[Source: Toxic Person Proof]
Celebrity divorce lawyer Christopher C. Melcher explains how to navigate a high conflict divorce in California.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Are you ready to become toxic person proof? Hey guys, Sarah Kate Ramsey, here to help you find love and success after a toxic relationship so you can design a life you’re actually excited about living. Hello, wonderful. It is Sarah and I have a very exciting guest for you today. Christopher Melcher is a divorce lawyer who specializes in high conflict divorces. And one of my favorite things about him is that he says he’s a problem solver for high conflict cases, which aligns so much with what I love and what I do. Hey Chris, how are you?
Christopher Melcher:
Hey, Sarah. Great. Thanks for having me on the show.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Oh, so happy to share space with you today. We had so many ideas churning before we got on, so I am excited to jump into it. Tell people a little bit about you and what you do before we get into the nitty-gritty.
Christopher Melcher:
Sure. So I’m a high net worth divorce lawyer of acclaimed law firm Walzer Melcher based in Los Angeles and handling cases throughout California and have had to learn along the way, how to deal with some very difficult people. Because in this role, I’m seeing folks in crisis. And it’s a strange job to have, it’s almost like being an undertaker.
Christopher Melcher:
These divorce lawyers, we provide a necessary but unwanted service. And so I’ve had to learn through the years, and I’ve been a lawyer now for 26 years, how to deal with people in crisis and more importantly, how to get them out of crisis. Because that’s where I’m providing value, not to just have them endlessly be in conflict with no way out.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Gosh, that’s so important. So I have a funny story. I have a friend who was a divorce lawyer and then he left that practice to do murder TV now. So now he interviews all these people who’ve been murdered and their children have been murdered and all this stuff, he’s like, gosh, that seems really like a hard job because it’s nothing compared to being a divorce lawyer.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
He said, “Oh no, I rest easy now. It’s no problem.” And just really it’s a crime television show. He’s a producer for crime television show and it’s these really horrific circumstances and still less emotionally draining than being a divorce lawyer, because you do care about your clients, I’m sure.
Christopher Melcher:
Well, and that’s one thing too, that we should talk about a bit is this boundary between the attorney and client, and it’s similar to the boundary between a client and a therapist. And because we’re in both instances, we’re dealing with people who have some difficult circumstances going on, we need to be good listeners, we need to relate to them, we need to make them feel like they’re being heard.
Christopher Melcher:
But we can’t identify with them so much that we’re now their friends or that we’re building this personal relationship with them. So there’s a very fine line there between having that empathy without crossing the boundary where we’re no longer in this advisory role that we can look at their situation objectively.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And I want to point out something really important if I may here. We get the idea of what a lawyer can do for us in a wrong way.
I heard very early in my own divorce process and they said, don’t use your lawyer as your therapist, they’re too expensive, right? And how did you define that role?
Christopher Melcher:
Well, that’s right. They’re too expensive and they’re not very good at it either because we don’t have that training. I mean, we’re just people like anybody else and with our own sets of problems. And some of us are better at having this psychological information and understanding how to be good listeners and helpers, but others are just terrible at it.
Christopher Melcher:
And so there is a lot of information that a divorce lawyer needs to know about the client. And now in California, we’re a no-fault state. So from a legal standpoint, we don’t care, the judge doesn’t care why the relationship broke down. But for me, it’s important because I want to understand the source of the conflict. And so I can’t really help the person too well, the client, unless I understand what happened because those reasons why their relationship broke down are also going to be coming up as a problem in solving their divorce.
Christopher Melcher:
Because in order to move forward with a divorce case in a settlement, we need to have good communication, we need to have respect for each other and we need to have trust. But almost by definition in every relationship that’s broken up, we’re not communicating well, we don’t trust each other, we don’t respect each other. And so how do we take that problem and then move to settlement? And so there’s some trust-building that needs to happen.
Christopher Melcher:
And so for me to understand the reasons why the relationship broke down will help me not to put it back together or to reconcile people, certainly not for that purpose. But then to say, how are we going to address this problem? But like you’re pointing out, along that way, I need to make clear to the client and the client needs to understand is that this is not a therapeutic relationship because I cannot solve any of those psychological problems.
Christopher Melcher:
I am lucky if I’m able to solve legal problems, which are strictly how much money is going to be paid in property or support and how much time do you have with your kids. And the outcome is a piece of paper called a judgment or an order that says those things. There’s never somebody coming down with a magic wand saying who are the good person and the other person is horrible. Judges and lawyers, we don’t offer that. And-
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Well, it’s not against the law to be an asshole.
Christopher Melcher:
That’s right.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And that’s something I really want to point out. Because people think, oh, if everybody knew… And my lawyer, he told me, he said, “Sarah, there’s a difference between logic and the law. We’re not talking about what’s logical here. We’re talking about what’s legal here. Know the difference so you know which fight you’re fighting.”
Christopher Melcher:
And this has been something I even struggle with to this day, is about how can somebody who’s done awful things get help from the court? How could they win? How could they get awarded something? And it’s got that very point that you just raised. And so we’ll see this where someone who’s just been really toxic, really, really awful in the relationship and continue to do so, lied in court.
