ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, February 14, 1996 TAG: 9602140050
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
FAMILY-VALUES upholders who are targeting "no-fault" divorce laws at least have turned to the right page of the hymnal.
Stable family life is, indeed, deteriorating at great cost to the nation. But the cause isn't gay rights or women's liberation, both convenient scapegoats. The tsunami pounding at this rock is the growing number of single-parent house-holds as a result both of out-of-wedlock births and divorce.
Unwed moms have been thoroughly excoriated by now, but parents who divorce? They populate the mainstream.
While individuals in either situation can and many do raise fine children, social critics rightly note the statistical increase in poverty and various social pathologies among children of divorce. Yet those who see the solution as a return to contested divorces - with their attendant character assassinations, child manipulations, lies and spies - are singing the wrong tune.
"No-fault divorce" may seem to imply that neither party carries any greater share of blame for the breakup of a marriage. That is, of course, often untrue. But the causes of a ruined marriage are often less than straightforward. And in cases where no children are involved, simple dissolution - with an effort to fairly distribute assets - is the rational course.
A divorce that involves children is far more complicated, and should be more complicated in the getting. Taking the "no-fault" out of divorce would accomplish that, but at great emotional cost to all, including the children. And issues of equity should bear more on the result than the causes of the breakup. More important than apportioning blame is for parents to consider consequences.
Marriage may end, but parenthood does not. The full realization of the financial and emotional impact of tearing a family apart might save some marriages. A proposal in Great Britain would require parents, after notifying a court of their intention to divorce, to spend at least nine months resolving the details, with their first obligation being to decide the future of their children.
That future might look brighter with both Mom and Dad in it, full-time. But not necessarily. And the British plan wouldn't work in abusive situations. Still, ways must be found to mediate differences and make plans - not to try to stop individuals from exercising their freedom, but to encourage them to take responsibilities seriously and to consider the consequences of their actions.
LENGTH: Medium: 52 linesby CNB