Dads Against the Divorce IndustryDA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS. DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes. |
|
by Cathy Young
A few years ago, as the no-fault divorce debate was beginning to
brew, Reason magazine ran an article suggesting a libertarian
solution: allow different types of marriages. People who want the
option of easy divorce could still have it. Others, who hold a more
traditional view and do not want enter a union that can be easily
dissolved, could have the law solemnize their intentions.
I doubt that Tony Perkins, the Republican legislator
who sponsored Louisiana's "covenant marriage" law, is a libertarian.
But the principle is the same as in the Reason proposal: allowing
people to choose between standard marriage and a more binding kind.
In a "covenant marriage," you cannot get a divorce without marital
counseling and without proof of serious wrongs by your spouse -
adultery, physical abuse, abandonment of at least a year or
imprisonment for a felony - or a two-year separation.
Starting Aug. 15, every couple getting a marriage
license in Louisiana is offered this option; couples already married
can renew their vows in a covenant marriage. A similar law is being
considered in Ohio.
This simple idea has a lot of people upset. Terry
O'Neill, president of the Louisiana chapter of the National
Organization for Women, says the law will hurt women (while Rep.
Perkins insists it will protect wives). Lynne Gold-Bikin of the
American Bar Association sees an insidious attempt to do away with
no-fault divorce by stealth, against the wishes of the people -
though Americans who want quick divorces to remain available can
simply decline the covenant marriage option. Nadine Strossen of the
American Civil Liberties Union deplores the government forcing
people to stay together.
But does the law really force anyone to do anything?
Yes, critics say: By setting up one form of wedlock as Marriage Lite
and the other as Marriage Premium, the state will, as Gold-Bikin put
it, "embarrass" couples into choosing the latter. No one will dare
tell a future mate, "I love you, honey, but I want an easy way out."
(As usual, most commentators seem to assume that the man would want
to say it - though women today take a more positive view of divorce
than men, and initiate most divorces.)
Ironically, this criticism seems to grant no-fault
divorce opponents their main point: a marriage that is more
difficult to end is more "real."
On Crossfire, Strossen worried about
"governmental pressure for people to make uninformed, unknowing
decisions to enter into marriage relationships which are much harder
to get out of when they don't know the consequences." But that's
simply inaccurate: The law requires couples opting for the covenant
marriage to get premarital counseling in which the implications of
the step they are taking will be fully explained.
In fact, the first day that covenant marriage was
available, it found no takers. Most people said they were not
planning to get divorced but found the premarital counseling to be
too much of a hassle. So far, the intimidation doesn't seem to be
working - though if covenant marriage catches on in a big way, men
and women who opt for standard marriage may feel somewhat defensive.
Which is still not the same as being forced.
Others have argued that the requirements of
pre-divorce counseling and a waiting period will endanger battered
wives, who need a quick, sometimes secret exit. That's another red
herring: while it may take longer for a divorce to be formalized,
the law certainly won't stop either spouse from leaving the home.
It is also worth noting that where there is no clear
fault but the marital bond has irretrievably broken down, the
covenant marriage law is hardly draconian: a two-year separation is
all it takes for the marriage to end.
Opponents of tougher divorce laws usually protest
that, of course, they want marriages to be stronger. But when a law
that seeks to build stronger marriages while preserving choice
causes all this alarm, one begins to wonder if they are sincere.
Cathy Young is vice-president of the Women's Freedom Network.
You may write her at The News, Editorial Page, 615 W. Lafayette
Blvd., Detroit, Mich. 48226. |
Dads Against the Divorce Industry