In a perfect world, a couple in the midst of a divorce would sit down together and calmly figure out what to do with their house. But, of course, this is not a perfect world.

Sometimes, in an attempt at a power play, one spouse simply disappears. And in rare cases, both spouses vanish, according to realty agents Sally and David Hanson, the only certified real estate divorce specialists in Wisconsin.

Divorce is an emotionally charged event, the Hansons pointed out on the real estate forum ActiveRain. Often, one spouse will take a hike when they believe the other one is exerting too much control over the situation. Sometimes, they disappear before an agreement is reached on how to sell the house. But once in a while, a soon-to-be ex takes off after the place is sold but before the deal goes to closing.

If the game of hide-and-seek is temporary, and the spouse reappears as if nothing happened, the sale can start moving again. But if they never come back, the transaction can easily fall apart.

That's what happened to agent Margaret Gross of Winnetka, Illinois. In what she recalls as a "terrible memory," her client, the husband, "ghosted on me" and refused to answer Gross' calls. He wasn't upset with her, she says: "It was his way of getting back at his wife."

In some situations, disappearing may be smart. Better to take off and cool off than act out in an aggressive manner, says Dorte Engel of RE/MAX Leading Edge in Bowie, Maryland, who says that one of her colleagues was once threatened with a machete. In another instance, emotions were so high that Will Hamm of Hamm Homes in Aurora, Colorado, had to sit between warring spouses.

One way for agents to deal with angry spouses is not to allow them to be in the same room together. Deal with them one at a time, separately. Another, perhaps better, way is for the couple to hire a skilled divorce real estate listing team and let them do their thing.

But the best way, advises Myrl Jeffcoat of GreatWest Real Estate in Sacramento, California, is to sit down together and discuss the situation as calmly as possible. After all, while the joy of living under one roof may have been lost, you may still be living together as housemates until the place is sold.

Of course, the house may not have to be sold at all. If kids are involved, one spouse will often want to remain in the house with them so their lives are disrupted as little as possible.

"If there are children in the house, please put them and their well-being" above all else, says Jeffcoat. "Doing so will help you focus on things more important than your own discomfort. If the children suffer less distress, it will be easier for all of you."

Whether the house is to be sold or not, it's wise to negotiate calmly about who will get what or how the mortgage will be handled.

If the place is sold, you must decide: How will you divide the proceeds? Will you both get half or will one of you receive more? Or if one of you wants to keep the place, who will pay the mortgage -- both of you in some kind of shared arrangement, or the one who remains? How will utilities and other household expenses, including maintenance, be handled?

If you address these things early on, before one of you gets bent out of shape over something else, it will go a long way toward making your remaining time together as bearable as possible.

It's not easy, of course, as Paul Henderson of Fathom Realty in Tacoma, Washington, can attest. He's had only one amicable divorce situation; he says the rest have been "war zones" in which "cease-fires were out of the question."

If you can't come to some kind of understanding, it may be best for one of you to move out. "In my humble opinion, it's best to vacate and separate rather than endure the consequences of living together," says Kimo Jarrett at Wiki Wiki Realty in Huntington Beach, California. "Emotions become a force of unreasonable and malicious retaliation, increasing stress and anxiety."

Actually, you have to keep your cool until the day you sit down at the settlement table. You can blow off steam after the closing, but don't let your pent-up anger blow the deal at the last minute. Or at any time during the selling process, for that matter.

Years ago, Kat Palmiotti of eXp Realty in Kalispell, Montana, was working with a client seeking to buy a house from a couple who, unbeknownst to her, was in the middle of a divorce. When it came time to close, the wife refused to sign the contract until her soon-to-be ex-husband agreed to pay a "very large" credit card bill that had nothing to do with the house.

"He didn't pay, she didn't sign," says Palmiotti, "and my buyers didn't get the house."

