SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I am grateful for any advice from people with experience in this process, especially in U.S. - it's the first time for me dealing with lawyers and never liked them (except in court dramas like "The Good Wife" etc. )

So I just started a no-fault non-contentious divorce - actually trying to negotiate & draft the settlement agreement. I had my first few sessions with a lawyer (U.S., Maryland) that I retained to help me navigate the process, the WW did not accept just a mediator and retained a lawyer first, so I had to do the same. Already run into issues with my WW, even though we agreed otherwise to a non-contentious divorce (messy story, shameless work adulterer screwing her professor (who was also my supervisor) for 10 years etc. and then having no remorse -- of course when the AP did not divorce his wife for her, she pretended to want reconciliation while decidedly refusing to separate at work from the AP first, since she liked that job with the AP, he has been the professional sugar daddy and "provider" of her whole career and my WW seems almost proud to just be his designated work mistress.. Yay academia!)

I am completely clueless about dealing with lawyers, this system of being billed by the hour (minutes, apparently), not content or quality of work, through these face-to-face meetings (Zoom, actually), seems very inefficient and rather unreliable as a way of communication and retaining important information. They do not like exchanging information or being asked questions (or answering them) in writing (email, which I prefer) so a lot of time in these meetings is wasted because I am gathering my thoughts trying to answer a question I wasn't quite expecting, searching for my words, etc. Sometimes they are also dragging their phrases in redundant, prolonged explanations (and it's not polite to interrupt, right?). I am not good at live, real-time discussions. Anyway, direct questions:

1) Can I ask them to provide some reports in writing (e.g. what they discussed with the opposing counsel) instead of relaying of oral reports.. Or is that taboo/forbidden? Sometimes I'd rather have them send me questions/topics to discuss, in writing (email) so I can prepare and use more efficiently the face-to-face meeting time, though if even their answers/follow-ups were in writing, it would be even more efficient. Am I asking too much?

2) Is it dangerous to admit I have transcripts (actually recordings, I can screen record the Zoom sessions very discreetly) of what they said in these meetings, so I can refer to the information they provided in a previous meeting, and the statements they made then etc.? Can I get in trouble by doing that -- just for my own records/information? After all, I pay for that time&information, why not have a full/reviewable record of it? Alternatively I'm thinking to have an AI assistant "taking notes" (real time speech recognition) so I have these transcripts of what was said during these expensive consulting discussions. Would that be better?

3) I don't really understand how the no-fault, "non-contentious" settlement negotiations work, it seems that the fact that she was an adulterer for so long does NOT really matter that much or even at all since we decided to go the no-fault divorce route. She makes quite a bit more money than I do, but I don't want alimony, I am OK with just splitting the marital assets 50-50 (which means I get a slice of her retirement savings and her other bank accounts that were much fatter than mine, she had a few other income streams in her name). She admitted the adultery to me and the kids, I have texts between her and the kids, and emails to me etc. where she admitted her guilt (we've been through hell, since she was a remorseless one all along, very entitled etc. she traumatized the children as well - though they are old enough that there are no custody issues etc.). I naively thought it was self-evident and everybody knew (including her lawyer) that she was the adulterer and that's why we divorce (which is the uncontested truth as far as I and the children are concerned), and I don't ask for anything except to not get screwed by her any further, and move on, but I would like at least the adultery to be silently acknowledged -- even though the adultery is not the legal grounds of this "no-fault" divorce, of course.

So I told my lawyer about this from the beginning (that my WW was a 10-years adulterer etc. and she upended my life with this betrayal etc. including professionally, but I'm ready to move on, I just want to split the marital assets "equitably" ) and did not think much of it. But a few days ago in my last discussion with my lawyer, she informs me that in her discussions with the other counsel it came up that my wife is complaining that I am being "cruel" to her, as in the last year and a half since I found out about her LTA I kept sending her "vicious", offending texts and emails, calling her "names" (like "adulterer", or "heartless" or "pathological liar", all true! children agree as well, they called her "psycho" for good reason..). Indeed I tried for a long time to "reach" her, again and again, I could not let go -- scolding her trying to make her feel real remorse and shame for what she did to me and the children (and ended up with her lecturing me that "shaming is abuse" -- thanks Brene Brown! , so she totally rejected the idea of "shame", she claimed to feel guilt but she actually told me later that "she decided to forgive herself" :) -- and never cared for my forgiveness, haha.. instead proceeding to call me "cruel" because of those texts/emails and I don't care about her feelings, she suffered a lot, you know (for being caught?) ).

