Coupled with remarriage of a divorced parent and subsequent death, adult children are often left to cope with the relationship and care of stepparents. With fractured and blended families, grown children, and families that are geographically dispersed, many face challenges in caring for stepparents and ex-stepparents.

I can appreciate the anomaly of feeling obligated for providing assistance to the spouse of your parent who has passed away. It feels odd to maintain the relationship with your parent's new husband or wife. In a study of grown children of divorce, Elizabeth Marquardt and Norval Glenn reported that these children are less likely to have a close relationship after their parent remarried. There was concern for how to care for their estranged divorced parents who were ill and living alone.

It's been noted that nearly 40 percent of adults have experienced their parents' divorce. Many others were born to parents who never married each other. The consequences of divorce and remarriage are felt by older children in different ways. Sometimes the stepparent relationship is good but in other cases there is resentment and a fear that their inheritance is at peril. We're in unchartered waters in the study of care for stepparents by adult children.

The problem of divorce, remarriage and the care for elderly parents and stepparents is greater if the children do not regard the stepparent as part of the family. It's the quality of the relationship which determines how or if care is extended to the stepparent who survives the biological parent.

I was reading a passionate and painful letter to the editor from a divorced father complaining about the "standard visitation rights" granted him. This dad sees his children every other weekend and every Wednesday night for two hours.

Living two miles away from his ex-wife and their kids, he requested more equal time for visitation. Why did the court decide that visits every other weekend are adequate? Why not every weekend?

Apparently, this guy did not want the divorce and bitterly faults no-fault divorce and the Florida family court system. I strongly support no-fault divorce but that shouldn't preclude reasonable non-custodial parent visitation. It appears that the parents were unable to come to court with a fair visitation agreement, so the judge applied standard visitation rights.

He's correct that visits every other weekend doesn't provide the opportunity to build a meaningful relationship with his kids. School night visits, which usually take place from 6-8 p.m., may interfere with homework or extra-curricular activities. The judge demands that he show "a substantial change in circumstance" to warrant additional visitation time.

This judge is being inflexible and bureaucratic. If he hasn't done anything wrong, this father should be able to make a reasonable request for modification. Children need and want the presence and support of both parents.

If hard feelings and rancor were not present, the split couple should have been able to reach a reasonable and equitable agreement regarding the children. This is an example of the all too common practice of women punishing their ex-husbands, just because they can.

This dad, if he is supporting his children financially, should be allowed to support them with a solid, stable, continuing relationship. Without more information, we can't explore why the mother and court are being hardnosed about additional time for visits. What do you think?

I was reading a column by Glenn Sacks, a men's and fathers' issues columnist, radio commentator, and blogger who criticizes conservatives for their feeble defense of men and fatherhood issues. He perceives a new tack by some Christian conservatives who have embarked upon a softer and more acceptable approach, advocating "shared parenting" in divorce actions.

There's really nothing new here. If religious leaders are facing up to vital family matters like divorce, custody, and the problem of large numbers of fathers frozen out of their children's lives, it is some progress.

Most enlightened people would favor joint custody except where abuse, drugs, or alcoholism was present. If both members of a divorced couple want to be part of their children's lives, they should both have that right, and that responsibility.

Sacks has been labeled, as an "unabashed testosterone-driven advocate for males", regardless of the subject. He quotes Michael McManus, criticizing the norm of granting sole custody to one parent and thereby separating the other from the lives of their children. McManus wants to replace no-fault divorce with mutual-consent divorce.

I don't agree with this proposed change. No-fault divorce became universal because there was a real need to reform the war-like atmosphere of proving fault on the part of one party. The key flaw of mutual consent divorce is that without your spouses consent, or proof of abuse or infidelity, you stay married, no matter what. I believe the Christian conservative movement's hidden agenda is to simply make it more difficult to secure a divorce.

When Grandma or Grandpa decide to divorce, adult children tend to side with the abandoned parent. When this happens, grandchildren follow the cues of their parents, resulting in estrangement from one grandparent. Adult children have the burden of explaining the divorce to their own children who can worry that their parents will also separate.

