Posted on 11/13/2007 7:08:30 AM PST by Responsibility2nd
A huge industry has developed that is making incredible amounts of money from the misery divorce inflicts on its victims. Judges, lawyers, counselors, child support enforcement employees, to name just a few, are making their livings (and often very good livings) by “working the system”. Even state governments are receiving dollars from the federal government for collecting more and more child support from the NCP’s. It is easy to see that if the number of divorces ever drops there will be many that will have to turn elsewhere for their livelihood.
These industries do what ever is needed to perpetuate and insure continued growth (they don’t care about anything but the money). In the case of the “Divorce Industry” this has been accomplished by providing one class of person with a distinct advantage in the litigation.
Women and mothers are led to believe that they can rely on the fact that they will almost always receive custody of their minor children and support from the husband and father. (There are exceptions, the courts can’t be too obvious.)
This is why women file about 80% of divorces. Most men don’t file for divorce because they don’t want to risk losing their children. If women stood the same chance of losing their children as a man, does anyone really think that there would be anywhere near the same number of divorces? I don’t think so!
Even lawyers who claim to represent the man are aware of how the system works. This is why so many lawyers will tell the man one thing, all the time knowing that the results will be different. Don’t get me wrong, there are good lawyers out there (I’m still looking for one), but too many will claim to represent the man while, in actuality, working to perpetuate the system. In other words, many lawyers may represent the man but don’t really want him to win. But they still expect to be paid for helping him lose. Too many fathers winning custody would cause mothers to think twice about filing for divorce, and the number of divorces to drop.
Is there an answer? Sure there is. Make men and women responsible for the covenants they make at the time they marry. Since filing for divorce is itself a violation of the marriage covenant (till death do us part), the courts should adopt the attitude that the defendant, man or woman, will be held harmless until the plaintiff provides enough valid evidence to prove that the defendant has injured the marriage beyond repair, or is not fit to be a parent. Holding the defendant harmless means that the defendant will be awarded custody of the minor children and the assets of the marriage unless there is evidence that the court should rule otherwise. If one person gets bored with the other and wants out - let him/her go. But don’t allow one parent to interfere with the child’s relationship with the other parent for his/her own selfish reasons.
Many are going to disagree with this idea, but I am not trying to make divorce fairer. That will NEVER happen. Children need and deserve to live with two loving parents who respect their marriage vows, not with one parent while seeing the other parent on some kind of court ordered schedule. If the courts were really concerned about the “best interests of the child”, they would try to discourage divorce. If divorce can not be avoided, the courts should find out why and use that as a MAJOR part of the decision about child custody.
If one parent has a “change of heart” or no longer loves the other or no longer wants the other around, that should be the parent to leave. They would be interfering with their own relationship with the children, not that of the
I totally agree.
If divorce was fairer, it would be easier. And easy divorces are why our children are living with the HORRIBLE after effects of so many millions of broken homes.
Putting an end to no fault divorces should happen IMMEDIATELY.
BTTT
Some people get married for all the wrong reasons. Some get married on the rebound, while others get married as an act of spite or rebellion against other folks. Some get married for the other person’s cash, and still others like getting married so that they can dominate, manipulate and control another human being like some sort of puppet.
The point is that a person should truly love and cherish the one he or she will marry, and the person should be the best friend as well the lover. Questions should be asked; “do I accept this person the way they are,” and “does this person behave like someone ready for marriage?”
Two people getting married should be open, honest and fair with each other, and they should date for at least a couple of years to get to know each other.
There should be no signs of tyranny or oppression, nor should there be any demeaning treatment.
Pre-marriage counseling is also a must, as it gives a third, unbiased person an honest assessment of whether or not a marriage will work out.
And you consider that better than two weeks in an office and two weeks laid-off? Or zero weeks in office? Children have needs from both parents. Shared parenting, although not ideal, is better than mis-parenting or no parenting, particularly when the father's role is at issue.
Forget about the divorce rate. The median length of a marriage is about 15 or so years - or just enough time for women to build up a profitable equity stake in the marital assets. You can say that marriages fail for a number of reasons, but the best predictor of a marriage failure is a woman's equity stake in the marital assets.
Marriage is a divinely established institution requiring respect for legitimate authority of that institution for enjoyment of its fruits.
The Law or guide to life as God provides it, gives considerable guidance on marriage. Those who fail to abide by it, aren’t breaking the law as much as His Law/His guidance breaks them and their failure remain with Him in Life.
Marriage is provided for believer and unbeliever alike, but the first solution to prevent a wrecked life is not to void that institution, nor to maintain the institution from outside in, but by first remaining in fellowship with God, daily growing in Him, so He may change our hearts from within.
Shall we assume "Marriage Savers" is a gay group?
Three years, fcol!!! Too early in the morning for this.
What good is it if a woman were to gain the whole world but lost her soul?
When my husband asked me to marry him, he told me that by doing so he was removing divorce as an option, never to be considered. When entering the marriage with that mindset, it did alter the way I looked at our commitment to each other. Especially given the fact that my father divorced once and my mother divorced twice.
I know the damage that divorce brings to a family. I lived it, through my parents’ divorce. I have never really recovered from their divorce.
Because of this, I don’t believe in divorce.
The odds are horrible. 50% end in failure and a good chunk of the rest are sickly. I know of two guys who remain married but do nothing but complain. Even the “happy” ones are far from complete bliss.
Sure, in theory marriage is a must, but modern culture and legal practicalities make it a suicide mission. And forget the law in divorce situations, the judges and lawyers will NOT make an even split of resources gained after tying the knot as hypothetically promised. Guys, you are targets to be screwed, realize that going in.
(Written by a non-divorced person)
what does that phrase mean, profitable equity stake in the marriage assets?
tia
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.