Conservatives push for end of "no fault" divorce

[22lcidw]

Yes it is the states business if an action can cause physical harm to a child.

But the concept of “stay married for the sake of the children” does not work.
Every child deserves to live in a happy household where the parents love each other
But it doesn’t always work like that and can’t be enforced by the state.

Kids in a household where the parents hate each other and are constantly fighting are not better off

Changes are needed in the divorce laws for the 2020's. The laws made from many decades ago are archaic for the ways of living we have today. Some years ago, I read that the Millennial generation males at 50% will never consider getting married. If there is any unfairness in divorce it has to be fairer. In divorces someone may suffer, or all may suffer in comforts of life.

 

[hadit]

Can we force someone who doesn't want to stay married to stay married? That is not america. The answer is a pre nup both parties sign. It would dictate divorce settlements should the marriage end.

The intention is not to force people to stay married if they truly want to divorce. The intention is to raise the bar a little bit, especially when children are involved. Basically, we're saying that when you have children, you should think of their welfare in addition to your own. You're no longer free to indulge just your own wants.

 

[ThisIsMe]

True
Some are just loveless marriages where parents tolerate the existence of each other

Still not worthy of continuing

But, for the sake of the child..isn’t it? Sure, the marriage may be loveless, but both of the parents can love and care for the child, which is good for them.

As far as the parents go, is it fair for one person to be “stuck” in a relationship, compared to the other person (usually the man) to end up having to lose his house, half of his possessions, alimony payments and child support for the next decade or two?

Works out great for the woman, not so much for the man.

Maybe if the courts change their position and start awarding the kids, the house, alimony and child support to the man, then maybe it would be fair. I mean, this is the idea of equality right?

Maybe, cases of abuse aside, the person who decides they are just tired of being married, should be the one to foot the expenses. This means if it’s the woman, she should be on the hook for all those bills?

 

[hadit]

Staying in a loveless marriage for the sake of the kids is the worst thing you can do for the kids

That's one extreme. The other, equally damaging to kids, is destroying a family because of pure selfishness and lack of concern for the kids. We feel that we've gone too far in the one direction and want to pull back a bit.

 

[hadit]

Yes it is the states business if an action can cause physical harm to a child.

But the concept of “stay married for the sake of the children” does not work.
Every child deserves to live in a happy household where the parents love each other
But it doesn’t always work like that and can’t be enforced by the state.

Kids in a household where the parents hate each other and are constantly fighting are not better off

As I've already stated, that's one extreme and the other is equally damaging to kids, when one or both parents split the family up for no better reason than they care more about themselves than the kids.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

That's one extreme. The other, equally damaging to kids, is destroying a family because of pure selfishness and lack of concern for the kids. We feel that we've gone too far in the one direction and want to pull back a bit.

Do you think someone that is that selfish and with a lack of concern is going to be a good parent if forced to stay in a marriage?

 

[Lesh]

The intention is not to force people to stay married if they truly want to divorce. The intention is to raise the bar a little bit, especially when children are involved. Basically, we're saying that when you have children, you should think of their welfare in addition to your own. You're no longer free to indulge just your own wants.

Regardless of the “intention”.

The effect is to FORCE people to remain married who do not want to be married

 

[hadit]

Do you think someone that is that selfish and with a lack of concern is going to be a good parent if forced to stay in a marriage?

Let's do away with the term "forced to stay in a marriage", because that's deliberately inflammatory and creates a false impression. No one is saying that. What we ARE saying is it should not be trivial to divorce, especially if kids are involved. If a parent is literally so selfish that they would destroy an okay family for no good reason, that parent should pay a price for doing it, normally with dollar signs and access to the children attached. For example, if you want out and there's no abuse or intolerable situations, you leave, your spouse gets the kids, and you pay child support and alimony. You should not simply be able to force your spouse to leave AND force them to pay you for the privilege.

 

[Rogue AI]

Reminds me of the 1960s before Divorce Laws became more lax.

Women had no option but to stay in an abusive marriage. Jobs for women were scarce and low paying. A divorced woman had no option but to stick it out.

Alimony is usually granted when there are children involved

Except this isn't the 60's. You folks love to play Little House on the Prairie while ignoring the vast number of resources now available that weren't available then. Not to mention the number of working women these days compared to then.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Regardless of the “intention”.

The effect is to FORCE people to remain married who do not want to be married

No. The bitches can GTFO but shouldn't get a financial REWARD destroying the men's lives!!!!

