Divorce- no fault vs. whose fault?

[Ethel mermania]

If most Conservatives went on board with backing "at fault" divorce, where would this leave Donald Trump, the twice and soon possibly thrice divorced front runner for the party?

I'm fairly confident all of these Trump shenanigans happened in pre-'10 New York

Irreconcilable differences, was the reason for a one sided divorce in the day.

Isn't that the wording used in all American no-fault divorces with no option to change or explain the actual reasoning in legal documents, or am I mistaking? (The British wording is "irretrievable breakdown".)

I dunno. Divorce is state by state here so the laws are a little different In ny you can get either a no fault or a faulted divorce. I dont understand why.

[Ifreann]

I'm fairly confident all of these Trump shenanigans happened in pre-'10 New York


Isn't that the wording used in all American no-fault divorces with no option to change or explain the actual reasoning in legal documents, or am I mistaking? (The British wording is "irretrievable breakdown".)

I dunno. Divorce is state by state here so the laws are a little different In ny you can get either a no fault or a faulted divorce. I dont understand why.

I'd guess because the evolution of the law has been for marriage to be for life, to annulments being possible, to divorce being possible in limited circumstances, to divorce being generally possible. And laws have ontological inertia, they tend to stay in existence until some force acts on them to move them out of existence. So the laws around faulted divorce persist even though no fault is possible.

[Bombadil]

In the footage from June 2021, he tells her to “f–king watch it” and accuses her of refusing “to do wifely things” while telling her he doesn’t love her.

At the time, she was eight months pregnant with their twins.

Her family released a statement saying she had been hiding his “mentally and emotionally abusive behavior” from her friends and family.

Next up I assume he'll be against the idea that rape in marriage is a thing..

Why is it all these right-wing conservatives calling for the sanctity of marriage turn out to be shitbags either cheating on or abusing their partners.

[Cannot think of a name]

In the footage from June 2021, he tells her to “f–king watch it” and accuses her of refusing “to do wifely things” while telling her he doesn’t love her.

At the time, she was eight months pregnant with their twins.

Her family released a statement saying she had been hiding his “mentally and emotionally abusive behavior” from her friends and family.

Next up I assume he'll be against the idea that rape in marriage is a thing..

Why is it all these right-wing conservatives calling for the sanctity of marriage turn out to be shitbags either cheating on or abusing their partners.

Maybe to them 'sanctity of marriage' means 'no consequences for me' to them.

[Ifreann]

In the footage from June 2021, he tells her to “f–king watch it” and accuses her of refusing “to do wifely things” while telling her he doesn’t love her.

At the time, she was eight months pregnant with their twins.

Her family released a statement saying she had been hiding his “mentally and emotionally abusive behavior” from her friends and family.

Next up I assume he'll be against the idea that rape in marriage is a thing..

Why is it all these right-wing conservatives calling for the sanctity of marriage turn out to be shitbags either cheating on or abusing their partners.

Maybe to them 'sanctity of marriage' means 'no consequences for me' to them.

Just so. The marriage they want is not a partnership between equals, but the purchase of a domestic and sexual servant.

[Saiwana]

Why is it all these right-wing conservatives calling for the sanctity of marriage turn out to be shitbags either cheating on or abusing their partners.

In Steven Crowder's case, he likely just has too much narcissism at play, if it isn't other things as well. Which is why he wants to feel in control over everything in his life, even for stuff that normally is external to what he'd want, like what other people want or are doing. This usually can't be helped, which is at odds with what he wants to get the control he craves; which naturally will probably have him trend towards being abusive. His personality is flawed and he'd have to want to change if he were able to find the right help.

[Adamede]

Divorce MUST be harder to accomplish unless in cases of extreme harm

Why?

[Dazchan]

Divorce MUST be harder to accomplish unless in cases of extreme harm

In my case, there truly was no fault in the divorce. My ex and I just fell out of love with each other and we both wanted to move on. Why should we be forced to stay together and be miserable?

[Dtn]

There should be a kind of worksheet that fills out that divides shared resources evenly

lol

[Ifreann]

Divorce MUST be harder to accomplish unless in cases of extreme harm

In my case, there truly was no fault in the divorce. My ex and I just fell out of love with each other and we both wanted to move on. Why should we be forced to stay together and be miserable?

Because Jesus said so, obviously.

[Bombadil]

Divorce MUST be harder to accomplish unless in cases of extreme harm

In my case, there truly was no fault in the divorce. My ex and I just fell out of love with each other and we both wanted to move on. Why should we be forced to stay together and be miserable?

My friend has been going through a divorce for 6 years.. 6 fucking endless years of courts and legal fees because his wife doesn't want the divorce. It's got to the point, given a child is involved, that he cannot leave the country with his daughter, without both parents signing off, which she won't do.. so he's just stuck, unable to move on.

