07/16 Anatomy of a Divorce, Part 2

Does she "deserve everything"
Posted by: flmom38
Posted on: 2004-05-19 08:33:25

You know, Amy seems to think that John should be reasonable and give up everything she calls "petty". Yes, they are petty, but if so then why doesn't she just give some of them up too? It does sound petty for instance when he wats "half of the tupperware". But if petty, why doesn't she just give it to him? I think today we all think the man should give up all household items. Why shold she get them all? By the way, I am a woman. I am so sick and tired of our society bashing men all the time. But hear someone say something negative about a woman and there will be hell to pay. Both of them need to give in but not only John. By the way, the jewelry should be split in half like everythng else. And definitely the house should be sold or she should buy it. God bless their kids.
Amy and John
Posted by: beashoney
Posted on: 2004-05-19 10:22:26

I don't agree that John should get half of the jewelery..unless of course he plans on wearing it,lol! Anymore than Amy should get half of his golf clubs, underwear, ties, or fishing pole. It is not about bashing men, it is common sense.

Posted by: analyze
Posted on: 2004-05-19 15:17:15

It's not about who uses what, it's about the value of them. You can't just say she should get 10,000 dollars worth of jewlery and he should get a 400.00 set of golf clubs, that's where bargaining and common sense comes in.

Posted by: rondasells
Posted on: 2004-05-19 16:35:10

Now lets be honest if it is his its his. If its hers its hers. Tupperware? that boths, put a price on stuff like that and split it up. Now the house, Appraise it and one can buy the other out if they can afford it and want the house. I think the house should stay with the children. Its their house why should they move? They didn't ask to be taken out of their beds and moved. Parents need to make the sacrifices not the children.

Divorce means making choises staying married is making choises. Which ones are you more willing to live with and will be better for the children. Parents need to suck it up.

Posted by: ddesai33
Posted on: 2004-05-19 17:34:04

I think they're both being petty minded and vile....There is NO excuse for what their doing to their kids. Whether they realize it or not at this moment in time, this WILL have an effect on their kids. I'm not saying that they should get back together as it's obvious from their behaviour, this is not an option for either of them but to make this divorce THIS messy is just plain ridiculous. Who care who gets the tupperware and the globe !!! Can't they just come to an amicable solution and hurry up with it ???
Vile
Posted by: ragtimeros
Posted on: 2004-05-20 08:17:09

Suzanne is the only one who is being vile, IMO. John is a whimp and used to hide behind his strong wife. Now he is hiding behind that S b**** ans she is doing all his talking.
I agree!
Posted by: tree491
Posted on: 2004-05-21 18:27:59

I agree with raqtimeros. The only people getting rich are the lawyers. With all the billing hours spent on fighting over tupperware, they could own shares in tupperware! I am especially disgusted by Suzanne's conduct. She talks about being concerned about the couple's children but the only thing she is concerned about is stirring up problems to increase her billing hours and using the Dr. Phil show as a soapbox to drum up more scumbag clients. She should be ashamed of herself and quite frankly, I think she's hurting her career more than helping it at this point.
Lawyers
Posted by: dmendonca
Posted on: 2004-05-22 14:06:41

I agree that Suzanne is part of the problem in finalizing this divorce. I am surprised that Dr. Phil has not pointed out her affect on the situation. He clearly saw value in how Ann was trying to handle things and commented on her performance. Why hasn't he done the same for Suzanne's negative impact on a very difficult situation?