FTR: I only speak of these things through observation. I've never married (thank GOD).

 

[Lesh]

Except this isn't the 60's. You folks love to play Little House on the Prairie while ignoring the vast number of resources now available that weren't available then. Not to mention the number of working women these days compared to then.

You folks certainly seem to want to bring us back to the 60s… actually the 50s

 

[Lesh]

No. The bitches can GTFO but shouldn't get a financial REWARD destroying the men's lives!!!!

FTR: I only speak of these things through observation. I've never married (thank GOD).

Yeah. We need to listen to an incel who couldn’t find a woman in a whore House

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Conservative US lawmakers are pushing for an end to no-fault divorce

Republicans in Louisiana, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas have discussed eliminating or restricting such cases

www.theguardian.com

This seems a gift to domestic abusers. I can only see it as a desire to take society back to a pre civilised age.
Message to failed husbands and wives. Once its over its over. You waste your time trying to turn the tide.

They imagine a return to a strict patriarchy.
They unfortunately don’t hold women in enough regard to realize the enormous power women now hold and that they will not abide a return to servility. I’m not sure how these men would force everyone else to abide without significant violence.

 

[hadit]

Regardless of the “intention”.

The effect is to FORCE people to remain married who do not want to be married

No, it is to assign a price to get divorced. If you are willing to destroy a family in which there is no abuse or intolerable living situations, you should pay a price. You should not, for example, be able to force your spouse to leave the house and force them to pay child support and alimony while you move a boyfriend/girlfriend into your bedroom. The partner who initiates the divorce should pay a higher price if the other partner does not want it (again, assuming no abuse is going on. That's a different story altogether).

IOW, how badly do you want out? If you're merely annoyed at your partner, your kids should not suffer the disintegration of their family just so you can jump to where you think the grass is greener (not realizing that it's greener because a septic tank is right underneath it) and you force your spouse who doesn't want to split up to pay for it all. If you want out, be prepared to pay a price.

 

[Lesh]

No, it is to assign a price to get divorced. If you are willing to destroy a family in which there is no abuse or intolerable living situations, you should pay a price. You should not, for example, be able to force your spouse to leave the house and force them to pay child support and alimony while you move a boyfriend/girlfriend into your bedroom. The partner who initiates the divorce should pay a higher price if the other partner does not want it (again, assuming no abuse is going on. That's a different story altogether).

IOW, how badly do you want out? If you're merely annoyed at your partner, your kids should not suffer the disintegration of their family just so you can jump to where you think the grass is greener (not realizing that it's greener because a septic tank is right underneath it) and you force your spouse who doesn't want to split up to pay for it all. If you want out, be prepared to pay a price.

So if a woman is stuck in a loveless marriage or one with abuse or alcoholism… she should pay a price to get out of it?

Wonderful

 

[hadit]

They imagine a return to a strict patriarchy.
They unfortunately don’t hold women in enough regard to realize the enormous power women now hold and that they will not abide a return to servility. I’m not sure how these men would force everyone else to abide without significant violence.

Total bull. You don't know real people. This is just advocating true equality. What need does the family court system have to automatically award a wife in a divorce custody of the kids and alimony? She can work any job she wants and get paid very well. If she wants out, let her foot the bill. That's equality, but is it what you really want?

 

[hadit]

So if a woman is stuck in a loveless marriage or one with abuse or alcoholism… she should pay a price to get out of it?

Wonderful

Dude, you are literally NOT reading what I write. Go back and read it again. In case you're incapable or refuse to acknowledge you did that, here:
"(again, assuming no abuse is going on. That's a different story altogether)."

 

[Rogue AI]

You folks certainly seem to want to bring us back to the 60s… actually the 50s

Baseless nonsense, although expected from you.

 

[struth]

Conservative US lawmakers are pushing for an end to no-fault divorce

Republicans in Louisiana, Oklahoma, Nebraska and Texas have discussed eliminating or restricting such cases

www.theguardian.com

This seems a gift to domestic abusers. I can only see it as a desire to take society back to a pre civilised age.
Message to failed husbands and wives. Once its over its over. You waste your time trying to turn the tide.

who are these....Some prominent conservative lawmakers and commentators are advocating for ending no-fault divorce, laws

folks?

 

[Blaster]

To say that divorce is not the fault of either spouse is ridiculous.