In this episode of JGL LAW FOR YOU, David Bulitt continues his conversation with family law attorney Christopher Castellano about the hidden costs of delaying divorce. This second part turns to some of the most personal and practical consequences of waiting too long to move forward, especially when children are involved.
David and Chris discuss how informal custody arrangements can quietly become the “status quo,” why temporary financial support decisions may later shape child support or alimony expectations, and how prolonged conflict can increase emotional strain for both parents and children. They also explore the strategic risks of delay, from stale evidence and harder-to-access financial records to resentment that can make settlement more difficult.
The conversation also looks at the other side of the issue: when delay may actually be useful, particularly for a financially disadvantaged spouse or when an informal arrangement is working in your favor. For anyone considering separation or divorce, this episode is a practical reminder that waiting is not always neutral, and that getting legal guidance early can help you understand the risks before temporary decisions become long-term consequences.
[00:00:00] David Bulitt: Welcome to JGL Law for You. JGL Law for You is a podcast by lawyers, but not for lawyers only. On JGL Law for You, we will be discussing a wide array of topics to help you navigate the many legal processes, developments in the law, other current events, and how they may affect you, your family, or your business.
We are back on JGL Law for You in a second part of a discussion that I’m having with my law partner, Chris Castellano, regarding the hidden costs of delaying divorce. The first episode we talked a lot about why people delay divorce, the financial issues, the drift that people have when it comes to planning or not planning for divorce, and information that may get lost while you’re thinking about it.
I want to pick up today a little bit, Chris, with the next piece of this discussion, and that has to do with kids. Talk to me a little bit about this whole, the involvement of [00:01:00] children in terms of planning for your separation and planning for your divorce.
Christopher Castellano: Yeah, that’s right. So, when we first talked about this idea of some of those hidden costs of waiting for a divorce, we reserved on one of the biggest triggers of the emotional responses to the divorce process, which is the children, right?
The children and the family, and when you delay a divorce, the list is pretty significant on the impact of the kids, right? We’re not going to get into a lot of the psychological impacts on children delaying divorce. That’s an entire topic in and of itself, and probably for a qualified therapist.
But nevertheless, we as attorneys can recognize a lot of these hidden costs on kids when you delay a divorce, specific to our bread and butter, right? And so, what I go to first is the basic: how do you handle [00:02:00] the kids’ routine, right? And I’m talking just the mundane activities of the getting ready for school, the scheduling for various different appointments, whether it’s doctors, dentists, et cetera, and school communications.
And then you branch out to the bigger questions, right? So, if you’re delaying the divorce process, but you’ve separated, where are the kids sleeping? How are you managing that? Are you changing the kids from house to house? What do the exchanges look like? Because of course, you’re not operating in the world of a formal agreement.
You’re certainly not operating in the world of a formal order. And so you’re doing this on your own, right? And you’re doing this somewhat ad hoc. And so that’s one of the big costs is that the longer you do this ad hoc arrangement, the more likelihood that you could create a status [00:03:00] quo, and that might be a status quo that you don’t prefer.
David Bulitt: When you say a status quo, tell us what you’re talking about.
Christopher Castellano: Yeah. So, let’s say that you’re doing this separation. You’re not acting in the world of an order or an agreement, but you’re just doing this because you want to start this process, but you don’t want to go full bore on it, right? And so, you say, “Listen, I’m moving into an apartment.
You’re staying in the marital house. You have the kids during one week, and then on Fridays I get the kids,” right? “And we’re just going to swap back and forth.” Well, if you’re in the context of a divorce, a formal divorce, you filed a complaint, the classic process, you may not be inclined to say, “I think that the other spouse should have 50% of the time with the kid.
I don’t think that’s really a, a good situation.” Well, the longer you consent, we’ll say, to a week on, week off, for instance, in this hypothetical, the more you’ve created [00:04:00] the basis and the history of 50/50 working. And so, you could, without necessarily intending to, create that status quo that tells the court that, “Hey, this is reasonably effective, this worked, so tell me why we shouldn’t do that.”
David Bulitt: So, in other words, unconsciously, for lack of a better word, you could be setting up what looks like the norm when you don’t really want that to be the norm. You want that to be sort of a temporary thing, a step sort of thing. Is that kind of what you’re saying?
