NO BONFIRES: 10 steps to getting rid of your ex's stuff

Everyone who has had a heart-wrenching split from their mate knows of the urge to have a bonfire.  Movies have touted its efficiency in purging emotional baggage.  But deep down, we all also know that the tactic is wrong.  Somewhere, deep down, we are motivated by anger, and destroying our partner’s belongs feels satisfying in its vengeful quality.      

SO,I must warn that the little voice in the back of your head is a good voice.  It is telling you not to trash your ex's stuff, and it is right.  Setting fire to things that symbolize your ex lover is doing violence, while perhaps not as taboo as doing violence to the person, it is still a violent display of anger.  At the outset, you envision living in a home free of their stuff, but deep down, a little devil inside is dancing with glee at the disappointment of your ex in finding out that the stuff has been trashed.  A bonfire is the ultimate display of disrespect for the person you once shared a life with.

While some therapists may encourage such grand displays of anger, I believe this is misguided advice.  I agree that it is good to expel the energy behind an angry feeling, but the harm that a bonfire does goes beyond a few missing photos and heirlooms.  Domestic violence experts warn that destroying clothing or precious items belonging to another person is abusive.  It’s a display of anger and destruction that will give the message to the victim of the anger, and the message is that the abuser is dangerous.  This message, whether intended to do so or not, coerces compliance.  The woman whose clothing has been slashed will fear defying her mate.  The man whose family heirlooms have been destroyed will fear that the person who destroyed these things intends to alienate the children from his side of the family.  The victims of this distruction fear defying the destroyer, in a way that does not do justice.  It only does more destruction.  So, when people plan bonfires with the intention of avoiding violence, and they would never want to believe that they are being violent, the opposite is what happens.  They become the violent abuser.  But ultimately, what they are doing is just as bad as the violent husband who has removed his wife’s clothing from the closet and slashed it, turning it into a message to her that he is dangerous and has control over things that are precious to her. 

If you are convinced of the wisdom of this, you need an alternative, acceptable, plan of action for getting rid of your ex’s junk.  So, here’s the plan:

1)       When you have separated and to not intend to reconcile, give your former partner a reasonable amount of time to get settled.  “Reasonable”, depends upon the circumstances.  It is longer than a week, not as long as a decade. 

2)      Consult your lawyer to make sure you do not make deadlines that are not appropriate for your situation.  Ask for help setting reasonable limits so that you will not have stuff taken from you and that you will be safe if there are issues of physical violence or distrust as part of this separation.  The lawyer can help you decide whether you need to have friends standing by with you, if you need to pack the stuff and leave the home, if you can have police standing by (you may have to pay for this service from off duty police officers).  There are many options, even if you do not have a lawyer, pay for an hour worth of their time to get some ideas on how to do this properly so that no one will ever accuse you of contempt of court or worse: a crime of taking or destroying someone else’s property.  With guidelines from your lawyer on how you can protect yourself and your stuff while your ex is removing their stuff, move forward.

3)      Let your former partner know that you want them to remove their property from your home.  Give them a reasonable deadline.  Offer opportunities to schedule the move-out. 

4)      Either give it all to them and give them enough time to pack it all, or give them enough time to sort through it all as well as time to pack it up.  It is often an entire lifetime worth of stuff.  Be reasonable.

5)      This part of the split is harder on them than it is on you.  For you, it is an imposition into your private space.  For them, it is the logistical nightmare of moving their entire life without causing too much trouble to anotehr person.  Do not complain that they do not have enough friends to help with the move, or that they do not have the strength or space in their truck to complete it in one trip.  Those complaints are only intended to embarass them and hurt them, and make the whole task more difficult.  Some people find it hard to impose on others for help in situations like this.  Other people cannot afford the moving van needed to do the job properly.  Do not be cruel about it.  Remember how difficult it was to move when you were together and being cooperative with each other?  This is worse for them, going it alone.  So have a little sympathy.  I know, I know, they hurt you and they deserve this pain.  Still, you want to be the better person (by seeking out advice, you are trying to be the better person).  So within your means and your former partner’s means, find a way to manage the logistics of removing their stuff from your house, without using it as an opportunity to hurt or embarrass them, or rack up unnecessary costs. This is the last time you have to cooperate with each other, try not to make it a nightmare that will cause everyone involved to feel justified in being upset with you.  Yes, there are plenty of reasons for you to be upset with them, but do not allow your anger and upset show in this task.  This is not the time or place for you to contemplate revenge.

6)      For items you agree upon, offer to pack.  It will save them time and save you time of being intruded upon.  If you do pack for them, then do so carefully.  Let it roll off your back if they decline your offer with some nasty comment that suggests you are incompetent.  Wrap and pack the things as well or better than you would do for yourself.  No letting it sit in moldy puddles of water in your shed after you have packed it and until they can schedule a pick-up.   

