Comments on: A Modest Proposal on Divorce

By: Sheila

Sheila — Sat, 20 Oct 2012 00:11:19 +0000

Since marriage is a contract, and the state’s role is to uphold contracts and punish those who default on them … how about the person who seeks the divorce (or commits crimes that make the other wish to divorce) loses all their joint property?

A little harsh maybe?

What the Catholic Church does works well: you can get divorced, but you can’t get remarried. Which is why Catholics (I mean serious ones, who don’t plan to break the Church’s law) don’t divorce except in pretty serious situations. On the other hand, this actually is civil law in the Philippines, and everyone just ignores it and move in with second “spouses” without telling anyone they’re not legally married.

However, I would NEVER suggest that, having lost one parent, a child should then have to lose the other. I can’t imagine how that would be in the best interest of the child. The person who wrote that clearly doesn’t know much about kids and their deep attachment to their parents. There are some situations where children have to be separated from their parents, but these are rare and they always do leave some scars.

By: Fred

Fred — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 23:27:24 +0000

Scotch Meg, Absolutely. It never occurred to me that anyone would interpret what I said to mean abusers, addicts, and adulterers could use their abuse, addiction, or adultery as excuses to abandon their family, but when I read your comment, I slapped my forehead and said, “D’uh.” I really need to be more clear sometimes.

By: scotch meg

scotch meg — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:21:56 +0000

Even in the case of the four “A”s, it should be only the innocent party – the one who didn’t commit adultery, didn’t abuse the spouse, doesn’t have an addiction, didn’t abandon the family – who can obtain a divorce. Sometimes spouses will not want to divorce even in these difficult circumstances, either because they hope guilty spouses will change, or because they calculate (often correctly) that they’ll be better off if they remain married.

By: Fred

Fred — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 21:26:35 +0000

I have to agree that de Bonald’s solution would never fly in these United States. But I do think that in cases where minor children are involved, divorce should simply not be allowed except for the four “A”s, adultery, abuse, addiction, or abandonment. And those should be pretty strictly defined.