I think that changing lawyers was an effective solution for this situation. Ideally, changing Suzanne would have been most effective, as two rational lawyers could have worked together to wade through all of the decisions needing to be made in the quickest and most cost effective way. Because that wasn't an option, hiring the new guy to counter some of Suzanne's cutthroat zeal may get them back on track.
You've got to be kidding
Posted by: onespirit4
Posted on: 2004-05-25 02:42:09

I feel Suzanne is calling it like she sees it. I think she is honest and trying to let Amy know how rediculus she is being. Amy just needed to find someone more like herself that wanted a good fight. I don't know yet what Amy's attorney will finally do with her demands, but I feel Suzanne is correct in that all that matters are the children. This has been her position right from the start. She never said," lets get more stuff." She's always said, it can be replaced. The only people that are losing and paying at the same time are the children.
Totally Agree!
Posted by: britt528
Posted on: 2004-07-17 23:06:55

I completely agree with onespirit4 on the suzanne topic. She is what johns needs to battle his crazy and demanding b of a soon to be ex wife. Amy is the one that is petty and vile if anyone, she is all about cut throat it makes me sick to think about people like her raising children to react the same irrational ways to any type of situation as amy does. Best of luck to John!
I hope he doesnt have to pay her alliomoney if she wanted out so bad then she should be able to keep up her life style with out him.
Have you been there?
Posted by: tjarchibal
Posted on: 2004-07-18 11:06:26

Sorry to come in sounding to pro-vile...but....first of, were any of us there in that house while Amy & John were conducting their day to day life? No, we weren't. My parents got divorced when I was 13. I was the one that had no say and just heard everybody else's opinion and what was happening. Everybody said my mom was such a b**** for taking me away from dad because he provided for us and ran things and was a good father and blah, blah, blah. When mom tried to tell people what really happened, most people's reaction was, yeah right sharon. He always looked so calm and collected and like the perfect father and husband. Meanwhile, back at home, we were all getting the s*** beat out of us and doing everything around the house while he lay down on his couch and drank himself stupid. Now really, does that sound like the perfect man? No, but nobody else saw that except for us? Now, my mom kept her cool, but then again it was a different situation and we were all scared silly. My point is we can't saw who's being reasonable and who's not...unless you were there living with them for these past years. Oh but wait, there's more...my dad hired a lawyer much like Suzanne. Completely ruthless and wanted nothing but a fight and to make my mom out to be the bad guy. My dad's lawyer say me up there on the stand and drilled me about if he was such a bad father why did I write poems for him and do this and do that for him? I didn't have the words then to tell her...if i didn't, I'd be dead by next week. Geez people. You don't know what happened in that house and you have no right in saying who's being irrational and who's not.
divorce
Posted by: cranman
Posted on: 2004-05-25 02:42:16

I agree with dmendonca, having been through it lawyers create problems and can drain you of everything. This couple is lucky to have Dr. Phil. My divorce went on for years just because there was money and no reason to close.
Not all lawyers do it this way!
Posted by: dcshearer
Posted on: 2004-05-26 17:22:40

As a divorce mediator and divorce professional, I looked forward to the show today (Wednesday)about divorce because I like Dr. Phil's approach to most everything. However, I was disappointed that at no point was the process of mediation, and even more importantly, collaborative law, mentioned in the show. I am a Certified Family Life Educator and counselor. I direct a non-profit called the Center for Navigating Family Change. We do all of the divorcing parent education in two metro-Atlanta counties, so I see 300-400 divorcing parents per month! I am also on the board of directors of the Collaborative Law Institute of Georgia. I help train lawyers, child specialists and financial professionals to work as a "team" to help divorcing couples avoid the court system, but not lose out on valuable legal advocacy. I could go on and on because I am so passionate about this, but I would refer everyone to the CLIG web site at www.collaborativelawga.com or the International Association of Collaborative Professionals (IACP) web site (I think www.IACP.org) for more info. Collaborative Law is a way for a couple to get a divorce with the most dignity and respect. Lawyers actually sign an agreement to not go to court and the financial and mental health professionals that work on the team are committed to being neutral, but are working for the "family." I would love to hear from anyone out there who has been through the collaborative law process! Not all lawyers are as contentious as the ones on the show.:)
Lawyers
Posted by: hrowat
Posted on: 2004-05-26 17:34:22

I totally agree that Suzanne is the biggest problem this couple has had to face. She behaves like a child and then asks the parents to be responsible and put their children first. She should be totally ashamed of herself, and I'm glad the world got a good look at how alot of divorce lawyers operate!!!
I Disagree
Posted by: aksapphire
Posted on: 2004-05-23 21:31:15