Christopher Melcher:
And then the outcome where that person’s being awarded custody, being awarded support and we’re like, how is this possible? When we look at it and we really break it down, what the judge is doing is an economic problem. They’re not saying good versus evil. They’re saying, hey, there’s a long-term relationship, we have one of the partners who’s not working and the other partner who is working and making a lot of money, good or bad, that person who is working is going to pay support.
Christopher Melcher:
And then if they got kids, good or bad, there’s going to be time that’s going to be awarded with that child and with the so-called bad parent. And this is, like I say, it’s hard for me because I want to right these wrongs and I want to see the good outcome, but it’s about setting expectations.
Christopher Melcher:
It’s no matter how bad the other parent is, unless there’s physical, sexual abuse going on or abduction, something just really horrible that’s extreme, there’s going to be co-parenting, there’s going to be shared time. And if there’s a huge imbalance in finances, there’s going to be money paid to the other side even if the other one is just wretched.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And I just think that’s so important because we have problems that can be solved and we have problems that are probably not going to be solved in thinking that magic fairy wand. It’s like, oh, once they have on paper that they were an abuser or whatever else, then everyone will know and believe me. And it’s like, no, no, no, they still wouldn’t believe it, right?
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And I have a phrase called starve, what is it? Yeah. Starve your ego, feed your soul. And there’s no soul work being done in the middle of a divorce process. Your lawyer is not your soul keeper, right? And when you feed that ego, I want to be right, I’ve got to prove justice, I’ve got to do this, it just becomes a battle that really prevents you from moving on rather than allowing you to move on. Is that what you’re saying?
Christopher Melcher:
Yeah. It’s very difficult. And when I was looking through your blog posts, there’s one that I just loved, and it’s called 9 Tips for Communicating With a Toxic Person, and you did this well, two and a half years ago. And to me, I learned a lot from reading through your blog post because you’re obviously very experienced in dealing with this toxic personality. And what I like about your focus is it’s very practical and common sense, and it’s not this find inner peace stuff. And it’s very much like, hey…
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
That’s true.
Christopher Melcher:
You have a problem here and we need to get out and not look back and just go. And that’s the way I approach these problems too. And those nine tips are excellent. And one of those is the one you just mentioned about feeding your soul, not your ego. And so I think what’s very difficult when people come in in crisis, in a divorce, early stages, again, they have these expectations about all wrongs are going to be righted in this divorce.
Christopher Melcher:
And so the first thing is setting that expectation. It’s no, we’re going to get an award over money and over time with your children, that’s it. So now we understand what can be done in divorce, we understand what a lawyer can do. But then we’re dealing with this toxic person on the other side, how are we going to win that war? And it has to be done strategically.
Christopher Melcher:
And then with the help of this lawyer, somebody hopefully is thinking logically and clearly can do this, but it’s hard because this case is going to go on even if it’s done well. Meaning that there’s not a lot of conflict, easily, six months. And with a high conflict divorce, it’s going to go two years. And so it’s a long time to hold your poker face.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
It’s a long time to hold your poker face. And something you pointed out before we jumped on here is that if you had a high conflict marriage, the expectation that you’ll have a kind or supportive divorce is pretty unrealistic.
Christopher Melcher:
So what I always… I ask, it’s like, well, tell me about your spouse. And they’ll say, “Oh, well they’re a narcissist and doesn’t get along with anyone, fights with their own family, goes job to job,” the whole nine yards. And I say, “Okay, well, how do you see your divorce case going?” Oh, we’re not going to fight. We’re not going to fight. It’s not going to be that… And I’m like, okay, obviously there’s something, there’s a huge disconnect.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Disconnect.
Christopher Melcher:
Either this person isn’t as bad as you’re making them out to be, or you’re just totally unrealistic about how this is going to work. And so then that allows me to drill into it a little bit more to say, okay, well, is this person really as bad as you think, or if they are so bad, why would you think it’s going to go well?
Christopher Melcher:
And maybe they’re just saying, well, hey, I’m just going to give in to everything. And then we’d say, well, that’s a strategy. And that goes against every grain in my body. But I had a judge in a settlement conference two years ago, just say, well, hey client, you could just give up and take anything and just walk away. And I’m like, wow, I didn’t even think that was an option. But she said, yeah, that actually is an option.
Christopher Melcher:
And so it’s something to explore and the way that I look at it as a divorce lawyer, it’s similar to a doctor. If you were going in for surgery, we expect informed consent, not just the doctor says, “Hey, well, you could have surgery. Do you want to do that?” Sure. You have to know the options. Here’s all the bad stuff that can happen, here’s the good stuff that can happen. Let’s talk through all these.
Christopher Melcher:
The options are, do nothing, do everything, a bunch of stuff in between. And a good lawyer will be exploring that with the client. And now part of my stuff on my menu is do nothing, just give up everything. And not that that’s really going to work in most cases, but it is on the menu.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And to me, I’m not a lawyer, but in my work in this, the best strategy that is if you have a lot of potential of rebuilding your next life, if you have a lot of career opportunities, if you have this wonderful life that people in sales, I’m like, okay, so if you fight this divorce, how well your mindset going to be for sales the next two years?
