I decided to write my position paper on marriage. I am taking the position that the government should implement mandatory laws to help reduce the number of divorces in the USA. We are presently at a 50% divorce rate, with around 65% divorce rate for 2nd marriages, and 75% for 3rd marriages.
From my research, I've found that there has been success in countries that implement mandatory counseling prior to divorce and/or mandatory wait times for a divorce to be finalized.
I am proposing that the law requires counseling before marriage, and in the case of a divorce filing, counseling before divorce and a mandatory wait time. In today's society, there is an abundance of information for how to get married, how to have the best dress, the best flowers, and the best honeymoon. Unfortunately, there isn't much information on how to have the best marriage. If more focus went into preparing for marriage, perhaps we would have longer lasting marriages. Pre-marriage counseling has shown positive results in saving up to 30% of marriages.
It may not be the solution for every marriage, but if it can help reduce the number of divorces, it has served a purpose. Vegas is a prime example of how wrong our marriage system is. The fact you can meet someone in Vegas, and get married the same night creates an issue. If those couples were required to go through counseling prior to marriage, they would most likely not get married once they fully sobered up :)
The other side of the issue is when a marriage is tinkering on the edge of divorce. If anything, pre-divorce counseling can save a marriage, or it can better prepare a couple for the stress of divorce. Divorces are ugly and can cause a lot of discomfort and agony to both the couple, and any children. Counseling should be a part of the process. Ideally it would save the marriage, and if it can't, it will save the dignity of the relationship afteward. Also, mandatory wait times allow people to make sure they are making the right decision, and not a flippant one. In research studies, couples who report unhappiness tend to report happiness up to 5 years later. This shows that time helps resolve some issues. In countries that implement anywhere from 6 months to 5 year wait times, divorce rates can be seen as low as 0.2%.
There are many factors, and many objections - some of the ones I'll discuss are - who pays for the counseling? Should the government get involved in our personal business? What if the couple has been together a long time or been married before?
I'm still forming all my thoughts and opinions on this, but there seems to be some opposition to this idea from my friends and family. However, most either haven't been married, or have been divorced, so I'm not sure they're the best ones to have an opinion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, I've been married, and divorced, and although from a country where the government is involved at most levels of people's lives (healthcare, education, etc.), I would NOT want that.
ReplyDeleteI do agree on pre-marriage counseling and advising people that they should be in a relationship for 5 years before deciding to get married--or something along those lines. I think the solution lies in making people realize that it is not a decision to be made lightly, that being in love is never reason enough to get married, and that until you have gone through and survived a major crisis together you have no idea what your marriage will be like.
Unfortunately, society has idealized the idea of marriage, and convinced young girls (mostly) that it is just the normal course of things to find a man who will sweep you off your feet and that you will get married some time between 20 and 30 years of age, have babies and live happily ever after. Half the time, girls get blindsided by the idea of getting married just because they think there is something wrong with them if they don't find someone to marry them by a certain age. So they may settle without learning to recognize red flags or identify the important values that must be shared prior to making that commitment. Honestly, I am only half-joking when I tell my friends that the legal age to get married should be raised to 30.
But once people have made that private decision, advice is all they should receive. I don't believe the government should have the right to prevent people from getting divorced, even for a few months or years. What about battered women? Victims of verbal and psychological abuse? Alcoholic or drug-addicted spouses that refuse to get counseling or relapse systematically? I can tell you first-hand that there are situations that you just need to get out of immediately, *especially* if you have children. And that by the time people have reached the decision to get a divorce, things have usually been bad for a loooong time. Everyone knows that a divorce is a costly and painful process to go through. It is rarely a spur-of-the-moment decision.
Also, if there was an imposed delay on getting a divorce, don't you think there is a chance it would actually INCREASE the number or divorce petitions?
I mean, if someone knew that the day they find a definite, point-of-no-return reason to get divorced they will have to wait 2 years to get it done, they may consider not waiting for a horrible situation that they'll want to get out of immediately; they may want to bail at the first bump on the road so they only have another 6 months/2 years/5 years to put up with it and maybe change their mind, rather than wait and find out how bad it can get and then being stuck for another 6 months/2 years/5 years.
Just my 2 cents! =)
California actually has a 6 month requirement for a divorce to be finalized. You file the paperwork, and 6 months later you go back to confirm you want it to be finished. During those 6 months, most people live apart from each other and continue on in their life. The government putting a delay on divorce doesn't mean you're forced to continue on as a married couple socially. Many couples end up reconciling during those 6 months and never finish the divorce.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the input though, everyone views it differently based on their experience. I'm going off the statistics and success rates of countries/states/etc that have tried these, and see that it is actually beneficial.
I agree with Cecile, though my position has little to do with the success of your argument. You may want to address, however, as it's bound to be one of the major objections, the fact that such laws infringe on human rights.
ReplyDeleteI think discussing the romanticization of marriage in our culture would be a great opening for the paper -- after all, quite a few people get married who probably shouldn't because they find themselves being carried away by the romance, excitement, cultural approval, the material goods that often come with weddings.
My two cents -- just that. :)