Anyway, so the opposing counsel was telling my lawyer that they even have "evidence" of my "cruelty" and vicious conduct (these angry scolding emails and texts from me) and ready to send that to my counsel.

I was stunned -- WHY?! I cannot understand WHY they did that, why did my WW and her counsel introduced a character attack in what is supposedly a "no-fault", non-contentious settlement negotiations?! I thought this stuff (including the adultery itself) does not really impact such no-fault negotiation process. My lawyer did NOT ask for proof of the WW's adultery (of which I have plenty).. I tried to ask her WHY and she got a bit patronizing with a rhetorical question "Now, why do you think ?!" -- made me feel like a fool.. I have no idea? And then she suggested (but not clearly explained it) that it was to somehow preempt me bringing up the adultery (?) Still confused about the whole thing. I asked my lawyer if I should now also provide her (and thus the opposing counsel) with proof of my WW's adultery, in return -- it only seems fair, right? Even though, again, I thought in this no-fault process such stuff should not really matter.. My lawyer responded, rather absentmindedly (she was typing something at the same time on her computer): "Sure, send me what you have". What is happening here? What's our "strategy"?

Anyway, I packaged and sent (summarized) a sample of the "evidence" -- I chose my WW's group chats with the children (shared by my children with me soon after that chat, last year) where she tried to vilify me but she also admitted to the long adultery, and clumsily tried to argue with the children illogically that she did not deceive or manipulate them all that time, but just me (they destroyed her in that chat, caught her lying/distorting multiple times, it was almost entertaining to read if it weren't so sad..).

So I'm confused and feel like a bumbling idiot, how are lawyers using this acrimonious stuff during this settlement agreement negotiations? First I was told the personal blame game does not matter and should not get into it, but now I see that it does matter, so I should "bring it on"?!

[This message edited by lbh50 at 7:42 PM, Tuesday, January 18th]

First of all, what does your attorney say about your questions re STBX? If you don't feel those questions are being addressed or you feel you don't understand the process or the scope of your retaining this attorney, you may be wise to look for a new attorney.

Billing by the hour/minute is standard (usually in 1/10 of an hour, or 6 min increments, tho everyone is different). Yes, it's expensive. You are paying for their time.

YOU are the client. If you want the info to be written, then say so (tho you are being billed for that - your atty may think that it's less $ for you to have a zoom or phone call vs the atty having to write something more formal. So you may have to balance desire for written communication with cost). There is no particular protocol in dealing with an atty vs dealing with anyone else. Lawyers (and judges, for that matter) are not Gods... they are mere mortal humans, with their own peculiarities and flaws, albeit with 7yrs of college (in the US) and a specific area of expertise to allow them to pass a bar exam.

As to recording convos with your atty, before I recorded anything, I'd check to see if your state is a one-party or two-party state for recording. If your state is a two-party state, you may be breaking the law by recording w/o consent of the other party (here, your atty). As to having recordings, I'm not sure they'd be seen to anyone outside of you/your lawyer as a problem (all of the conversations should be considered subject to the attorney-client "privilege"), tho personally my gut says I wouldn't want recordings of convos with my lawyer sort of hanging around.

Also, I'm confused about saying it's an AI recording vs you recording. Do you not trust this atty? Trust is a two-way street, so if you are recording w/o the other person's knowledge, and then seem to be Ok being less than candid about how the recording occurred, doesn't sound like a good lawyer/client relationship. If you do not trust your lawyer, you may want to find someone you feel more comfortable with (and if your atty discovered you being dishonest with them, that's about the best reason in the world for them to stop representing you - if they are aware that you are Ok with not being forthcoming, how can the atty feel confident what they represent to the court is accurate?). If trust isn't an issue, but you want things in writing to better assist you in understanding (cuz Heaven knows our minds can get foggy in the midst of all of this), then say so. If your atty won't accommodate, you have to decide if you are OK with that.

You mention that STBX hired an atty vs a mediator. To me, it's always a good idea for each party to have their own atty - the mediator is a NEUTRAL to help you come to terms, and having your own attorney review those terms is a way to protect yourself. A part of me wonders if one of the issues MAY be that you / your attorney went into this thinking it would be a non-contested D, and that the scope of their work would be to basically review the agreement, answer Qs, etc. Now that STBX is bringing up abuse, that situation may have changed. Does your engagement letter (ie contract with your atty) discuss the scope of work or limit to advising you in a non-contested D? Does it talk about communicating in writing vs zoom or phone?

