Every Move You Make, I'll Be Watching You

One of the biggest musical hits in the US and the UK was the Grammy winning song “Every Breath You Take", written by Sting and performed by the rock band The Police. For better or for worse it could easily be the anthem of the current world of divorce, where spouses are constantly spying on each other. As Sting reminds us “every move you make, every vow you break… I’ll be watching you.”

How prevalent is spying in the context of divorce? Based upon everything I have seen in my divorce practice, spousal spying is not only becoming more commonplace but also more sophisticated.

For many years “surveillance”consisted of hiring a private investigator to follow and, if possible, photograph your spouse in compromising situations. The primary purpose of such investigations was to establish grounds for divorce such as adultery or cruelty.

However, the days of the private eye lurking around the “love nest” of your cheating spouse have been replaced by sophisticated devices and apps which cost a fraction of the PI bill and are far more effective. Additionally, the purpose of the spying has grown to include financial discovery, the location of hidden assets and to secure evidence relating to custody of the children.

The major caveat here is that many of these devices and techniques are illegal under federal and state law, which not only results in suppression of the illegally obtained evidence in the divorce case but also opens up the spying spouse to criminal prosecution. Thus, it is absolutely critical for spouses to consult with an attorney in their state or country before engaging in such activity.

For example, the photo lens has been replaced by telephone taps and voice activated tape recording devices. Clearly such techniques are illegal in most jurisdictions in the US. Similarly downloading a keystroke program onto your spouse’s computer – a program which can be purchased online for about $49.00 - will allow you to virtually see everything written by him or her on the computer. The use of such sites and apps is also illegal in most jurisdictions. Similarly, downloading apps on your spouse’s smartphone with the capability to listen in on conversations or record them is also a big No-No. As are GPS trackers.

Of course, there is the use of “nanny cams” or other “hidden cameras” to catch your spouse in compromising situations. Recently, a woman shared on Tik Tok that she set up a camera in her home because she believed that her husband was cheating on her. What the hidden camera captured was her husband fooling around with the wife’s best friend, who had been invited to stay at the couple’s home by the wife as a temporary measure. The wife shared the cheating video and the subsequent one where she confronted the wayward husband and her friend (including the fisticuffs which ensued) on Tik Tok. The videos have over 9.1 million views and 1.1 million likes. Let’s hope that the next video is not the wife going off to prison for the felony of illegal eavesdropping.

Some states such as Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Washington, Florida, Illinois, Maryland Massachusetts, New Hampshire, California, Montana, Michigan and Nevada have said that the use of hidden cameras is illegal without the consent of the person recorded. Less clear is whether such laws apply to divorcing spouses who secretly record their mates inside the marital home. However, an Iowa court recently found that a man had violated his wife’s privacy by videotaping her with a camera surreptitiously installed in an alarm clock in her bedroom in their home.

As noted above, this entire area is a minefield for divorcing spouses. While the spying techniques described above were previously employed to uncover infidelity and to establish grounds for divorce, people are now expanding the purposes of the spying activity to deal with other aspects of their divorce case. This will be the subject of future articles.

As a final note it bears repeating, that spouses need to solicit advice from an experienced matrimonial attorney before engaging in such behavior. Moreover, clients should note that revealing or turning over such illegally gathered evidence to your divorce attorney may put him or her into an ethical bind with respect to the handling of your case. Caveat Client!

My, People Come and Go So Quickly Here

In the classic movie “The Wizard of Oz", Dorothy was heard to observe; “My, people come and go so quickly here.” While speaking in a different context, she could easily have been talking about the process of divorce. Let’s take a look at the various ways that countries around the world make it harder or easier to “come and go.” First, we start with the countries that make it hard to leave your lover.

How about making divorce non-existent? In Vatican City (an independent Catholic-run country controlled by the Pope) citizens are not allowed to divorce. Given how many citizens of the Papal City are Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, Nuns or people who work for the Vatican, this is not a major issue, especially since they are not married.

Similarly, divorce is not permitted in the Philippines. The one exception to this country-wide prohibition is for Muslim citizens (5% of the population) who are allowed to obtain a religious divorce. Over the last several years, proposed statutes allowing divorce have come closer to passing but there is still fierce opposition to the change. The country is so opposed to divorce that if you get one somewhere else the Philippines will not recognize it.

Another largely Christian country, Chile, did not permit its citizens to divorce until 2004. Even with the change, the government still makes it extremely difficult to get out of your marriage. Currently, there is a lengthy waiting period which must be complied with. If a couple mutually agrees to split up there is a one year period of separation required before they may seek a divorce. However, if one of the spouses opposes the divorce, there is a three year period of separation required, absent significant fault issues such as infidelity, drug addiction or abuse.