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Well, it’s going to be in the tank, I’m not going to make any money. If you just walked away from everything, could you recap that money by building your business and being in a better frame of mind for sales? So usually they say, yes. I say, then it is not a good fight.
Christopher Melcher:
And this changes people. Obviously, the relationship is going to already have changed them. And but then this process changes them again. And I’ve seen folks come in as a client that are just wonderful, just really warm people and then after years of fighting coming out being really defensive, closed down, angry, resentful, untrusting. And to me, I mean, unless there’s a lot of zeros at the end of that fight, it isn’t worth it.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
That’s what I say too. But yeah, that’s what I say too. It’s like, well, how much money we talking? Is it worth that fight and how much are you going to lose? And again, back to that, whenever people are acting off principal, and I say, ooh, you don’t need that couch over principal. Don’t spend $10,000 or $20,000 or $30,000 or $50,000 on principal, right? To prove them wrong.
Christopher Melcher:
Well, and there’s two ways to spell principal, there’s the le and the al.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
It’s true.
Christopher Melcher:
And so the principle ending in le is the one you’re talking about. It’s just like, I am fighting the good fight, I have to right the wrong. And we should never be fighting that fight. And the one ending in al is the money, and that’s the principal on your mortgage, that’s the amount of cash that you could get. And that’s what we should be focusing on.
Christopher Melcher:
And then, like you’re saying, weighing that against the outcomes that we know are going to happen. It’s going to be a destructive process, it’s going to defer. Moving forward, it’s going to be a huge amount of time dealing with the lawyers and courts and a lot of money out the door. And it has to be done in a business-like way where we’re saying, well, okay, am I going to really spend half a million dollars in attorney’s fees fighting this fight?
Christopher Melcher:
Well, a business person would say, well, sure. If the whole company is on the line, if I could get $10 million, sure, I’ll spend a half a million in legal. I’m never going to spend half a million in legal over a hundred thousand dollars. No business person is going to make that choice. And so a lot of times with the money, property division support, we can quantify that saying, this is how much legal costs we think are going to be involved in the fight, this is how much the outcome could be.
Christopher Melcher:
That’s easy, at least for us that are business-minded people to figure out. When it gets to custody, it’s hard.
But then again, realistically, what can we do in a child custody dispute?
So is your child’s life really on the line? No, your child’s life is really not on the line in most child custody cases.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And that’s so difficult when you’re emotionally charged in this situation. Again, it is not against the law to be an asshole. I just want to point that out because it’s such an important point.
Christopher Melcher:
And we’re not dealing with that in divorce court. And we’re just looking… And the divorce judge, and I think one helpful point is for people that are thinking about being divorced or starting out with the process is go down to your local divorce court, sit in the room. They may ask you like, hey, can we help you?
Christopher Melcher:
But it’s a public courtroom, most of them all are. There’s some proceedings that are closed, but most of them are open. And I would go there and watch for a day and see people fighting. And you’ll see that it’s like, wow, that’s a ridiculous fight. I can’t believe they’re fighting over whether they’re going to exchange the kid at Starbucks or Coffee Bean. Yeah, they really do. They fight over that stuff.
Christopher Melcher:
And then you see people saying like, “Oh, I need 20,000 a month in support, I can’t possibly live off of that.” And then the next person coming in saying, “Hey, I’d really love if I could get $250,” because that’s all the person could afford. And if I got the 250, I’d be okay. And they see everyone, all different walks of life.
Christopher Melcher:
And I think going in there and seeing the pressure that’s on that court in the 10 or 15 minutes you’re going to get for your hearing, there’s never going to be this deep dive of a 20-year relationship and all of the psychological impacts on it. No, you’ve got 15 minutes in a lot of these hearings. So I think that that’s helpful for the client to see that, what it really looks like in court. It’s not like it’s on TV.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
So and what else do people who are not divorce lawyers not know? I love that idea about going and watching the divorce court and seeing, that’s a fabulous suggestion.
Christopher Melcher:
The other thing is picking a lawyer. And so this is the first step. So after you’ve decided I want out of this relationship, this is toxic, this is not going to get better. There’s nothing I can do that’s going to make this relationship better, I need to leave. And so they’ve made that decision and now that’s when I get the call from a potential client.
Christopher Melcher:
And I think what I’d really like to help people with is picking a divorce lawyer.
And so even if you’re not in California, if you’re listening to this show and you’re going through this and you need some help picking a lawyer, call my office and say, “Hey I heard Chris on Sarah’s show and I just wanted to talk through. I’m interviewing some lawyers. What kind of questions should I ask?” I’m happy to give that help.
Christopher Melcher:
And because this is so important because you have the two spouses that are going to go through this conflict, well, each of them, if there’s enough money involved, they’re going to each hire lawyers. So now we’ve got four people that are involved now in this conflict. All four of them have to be rational, sane, normal, truth-tellers. What are the chances of four people being all that? It’s almost impossible.
Christopher Melcher:
And so we can control ourselves. So we can say, we’re going to go through this with dignity and we know what our expectations are, we can control who we hire. But what if we end up hiring somebody who’s a complete maniac and now we’re just exiting one toxic relationship and going into another one with this lawyer? And it happens all the time and clients don’t know how would they know how to pick a divorce lawyer. And they wind up many times picking the wrong one because it’s really what I call the cheerleader.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
That’s a great point.