Christopher Castellano: Yeah. I mean, your intention to have a more gradual change, and maybe it doesn’t impact the kids in such a dramatic way, the intentions there could be noble, but the reality is, is that you could be setting yourself up for what is a relatively uncomfortable court experience when the court says, “Hey, you have an arrangement that you established here that you were okay with, that you felt comfortable with, that you [00:05:00] believed would not harm the kids, ’cause otherwise, frankly, you wouldn’t have done it. And so, tell me why we shouldn’t do this formally.”
David Bulitt: Particularly if the kids are doing well in that scenario, right?
Christopher Castellano: Well, that’s right. If the kids are thriving, they’re doing well in school, their friendships are maintained, they don’t have mental health concerns that have arisen as a result.
These are all indices that the court will look at ultimately to say, “Tell me why this arrangement is bad.”
David Bulitt: So, folks, listen carefully to that in terms of what plans you make, even if you think it’s going to be temporary just to sort of get things going. Be careful of what it could look like in terms of this is what’s best for your kids.
I mean, that’s really what you’re saying.
Christopher Castellano: Absolutely.
David Bulitt: Let’s slip over to child support. Tell us how delaying moving forward can affect not just child support, but contribution toward kids’ expenses and potentially even alimony. I don’t want to stray too far, but [00:06:00] let’s talk about all those potential financial consequences of waiting.
Christopher Castellano: Yeah, it’s very similar in overall concept, right? When you create a presumption that a custody arrangement is proper, the court’s going to look at, “Tell me why this is wrong.” If you create a presumption that a support exchange is proper and is suitable for the circumstances, including the custody arrangement that you just informally established, you’re going to have a hard time overcoming that presumption that that’s not still a relatively reasonable outcome.
Now, it depends on a couple of different factors when we talk about child support. In Maryland, we have the child support guidelines. If you and your spouse are below $30,000 per month, then the guidelines will attach to your case, meaning that the court is going to presume that the guidelines are an accurate child support figure for you.
[00:07:00] So if you’ve deviated from those guidelines, subconsciously or not, then the court’s going to say, “Okay, I understand that you think that this custody arrangement’s working for you. I’m not going to disturb that. However, you agreed to number X for child support. That’s well off what the real child support number should be, whether higher or lower, and the child support guidelines say it should be Y, and so we’re implementing Y.”
The court has the authority to do that. Now, if you are what we call above guidelines, so you and your spouse are making in excess of 30,000 per month, and you have created a financial circumstance as far as the support that is different than what the child support guidelines would recommend, then in that situation, even if you don’t like that support number, the court will be more inclined to say, “I understand what you did here.
I understand why you [00:08:00] did this, and so you tell me, ”Just like with custody, “why we should deviate away from this.” So, it depends on your particular circumstances, depends on your income structure between you and your spouse, but you could, just like with custody, create a presumption that you don’t necessarily want to be creating.
David Bulitt: So again, where let’s say, for example, the higher wage earner of the two in the couple may be setting a precedent that they can afford to pay more than what the guidelines number might otherwise spit out.
Christopher Castellano: Oh, and it’s only doubly true for alimony, right? If you pay, let’s say the child support guidelines say it’s 500, right? And so, you start paying the 500. But then you’re also paying 2,000 for alimony, right?
Because you say, “Well, listen, I want to get the separation going. I’m the higher earner; my other spouse has been a stay-at-home spouse. I’m just going to pay that $2,000.” If you were in the litigation mode, it may not necessarily mean that the facts would equate to the reality that you should be paying 2,000 a month.
But because you’ve done that voluntarily, you’ve established a pattern that you’re not impoverishing yourself by paying the $2,000 a month. And so, the court’s going to say, “Again, tell me why you can’t do that. You were doing it for 10 months. What’s changed?”
Because filing in court is not all of a sudden going to change your income structure, right?
And it applies to a lot of different things. If you go into court and try to say, “There’s not enough money to continue paying for private school,” but you’ve been paying it for two years, that becomes a very difficult argument.
So again, to that theme, hidden costs of delaying the divorce process, it’s the presumption — that’s the hidden cost that we need to be aware of.
David Bulitt: So again, same kind of thing, right? Even if you’re trying to build a short bridge between married life and divorce, you could end up creating a much longer obligation.
Christopher Castellano: Yeah, absolutely.
Yeah, certainly. You know, anyone can find me over at Joseph Greenwald and Lake. They can give me a call directly at 240-399-7881, and my contact information, including email, is also on the firm profile. And thank you, David, for having me as always.
David Bulitt: Folks, you heard that. Talk to a lawyer. Chris, thank you. I am David Bulitt, and this is JGL Law For You.