And who knows why STBX/her atty brought up the abuse. Could be that she's willing to pay $ to have "her side" vented (same as your desire to have "your side" WRT the infidelity vented). Could be that she believes that alleging your abuse will help her better negotiate on the $ or custody fronts (and your state's laws about that are what's important - in my state, emotional abuse is not easy to evidence, and many judges won't really care - they'll figure that if spouses got along / didn't argue with nasty texts, etc., they wouldn't be getting a D). Could be that she's willing to pay her atty to bring this up so she can spend a little more time living in your head rent free. The problem is that you don't feel your atty has explained if/how those allegations - SEPARATE from her infidelity - may impact your D/settlement. A tact I've used is, to quote Denzel Washington in the film "Philadelphia", "explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old", to make your point - ie that your atty may be talking over your head in terms of the legal jargon, etc. Some VERY good attorneys suffer this problem (like an excellent surgeon with a lousy bedside manner), and you have to decide what your priorities are and if this is a good fit in light of those priorities.

[This message edited by gmc94 at 8:38 AM, Sunday, January 16th]

gmc94, cannot thank you enough for replying, I feel very grateful to have your opinion on this!

To address a few points:

I'd check to see if your state is a one-party or two-party state for recording

Maryland is apparently an "all party" state . However that is my problem -- I would never intend and legally COULD NOT use those recordings for anything legal, they are really just for my private use -- it's only for the information that I paid for to obtain. So I don't really see any ethical issues there, frankly.

tho personally my gut says I wouldn't want recordings of convos with my lawyer sort of hanging around.

I am one of those weirdos who do not care much about privacy that way (if this is a matter of privacy), it's not like I am discussing intimate things with my lawyer or plotting something unethical etc.

[Edit:] Oh, I think I see what you meant, I'm only thinking of my privacy here, not the lawyer's, but if by mistake (hacking etc.) these digital recordings leak publicly, I could be sued and get in trouble I guess. Oops, did not think of that..

doesn't sound like a good lawyer/client relationship. If you do not trust your lawyer [...]

Do you not trust this atty?

Yes, you might say I have some serious "trust issues", after I discovered that I had an imposter "life partner" for many years.. But beyond that, how can one really trust lawyers (unless they are a close friend or a relative.. but even then..)? This is one of those professions that have an inherent conflict of interest, isn't it? The longer those consulting sessions are or the more the negotiations are dragged on, the more money they make (I think I'll have to replenish the retainer soon if my STBX brings on more complications like this). As you wrote -- they are not "gods" or some impartial beacons of justice, they have their own personal interests (money being the obvious one), why would I trust they'll put their personal interests behind those of their client ? My STBX taught me a harsh lesson about how life works, unfortunately.

In my particular situation here I think the lawyer of each party (mine and STBX's) may even benefit from sowing more acrimony between me and my wife -- look, bringing up my "abusive" texts/emails seems to benefit our lawyers quite a bit, now I have to pay my own lawyer to review the evidence I have for her adultery and bad behavior (and I'm sure the opposing counsel would bill time to review the same evidence etc.)

I really thought this was meant to be an uncontested, non-contentious D. But frankly I would not put it past these lawyers to even "cooperate" with each other a bit in order to "nudge" things in a more acrimonious direction -- it's in their financial interest after all to make things a bit more "complicated". They obviously have their own private phone conversations (which I'm sure I'm paying for) -- my lawyer was relaying those to me like this: "from what I am hearing from the other party, you and your spouse have very different views about what happened, the situation in your marital home, and what you expect from these negotiations [...] and I don't think she will agree with [...]"

You mention that STBX hired an atty vs a mediator. To me, it's always a good idea for each party to have their own atty - the mediator is a NEUTRAL to help you come to terms, and having your own attorney review those terms is a way to protect yourself.

Yes, I initially discussed the mediator option with the STBX and while she initially agreed, I think I was the one who said that I feel I might need advice from a family lawyer to represent my interests in this process, and then I guess the STBX preempted my actions by retaining a lawyer herself before I even fully decided on lawyer vs mediator (she could've pushed more for a mediator herself, it would've been in her interest too, I think)

A part of me wonders if one of the issues MAY be that you / your attorney went into this thinking it would be a non-contested D, and that the scope of their work would be to basically review the agreement, answer Qs, etc.

YES, that's exactly what I thought, and why I retained this lawyer! The retainer contract is for representing me "in the following matter: Negotiate/Draft Separation Agreement." There is no mention in there about non-contested D or anything like that, unfortunately. Actually there is nothing about divorce per se, but I took it as obvious that's what the "separation agreement" is about.