Christopher Melcher:
You don’t want a cheerleader, you want the lawyer who kind of disagrees with you in a way, but also is going to listen to you. And that’s a hard one to find. So you don’t want somebody who’s just going to say, “Oh, yeah, you’re a client. I can’t believe somebody treated you that way. I will go in and get my sword out and slay the dragon.” You don’t really want that. You want somebody to say, “Hey, you know what? All that stuff you just told me about your spouse, that sounds really horrible, but here’s what I can do for you.”
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
That is so honest. I just want to recap what you said, because so many people I talk to are like, I’m looking for a dragon slayer.” And my whole spiel is like, become your own dang dragon slayer. You have to become your own dragon slayer, whether you’re protecting yourself, you take you through life. And I like that you connected the cheerleader with the dragon slayer because it’s almost like a dragon slayer in sheep’s clothing or something. It’s like, “I’ve got you. It’s going to be fine.” Rather than the second version sounded more honest.
Christopher Melcher:
It’s very strange. And I’ve learned this where at first I thought, well, gee, this other person I’m dealing with is a divorce lawyer, they’re professional, they probably think the same way that I do. We can talk and maybe off the record a little bit and say, “Hey, we were only fighting over one or two things. How do we work that out?”
Christopher Melcher:
And then it’s like, no, there are some people out there who are completely dysfunctional. And they may even be corrupt. They may be saying like, “Hey, I can make a lot of money off this case if I pour gas on the fire.” And they’re very good at that. Or they’re just so messed up in their own world that they have to be in conflict mode and they want to make the other person suffer. And it’s like, wow. And it’s like, how does the client know that until it’s too late, that their lawyer is pouring gas on the fire or their lawyer has some dysfunction of their own where they just want to make the other side pay and punish them?
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
I want to really emphasize what you’re saying here because if you’ve been in a situation where it felt like, “Oh, I finally need justice.” And then there’s the lawyer who sounds like, “Oh, yeah, but he made such a good point. Chris makes such a good point in saying they could have their own need for conflict.”
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And if you’re divorcing someone who has a need for conflict, and then you choose a lawyer that has a need for conflict, and then you’re going to your coach or your therapist, or whoever, saying, “I’m just looking for peace. I just need internal peace.” That is really not aligned with the people you’re surrounding yourself with.
Christopher Melcher:
That’s right. And it’s these lawyers, we’re spokespeople. I mean, that’s why we’re there to… We understand we’re kind of a guide. So we understand the court system, how to walk you through the court system. We’re going to talk for you to the judge. And it’s easy for somebody who’s getting out of a toxic relationship that had no power in that relationship at all. And now feels like, hey, there is this lawyer, a strong advocate coming in there, making the other side pay.
Christopher Melcher:
And I have one of these cases now that I’m reviewing where this happened. And so I think that maybe at the beginning of this attorney-client relationship it’s possible the client like this, where the other side was basically begging to say, “Hey, I want to settle. Can we sit down? I can’t take these letters from your lawyer. These are just nasty. What’s going on? Can’t we sit down and work this out?”
Christopher Melcher:
And maybe the client felt at that moment, some power that they never had. And they figure like, “Hey, I kind of like this. I like that the other side’s on their back foot. I like that they’re suffering.” Well, if you’re really rich, you could play that game. It’s a sick game. And we do this in these, and I’m talking people worth more than a hundred million dollars or billionaires.
Christopher Melcher:
I mean, we’re just servants to the rich at that point. But we can play that game. But most people can’t afford that game and it’s a sick game to play. And so to me, it’s this get in, get out, and hiring somebody who’s going to tell you like it is, who’s not going to be paternalistic and say, “I know better. Let me cure these wounds for you. I’m going to make the other person suffer.” No.
Christopher Melcher:
It’s saying like, “Hey, I will tell you what I think is a good deal or not.” But if you came to me and said, “Look, Chris, I’m just going to give up. I know I could get some support, I know I could get some money here from retirement. It’s not worth it. I’m going to give up. I need you to support me with this settlement.” There are some lawyers who say, “No, I won’t do that,” because they don’t want to get sued for malpractice later on.
Christopher Melcher:
I think that’s one of the key questions when you’re interviewing the lawyer, is saying, “Hey, if I just said, I would take something less than what you recommended, would you support me with that or would you say, no, I can’t help you with that if you’re going to go against my advice?” And so that’s just one way of exploring who has the power in this relationship because it’s the client who is supposed to.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Oh, it’s interesting.
Christopher Melcher:
And I am the servant. I serve the client. The client is all-powerful. But most lawyers and most clients look at it the other way, “Oh, no. The lawyer is the master. The lawyers the ones that has the power, they’re the ones experienced, the lawyer will tell me what to do.”