In France, even the grave offers no relief from marriage. France permits a “posthumous” marriage if you can prove that the dead person “intended to marry you.” Go ahead, ask him. He’ll tell you.

While many countries have made it harder to get a divorce, others seem to make it available for almost any reason. In Samoa, a woman has the right to divorce her husband if he forgets her birthday. And in Saudi Arabia, a husband is risking a divorce if he doesn’t bring his wife the cup of coffee she asked for.

Similarly, getting a divorce in Japan is pretty simple, if you are not fighting about custody of the children. There is no need to go to divorce court. Rather the unhappy couple can sign and file a simple form. However, Japan has no provision for “joint custody” of the child or children, making custody battles long, expensive and acrimonious.

Finally, in Australia, Aboriginal women can have a divorce for the asking. If she asks her husband for a divorce and he says “yes” the marriage is over. Alternatively she can simply say “I do” to another man and she is then considered divorced from her husband. Apparently inspired by the ease of such an “uncoupling”, the American actress Lisa Bonet and her actor husband Jason (“Aquaman”) Momoa recently declared after an 18 year relationship, “we free each other to be who we are learning to become.” Call me a pessimist but I think that it is going to be a lot harder than that once the divorce attorneys get involved.

Closer to home a number of different states in the US have interesting laws about grounds for divorce. In Delaware, you can get a divorce if the marriage was the product of a jest (“I was only kidding”) or a dare (“I Double Dog Dare You”). In Tennessee, a husband was able get a divorce if he left his wife a certain amount of dried beans, dried apples and yarn to knit stockings.

And no more of those mother-in-law jokes. In Kansas a divorce is available if you don’t get along with your in-laws. Finally, in Mississippi you can leave your spouse if they are an idiot. Boy, talk about making divorce easy.

Man sentenced to 8000 years in Israel

Various countries, including the United States, have addressed the enormous financial hardships which children face when a parent or responsible party fails to pay his or her child support. According to CBS News, the failure to pay child support in the United States is a $10 billion dollar problem. Over half of all parents who have a child in common have no child support order in place. Of those that do have such support orders more than 30% of child support payments are not made, with full compliance a rarity. The result is that many single parents and their children live at or below the poverty line.

Here in the United States, various child support enforcement mechanisms have been attempted. Across the country, the failure to pay child support can result in wage deduction orders, seizure of assets, license revocations (such as driver’s and professional licenses) and even incarceration.

In Israel, the problem is reaching epic proportions. According to The Guardian, 43% of divorced Israeli fathers refuse to pay any child support to their ex-spouses. Responding to this crisis, Israeli courts have employed new, stricter enforcement methods.

For example, the failure to meet one’s monthly child support obligation can result in a prison sentence of up to twenty one (21) days for a single violation. However, the more serious enforcement mechanism is the court’s issuance of a “stay-of- exit order.” This order prevents a parent who is obligated to pay child support from leaving the country for any reason (including a work related move, a medical issue or a simple holiday), until he pays not only any prior arrears but also all future child support until the child or children emancipate (typically age 18).

According to multiple reports from various news outlets an Australian father who moved to Israel to be closer to his two children and ex-wife was banned from leaving the country for 8,000 years or until he paid the totality of his future child support – the approximate sum of $3.3 million dollars. The order, issued as part of a 2013 divorce proceeding commenced by the wife in Israel, expires on December 31 of the year 9999. The father in this case, Noam Huppert, has already been in Israel, unable to leave, for almost 8 years. He is not alone in this situation.

While it is nearly impossible to get accurate numbers on how many individuals are subject to the stay-of-exit orders, there are other known examples. An American father, Abraham “Avrumie” Herssein, a former investment banker with Goldman Sachs, was recently barred from leaving Israel until the year 9998, one year less than Noam Huppert. According to the Israeli court Herssein owes approximately $1.5 million dollars in future child support which must be paid now, despite his claim that he is unemployed and broke.

Indeed, the US State Department notifies its citizens of the strict Israeli laws in its Israel Travel Advisory. In relevant part the advisory notes; “US citizens, including those without Israeli citizenship, should be aware that they may be subject to involuntary and prolonged stays (and even imprisonment) in Israel if a case is filed against them in a religious court, even if their marriage took place in the United States, and regardless of whether their spouse is present in Israel.”

At the present time it is unclear whether the Israeli approach has had the desired effect of encouraging and enforcing compliance with its child support orders.