There is no one-size-fits-all family in Rhode Island. Everyone's family is a little bit different from the next. Therefore, each family has slightly different issues and concerns. In most situations, there are varying personalities, concerns, issues and histories that have to be accounted for. Families often disagree as much as they love each other. With so many moving-parts, family dynamics can be complicated and difficult for those unfamiliar with the family to understand.
Rhode Island residents may know that divorce can be one of the most challenging experiences an individual may go through. One of the reasons divorce can be such a difficult experience are the plethora of family law issues that accompany the divorce. These issues can often linger, even after the final divorce papers are signed. One of these lingering issues is child support.
Issues concerning divorce do not always end when the Final Judgment is entered. Experience has shown that many couples return to court for several reasons. One of the most common reasons leading to a revisit is to modify child support when either party's income changes significantly. Another purpose is to modify a parenting schedule if a party moves to a different location, changes job locations or as the children get older, a change is necessary as their needs change.
Whether involved in a RI divorce mediation or working with a divorce lawyer, parties need to consider tough questions.
Rhode Island's Child Support Guidelines have been revised effective as of June 4, 2012. Federal regulations require that each state review its guidelines every 4 years. In the fall of 2011, the RI Family Court convened the Child Support Guidelines Committee, of which Steve Hirsch was a member. The Committee, in February 2012, submitted its final report with the proposed Guidelines.
A Cohabitation Agreement describing rights of unmarried parties will become more important due to the changes in the number of marriages. A recent news articles, "For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside Marriage" described the sociological shift that has occurred. Many underlying assumptions are described but the result is still the same.
The equitable distribution in a divorce agreement is not disturbed by the RI Suprme Court dispite a $2.5 Million dollar discrepancy. The husband owned a 25% interest in a company. The Court appointed an appraiser for the husband's interest. The appriased value was $2.9 million dollars. The parties entered into a settlement agreement for the equitable distribution of their assets based upon that appraisal. They signed the agreement and testified to their approval of the agreement in March 2007 and the Court sanctioned the agreement.