Fort Lauderdale Divorce Lawyer Blog

Many men and women from Broward that are enlisted in the military may find themselves in need of a Fort Lauderdale divorce lawyer. According to an article published in the USA Today and Sun Sentinel, divorce rates for soldiers enlisted in the Army increased for the seventh year. 10,000.00 married G.I.'s divorced during the fiscal 2009. It is also being reported that 4% of marriages among soldiers failed.

The Army has found that an increasing number of U.S troops in Iraq complain about troubled marriages as a result of long and multiple deployments to Iraq. While the pressures of being away from family is more prevalent for young soldiers, there has been recent affect on senior enlisted soldiers as well.

The Air Force is also reporting a 4.3% divorce rate this years. However, the Army has 100,000 more married troops than the Air Force. The Marines is reporting a 4% divorce rate that has remained steady from 2008 to 2009. While the civilian divorce rate in the USA was recently 3.4%, the total divorce rate for the U.S. military has increase from 3.4% to 3.6% in 2009.

Research has found that soldiers with more electronic access to their families are having more marital problems since they become too involved in their family lives over the internet and telephone. Soldiers find themselves being involved in minor squabbles that can be resolved by their spouse.

Ironically, Florida Statute 61.13002 permits a Fort Lauderdale divorce lawyer to request that the Broward divorce court temporarily modify time-sharing and parental responsibility if a parent is activated, deployed, or temporarily assigned to military service and the parent's ability to comply with the time-sharing is affected. In the temporary order or judgment and if feasible, the Florida marital and family law court is to provide contact between the military service member and his or her child by electronic communication by webcam, telephone and other available means.

In order to temporarily modify custody in Broward County, Florida, you must show that there has been a substantial or material change in circumstances and that the modification is in the best interest of the child or children involved. There must be a factual basis sufficient to show that conditions have become materially altered since the entry of the prior custody order. In the case of Bon v. Rivera, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a Fort Lauderdale, Florida divorce judge who granted the Former Husband's Emergency Motion for Temporary Change of Custody.

At the time of the parties divorce, the Former Wife resided in Miami-Dade County, Florida and the Former Husband resided in Broward County, Florida. The Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage that incorporated the parties' marital settlement agreement stated that neither party shall relocate the minor children from Miami-Dade County, Broward County or the southern portion of Palm Beach County, Florida. Two years after the divorce, the Former Wife accepted a job in West Palm Beach, Florida and advised the Former Husband that she intended to move with the two minor children.

The Former Husband filed an Emergency Motion for Temporary Custody, Child Support and Attorney's Fees alleging that the Former Wife had violated the relocation provisions of the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage. The trial court entered an order modify the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage and granting the Former Husband temporary custody. The Former Wife appealed the decision of the trial court and alleged that the trial court abused its discretion in modifying custody since there was no true emergency.

In reversing the decision of the trial court, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in temporarily modifying custody of the parties' children. The Court reasoned that the Former Husband did not specifically allege, in his motion or at the hearing, that there had been a substantial change in circumstances since the entry of the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage. Furthermore, the trial court did not make any written findings to support its ruling. The Court further stated that Former Wife had a misplaced reliance on the "true emergency" test. The Court reasoned that under the "true emergency test", a court can modify custody without notice when there is a showing that the minor children are to be threatened with physical harm or about to be removed from the state. However, in the instant case this test did not apply since the trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing after notice to both parties.