And who knows why STBX/her atty brought up the abuse. Could be that she's willing to pay $ to have "her side" vented (same as your desire to have "your side" WRT the infidelity vented). Could be that she believes that alleging your abuse will help her better negotiate on the $ or custody fronts

There is no custody involved (children are 22 and 18 now) but indeed my lawyer said at one point, after I pushed repeatedly for her opinion, that she cannot really speculate as to WHY my wife brought that up.

But here is another thing -- STBX, as a typical adulterer, is playing hard the misunderstood victim role and the blame shifting that goes with it. But I have texts between her and the children (which I sent now to my lawyer) where our children reminded her that in fact she was the emotional abuser in the last few years (she never did that to me in writing though -- which seems convenient now..). She would have shockingly loud shrieking fits of rage/hate against me, shouting bizarre things like: "you are the most horrible man" and "you want to destroy my life" ( projection?), also occasionally threatening divorce, which I took as irrational "rage talk" every time, as there was no explanation/justification for shouting those things to me.

Usually what would trigger those rage episodes was me questioning her behavior towards me (she was cold and dismissive of my opinions and very sensitive to any criticism of her behavior coming from me) or even her close relationship with the AP (which I did not know at the time was her lover, of course, yet she was horribly enraged when for example I expressed my discomfort with just the two of them taking a work trip out of town and thus just the two of them spending a few nights at a hotel etc.).

My children were unwilling witnesses to such episodes of rage against me (she was very loud in her shrieking, I think even the neighbors were witnesses ) and they were obviously traumatized by it (in one of those texts to her my son reminds her "you are the one that made me cry myself to sleep some nights, not dad" ). My daughter recounted one such traumatic episodes to a close friend of hers stating that her mother behaved "like a monster" to me at the time.

It was the children who came to me after she admitted to the adultery, showing to me, through online articles, that she checked a lot of the NPD behavioral markers (even those episodes of irrational rage fit the description of "narcissistic rage", when a person of a "lower status" -- me -- dares to question the authority or character of the narcissist. And yes, I later called her a "narcissist" in some of those texts/emails, unfortunately.. so the lawyers have that against me now, too..).

Our children told me they are ready to testify as direct witnesses of the STBX behavior as mentioned above and in those text chats (how sad is that, to have your own children ready to testify against their own mother? yet she still believes SHE is the misunderstood victim in all this.. Isn't this delusional?).

A tact I've used is, to quote Denzel Washington in the film "Philadelphia", "explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old"

Yes, r/ELI5, good point -- thank you, I am going to do exactly that in my next meeting with my counsel (I am still waiting for her reaction to the "evidence" I sent about the adultery and the STBX character/behavior -- those texts between her and the children). If I am not satisfied with her answers indeed I'll have to considering hiring another lawyer.

Thank you again for taking the time to share your opinions and advice. You see, it's much easier to trust and appreciate free advice/opinion like this, rather than the one I am paying for by the minute.

[This message edited by lbh50 at 4:03 PM, Sunday, January 16th]

You called your cheating wife a name? How dare you (eye roll snd sarcasm here).

Typical cheater behavior BTW.

It’s not domestic violence to call someone a name. Your wife is fishing for "evidence" to make you the bad guy.

Sorry for you.

Hey The1stWife, of course , but you see, times are changing, we live in a hypersensitive snowflake world now (at least in U.S.), where disagreements or stating inconvenient truths, or using the "wrong" words, can be construed as "offensive", "abusive" or even "hate speech" sometimes.. At least in the court of public opinion (e.g. twitter etc.), in this new "cancel culture".

Also, calling out and unmasking a chronically dishonest and manipulative person is obviously perceived as "abuse" and "cruelty" to such person, that is undeniably her subjective reality.

Admittedly, women/wives were actually abused and persecuted for many generations and the abusive men got away with all that for too long, so now one might say that it's just expected for the pendulum to swing the other way these days (also supported by the "Me Too" movement etc.).

Clearly my WW is trying to ride that wave -- she is actually quite intelligent and this culture shift fits quite well her victim narrative.

What I am confused in all this, as we started this negotiation process with the lawyers, is how much of an impact her claims of verbal abuse, in the current culture, have on these negotiations, and in what way -- how much of a "legal standing" she might have there, as opposed to some kind of a "court of public opinion" style of influencing these negotiations etc.

Btw, to all those claiming "abuse" and "cruelty" or even PTSD from texts or emails (or even tweets) -- do you special people not know where the "Delete" (or "Block") button is, really ?!

[This message edited by lbh50 at 3:24 PM, Sunday, January 16th]

it's only for the information that I paid for to obtain. So I don't really see any ethical issues there, frankly.

It’s not a question of "ethics", it’s a question of committing a crime under your state's laws, whether you "own" that conversation or not. I would not do it w/o prior written consent from anyone on the call/zoom.

