Posted on 05/09/2002 5:34:29 AM PDT by Pern
Some want to put the "fault" back in "no-fault."
Others just want to "close the exit doors a little."
Though particulars vary, challenges to no-fault divorce are multiplying in state legislatures nationwide.
None have actually changed the no-fault divorce laws that have spread to every state since the 1970s - laws that allow one spouse to end a marriage without needing to accuse the other of evil, or "find fault."
But since the late 1990s, efforts have intensified to require such features as waiting periods and couple counseling, or even to eliminate no-fault divorces for families with young children.
"It could be called marriage advocacy, but probably it's more like divorce resistance," said Judy Parejko of Menomonie, Wis., author of "Stolen Vows: The Illusion of No-Fault Divorce."
Advocates say they want to protect children from the problems of divorce, and defend a husband's or wife's wish to attempt a reconciliation for reasons such as religion.
But some attorneys and counselors warn that resurrecting fault will just drive families back to the nastiness and deceit that tarred the old system. Besides, they say, most states were getting around fault requirements already, with some catch-all or de facto grounds such as "cruelty."
Also, family historian Stephanie Coontz of Olympia, Wash., said the divorce rate has dropped 25 percent since 1981. "So I think we are saving more potentially healthy marriages, and getting better at making a marriage less contentious when it does happen," she said.
All the proposals circulating in current legislatures would be more forceful than a recent wave of laws that encourage couples to take couple-education classes before marriage: for example, incentive plans such as Minnesota's, where a 12-hour prenuptial course shaves $50 off the cost of a marriage license.
New proposals include:
- Michigan: For divorcing couples with children still at home: one bill would require they make a "parenting plan"; another would require they attend classes about the effects of divorce on children. Under a third bill, those couples could get a no-fault divorce only when both want it; otherwise, one spouse must prove the divorce is in "the best interests of the children" or give up rights to most family assets.
- New Hampshire: A bill would have required mutual consent for a no-fault divorce, if the couple had children.
- Kansas: A bill would have allowed no-fault divorce only for parents with children at home, and only with mutual consent.
- Colorado: A bill would have required couples with children at home to wait a year and take a course on divorce's effects on children before they could divorce.
While all those failed, many get more votes each time they're re-introduced, advocates said.
"The most important thing is educating people about the possibility of saving their marriage," said John Crouch, a divorce attorney and founder of Americans for Divorce Reform, based in Arlington, Va. "But I think legislation restricting divorce somewhat is a necessary part of changing the culture of marriage and divorce."
But, if one wants out without having to prove the above situations, then they should be free to leave with what they can carry. They have no right to half, the children, etc... You want out, fine. Leave. But I'm keeping everything.
Sorry, I have to disagree. I had a no-fault divorce with my first wife, and we have a kid together. Just because the woman and I don't get along, doesn't mean that I'm not entitled to visitation/custody of the boy. I pay support like a good parent should.
If the spouse is requesting a divorce because of reasons such as spousal abuse, affairs, and other legitimate reasons for getting a divorce should clearly have the ability to fight for and get the kids.
But when a spouse decides to just cut and run to head for greener pastures, the spouse should not be able to pack the kids along.
My comments are directed at cases where one of the spouse just ups and leaves or just decides one day that they no longer want to be married. No grievance with the other spouse. There was no cheating, abuse, neglect, etc... They just decide they want out for no particular reason. I have seen it a couple times with family and friends.
It is cases like this that I feel the spouse who just up and quits should get jack squat.
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.