Grandparents don't want to become distant from their grandchildren, but family separations do occur. In an article I was reading, one 12-year-old wondered if she would be seeing her Granddad anymore. The answer? "Yes, but not with Grandma." It was awkward for her when Granddad came over since she was closer to her grandmother.

One daughter, angry that her father left her mother, experienced "horror" at meeting his new "companion." Children also wonder if their potential inheritance will be lost to a stranger. Divorcing seniors divide family loyalties, with adult children caught in the middle.

In one family, a grandmother refused to attend the christening of her grandchild because her son had invited her ex-husband's new partner. The son found himself in a no-win situation.

Just as parents of adult divorcing children need to stay neutral and build good fences, there are rules for adult children to follow when their parents divorce.

1. Allow yourself to grieve over your parents' divorce.
2. Let your parents know how you feel to avoid anger from surfacing later.
3. Assure your children they will still see their grandparents.
4. Don't take sides — stay clear and neutral.
5. Don't try to mother or smother either parent with caring advice.

Amanda suggested that eight-year-old Grace should have input into the decision of where she goes to school. I don't think that a very practical idea, since the divorce decree gave the father the last word on her education.

Although they have joint custody, Esther Yang lives in Manhattan and Edward Carter on Staten Island. Grace spends Tuesday through Thursday with her father, and the other four days with mom. She was attending PS 16 near the father's home, where only 50% of the students scored at grade level or above. The mother, without authority, enrolled her in the coveted PS 6, on the upper East Side of Manhattan.

The father objected because of the long commute to PS 6 and re-enrolled her in PS 16. We don't know why her father didn't welcome the opportunity for Grace to attend a school where 90% of the students tested at grade level or above. Why would he stand in the way of this apparently gifted student who scored 92% in a private elite school test? She deserves to be in school with peers like herself. Her father says he fears she would lose the opportunity to participate in extra curricular activities at the school near his home.

In reality, this little girl is a pawn between parents, who are not providing an appropriate education that is in the best interest of their daughter. Why would this mother agree to let her ex-husband's choose their daughter's school? Perhaps what the father really needs to do is to move to Manhattan, to ease the commuting the child already does, though it may be a tougher commute between Staten Island and the Upper East Side. So far, the Courts have sided with Grace's father, but her mother has appealed. We'll just have to wait and see how it all turns out.

The end of the summer is always a nightmare in family court, because this is when the courts see case after case with divorced parents at war over which school their children should attend.

According to the Detroit News, a Michigan judge has ordered that two children should remain in the Grosse Pointe school system even though their parents have divorced and their mother has moved to another school district 60 miles away. The parents share custody and the judge is scheduled to hear evidence from the mother, who says the kids should go to the schools near her new home because they are better than the ones in Grosse Pointe.

Typically, the court will decide which school children attend when one parent moves out of town to another district. Divorce decrees may award joint custody, but one parent will have primary physical custody, and that parent should be permitted to enroll the children in the schools near his or her residence.

Here are the basic legal guidelines for school determination:

1. Children should continue to attend their previous school until parents agree or the court orders otherwise.
2. For a child not previously enrolled in a school, neither parent should take any action without the other agreeing.
3. Children should be enrolled in the district of the parent where they spend most of their time.

Common sense should guide these decisions, with both parents agreeing to do what is best for their children’s education. Judges do not want to make these decisions, but are forced to if warring parents can’t come to an agreement.

This problem is occurring in all states. The education of children is too important to be jeopardized by divorced parents who refuse to make reasonable decisions. When this happens, courts are the place to resolve these disputes. I sympathize with this Michigan mother.

Keep in mind that each year, December 31 is "D Day," or the date determining your marital status for income tax purposes. If by December 31 you have a final divorce decree, you can file as "single" or as "head of household."

If your divorce isn't final by the last day of December, you may continue to file jointly or married, filing separately. Joint filing will result in lower taxes but there's a downside, because you remain liable for your spouse's taxes if he/she doesn't pay. IRS rules are a bit complicated but we'll try to simplify them here:

For head of household, there are three requirements:

1. During the year, you've paid for more than half of your home's upkeep.
2. The home was your and your children's principal home for more than half the year.
3. Your spouse hasn't lived in the home for six months.