I think Suzanna is acting exactly how a divorce lawyer should in such an ugly divorce. If I ever had to go through an ugly divorce like this, I would hire her in a second because I would want to make sure that I come out of it with at least half of the marital assets because I was half of the marriage that acquired those assets. Men get shafted way too much in divorce proceedings and to have a woman fighting as hard for her client as Suzanne is, she is doing everything morally and ethically right. Let's examine Amy's new lawyer and see if he doesn't do the same thing as Suzanne in trying to get the most out of the divorce for HIS client.
Suzanne is evil
Posted by: ntdmbblnde
Posted on: 2004-07-16 12:00:43

I couldn't agree more. Suzanne is creating more than 90% of the animosity in this case. Dr. Phil..where are you on this one? I can relate wholeheartedly as my ex husbands attorneys were the same way. They ran up rediculous legal fees fighting over the color of the sky, when all I ever wanted was a fair settlement and reasonable child support. My case still goes on heading into year 4 now. Suzanne, like my ex husbands attorneys only cares about billable hours and creating more animosity so they can increase their own income. Even the courts should end such rediculousness, but I know from experience, they do not care about the best interest of children, only lining the pockets of attorney's. My attorney is very similiar to the wife's 1st attorney in this case, but unlike her, I was unable to afford to change attorney and my case may never end. The pettiness in this case far exceeds that of mine, but here were are over three years later still fighting over basic child support and 3 assets. Suzanne should never be hired by anyone who wants to do what is best for their children and I sincerely hope this show stops other sensable people from hiring her to simply destroy the other side.
Seeing past the anger for the children
Posted by: wishhunter
Posted on: 2004-05-21 09:14:34

I agree. I am so disturbed by their inability to recognize what they are doing to their children. It is beyond me that neither one of them realizes the true impact this will have on their childrens lives, ability to have a relationship, ability to be parents and good and loving human beings.

My parents did all of this stuff to myself and my three siblings with pretty devestating consequences. To this day, they are still trying to divide us without any thought to how unfair they have been.

Dr. Phil is right...for the sake of their children and their futures they need to start a new relationship with respect for each other. They both claim to put their children first but they obviously are so selfish that they are sacrificing their children's futures instead of making sacrifices for their welfare. They should grow up, get some therapy and put their children first!
Seeing past the anger for the children
Posted by: wishhunter
Posted on: 2004-05-21 09:14:57

I agree. I am so disturbed by their inability to recognize what they are doing to their children. It is beyond me that neither one of them realizes the true impact this will have on their childrens lives, ability to have a relationship, ability to be parents and good and loving human beings.

My parents did all of this stuff to myself and my three siblings with pretty devestating consequences. To this day, they are still trying to divide us without any thought to how unfair they have been.

Dr. Phil is right...for the sake of their children and their futures they need to start a new relationship with respect for each other. They both claim to put their children first but they obviously are so selfish that they are sacrificing their children's futures instead of making sacrifices for their welfare. They should grow up, get some therapy and put their children first!
Future
Posted by: lnscrimp
Posted on: 2004-05-26 16:07:06

Someday someone is going to show Amy and John's two grown children a tape of this show and they will be mortified. No one will benefit from all this petty fighting. John should be a man and take what's his and leave. Amy should be a woman and let sleeping dogs lie. Every time they start to get in a heated argument they should ask themselves, "How will the children benefit from this?"
child of a nasty divorce
Posted by: andresha
Posted on: 2004-07-16 23:03:04

i agree with ddesai 33. those two people are selfish and petty and have no regard as to how their constant bickering and name calling affects teir kids. when kids see their parents fight they will remember all the nasty things one parent said about the othe parent. my parents divorced when i was 6 yrs. old. i amd 26 now. and i still, 20 years later, remember every nasty thing my mom said about my dad and the things she would tell us about him. to this day i resent her for it. i am old enough now to understand why they divorced, i did not understand it when i was 6 years old. those two have to remember that they are examples, of what ADULTS should act like, to their kids.