I just read about this in an article by Paul Sullivan in The New York Times. 

Sullivan writes: What happens when an acrimonious separation leaves one half of a wealthy couple broke? Increasingly, the penniless partner will turn to a so-called divorce funding company during a protracted court battle to help pay for living expenses and legal fees. The firms work by loaning less-moneyed people quick cash so they can pursue court settlements against their deep-pocketed former partners. In most cases, the companies lend around 20 to 20 percent of the value of an expected settlement, which tends to average about $1 million. Most firms charge 12 to 18 percent interest a year, while others take a double-digit percentage of the final settlement. The firms justify the high rates by arguing that they level the playing field against the moneyed spouse who can otherwise force the one without money to settle. 

Here in New Mexico, I think this is completely unnecessary. If you leave a marriage where the other person made most of the community money, after filing for divorce, also make a motion for interim spousal support, interim child support (if you have the kids), and a motion for attorneys' fees. I have found that the New Mexico courts want the playing field to be as level as possible from the start of the action. 
​
At the very least, get some good legal information before borrowing money from a divorce funding company.

I know it's not very romantic, but talking about financial issues with your partner will save a lot of heartache down the road -- and this is even more true if you and your partner are not married.

First and foremost, it is probably not a good idea for unmarried couples to merge all bank accounts. However, a joint checking account to pay bills or buy groceries can be a good start to test how you both handle dealing together with money. In a more committed relationship, you can try opening a joint savings account for a specific goal, such as an upcoming vacation or your wedding.

Here are some tips for unwed couples who live together:
1. Schedule a time to talk about money.
2. Disclose how much each of you make and all debt that you carry.
3. Determine who will be responsible for each bill.
4. Plan for the worst. Who will stay in the residence after a breakup? What about division of personal property? What if you have a pet together? (If you have children together, obviously you're in a whole other ballpark and most of this does not apply.) You can make these decisions formally (with a contract, for instance) or informally.
5. Keep finances separate -- with the exceptions discussed above.

As a family law attorney, this is probably one of the most frequent questions I get. In the normal course of events when parents break up, a GP’s right to see the grandkids is derivative of that of the GP’s child; i.e., whatever time mom or dad have with the kids, is the period during which GP can also spend time with the kids. But unfortunately, when parents are separating, too often their anger at each other spills over onto everyone else in the family circle, including children and in-laws. Some parents will then act on this anger by cutting off visits between the kids and the GPs. Everyone loses when this is the case.

So do GPs have a right to have visitation with the kiddos, over the objection of a parent?

The short answer is no. There is no such right under New Mexico law. However, there is a privilege, meaning our state considers time-sharing between kids and their GPs important and deserving of some legal protection, but only under certain limited conditions, and only if it is “reasonable.” 

So if you are being prohibited from seeing your grandkids, here are some questions to ask before you decide to file a lawsuit.

First, are the parents of the children currently involved in a divorce or parentage case? If so, you can file your GP visitation petition using the same case number as is being used in their divorce or parentage case. If not, then you can file a new case asking for visitation only under three circumstances: 1. if one or both parents of the minor child are deceased; 2. if the grandchild lived with the GP; or 3. if the child has been adopted by a stepparent. 

Second, what kind of relationship have you had with the child in the past? Judges will look closely at the interactions within this family. I think it’s safe to say that you are more likely to be granted GP visitation if you can show that your time with the child is in the child’s best interest; and that you are willing and able to put aside any negative feelings you may have for the parents and speak kindly of them to the child.

​I remember my grandparents as the most important people in my life, so I feel strongly about encouraging children to spend time with their GPs. But I also understand the high level of emotion that exists when parents are breaking up. My advice to GPs who are currently not allowed to be in their grandchildren’s lives is to keep up whatever level of contact you can, without being intrusive or obnoxious, and without irritating the parent. Sure, you might be rebuffed, but at least you’re trying to keep the lines of communication open.