Posted on 06/12/2014 10:24:43 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
OKLAHOMA CITY —Oklahomans filing for divorce will now have to go through an extra step if they have kids.
Gov. Mary Fallin signed a bill last week that requires married couples who have children younger than 18 to pay for and attend classes before they can split.
Those classes will cost anywhere between $15 and $60 and will teach parents about the impact divorce will have on the kids.
Many Oklahoma residents have mixed feelings about the new law.
“I don’t think it’s a bad idea, but I just don’t agree with people have to go to classes,” Linda Fuller said.
“If I know we’re not in love anymore, I don’t feel like I should go to any class, just move on with our lives,” Davon Shepherd said.
The law goes into effect on Nov. 1.
You are correct about this statement. A government big enough to do good is a government big enough to perpetuate evil. The best choice is a government that can’t do much of either.
What are fudge blockers?
I think a lot of people in this thread are painting with too broad a brush. Sometimes divorce benefits the kids when one spouse goes off the deep end due to addiction or exceptionally poor behavior. In my case, my kids improved across the board when the x was finally kicked out of the house. The home calmed down, the behavior improved, the grades improved, the stress level plummeted. Not all of us divorce simply because we got tired of the other half.
I think if the state is going to require classes, it should require them before issuing a marriage license.
OK, I get it.
Even when there are measures that work and that benefit the State - we should avoid them.
I don’t agree. I guess that makes me a Nanny Stater, huh?
Wrong legislation. Should have just outlawed no-fault divorce.
I was divorced 2 years ago here in Ohio and had to take a 3 hour class on the effect of divorce on kids. No big deal...
[snicker]
Good one...
I would agree with you in principle; but what about women tethered to an alcoholic who is abusive to her and the children and uses all the family money for himself, even running up debts in her name? It's just not simple.
>>You can say that again. I know I’ve said this before, but I STILL can’t get over my mother saying, ‘Why don’t you want me to be happy?’ when I protested her divorcing my father. As if she was the only one whose feelings mattered.
And I don’t mean to implicate all divorcees by my comments, I just find that many times the kids, regardless of the conditions, want to have a “stable” family like everyone else. The biggest victim I see is girls that lose time with their fathers. It scars them mentally.
I want government small and frustrated with a lack of power and money. Safer for everyone. We have in our possession a Constitution that was written with that view in mind. The perceived need for intervention and good works has however vastly expanded the size, scope, power and expense of government. Now when evil people gain power they possess unfettered scope, power and money to work mischief.
Keep government small and we can all be a bit frustrated by the ineffectual government. But we can rest in our beds knowing that the government cannot perpetrate tyranny.
Well, it must not be too bad if she doesn’t want to walk away?
The object is to make it not easy, and with zero to gain from it.
PS...About that $10,000 marriage license, each has to pay half, and with their own money.
Or "War of the Roses."
With your 10k marriage license, a whole lot of people who have been married for 40 plus years would never have married. They would either walk away or shack up.
BTW who gets the money? The State? They would use the money to buy office furniture and cars. No thanks. That’s quite a transfer of wealth from the private sector to the public sector.
This one might be a good idea... nanny state or not. Too man people destroy their children in their desire to punish each other...
Not to long ago Oklahoma passed a law requiring a woman who wanted an abortion had to first look at an ultrasound of the fetus. The purpose, I assume, was so that the person wanting the abortion would know full well that their decision did not apply to themselves alone but also impacted another living human being. Is that a case of the nanny state interfering in our lives? Perhaps, but when children are involved then maybe the state should go the extra mile to protect them. So why should divorce be any different? Divorce doesn't just impact the parents. The kids are affected as well, and quite often suffer more than the parents. Why shouldn't the parents be forced to consider that before ending the marriage.
A compulsory class will fix that?
IMO, this is a stupid law. If the parents do not care enough about their children already, forcing them to pay for and attend these classes will do no good.
Many people seeking divorce don’t care enough about their children’s well being or they would not be looking to split in the first place.
“BTW who gets the money? The State? They would use the money to buy office furniture and cars. No thanks.”
The money goes to enforcing the law against shacking up.
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.