Christopher Melcher:
And it’s just the same with the doctor. It’s the same analogy. It’s like, well, of course, you’re going to defer to a doctor. But if the doctor’s doing his or her job right, is explaining to the patient, here are your choices, this is your body, this is your life, and I’m here to give you the information to lead you to make a decision. I’m not going to decide for you.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And I want to just super jump in on there and say, that is why it’s so important to get the mental health component taken care of. So you can be your own best decision maker. So you can go into your legal strategy sessions stable, as stable as possible. I’ve had clients, they’ll say, “Oh, the first two meetings with the mediator I just sat and sobbed the whole time.” It’s like, “Oh my gosh.” And these are about her kids. She had little twins that she loved and it was just this horrible situation. So trying to bring an educated version of yourself and a stable version of yourself to these meetings.
Christopher Melcher:
Well, and I think having a friend or a relative help, and normally the attorney-client relationship to keep those communications privileged, meaning that they can’t be put into court.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
That’s true.
Christopher Melcher:
We just have the attorney and client present. But there are exceptions, and one of them is to allow a support person into the conversation when is necessary for the client to access legal advice. And it would just be, again, I am using a lot of doctor patient analogies, but they work well because we have more experience going to the doctor than we do going to a lawyer.
Christopher Melcher:
So if somebody like say your parent was going to a doctor and they had cancer, and they’re talking about, do we do chemo or not, or radiation or not? Well, it’d probably be a good idea for you to go to that because the patient, your parent is probably not going to hear a word other than cancer. They probably tuned out after the C word.
Christopher Melcher:
So it’s like cancer, I’m going to die, I can’t even hear or think anything else after that. Now, you’re there as the adult child listening, asking the questions, remembering it. And then when your parent has had time to reflect and calm down a bit, you could say, “Well, hey, the doctor said you don’t have to do the chemo. Or if you did the chemo, here’s how it could work.”
Christopher Melcher:
Well, we can do the same thing in a lawyer client relationship, is bringing in a friend or a relative to hear that. And that way, when the emotions have calmed down, the friend can say, “Well, hey, your lawyer was really not telling you to do this. He was just giving you an option.” And that’s where the problem is.
Christopher Melcher:
What I found the disconnect is when I tell a client, “Well, you could get $20,000 a month in support.” Well, they hear, “I am going to get $20,000 a month in support.” And now when the offer’s 15 or 10, they figure, “Well, why am I going to take that? My lawyer said I’m going to get 20.” Well, no, I didn’t say you were going to get it, I said you could.
Christopher Melcher:
And so this is another recommendation, what I have is having that lifeline. And it certainly… it would be somebody who’s going to love you a lot because it’s a lot of work and it’s going to be a long time. But if you have somebody in your life, is to read them into the case, have them involved in some of the attorney client communications.
Christopher Melcher:
And it’s one of the questions you may want to ask the lawyer when you’re interviewing. It’s like, “Hey, I’ve got my dad or mom or relative friend, could they sit in on a couple of these to understand? Are you comfortable with that? Because I think it’s necessary because I don’t think I could access your services without that.” They should be okay with that.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Especially if you can find someone who’s been through the journey within that one client. She was saying, “I don’t know what’s worth fighting and what’s not.” And if you parents maybe are divorced, right? And then you’re saying, well, what’s a bigger deal, where the kids go to school or if it’s a 2:00 o’clock or a 4:00 o’clock pickup on Christmas Day, right? It’s like wow, one of those has huge implications and one of those has very few implications. But the time, if the person hasn’t had any experience, it may feel like both of those have the same level of problem to solve and have much deeper long-term ramifications.
Christopher Melcher:
Well, and especially to somebody who’s been through it and it’s been years ago.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Exactly, exactly.
Christopher Melcher:
Because they can see like, “Hey, this is horrible what you’re going through right now, but you’re going to get through it and move on.” And especially with child custody stuff, because we’ll see these really bad fights over child custody and over hours or days or who’s going to be the primary parent where the child is going to live with.
Christopher Melcher:
But somebody who’s been through this, like myself, not been through a divorce, but seen and helped people with really young kids who are now adults, we’re seeing even clients who have lost custody in cases that I’ve handled, that the child’s come around and said, “You know what dad? I want to live with you.”
Christopher Melcher:
This wasn’t issued by the court. This is issued by the dad being a stable force in that child’s life and the child now growing up and recognizing and saying, “I love you. I want to be with you.” And so somebody who’s seen that saying like, “Do we really want to spend a million dollars fighting over whose house the child’s going to live in primarily?” Just be a loving parent. It’s going to come back to you.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And what are some pitfalls that you see over and over again? Whether it be worrying about what the other parent’s doing at their house, maybe not advocating for yourself. What are some pitfalls that you see?
Christopher Melcher:
So the pitfall number one would be failing to recognize that the child has two parents. This is mostly coming up with moms because moms are great and they are the primary caretaker in most families. And they are the expert as to this child and have provided for every need of this child and done a great job at it.
Christopher Melcher:
But now they’re getting a divorce and there’s going to be two separate households. And letting go and saying, “Well, gee, I really don’t know why does my child need to spend so much time with the dad?” The dad doesn’t know how to take care of the child. Maybe he has a girlfriend now, all of this other stuff going on. And to say they’re going to resist that and fight, fight, fight.