[Hoxie]

Marriage is the only contract where one party can unilaterally void the agreement with no cause. So until it is no longer a contract, and until alimony is non existent, No Fault divorce should not be permitted.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Sometimes the marriage just isn't working and people need a divorce.

If anything, making it harder to get married makes more sense than making it harder to get divorced. When you marry someone from another country and you apply for a visa to bring them into the country, there's a whole process designed to weed out people who aren't serious about their marriage, so people don't just abuse it as a way to get through immigration. It's probably too much bureaucracy to have such an extensive process for every marriage, but something in that direction makes more sense than ending no-fault divorce.

I've read that storing your gun at the opposite end of the house from your ammunition makes it less likely that you will shoot yourself, because the time it takes to walk from one of the house to the other is enough for some people to reconsider. Maybe some extra bureaucratic hurdles would have the same effect for people that are getting ready to marry the wrong person.

I'm not firmly committed to the idea, but I think if you want stronger better quality marriages, then some quality control going in will be more effective than just trapping people in a marriage that has already gone bad.

[Dazchan]

In my case, there truly was no fault in the divorce. My ex and I just fell out of love with each other and we both wanted to move on. Why should we be forced to stay together and be miserable?

My friend has been going through a divorce for 6 years.. 6 fucking endless years of courts and legal fees because his wife doesn't want the divorce. It's got to the point, given a child is involved, that he cannot leave the country with his daughter, without both parents signing off, which she won't do.. so he's just stuck, unable to move on.

That's awful and I hope your friend can get the divorce soon.

In my case, since it was (more or less) amicable, we were done in about six months. Would have been quicker, except lawyers.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Divorce MUST be harder to accomplish unless in cases of extreme harm

In my case, there truly was no fault in the divorce. My ex and I just fell out of love with each other and we both wanted to move on. Why should we be forced to stay together and be miserable?

I think it's a sign of maturity and fundamental decency when people can part ways amicably like this.

[Adamede]

Marriage is the only contract where one party can unilaterally void the agreement with no cause. So until it is no longer a contract, and until alimony is non existent, No Fault divorce should not be permitted.

Marriage isn’t a fucking business arrangement.

[DeMoNiC sAtAn]

Marriage is the only contract where one party can unilaterally void the agreement with no cause. So until it is no longer a contract, and until alimony is non existent, No Fault divorce should not be permitted.

Marriage isn’t a fucking business arrangement.

For you. For some people it is.

[Adamede]

Marriage isn’t a fucking business arrangement.

For you. For some people it is.

For medieval ritual Ty sure. This isnt the fucking Middle Ages.

[Awesomeland]

Divorce shouldn't be a thing. Until death do us part MEANS it, and the traditional way my people have done it is that the female kills and eats the male. Fortunately, I taste terrible, and will be dead soon, so the wife has little incentive to try.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Divorce shouldn't be a thing. Until death do us part MEANS it, and the traditional way my people have done it is that the female kills and eats the male.

I think your people have some different traditions from most other cultures.

[Kenmoria]

Marriage is the only contract where one party can unilaterally void the agreement with no cause. So until it is no longer a contract, and until alimony is non existent, No Fault divorce should not be permitted.

This simply isn’t true. There are many contracts that can be unilaterally ended. Take the Romanist contract of depositum, for example, which is a contract in which A gives B an item for safekeeping. At least classically, A can void the contract simply by retrieving the item from B. More generally, it is not uncommon for contracts of hire to feature a clause wherein the hiring party can, at any point, stop hiring, which ends the contract.

Not only does your point not work in contractual law, it wouldn’t work even if you were correct about the law of contract. Marriage is a very unusual contractual arrangement, so it would be entirely foreseeable that marriage could differ from the rest of contractual law and, indeed, it often does.

[Bombadil]

For you. For some people it is.

For medieval ritual Ty sure. This isnt the fucking Middle Ages.

My girlfriend wanted me to treat her like a princess, so I arranged for her to be married to a stranger to strengthen our alliance with Poland.

[Shinkutsuki]

Marriage isn’t a fucking business arrangement.

For you. For some people it is.

get the feeling that might be related to why some marriages are doomed from the start?

[Barfleur]

Ending no-fault divorce means that one spouse is required to remain part of an intimate arrangement against their will--how can that be a good thing for anyone involved? If one spouse wants a divorce, they've probably given up on "making it work," and so it's not like artificially forcing them to not separate will help either one. Especially when there are children involved, I could easily imagine that the spouses might be good parents individually, but when forced to live together and at each others' throats, would just expose the children to constant fighting, not to mention the possibility of violence. We just have to admit that not every two people do well together, and that in any case people change over time, meaning that two people who made a perfect pair at one stage in life might become incompatible after 10 or 15 years. No shame in that.

[Dtn]

For you. For some people it is.

get the feeling that might be related to why some marriages are doomed from the start?

Yes, couples who fail to realize there's a business aspect to marriage are probably doomed.