It has become a common habit to air our day-to-day successes and frustrations to the public audience on social media websites like Twitter and Facebook. As users of these social media websites, we very rarely think about the long-term effect that our published words have on our readers, and more specifically, our friends and families.
Divorce can be an extremely difficult time for not only the couple involved, but the friends, relatives, and more importantly, the children of the couple who watch as their family unit splits. Social media networks can serve as a diary, where we let our friends and family know about our positive and negative feelings throughout the day; we find solace by discussing our hardships, and receive affirmation and support from our readers. Though social media may be a useful tool in the healing process by providing our loved ones a venue to send their support through emails, texts, and messages, it can also be a prime forum for hurt, anger, and the revelation of confidential, marital secrets. As a result, social media has the possibility to create irrevocable harm, emotional and legal, if we do not utilize great responsibility in the words that we publish, post, and reveal to the masses.
Agreeing to Be Nice
In July 2013,NBA basketball player Steve Nash’s divorce brought to light the issue of the use of non-disparagement clauses in divorce agreements and an individual’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech. The Arizona Court of Appeals upheld the non-disparagement clause in the joint custody agreement between Steve Nash, and his former wife, Alejandra Amarilla Menrath, requiring that any remarks made by either Nash or Menrath must be respectful and non-disparaging.
The purpose of the clause was to protect their three children from any mudslinging between the parents and attempt to make the divorce between Nash and Menrath as easy and constructive as possible. However, after the joint custody agreement was signed, Menrath allegedly tweeted disparaging comments made about Nash, which led to a court fight. The Maricopa County Superior Court issued an order barring either party from publishing disparaging comments on social media websites. Menrath claimed that the order violated her first Amendment rights. The
Arizona Appellate Court affirmed the order, arguing that both Nash and Menrath entered into the joint custody agreement voluntarily, and therefore the non-disparagement clause was not a violation of their First Amendment rights.
This noteworthy case, among others involving the use of non-disparagement clauses, reflect on whether or not these types of clauses included in a divorce settlement can have the intended positive effect or limit a spouse’s right to open and free expression regarding any aspect of the divorce.
The Benefits of Social Media During Times of Divorce
...