There's no one-size-fits-all when it comes to real estate. Each deal is different, and rarely does one go off without a hitch. But when it comes to divorce, selling a house becomes that much more complicated.

When spouses are calling it quits, the situation calls for an agent who's not only experienced in handling transactions between polarized people, but also one who can offer a little handholding.

Agents who represent one side or the other are often called on to be part therapist, part ambassador, part spokesperson and part legal expert, says Florida broker Raquel Ramirez of Featured Properties International, a specialist in these situations.

"Psychology is a big part of this. Knowledge of the legal process is, too," explains Ramirez. And when there are kids and/or pets involved, or in cases of domestic abuse, "those transactions call for more awareness and finesse," she says.

"When children are involved, agents should work towards providing a sense of safety and familiarity. You don't want to add to the trauma children already feel," says Ramirez.

One thing to consider: You probably won't want a lockbox on your doorknob. It's always best that your agent is present for all showings, whether a divorce is involved or not. But with a lockbox -- even a certified electronic model provided by the local Realtors association -- agents and their clients lose some control over who visits. Someone you don't want in the house could send a "close friend" to the place, posing as a potential buyer.

Ramirez is a Certified Divorce Specialist with the National Association of Divorce Professionals, a multidisciplinary group that includes legal, financial and mental health professionals, as well as realty pros. While NADP is not affiliated with the National Association of Realtors, the group offers classes that are accepted as continuing education credits for NAR members in some states.

An agent should not try to be a therapist or financial advisor, says Liz Becker, NADP's founder and president. But they should know who their clients' other professionals are, and at what stage in the process their clients should be talking to them.

"You can't change the (divorce) laws," Becker says, "but you can change the experience."

According to Becker, who says she has first-hand experience with this situation, many divorcing couples get stuck, unable to make decisions about what to do with the house. That's often because one person or the other is clinging to the idea of the family home. But at that point, Becker points out, "it's no longer a home, it's a house -- a commodity to be split, just like a bank account and other assets."

But at the same time, when children are involved, it's usually best to keep family photos and mementos in place and maintain as much normalcy as possible until the day the house actually changes hands. Consequently, agents who recommend staging the property to appeal to the widest possible pool of buyers could be doing their divorcing clients a disservice.

Selling a "divorce house" can go sideways in any number of ways. Here are a few common problems:

-- Sabotage can be a big issue, says Ramirez. Say one spouse refuses to sign certain papers or allow a home inspector to examine the place, or the other spouse fails to show up at closing. Sabotage isn't always intentional, but if it is, a lawsuit could result.

To avoid such problems, it's important to keep the lines of communication open so that contractual obligations can be met without delay.

-- The person who is making the mortgage payments until the house is sold has a major responsibility. If he or she fails to stay current, it could sink the sale. The same goes for homeowners' association dues, utility payments and other bills.

"In the best-case scenario, it'll simply result in accrued interest and penalties, which will hurt their bottom line," says Ramirez. "In the worst case, it could result in foreclosure. Failed payments also hurt their credit scores, which could hinder the process of purchasing a new property or even renting."

-- How well the house is maintained can mean the difference between receiving full price or taking a big hit after the property has been sitting on the market for too long.

"While this may seem like a simple thing that is relevant to all transactions, it's quite different when you're working with parties who are not on the same page," Ramirez explains. "These things should be addressed early on to avoid deferred maintenance, additional costs, further disputes and missed opportunities."

-- Planning the exit strategy often requires careful coordination. It involves ensuring the soon-to-be ex-spouses have places to go and that they're on track with the schedule. Here, the marital settlement agreement should be as specific as possible, addressing such matters as maintenance costs, listing dates and disbursement instructions.

Next week: Tales from the trenches.

With the end of the year rapidly approaching, it's time to catch up on a few of the hottest topics this column covered since the first of the year:

-- In April, we wrote about some jurisdictions that confiscated all the equity owners have in their homes to satisfy property tax liens that were well below what their homes were actually worth. At least 12 states allow what the Pacific Legal Foundation labeled "legal tax lien thievery."