Christopher Melcher:
Now of course, if there’s abuse happening, sure, we’re going to fight that fight. But if there’s not abuse happening, there has be some letting go. And to realize this person’s not a stranger, it’s not saying, “Well, oh, we’re just going to have your child go over to some random person’s house once a week.”
Christopher Melcher:
This is the dad. What do you really think the dad is going to do? And maybe it’s not going to be as great as the experience with the mom, but it’s still the dad and the child needs the dad in their life. Again, we’re not talking about abusive relationships.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Sure, sure, sure.
Christopher Melcher:
We’re not saying abusive, we’re not saying mean, I’m saying physical, sexual.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And my advice would be to look up in your state the definition of… and you may have, if you’re unclear on what is abuse, what does that mean? States are going to have definitions of that that you can Google.
Christopher Melcher:
Well, yeah. And most of them are psychologically informed and we kind of know it when we see it. But even when there’s abuse, and this is the hard part to get around.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Yes, it’s hard.
Christopher Melcher:
There’s going to be shared custody. It may be supervised at first, but parents get reunification services, they get a second chance. And so this is the most difficult part to deal with. The biggest pitfall is just to recognize there’s going to be some sharing and to have some trust and to let go, and it’s very hard to do.
And I get that. Easy for me to say, not my kid. But that needs to be let go. And there’s a reason for it because dads know, and I’m being stereotypical now, but dads know that their exposure is money. And I’m talking the traditional household.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Sure.
Christopher Melcher:
Mom stayed in home, dad went out and worked. Well, dad’s going to continue working and mom’s going to continue staying at home. Mom’s going to want to fight over custody, dad’s going to want to fight over money. And dad’s will realize, “Well, gee, she’s now made it clear she does not want to share much custody and she’s willing to fight. Well, that means she’s willing to pay me something, give up something.”
Christopher Melcher:
So maybe there’s a deal to be had where she goes easy on me on support I go easy on me on property division. So I can give her more custody, and now sets up the custody dispute that should never have been had. And to think strategically and smart about it, if I’m representing mom is when she’s telling me, “I don’t want to share custody. I don’t trust that guy. I don’t like his girlfriend. His house isn’t baby approved. He just puts the kid in front of the iPad. I would do the homework.”
Christopher Melcher:
You’re a great mom, I get all that. But here’s how you win. Say, “You know what dad? I am so happy that you want to be involved in our child’s life. I will give you 50/50. Starting now we can have 50% of the time. And here’s all the homework that needs to be done and here’s a schedule that I put together. And every two days we can trade all this. I am so happy you’re finally wanting to do this. I’m so just ecstatic about it.” And then they’d be like, “Oh, what? 50/50? Okay. Well, I guess this… and wait three weeks.” Oh, you know what?
Christopher Melcher:
Can you take care of this day? Oh, really? Oh, sure, sure. I’m happy to take that. Yeah, no problem. I know you have to go on that trip.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
That’s exactly what I tell people to do. Yes. And that is so important. And it’s like, you can just smell it, you can sniff it out, right? When you’re doing this, I’m not a lawyer, I don’t pretend to be, but it’s like, that guy will be gone in a year. He will not. And if you had given up all your money, that 50/50 assets, and then you can’t even provide for your kids. And then he’s Disneyland dad and showering them with gifts where he only sees them an hour a month, it sets up a really bad dynamic.
Christopher Melcher:
It does. And then to think about, okay, so if most likely it’s going to come out where the dad’s going to say, “You know what? I can’t use 50/50. I’m probably going to do 80/20.” Well, now it’s the dad saying it. And especially if they’re a narcissist or something, it has to be their idea. So they’ve now solved it and now telling you the solution that you wanted secretly from the beginning.
Christopher Melcher:
Now we have a convincing solution, not that it’s forced on them. But what if it turned out where they said, “Hey, I’ll take that. I’ll take that 50/50,” and they actually used it? Well, what a great thing. Now you have this dad who’s super involved in this child’s life. And unless you really just hate this person and don’t want them to be involved, which is actually really abusive towards your own kid, to think that way, you now have a super-involved parent.
Christopher Melcher:
And obviously the big exception is true abuse, not invented abuse, but true abuse. Obviously, if there’s neglect, there’s physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, then I’m not saying just give 50/50. So it has to be… But absent that, it’s a really interesting technique.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And please, again, look up what that means. Because when you’re emotionally charged, there’s no food in the house, my kids not eating over there, are they really not eating over there? Sometimes that can be true. And I’ve heard of circumstances that it is. It’s just so hard to see that in black and white when you’re so emotionally charged and connected. So it’s having a true checklist is helpful.
Christopher Melcher:
Well, and one thing, I think it’s hard because there’s some people who will use the abuse word a lot. And it’s hard. And I don’t want to minimize anything at all. So when people say that I’m in an abusive relationship, my inclination is saying, okay, you were and I’m going to kind of believe that or want to believe that, but I’m certainly going to ask questions about it to see, okay, what do you really mean by that?
Christopher Melcher:
But here’s the thing is, is that not every breakup can involve an abusive relationship if we’re using the legal definition. So there has to be a difference between, “Hey, our relationship didn’t work out. Bad things were said to each other, feelings were hurt. We don’t like each other.” As opposed to an abusive relationship.
