders.”  They then blame what may be an unfair order on the bench when it first emanated from the colluding attorneys.

You may be eager to tell the court why you filed for divorce (infidelity, stealing family money and shuttling it to their side of the family, etc.).  But in no-fault divorce States like California, where I reside, you entered into a very strange contract when you got married.  The other party to the contract can withdraw affection, and take the kids and the money, for no reason at all.

The process of modern divorce is a crime.  It is an exercise in wealth transfer.  But who will put a stop to it?  Divorce today is not fair, but it is legal.  Somebody told me in divorce nobody in the courtroom believes anybody is telling the truth, certainly not the attorneys and sometimes not even the judge.  Be forewarned.