I think the lawyer of each party (mine and STBX's) may even benefit from sowing more acrimony. ….[and] frankly I would not put it past these lawyers to even "cooperate" with each other a bit in order to "nudge" things in a more acrimonious direction -- it's in their financial interest after all to make things a bit more "complicated"

Ya know, there are bad apples in ANY profession (eg doctors, car mechanics, contractors, AND lawyers). However, after decades in the biz, I can say w/o any hesitancy that the vast majority of attorneys want to do a good job, get their client a good result, and move on.
Think about it. A lawyer is gonna bill x number of hours/day no matter which type of case they are working on. Would you rather spend your time working on something where everyone is PO’d (your client, the other party, the other atty, and you) ? Or something where it’s the "nuts and bolts" of dollars & custody or a more straightforward, non- emotional, creation of a deal or compromise? Again, there are always some "sharks" who thrive on that crap, but the vast majority of the ocean of D attorneys are not sharks and do not want to take on more stress than already exists (D work is NOT easy work, for anyone in the chain - the receptionist to the paralegal to the attorney to the judge.. I've heard D work referred to as the "proctology of the law"). A solid, well respected, lawyer will have plenty of clients to choose from, and does not need to pad their daily hours by poking the bear of acrimonious D. Not to mention that the VAST VAST VAST majority of D attys get their clients via REFERRALS. So even if you painted attys as selfish, self-interested jerks, it's counterproductive. If an atty is stirring the pot to make a D more contested than the parties want/need, the atty will have an unhappy client, will likely have to chase the client to get their bill paid, has the potential for bar or malpractice claims from the unhappy client, AND they lose the referral they’d get from you (and those tentacles reach far and wide). A car mechanic is an easy comparison. If your mechanic is jacking up the bill for things you don’t really need, you will ultimately stop using them, fight about the bill, perhaps report them to say, the BBB or local chamber of commerce, and rather than telling folks about your good experience and sending your friends/family to that biz, you may/likely will bad mouth that biz on SM, yelp, etc. Any biz – esp small biz dependent on referrals, like a divorce atty - will ultimately wither.

As to trust, I get it – I’m a BS with a 25yr M full of infidelity in one form or another. However, moving forward means we have to learn to take risks and to trust our gut. When you see your physician, do you trust them?

As to the "private" convos between the attorneys – how else would you have this work? You say the M and potential D is X. Your WW (thru her atty) is saying it’s Y. How else does your atty learn that your STBX sees things as Y, and not X? And yes, you are paying for that – your atty isn’t calling her atty for their health (any more than your mechanic is bleeding your brake line or your contractor is erecting deck posts for THEIR health). Your atty is making that call to work on your case, to understand the issues from the OTHER SIDE’s perspective, to voice THEIR SIDE’s (ie your) perspective. Both will explain why they think their arguments are /will be more persuasive with a judge, or how they are/are not authorized under the law, etc. And then each will call their respective clients, lay out the status, and decide upon next steps.

If one party to a D wants to make it a shit show, they can make it a shit show, even if their atty does not want that. The atty is obligated to raise any non-frivolous claims their client wishes to raise, if that’s what the client wants after being advised about the potential ramifications. Same can go when attys are at loggerheads. Some folks get PO’d when it appears the attys are chummy with each other. Please believe me when I say that attys doing their job w/o emotional involvement are the most effective and efficient. If lawyer A and lawyer B have personality conflicts, it will become a shitshow – even if the clients are pragmatic and not at loggerheads. A client may feel good to see their atty beating up the other atty, but it is like feeling good about beating up an AP – it’s fleeting, doesn’t really solve anything, and almost always creates MORE problems in an already problematic situation.

Here’s the thing. It sounds to me that your STBX is behaving as she always has. That has got to be frustrating and infuriating. And that frustration/anger should be directed at STBX, rather than your atty.

AND, this still may not be a good "fit" for you and your atty. Your engagement agreement may need a re-boot. You and your atty (either this one or someone else) can either find a way to forge a trusting relationship and get on the same page to present your best case/arguments to fight your STBX, or YOU can spend energy fighting with BOTH your atty AND your STBX.

Thank you again gmc94, I realized I may have been too harsh with the "atty" (I like this shortcut), mostly due to the frustration with my STBX' old shenanigans, just as you said.

I will try the ELI5 approach (as politely as possible) and see where I get. I still feel she could've prepared me better for this escalation of the situation, by asking for proof of adultery from the beginning etc., but on the other hand I also did not inform her properly about the vicious character of the WW and how she complained about the "cruelty" of my texts/emails already, to me and the children (and it seemed ridiculous to us). I just did not expect for the WW to bring that into these negotiations from the beginning.

