The lessons unilateral divorce teaches children

Submitted by rlaspari on Sun, 2010-12-26 07:41

I was surprised to see a good article article about some of the bad lessons unilateral (I mean, "no-fault") divorce teaches children written by a woman. However, if in college educated households 90% of all divorces are initiated by women, that means there are still 10% of them where the woman did not initiate. I guess the author is one of those 10%. Regardless, it's refreshing to see an article that examines the harm no-fault divorce is causing and why it needs to be reformed.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

My thoughts on divorce are to give litigants 3 options:"

Allow unilalteral divorce, but the party seeking is not entitled to the children and to only 20% of marital property. They will also be expected to pay child support and alimony, depending on the situation.

Allow bilateral divorce, to be granted when the two parties reach agreements about division of property and care of children.

Allow fault-based divorce, in which the requesting party seeks to prove fault on the part of the other. Jury trials would be permitted. Both parties can deny the fault and present evidence against the other. The judge/jury would decide the division of property and placement of children, depending on the outcome of the trial. The burden of proof is on the person seeking the divorce, not the party opposing the divorce.

The current unilateral divorce, with mom usually getting all the goodies, encourages divorce, the destruction of marriage, and absent fathers.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by el cid on Mon, 2010-12-27 16:35

A modest proposal on marriage and divorce:

In my world of the future, ending a marriage would involve the state only if each person had entered the marriage as part of a legal contract. The state would have the authority to enforce the marriage contract just as it would any other legal agreement. Marriage not entered into as a legal contract, from a state perspective would simply be a personal agreement between 2 individuals.

There would be no state-mandated contents of the contract except to require 1) an agreement on child custody if the contract expires without renewal, 2) division of assets if the contract expires without renewal, and 3) what occurs if one of the parties is convicted of a felony. Couples would be able to customize their contract to suit their situation and desires. Contracts would not necessarily be open-ended. For example, a 5 year contract would be renewed only with the agreement of both participants, possibly with modifications.

The contract would be legally enforceable! But - no contract, no legal involvement absent any criminal behavior.

Many would see this as a crazy idea. But is it any crazier than what we have now?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Arty on Wed, 2010-12-29 17:51

El cid, I think your proposal is well thought out. I have been in favor a system with a rebuttable presumption of custody for the repsondent in a divorce, but your proposal is more well detailed and explicit. The problem is there are not enough people willing to listen. It would be wonderful if we could make such a change to the divorce system in place, but no one will listen unless our voices get louder and much more numerous.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by rlaspari on Thu, 2010-12-30 10:16