Christopher Melcher:
Because every relationship by definition involved hurt feelings, mean things that were said, control, somebody controlled the kids, somebody controlled the money. Somebody had a bad temper. Every relationship that’s broken up involves that. Abuse is something over all of that, something more extreme, where it goes into a power and control dynamic where somebody is taking advantage of somebody else to the point that it’s harmful to them. And it doesn’t involve physical abuse, it can be psychological or emotional abuse can be just as harmful as physical. But it’s really something more than the, “Hey, we broke up. It didn’t work out.”
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
And as you’ve looked through my stuff, you’ve probably noticed the A word been pretty absent, right? The abuse word is pretty absent. And I use toxic on purpose because it’s like, let’s define that. And really, to me, it’s all about a pattern. Like how consistent was the pattern of anger?
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
How consistent was the pattern of control? How consistent was the pattern of manipulation? How consistent was the pattern of… Versus everybody has a bad day, we fell out of love and it got really bad towards the end versus a whole pattern. So if you were trying or needing to prove, where would it be useful to try to prove abuse and where would it just be kind of a waste of your time?
Christopher Melcher:
Well, I think, like you said, a pattern is super important. So what we’ve seen is kind of the old school, older judges were more what I call blood and guts. And especially if they’ve come from a criminal background, their definition of abuse is still stuck in a very outdated mode, which is who got hit? Okay, well, obviously we got somebody who was hit, then we have physical abuse. We know what that looks like.
Christopher Melcher:
And there’s no reason to even talk about that, that’s clearly abuse. We have sexual abuse, clearly we know what that looks like. Then we have things that are just very scary but don’t involve physical contact that could be breaking things, throwing things, hitting the wall, to blocking movements. To me that didn’t involve physical contact, but it’s still a form of what I would call physical abuse. It’s still at that level.
Christopher Melcher:
Because the implied threat is that, “Hey, I’m going to hit this wall next. I’m going to hit you. I’m going to block you from moving and if you try to get past me.” So now I’m dominating and controlling you. To me, that is in that same sphere in my mind is like physical abuse. The harder ones we come up with, what’s now being called coercive control.
Christopher Melcher:
And now in California we’ve added that to our definition of abuse. And I think it’s the right thing to do. I’m worried that some people are going to take advantage of it because there’s a lot of legal benefits to being claiming that you’re a victim of domestic violence. Easy access to the courts, kick out orders, immediate support orders, and that’s been abused by people.
Christopher Melcher:
And it really, really makes me angry because these immediate access to the court is designed to protect victims, not to be given as an advantage to people claiming falsely that they’re a victim. And it’s hard for courts to sort that out. But this issue of course of control is dealing with, like you’re saying, a pattern where somebody is in a dominant role in the relationship, somebody is in a subservient role and they are exercising that dominance over another person against really their will.
Christopher Melcher:
It’s in such a way that no one would consent to that relationship that’s isolating them from friends and family, taking away all of their free choice and not ever hitting them, but using things like money, things, words, criticism that is done over time in a consistent way where somebody is… really there’s no power in that relationship anymore, and they’re being dominated.
Christopher Melcher:
And I was helping to work on commenting to the legislature in California on this definition of course of control. And one of the things I was worried about, because they’re saying, it’s like, well, isolating, telling somebody you can’t see a friend or telling somebody they can’t spend money, in my point was, is there are protective reasons for that. What if the friend’s a heroin addict?
Christopher Melcher:
They will say, “Well, hey, you cannot be with this person. I forbid it.” Well, that’s protective. That’s what we would hope a spouse would do. What if they’re spending excessively and it’d be like, “You need to stop spending our money.” That’s a fine thing for a spouse to do. So again, this is very nuanced and very complex in relationships.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
It’s so nuanced. And why it’s so important to talk to somebody who knows what the heck they’re talking about. And I think there’s kind of assumption every therapist, or maybe every lawyer, maybe everyone is experts in these subjects, in these relationships and the nuanced… Because I have a lot of clients in California who’ve had protective orders brought against them and get kicked out of their house because there were years of control and then they set them off and they reacted, and then now you have protective orders against them.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
But the pattern is that they were on the losing end of this for 30 years. And there was one instance, they finally flipped their lid because they should have done something earlier and didn’t, they flipped their lid, and then they’re out of the house. It’s terrifying.
Christopher Melcher:
It is. And if you are in this toxic relationship, one of the things that I had to learn, and I see you pointed that out in your blogs is the pitfall of thinking that others act, believe, have the same morals than you do. And that was a hard thing for me to understand. Because it’s like when I was growing up, I mean, I had just such a great family and friends and network of people. And I just thought like, “Wow, everyone’s just great.”
Christopher Melcher:
And then you start coming into contact with people and it’s like, “Wow, they’re just evil. There is evil in the world.” And to understand that, and especially in a personal relationship, that they could be triggering. And I’ve seen that and I’ve got a law enforcement background. And one time, a long time ago, I had a domestic violence call where I ended up arresting this lady and taking her out of her house in handcuffs because she had thrown a whole bunch of plates at her husband.