7)      For photos and memorabilia, sort out what you want and put the remainder in a box for the ex.  Your ex gets that box outright and can take it home to sort through at leisure.  Let the ex sort through the items you choose to keep.  They will be sorting these items into two piles.  Some they do not want and therefore automatically go to you without question.  Others, they want.  This is the pile of disputed items.  For disputed photos and papers, get copies.  If any disputed items can be copied, then do so and each of you keep a copy (digitalizes photo records make this task much easier than a decade or two ago!)  Keep the remaining disputed items and come up with a way to distribute them later.  Never, ever assume that it yours and use it or dispose of it until you have resolved the dispute. 

8)      If your former partner does not cooperate with your attempts to get them to remove their stuff, your lawyer can help in explaining what is reasonable as far as giving them notice and a deadline.  Be reasonable. Make sure they receive your message that you will be getting rid of their stuff if they don’t pick it up.  If you have a court order to give them stuff, and it’s still at your home, your lawyer will probably recommend going back to court to get an order that will set deadlines and procedures for managing the pick-up.

9)      ONLY after you are certain that your partner has every item that they might want to get, assuring that you have not hidden things from them, that they have not forgotten some vital heirloom that they will only remember at Christmas, or their parent’s anniversary, etc., THEN you may dispose of the remainder of the items.  Have a garage sale, toss them in the trash.  If they are papers that contain identifying information, shredding and bonfires are acceptable.  Be safe about however you handle their former property that they have chosen not to pick up or forgotten about.  You do not want to be the source of a lifelong identity theft problem because you failed to take care of their copy of their birth certificate when you found it in your attic a decade after the divorce and they didn’t want to pick it up. 

10)  Throughout this, remember that you can only control your own behavior.  You cannot control theirs.  Do your best to remain in control of your emotions and be treat their property and them with respect.  Do not call them names or demean them for having difficulty in organizing this task.  Remember that it is a monumental task and they are in just as much pain as you are, more, maybe, for having had to make do without their stuff, since the separation.  Remember that they are the ones moving and going through this part of the trouble, only half of the problem is over with for them, once they have removed the stuff from your home.  They still have to figure out what to do with it, where to put it, how to unpack, etc., etc., after you are finished with the task.  Be respectful.  Even if they are cruel, mean, angry, remember that this is their behavior, and you do not have to respond in kind.  Try not to cry or yell or have drama during the contact.  There is time enough for you to fall apart when it’s over. 

If you follow these steps and do not play games with them or do anything unreasonable in the course of setting deadlines and making this happen, you will have the satisfaction of knowing that you did the right thing and did not give into the temptation to hurt someone else, needlessly. 

Cooperative co-parenting: giving each other the information

I recently helped someone figure out how to handle a situation:  her child was scheduled for an event.  She and her ex husband had chosen to schedule the event together, because they were trying to be cooperative co-parents rather than competitive co-parents.  But she was the "point person" on the task of applying for the event, paying, preparing and taking the child to the event.  She sent several reminders, and could not figure out why he had not yet asked her for the address or contact information so he could attend and participate.  She was getting frustrated, and believed he was expecting her to act as his receptionist, organizing his schedule for him and helping him figure out how to get there and who to contact so that he could do something special for their child.

It took about a minute and a half of talking to her that she realized what was going on.  In her head, she was handling this in the same way she handled things during the marriage, when they lived in the same house and drove to events in the same vehicle.  She was frustrated at what she perceived to be his inability to organize his life.  She expected him to rely upon her, so she did not just cut and paste the contact and other event information (date, time, location) into her e-mail reminders to him.  She was waiting for him to realize that he did not have it already and ASK for it.  She was getting frustrated at him for not recognizing that he did not have it yet, and expecting her to organize his life for him (or at least his participation in this event).

I pointed out that it does not matter HOW he organizes himself any more.  That's up to him.  But in case he is the type who doesn't realize that he doesn't have the address of the place he's going, until he's about to get in the car, she can save herself the frustration of getting a last minute call from him while she's in the car and on the way, if she only cuts and pastes the event information into one of her reminder e-mails to him. 

She admits to me that her thought process was mixed up with a little anger at him for a past situation where he failed to give her event information until she asked directly, but she realizes that letting this issue become "an issue", is more appropriate to competitive co-parenting than it is to cooperative co-parenting.  She realizes that she solves the potential drama in this situation if she sends him the information without making him ask for it first. 

We talked a little about her feeling that he was turning her into “his secretary", as she put it.  I pointed out that even if this is one of the support staff-like functions of organizing a family, then the secretary of the business doing the event-planning is responsible for sending out the complete contact information for those business people who are not directly planning the event, bur merely attending and participating.  When she realized that she is acting as HER OWN secretary rather than his, by giving him complete information, it fell into place in her head.  Her responsibility in being point person on an event they agree about, is to keep him fully informed without waiting to be asked.   

Once she gives him the information that she possesses, her responsibility to him is over.  He can keep or toss the information, if he mistakenly hits the "delete" button, then it's reasonable for him to ask if she can re-send and she’s being nice (and doing right by her kid) to do that, but other than that, it's all on him.  