Great advice from gmc94. Keep your eye on the prize. Rely on your attorney to tell you what is relevant in your divorce process under state law and what is not. Don’t let your WW bait you into engaging over stuff that has no relevance to the outcome of your D. With no custody issues your divorce is simply about the equitable division of marital assets. Figure out what are your priorities in the division of assets. Communicate these priorities with your attorney to figure out what you can reasonably expect to receive in a settlement under state law, and together devise a strategy to reach your goals. If your WW wants to throw irrelevant dirt or try to smear you in the process, my advice is to ignore her as long as it is irrelevant crap. After all you indicated your state has no fault divorce laws. Keep your communications to a minimum and only about matters relevant to the D. Your stress level will be much lower. If you feel you must respond to the lies and dirt she is putting forth, just keep it short: Untrue. False.

She sounds like a narcissist who feeds off getting under your skin and keeping control by making you engage. Don’t do it. Keep your eye on the prize. Read up on the gray rock method. Good luck.

I’ve been a divorce attorney for thirty years.

I’ve had clients covertly record our meetings.

I fired them as clients immediately.

If you don’t trust your lawyer, get one you trust.

lbh50 -- I got the impression you are recording the conversations with your attorney simply to have something to refer back to as you cogitate on the issues. As academics (I am one, too), we are used to having things in writing (e.g., books, academic papers, e-mails...) and taking our time reading, and re-reading, as we think through things. And we like to respond in writing, so that we can again take our time to "wordsmith" and make sure we're really saying what we want to say. At least that was my take on your posts, not necessarily that you don't trust your attorney. Am I wrong?

I would recommend either resorting to taking copious notes during your conversations or getting permission to record.

Of course you are interested in controlling costs, but exchanging e-mails with your attorney rather than having real-time conversations, probably is not going to save you much if anything (they are still going to charge you for their time reading your e-mails and writing their responses).

In a no-fault divorce, both of the issues of alleged abuse and of adultery should be irrelevant. Your desire to have the adultery acknowledged, as expressed in your OP, is contradictory to the no-fault un-contentious divorce you are seeking, which is why your attorney hasn't really been interested so far. That your WW has apparently convinced her attorney that her allegations of abuse are somehow relevant suggests that maybe STBX is not really interested in a no-fault un-contentious divorce even though she supposedly agreed to going that route. It seems both parties have their issues they want acknowledged (whether they have merit or not), which I think is something that tends to happen during divorces.

I've often read advice suggesting it is best to think of divorce as merely a business transaction -- separate the emotional baggage from the transaction, and focus on getting the deal done as quickly as possible with your equitable share of the marital assets intact.

Related advice I've read is that therapists are less expensive than attorneys so be careful about unloading the emotional baggage on your attorney, get a therapist for that instead.

Good luck!

[This message edited by TurnedTurtle at 9:57 AM, Monday, January 17th]

I am very grateful to anyone who replied here.

I got the impression you are recording the conversations with your attorney simply to have something to refer back to as you cogitate on the issues. As academics (I am one, too), we are used to having things in writing (e.g., books, academic papers, e-mails...) and taking our time reading, and re-reading, as we think through things. And we like to respond in writing [...] At least that was my take on your posts, not necessarily that you don't trust your attorney. Am I wrong?

You are correct, that described very well my need for having things in writing. I cannot write that fast myself and seems wrong to introduce delays in the consulting session just so I can catch up with my note taking etc. That's why I actually seriously considered the AI assistant option that could be taking "copious notes" for me in real time (I am now looking at options like otter.ai and I am going to ask for consent for that from the lawyer).

There is also the fact that I feel I could not rely on my memory of what my atty said during these meetings, especially when relaying stuff from the opposing counsel and the STBX, as I feel that this emotionally charged content can color and even distort my memories of what has been relayed, since I am now easily "triggered" by any hints of further dishonesty, manipulation and blame shifting coming from the WW, now that I know what a devious unconscionable person she proved herself to be (yes I also feel I may have become a bit paranoid after what STBX did to my life, that now I cannot trust anyone, especially lawyers , to have my best interest at heart).

but exchanging e-mails with your attorney rather than having real-time conversations, probably is not going to save you much if anything (they are still going to charge you for their time reading your e-mails and writing their responses).

Of course they are, but I still think it could save some time/cost -- specifically that time which is wasted by me trying to process and react to new information (especially emotionally charged one) in real time, that can cause quite a bit of dead air, verbal hesitations and looping/redundancy/incoherence, or reactive statements that are not really relevant but instead wasted maybe minutes in that discussion etc.

