Burnt Orange Report

Uh, wait a minute, are you advocating legislating obstacles to divorce?

This comment is long and I apologize, but my feelings on this issue are very strong. No-fault divorce must be protected for these reasons, which I have never seen in any discussion of the state of marriage:

Human beings are not omniscient, omnipotent or
infallible. We can not see or predict the future, we are not capable of magic and miracles to 'fix' any problem and we make mistakes. Several months or years of happiness and compatibility with a partner does not predict, and certainly can not guarantee, a lifetime of the same.

Also, couples decide to marry for a wide variety of reasons that do not necessarily include affection or a sincere desire to share a life.

Lastly, a purely pragmatic and compassionate reason: no-fault divorce is the only means by which a couple who prefers to keep the circumstances of their divorce private may do so. This is especially important in cases where the cause of the divorce may cause pain and significant difficulty to children.

I am the recipient of a no-fault divorce. We were happy for the first few years but we grew and changed, as humans necessarily do. And we discovered that our desires and needs for life were wholly conflicting. For this reason, counseling was ineffective. Events and circumstances arose because of this incompatibility which would have allowed us a divorce under any legal code, however, we had no desire to make these painful and difficult episodes a matter of public display or record. We also had no wish to relive or expand on them merely for the purpose of satisfying the puritanical voyeuristic caprices of nameless, faceless lawmakers pandering for a 'family-friendly' vote.

If you wish to protect marriage then I would suggest greater access to addiction counseling, greater support and protection for abused spouses and children, and much greater support for families living in poverty. I would also suggest wider, affordable, non-stigmatized access to the full spectrum of family-planning methods.

I also believe that funds earmarked for "protecting the family" would be best spent on PRE-marital counseling and PRE-parenting classes, to reduce the number of couples marrying and becoming parents when they are not ready or capable of doing so. Counseling would help prepare people for marriage and parenthood, but would also provide an opportunity for people to make informed decisions that perhaps they are not ready for these commitments, and that it is acceptable to resist societal pressure to enter them.