The lesson here?  In this world of instant communication, the process of letting each other know who, what, when, where, why (and how much $$), is simple.  Cut, paste, and <send>.  Assuming that you are in agreement on the actual event, coordinating attendance is as simple as handing each other the information.  Cooperative co-parents learn to do this automatically, as automatically as if they were acting as THEIR OWN secretary in forwarding their boss' invitations with complete information.  Once the recipient gets the information, it's up to them to follow through.  Cooperative co-parents need not nag, push, manipulate or mislead each other on this particular issue.  After they have been so good as to cooperate in choosing the event and choosing a point person for making the event happen, all they have to do is inform.  Completely. 

Is she on DRUGS?

I was recently asked this question by a colleague who was mystified at his opponent’s behavior.  His opponent is representing herself in court, having fired several attorneys.  They’ve been through several judges.  She hides information and seems to think that no one realizes that vital pieces of information are missing from the bare minimum stuff she has sent in discovery.  Those closest to her, including his own clients, do not believe she is on drugs, but they admit that they are not close enough to be sure.  

While no one is ever close enough to be sure that a person is not doing drugs, this strange behavior can be explained by something other than drugs.  Some personality disorders allow people to lie at will, without seeming to have any concept that their lies are obvious, and without seeming to have any feeling of guilt or embarassment about having lied.  The people who have these disorders do not suffer nearly as much as those around them.  They lie at the drop of a hat and appear so convinced of their versions of events that you are certain they would pass a lie detector test.  They'll tell any story that might get them off the hook for a minute.  And they may even pass lie detector tests.  People with these disorders can convince themselves of the truth of their own stories, despite that anyone who knows the whole story would easily prove that the story is a lie.  Or they have no capacity to feel empathy, so their physiological systems do not register negative when they lie. 

A person with an extreme version of one of these personality disorders may re-define the common meaning of words to suit their own purposes.  Maybe the person thinks the people who wrote a contract WANTED a certain thing to happen, and so they'll say that's what the contract says, despite that there is nothing in the contract that says so.  They'll hear a rumor and think it's their duty to pass it on.  They'll take money from their parent's estate on the theory that the parent really loved them best and didn't want the siblings to have as much, despite that the wihll says otherwise.  They'll say, "well it was Dad's WILL", meaning his "intent" (as they interpret it) rather than the actual document called the "will".  This person is referring to what she believes her parent would have wanted.  The fact that others disagree with her opinion on this is of no impact to her, she believes she is stating her opinion and that her opinion of her parent’s “will” is valid.  She never once seems to feel the need to conform her personal definition of “will”, with the technical, legal definition, the document that has been filed in probate court.  Or he will tell judge that the children say their mother is abusing them.  He knows full well that the kid's definition of abuse is making them do their homework, and that no one else would define it the same way, but the next thing you know, everyone in the neighborhood hears the rumor that their mother is abusive.  It becomes the "truth" of the family that Mommy is abusive, and she has a heck of a hard time in court, convincing people otherwise. 

But when the psychologists and lawyers finally question him about hwat he claims is abuse, they can't believe their ears, and next thing you know, "is he on DRUGS?"  or, "does he really believe we'll agree that THAT is abusive?"

It’s an interesting dichotomy.  The person with a personality disorder recognizes what the truth is, but simply believes that if they can convince others of their version, then that their version must be truth.  The court system permits her to go to court and tell her story, so she tells her "story", whether or not it makes sense, and if she manages to create enough confusion, then maybe she'll win by default. 

So my answer to my colleague is “no, it’s not necessary that she’s on drugs.  Not everyone whose ability to process logic and follow through on clear instructions is impaired, is on drugs.  Some of the people who are doing this are simply motivated by some internal problems that the rest of us cannot understand.”  There is no drug test that will solve this court battle, no lie detector that will help you prove her wrong.  She will likely pass both.  Don't bother trying to figure out why it is this way, just understand that this is the way she is.  Then move on to seeking the discovery through the appropriate channels, understanding that she will lie and hide stuff, and that you must follow through to get alternative sources needed to prove that she is lying.  

The subpoena to get the one month worth of bank records that was missing (you can be sure that is the month where something improper happened).  The psychological evaluation of the kids to verify that they are not really being abused.  The deposition of the independent witness who knows the truth.  Welcome to high conflict litigation, where the settlement conference never resolves the whole issue, the discovery is actively obstructed, and wacky things get blurted out at the last minute to delay the whole process even further.  

I know you wish you could just get an order for a drug test and take care of it with that, but unfortunately, if you're dealing with one of these personality disorders, you are likely spinning your wheels with that tactic, and should fall back on the more traditional, advesarial tactics that drive up the costs of litigation.  If your client is upset about this tactic, remember, the client is the one who got tangled up with the opponent, and without these traditional discovery methods, this opponent will likely win the case.   You didn't create the situation, but you can fix it.  Unfortunately, factors beyond your control make it impossible to fix on a tight budget. 

Just keep good records so that when you get the judge to order that this person pay your litigation costs because of their unreasonable behavior, that you'll be able to find their assets, because this is the same person who will not voluntarily follow a court order. 

And good luck.