Related to this, my atty even tried to push mediation with counsel in the last discussion (hiring a neutral 3rd party to "settle" some of our issues in real time) but I categorically said no to that, exactly because it is, again, real time and does not give me time to think and respond appropriately. I do feel the need for these negotiations to happen in writing, as much as possible.

Mediations usually do occur in real time. Pre-covid, would be everyone in a room, with breakout room(s) available. It nay - or may not -include each party's attorney. Post covid, it could be done virtually (with breakout rooms, if needed).

What usually happens is that you & your atty will have hammered out what your perfect world vs bare minimums are. So, at the time of the mediation, you have some sense of where you are, what you want, etc. The parties may have submitted demands/offers prior to that as well (so you have an understanding of what each wants and how to split).

So - I guess my question (for you to answer for yourself, not here on SI), is if you and your atty or STBX have even discussed what is or is not at issue? Are you both interested in a 50/50 split of assets? Do you have any proposal (or has she made one) as to how to accomplish that?

If you are simply talking about how to divide the pie - I'd get a spreadsheet of all your assets and then make the columns as appropriate. Basically, you need to have an idea of what the parameters are for the overall situation (eg 50/50 or something else, will maintenance/alimony be sought, etc). Then the lesser level - like what is liquid and what is not (eg house, cash/bank accounts, stocks, retirement plans that may have prohibitions that come into play, etc), and then how to divvy it all up.

If you are able to get those threshhold issues out of the way, mediation is quite often the best route. Yes, it sucks that our concentration may be blown from the trauma. AND, if you are able to be prepared with your best/worst/will live with scenarios, I think it can be done.

And all of this is against the backdrop of both parties committing to non-contested scenario - which means that neither side is going to be brining up or hashing out their claims of inappropriate conduct.

lbh50, I D'd in MD about 6 years ago. Feel free to send me a private message if you like.

The verbal "abuse" is probably irrelevant to the court. I think they know that most people who D say mean things to each other.

My advice to you is to vent here, not to your attorney. This is free. Before you send her anything, you should ask if it is relevant to the case. If not, no need for her to review it and charge you.

Infidelity does not affect alimony or CS, and since you are saying you don't want alimony and CS doesn't apply, then it is irrelevant. If you are negotiating, her claims of "verbal abuse" are also irrelevant. Let her send that to her attorney and waste their time. Yours should point out that it doesn't affect the D. Assets should be split, unless your STBXWW has reason to show it is not communal property.

Keep your attorney on track, don't let them wander off and run up billable hours.

The attorney I used was very good at sticking to the topic and keeping things clear. I was also lucky that XWW wanted a quick D and was fair with me, so it wasn't contentious.

Good luck

gmc94, cannot thank you enough! You explained mediation and the right questions to ask (myself/my atty) better than my atty could (and she tried!) -- and I am not even paying you, almost feel bad about this . I actually made exactly the spreadsheet you suggested and I was supposed to discuss on it with my atty in the last session but we got distracted by the acrimonious character attacks she relayed from the opposing counsel.. (mission accomplished for them, I suppose )

Tigersrule77, I appreciate the offer and I would take advantage of it, but I cannot PM (not enough posts I think, I don't know). Anyway, you make a very good point, I get it now, albeit a bit late -- I already sent a long email to my counsel with chat transcripts attached, summarizing my "story" and the WW behavior, with WW admitting to the adultery to our children multiple times, my children mentioning her verbal abuse in the last few years etc. I hope this settles the issue, in case my or her attorney had any doubts that the WW's LTA actually happened, and about her character. And that my "cruel" emails/texts that followed were kind of a logical response to those devastating actions against me and her lack of remorse (also because she had the habit of running away (literally, even out of the house), refusing face to face conversations, or locking herself in the bedroom etc. so I did not have much choice).

I'll try now to stick to the "business" as suggested and keep it a non-contentious divorce -- I don't think she has any chance to play "dirty" in any way, I feel quite protected with the children on my side. Frankly I feel I owe my life to these children, if it weren't for them to keep me anchored in reality, I would've likely believed the WW's devious attempts to convince me that I was such a worthless man that I somehow deserved what she did to me (+the usual entitlement of adulterers etc.).

Thank you all, this has been exactly the kind of thoughtful opinions and advice I was hoping to get by coming back to this great SI forum, as it helped me so much in the past as well (after DDay).

[This message edited by lbh50 at 10:36 PM, Monday, January 17th]

Thirty years as a divorce lawyer speaking here.

