Loeb & Herman, S.C. ::: Articles | Divorce And Suicide Bombers

Divorce And Suicide Bombers

By Gregg Herman
As it appeared in the Summer, 2003 edition
of The American Journal of Family Law, Vol. 17, No. 3.

The former CEO of General Electric, Jack Welch, was the "victim" of a suicide bomber. His estranged wife, Janet, filed divorce papers claiming that the $35,000 a month in support she was receiving does not allow her to enjoy the lifestyle she enjoyed during the marriage. To evidence their lavish lifestyle, she disclosed that GE paid for their luxurious Manhattan apartment, including food, wine, cook and waitstaff, lavish furnishings travel expenses, entertainment, private car and driver, and computer equipment. While Welch denied the allegations, they were taken seriously by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which opened an investigation.

The media had a field day with the allegations. In addition to questioning the alleged "perks" that Jack received from GE, they had fun with Janet's allegations of an inability to get by on a mere $35,000 in support. Neither Jack nor Janet looked good in the press.
While the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage is one of many factors entering into a spousal support case, certainly there have to be better ways to establish it than the very public method chosen by Janet Welch. In fact, the judge found that her financial statement contained inappropriate "editorial comment" and said "It's a brief, not just a financial statement, because there are opinions in it."

While it is to read about the lifestyle of the rich and famous, does it really benefit Janet Welch to publicly humiliate and, perhaps, destroy Jack Welch? Does anyone really think this case is about money?

Avoid Publicity

In my firm, we are fortunate to have represented a number of people in the public eye, either in politics, sports or entertainment. Regardless of which side we represent, our office policy is to avoid publicity. While there may short-term satisfaction to a client in seeing his or her spouse humiliated, the long-term consequences are usually adverse to both parties.

The most egregious example of disregarding the consequences of an open microphone occur when there are children of the parties- whether minor or adult. No child wants to see his or her parent humiliated. bad enough that the parents are divorcing, the extra strain of seeing the case played out in the media rubs salt into an open wound.

Another typical example is where the husband's income, as reported on his IRS 1040 forms, have little to do with his real income. The spouse must consider two potential consequences before she goes public: First, did she sign the joint return? If so, having the IRS extend innocent spouse protection is far from guaranteed. Second, if the IRS only pursues its remedies against the husband, if they are successful, what is the effect on her potential support if the husband's income stream is interrupted? Before blowing the whistle, the wife needs to consider that any funds soaked up by taxing authorities means less funds available for her support.

It is doubtful that Mrs. Welch ever considered these consequences. Sometimes the satisfaction in destroying the other spouse's image and making his or her life miserable is the only mission at hand. In this way, these spouses are similar to suicide bombers. Whether they have legitimate grievances or not is lost in the ensuing explosion.

Preventative Measures

How can this be prevented? Firs and perhaps foremost, we as attorneys can avoid the attraction of self-promotion. Yes, it is exciting to be on television and see one's name in print. however, as professionals, our focus has to be on our clients, not on ourselves. Rarely does publicity help the client, but it can do great harm.

Second, if publicity is unavoidable, the lawyer should learn how to handle it. Sure. it looks easy when experienced professionals appear on television, but Brett Favre makes passing a football in the face of rushing lineman look easy, too. Professional training in dealing with the media is available and is crucial.

Where the client would like to see the opposition destroyed and use the media as the vehicle to accomplish this, counseling and psychotherapy are requisite. The mental health therapist can help the client consider the long-range effect of his or her actions and suggest coping skills for the anger and hurt which is being felt.

Collaborative divorce was developed to provide a means for handling divorce cases in a non-adversarial manner. In this approach, mental health coaches can be brought directly into the divorce process to help the parties develop a "win-win" approach, which is the polar opposite of a suicide bomber. While not appropriate in every case, collaborative principals can be successful in defusing the bomb before it is even strapped on.

Sometimes, none of these approaches works. Like a suicide bomber, some spouses are so intent on destroying the "enemy," they do not care if they destroy themselves in the process. In those cases, all that is left is to clean up the damage afterwards. Still, as family law attorneys, we woe it to our clients to avoid the calamity which ensues from public airing of private grievances and certainly not to instigate it ourselves for personal aggrandizement.

Back to Herman Article Archive

© 2008, Loeb & Herman, S.C.
Suite 1725 - Chase Tower
111 East Wisconsin Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53202-4868
414.272.5632 | Fax 414.272.7918