Dependent exemptions:

1. You can receive $3,400 for each child but which parent can claim dependency exemption?
2. Dependency exemption can't be split; the custodial parent where the child lives more than half the year usually gets the exemption where both parents support the child.
3. An agreement should be made as to which parent will claim the dependency exemption.
4. The custodial parent can release the exemption to the non-custodial parent.
5. Where custody hasn't been determined, the parent who pays the majority of the child's expenses and has physical custody for the majority of the year, may claim the exemption.

Child tax credit:

Here's the gist of it: Augusta Roman tried for several years to have a child before resorting to fertility treatments. The day before the embryos were to be implanted, her husband, Randy, told her he wanted to wait until they had resolved their problems. After six months of counseling, they divorced.

The dispute escalated as the fertility lab consent form clearly stated that in the event of divorce, the embryos would not be implanted and would be discarded. Augusta sued and was granted control of the embryos in the Trial Court but her husband appealed the case; the Appeals Court unanimously reversed the lower court. Augusta then appealed to the Texas Supreme Court which recently refused to hear the appeal, thus upholding the Appellate Court's decision.

The case raises a moral and legal dilemma for August, 45, who regards the embryos as her unborn children. She said she would sign away any support responsibility for the divorced husband. Her attorney attempted to distinguish this consent form from an enforceable contract.

While I commiserate with Augusta's sincere desire to become a mother, it would be bad public policy to ignore the clear meaning of the consent form. In fact, the form had an option, if chosen by both parties, for releasing the embryos to either spouse. But neither made that choice and instead, checked the option to discard the embryos.

Andy didn't want a child after the divorce and even though Texas law protects anonymous sperm donors from child support, this is a different case. There is legal precedent for sperm donors to be liable for support. Family courts could award financial support despite the waiver by the wife.

In Australia, there's an interesting debate going on over whether parents going through divorce should be required to take lie detector tests in order for courts to investigate false claims and manipulations, particularly where kids are concerned.

Ann Bressington, a South Australian member of Parliament, is proposing legislation mandating compulsory lie detector tests for parents going through divorce.

It's her contention that men and women go into Family Court and lie about the conduct of their partner, especially where child custody and property issues are concerned. These accusations result in thousands of hours spent by social workers investigating exaggerated and false accusations.

Bressington asserts that "we have children being coerced in interviews to support false allegations." All of this has a negative impact on children when they're in need of protection from the court. She believes that the lies often strip parties of assets making a mockery of family law.

In the U.S., suggestions were made that divorcing parties, prior to getting to divorce courts, be polygraph tested. I think this is a really bad idea and furthermore, it's not necessary. Polygraphs can be unreliable and only work if the tested person actually realizes they are lying. Spouses may firmly believe their testimony about their ex is factual and true. They don't think they're lying. Introducing criminal court tools into civil matters is alien to our privacy and civil rights.

As part of a series in the Lancaster, Pa. Intelligencer Journal, tax attorney Patti Spencer, hit upon some tricky tax questions. When are alimony payments deductible to the payor and taxable to the recipient?

Alimony is always deductible in your federal income tax, but child support is not. Child support payments are not taxable to the recipient. The former spouse must report the full amount as if it is earned income. He/she must also provide the ex's social security number. Failure to do so may result in a $50 penalty and disallowance of the payment as a deduction.

Spencer spells out the implications of alimony payment and their impact upon deductions and reportable income for both parties. This is practical and useful information which many couples lack. In settling a divorce, the parties should consider and plan on the tax consequences of divorce.

IRS rules are complicated and strict. Couples must secure clarification in order to get the benefit of the law. I've known women who failed to understand that alimony is fully taxable. They've confused alimony and child support. For alimony to be deductible by the payor, it must be required under a divorce decree or a separation agreement. The money must be paid in cash, check or money order and ends at the death of the receiving spouse. Both parties must be living in separate households and file tax returns, individually.

Divorced couples must be cautious about co-mingling alimony and child support.
Alimony and child support payments may have complicated tax effects which become a challenge for divorced couples. What's your experience? Write and tell us.

Click here for more.