Sometimes I wonder if people also go to their doctor's office or the auto mechanic's work space and tell those people how to do what they do every day, or if this phenomenon is limited to the practice of law.

There is a difference between the exchange that is necessary between a client/patient and provider to give informed consent to a course of action on the one hand and unhelpfully second guessing an actual subject matter expert on the other.

Wise old fool- please. Ivermectin?!?!? Lol. Every day.

Lol- I’m a physician. They do it to us, too.

EVERYONE REPEAT AFTER ME- I promise not to use my attorney or medical doctor as a therapist. I will use my therapist as a therapist. And when my doctor recommends a therapist, I promise to remember it’s because my physician’s brain is full of Kreb’s cycle and anatomy and side effects of SSRI, but they don’t know how to do CBT. Neither does an attorney. But you know who does?!?! Therapists!!! Yay!

And we can’t really effectively bill by the minute for drama. It has to be a real condition. Although, I have coded for everything before if someone is being silly. If you mention constipation, I’m offering advice and coding. If you mentioned that you fell a year ago, I’m billing "Fall, subsequent encounter". Dude, and Medicaid has some modifiers in there, too.

OB doc here- I’ve never had a patient answer me directly when I ask what time their water broke. It’s always so circumloquacious "Well, I was blah blah blah and then I think I started leaking and maybe it happened…. Oh no wait honey, what time did you take the dog out to poop? It was forty three minutes before that."

Me- "So what time did your water break?"

Her- "Well, he took the dog out at 1144".

Me- "Sooooooo. 1101?"

😐

So I’m hearing law school wasn’t a better choice? Lol

[This message edited by 3yrsout at 5:49 AM, Tuesday, January 18th]

I would also bet, barring actual physical violence or threats thereof, that most attorneys don’t care if you were terribly horrible or whatever to your ex. I would bet that unless the other side has actual evidence, they don’t care.

You don’t need to plea your case to your attorney. They are being paid to defend you and they just need to know your ex won’t be bringing video of you hitting them or ER visits for a punch to their face. They should know of that shit will come up. Even the guilty people need attorneys. You attorney likely doesn’t care.

I suspect it’s like what the patient is doing when the water broke. I don’t care. I just want to know how long it’s been broken because it helps us decide infection risk to the baby.

I have a friend who hired an attorney to sue a contractor that did a half-ass job in his house. When the case was over the attorney sent a bill for 20 hours at 200 per hour with scant detail on how the time was spent (not the real numbers – don’t remember that detail). My friend was furious at the amount, phoned the attorney and demanded a detailed time-sheet with the invoice.
A couple of days later a new bill came in the post. Now it was for 22.5 hours and 500 higher.

The second to last line item:
Telephone conference with client about legal cost 1/2 hour
The last line item:
Documentation of legal actions and work 2 hours.

My friend just paid the bill.

I suspect it’s like what the patient is doing when the water broke. I don’t care. I just want to know how long it’s been broken because it helps us decide infection risk to the baby.

As fun as this analogy may be, let's admit it is a poor one. I don't think there can be something more relevant to a divorce than adultery (well, perhaps abuse is up there as well). The fact that an adultery (well proven and documented) does not have any (moral) bearing on a no-fault divorce settlement sounds like one of those ridiculous ethical weaknesses of the law. This woman took 10 years of my life, pretending to be my life partner while screwing around with her professor and senior partner, for the great benefit of her own career -- she did something terrible to me and I believe there should be a moral undercurrent even through these so called "no-fault" divorce settlement negotiations.

But I was told that's not the case, by multiple people, even by my own lawyer. Moreover, I was told that even if I go the "fault" route (much more expensive process), the adultery might not really matter either in the outcome of a divorce, these days.

So I did not push it -- I acknowledged it to my lawyer, but that's it. So how can I not be confused and offended now, when I then see that this admittedly shameless adulterer has the nerve to attack *my* character, through her lawyer, during these supposedly "non-contentious" divorce proceedings, as she inanely continues to push her victim narrative?

Ahhhhhh. You think divorce is about feelings? The relationship is about feelings. Divorce is a legal proceeding. Not about feelings.

Surely you know justice is not found in the courtroom.

You will not get justice in court. And your WW has no morals, so there won’t ever be justice. You have to have morals to have justice.

Find your justice in other places, where you don’t have to pay an attorney by the hour. Spoiler alert- there is no justice. People that do this are just broken and they lack empathy. Maybe their parents didn’t hug them enough, or maybe they lack some small part of their brain that shows empathy. Invest in a safer place, like pets and therapy.

It’s an attorney, they ain’t your friend.

And give up on justice.