Actually, make that 11 states. In October, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that Michigan violated the constitution when it took Tawanda Hall's house to satisfy her unpaid tax debt.

With combined interest and fees, the state was owed $22,262, which it had every right to collect. But the nursing assistant's house was worth $300,000 when the state took it. And she never saw a penny of the difference.

Judge Raymond Michael Kethledge would have none of it. "The Michigan statute is not only self-dealing, it is also an aberration from some 300 years of decisions by English and American courts," he wrote. "The government may not decline to recognize long-established interests in property as a device to take them."

Now Pacific Legal, which represented Hall, is continuing its battle elsewhere. "Our fight isn't over," said senior attorney Christina Martin. "We will continue to advocate for people like Tawanda until home equity theft is rejected across this country."

-- In a July Housing Scene column, I took apart an outfit called Home Title Lock for charging homeowners for "monitoring" their titles -- which owners could do themselves, often for free -- and for exaggerating the breadth of the crime.

Not that title theft doesn't happen. It does, and in a few spots, it is rampant. As a first step toward stopping the crime, two Democratic lawmakers -- Reps. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri and Dwight Evans of Pennsylvania -- dropped a bill that would establish the first federal definition of deed fraud, as well as sentence those who commit it.

The Good DEED Act (for Good Documentation and Enforcement of Estate Deeds) also would establish a $10 million annual fund to assist states in the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of title theft. Any jurisdiction receiving funds would be required to fingerprint, photograph and video anyone filing a deed.

-- In January, I covered Uncle Sam's efforts to end money laundering through real estate. Now, the government is once again expanding the rules that require title companies to identify individuals who purchase residential real estate for cash through shell companies when the deal exceeds $300,000.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, has now renewed the program and added the counties encompassing Houston and Laredo, Texas, to the list of 20 other jurisdictions where title agents must comply.

The other places include the counties within these metropolitan areas: Boston, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Honolulu, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle and the District of Columbia. Also included are the city and county of Baltimore; Fairfield County, Connecticut; and the Hawaiian islands of Maui, Hawaii and Kauai.

According to FinCEN, the program has provided "valuable data" on the purchase of residential real estate by persons possibly involved in various illicit enterprises.

-- Most recently, I wrote about MV Realty, which is luring homeowners into 40-year listing contracts by offering them a small stipend in cash. In October, I reported that the Florida firm is paying up to $5,000, based on the value of the house, to owners who sign a four-decade listing agreement that most don't realize will be recorded as a lien against the property.

Now, regulators in North Carolina, as well as the state real estate commission, are investigating the company to discern whether the agreements constitute predatory lending. Other state attorneys general are also said to be looking into the firm.

Meanwhile, a Maryland homeowner whose wife was cold-called by MV Realty -- despite the company's claims that it doesn't contact anyone who doesn't reach out first -- and his attorney have succeeded in convincing the company to release its lien on the property. The homeowner reached out to this column.

The man and his family had just moved into their new house when his wife was offered $1,500 to sign a listing agreement. She agreed, but he didn't know about it until a notary showed up at the door to collect their signatures. He said thanks, but no thanks.

"We had just moved in, so we had no need for an agent," he told me on the condition that his name not be used.

At the same time, Sherryll Martens Dunaj, an attorney with Simon, Schindler and Sandberg in Miami, believes she's the first to challenge MV Realty on legal grounds and win. Her clients, the heirs of the homeowner, were trying to sell his residence after he had died.

Dunaj said she had another client who decided not to challenge his contract with MV because it was cheaper to pay the company's commission than to incur the legal costs of going to court.

The Maryland man agreed to speak with me because he feared people who signed up with MV "could lose their houses."

And lawyer Dunaj believes the company is "laying in wait" for people who violate their agreements by selling their homes using other agents.

"These are very bad people," she said.