Christopher Melcher:
And I went there and there were broken plates in the kitchen and he got hit by one of them and it’s like, got arrested. California law requires it. And then he came to the station afterwards and said he wanted to talk to me. And he was just like, “Yeah, well, I just really wanted to teach her a lesson.” And I was like, “Oh, wow.” I just felt so taken advantage of. And he triggered her and I talked to her and he triggered her.
Christopher Melcher:
And so she wound up with an order kicking her out of her home, I’m sure getting a divorce and then a criminal arrest and being in jail. But ultimately she threw those plates, she didn’t have to do that. And I think that’s where, when I’m counseling clients and talking to them about like, don’t be triggered and have a bag of clothes ready to go, get out. It’s not worth it.
Christopher Melcher:
Because yeah, if there’s a fight, we don’t know who’s getting arrested. And then certainly if we’re living in that level of fear and uncertainty, then we should be looking at a restraining order maybe us coming in first, certainly getting out of that. And people don’t… and it’s hard because I represent wealthy people. It’s a great niche that I’m in.
Christopher Melcher:
Most people don’t have the option. Most people can’t just go to a hotel, can’t go to their summer home or something like that. And it’s like they’re really stuck. And the restraining order is there in appropriate cases to say, “Hey, the abusing party needs to leave and they’re going to have to figure out whose couch to sleep on. It shouldn’t be the victim.”
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
I want to point out something you said, because if you see my work, we get abuse and really categorize it into, oh, this one type of socioeconomic group has abuse present, but then others don’t. And it’s really just such a disservice because it sets people up who have been successful in other areas of their life to think they’re safe from it or immune and they don’t have to watch out in the same way as if they were picking up people in the… some, I don’t know where it would be, this other socioeconomic background. And in my book, Toxic Person Proof, there are toxic people, one, two truths, one, they’re toxic people, two, you know them. And we just have to get that in our head so we learn how to keep ourselves safe.
Christopher Melcher:
It does cut across all socioeconomic areas and also gender too.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Sure.
Christopher Melcher:
And this has been really hard because I’ve represented men who have been DV victims and courts just won’t believe it. And there’s a huge bias that’s still there. Sorry, judges, it’s still there. And so there’s that. But one of the things that I found in handling these super wealthy clients is that some of the characteristics that make them toxic people probably made them really successful too.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
Sandra L. Brown, she wrote a book How to Spot a Dangerous Man. And she said, as soon as they’re successful, we assume that they’re safe. And those are two drastically different conversations.
Christopher Melcher:
I think that that’s right. And you see somebody who’s an executive or they’re very wealthy and you figure like, “Oh, well, they’re an upstanding person.” And that’s our own bias. We put that on there. And we say we’re more willing to believe that somebody, an immigrant that’s poor is going to beat their wife than somebody who’s rich. No, it’s just everyone has the same capacity to do harm really.
Christopher Melcher:
And so it’s that hard-driving personality, the intensity and that’s partly for sure going to make somebody successful because if they’re just passive and they’re not really that driven, well, unless they inherited, they’re not going to be wealthy. And so we’re going to have somebody who’s type A, hard-driven, intense, and then they’re going to be working a lot, so they’re going to be under stress.
Christopher Melcher:
So that may certainly add to conflict and not being a nice person. They’re not around, they’re not available. When they are, they’re a jerk. But then there’s this part of maybe they don’t care about other people in the way that we would think, and now they use other people as just ways to get ahead and they don’t really care about the morals of the deal. They just care about winning the deal. And that’s something we just can’t understand.
Christopher Melcher:
But that’s where… I mean, I’ve done really well, I think, but I’ll never be super rich just because I don’t count my pennies and I don’t want any deals that I’m involved in. I don’t want to make the other person feel like I took everything. I want them to feel like this was a good transaction. And so I’m always going to leave something on the table. That’s why I’ll never be super rich.
Christopher Melcher:
But these people that I’ve dealt with that are there, they’re really… I mean, they don’t leave a dime on the table, they’ve taken everything and maybe then something. So that does inform something about their personality. And so it’s not really surprising that their spouse is going to report a really… not a very good relationship with them.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
I think that’s so important. Chris, thank you so much. Any last words of wisdom and any info on where to find out more about you?
Christopher Melcher:
Sure. So I think it’s understanding you’re going through a crisis, but you’re going to get through it. And the hardest thing is to say, I’ve identified this is a bad relationship and I want to leave.
And then it’s just a matter of really a business deal, how do you get out mechanically?
Find somebody who is normal as a lawyer or somebody who can listen and tell you how it is and guide you through that process and get out as quickly as you possibly can. These cases do not get better as they go on.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
As they age, yes.
Christopher Melcher:
They don’t age well. And if you wanted to find out more information about me, you can just Google me, Christopher C. Melcher, M-E-L-C-H-E-R. You will find a bunch of stuff about me. And if you needed some help, please just give me a call. And if I can’t help you, I’d love to point you in the right direction.
Sarah Kate Ramsey:
I love that. Chris, thank you so much. And I love the conversation about thinking of divorce as a business, you’re in the business of getting a divorce rather than using divorce to prove your worth or prove your innocence or prove that they really are a jerk. That one idea just has so much power. So thank you so much for helping us on our journey to become toxic person free.
