SOCIETY
For the kids' sake
Behind new moves to repeal 'no-fault' divorce laws -- the reality that breaking
up is hardest on the kids
By Maria Ruiz Scaperlanda
Divorce is a painful and devastating ordeal for the spouses. But in the
majority of cases, minor children are involved, too, multiplying the pain.
But while everyone agrees that breaking up is hard to do, there is no consensus
on what to do about it. What is agreed is that there is a problem in divorce,
American-style.
In the United States, divorce rates -- already double the rate of any other
Western country -- doubled again from 1965 to 1985. While the rate has leveled
off since 1985, it is still estimated that 40 percent of all marriages will
end in divorce.
Proposed legislation in Michigan leads what appears to be a renewed interest
across the country to rewrite the "no-fault" divorce laws currently
on the books. Similar proposals are under review in Iowa and Illinois, and
legislators are talking about toughening divorce laws in Idaho, Georgia
and Pennsylvania.
Before 1969, spouses who wanted out of their marriage had to demonstrate
their partner's emotional or physical cruelty, adultery, drunkenness or
desertion.
But all that changed when then-Gov. Ronald Reagan of California signed an
unprecedented divorce law that became popularly referred to as "no-fault"
divorce. The law allowed couples in contested divorces to split up without
offering any reasons.
Within five years, 45 states had followed California's lead and had eased
restrictions on divorce. Today, all 50 states have no-fault-type laws on
the books.
With either spouse able to cancel a marriage at any time for any reason,
the marriage contract is easier to break than one involving a home, a car
or a job.
Guilt-free
While no-fault laws cannot solely be blamed for skyrocketing divorce rates,
Harvard Law School Professor Mary Ann Glendon argues that current divorce
laws feed a casual attitude toward divorce.
Glendon, 56, author of "Abortion and Divorce in Western Law" (Harvard
University Press, 1987), is a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social
Sciences and was the head of the Vatican's delegation to a United Nations
conference on women held in Beijing last September.
"When that term -- no-fault -- came into use in the 1960s, it was just
around the same time that the psychotherapy world was telling people that
they shouldn't feel guilty about anything," Glendon told Our Sunday
Visitor.
"The no-fault movement played into a general cultural climate of irresponsibility.
People started getting the idea that nobody was responsible for divorce
and nobody was responsible for what happened after divorce."
Glendon believes that it is unfortunate that the term "no-fault,"
borrowed from no-fault auto-insurance law, ever became associated with divorce.
While changes in divorce law succeeded in taking the courts out of the business
of finding fault, she added, it also affected people's attitudes about the
consequences of divorce.
The proposal being considered in the Michigan legislature would change that.
The bill, revised after a series of hearings, is part of a package that
will require counseling before marriage and divorce, alimony schedules for
people married more than 10 years, and parenting plans in divorce. If both
partners agree to a divorce, the no-fault system would still apply, though
consenting spouses with children would have to go through counseling.
The Michigan proposal would also provide a financial incentive for marriage
partners to go through a counseling session before tying the knot. A marriage
license for those who get counseling would cost $20, for others $100. The
measure would also mandate a 30-day waiting period before marriage.
If the Michigan proposal becomes law, a spouse seeking divorce from a partner
who objected would have to obtain counseling and prove either adultery,
physical incompetence, three years of imprisonment, two years of desertion,
drug or alcohol abuse, "significant or repetitive physical abuse"
or "significant and repetitive mental abuse" of spouse or children.
Opponents of changes in current divorce law argue that it will create a
return to courtroom parody, deserted families, invasion of privacy and more
abuse of women and children.
But proponents point to the fact that domestic violence has risen steadily
despite no-fault divorce and tougher laws against abuse. And even in families
without abuse who split up, children suffer a devastating financial impact.
According to the Census Bureau, the median income for a married couple with
children in 1994 was $47,244; for a household headed by a single mother
it was $14,902. Experts say households with children suffer, on average,
a 30 percent drop in income after divorce.
Studies also contend that children of divorce have a two to three times
greater risk of dropping out of high school, becoming delinquents, having
out-of-wedlock children or getting divorced themselves.
Glendon advocates changes in divorce law that address the economic consequences
of divorce. She supports a "children-first" principle that gives
priority to making sure that the custodial household -- where the children
are primarily being raised -- is on sound financial footing. In 9 out of
10 cases, women have the responsibility for child care after divorce.
Studies show that the first year after divorce, men's standard of living
rises 42 percent, while that of women and their children drops 73 percent.
"If those statistics were the other way around we would see less divorce,"
Glendon said. "My theory is that if you really made the cost of divorce
fall evenly on men and women then the divorce rate will go down."
Ultimately, however, Glendon questions whether a law can change the way
society thinks about divorce. "I would put more faith in things that
strengthen marriage," she said. "Divorce is the death certificate
for a relationship that has broken down. What we really have to get at if
we want to address this problem is the causes of marriage breakdown."
Keith and Tammy Kaiser agree.
The Kaisers, co-authors of " Incredible Gift: the Truth About Love
and Sex" (Our Sunday Visitor, $8.95), want to begin by educating teenagers
and couples in marriage-preparation courses.
Keith, who said he still carries scars from his own parents' divorce, believes
that if marriage is, as Catholics teach, a sacrament, then "God is
the source, the power, the strength that's going to keep that bond together
when things get tough."
Perspective
While laws are helpful in how they set the parameters, Kaiser said, the
answer to the high divorce rate is not in the laws but in a change of perspective
on marriage.
He stresses the need to emphasize the permanence of the bond of marriage.
"It needs to be understood," Kaiser said. "It needs to be
proclaimed."
Acknowledging that in his nine years of marriage life has not always been
picture-perfect, Kaiser added, "We know the strength for our marriage
is God's love, and we know that God and His grace will be able to take us
through. We need to communicate that message better in the Church."
It is normal for couples to have a downtime in their marriage, Kaiser remarked.
And for those struggling through separation, he added, "I would hold
out the hope for them of God's healing grace, the hope that God can bring
you through it -- that He will bring you through it if you rely on Him."
Perhaps the most unpopular solution to unraveling the causes of divorce
in our culture lies at the heart of the matter.
As Glendon concluded, "Like so many of our problems, the answers are
going to be in the culture, and in the minds and hearts of individual men
and women."
Scaperlanda writes from Norman, Okla.