A recent article in The Guardian, “Conservative US lawmakers are pushing for an end to no-fault divorce,” weighed the pros and cons of this legal framework.
While the article appeared to offer a balanced view, many of its statements need a closer look.
One critical point to address is the dishonesty in calling it “no fault.” Although I understand the appeal of the “kinder, gentler, judge not” mentality behind this divorce option, embracing it would be dishonest.
Divorce happens only when one spouse causes it, intentionally or otherwise. One spouse must make the marriage unsustainable or choose to break their vows without a valid reason. This decision is never accidental. Some might try to blame the other spouse for their shortcomings or inability to bring happiness, but marriage vows are for better or worse, not just for better. When we enter marriage, we expect challenges, and the vows are a promise to endure those difficult times with love and honor.
Diverting Attention From Promises to Pros and Cons
The Guardian article shifts attention from wedding promises and moral obligations. Instead, it focuses on an often skewed weighing of pros and cons.
First, they assert this change could hurt women’s rights. This is a common tactic, especially on the left, where accusations of sexism, racism, or other forms of bigotry are used to avoid addressing the real issue. Instead of discussing the merits of the solution, they focus on how it could be unfair to a specific demographic—in this case, women. However, the goal is to remove unfair treatment for everyone, including women.
Conservative Concerns for Men’s Rights
The article also claims that conservatives and religious groups push for ending the no-blame divorce system because it violates the rights of innocent men. These men lose their marriages, families, and property without the due process promised in the 14th Amendment. While some may argue this point, it’s difficult to dispute the fact that this type of divorce also harms women abandoned by unfaithful husbands.
The problem is clear: no one needs to do anything wrong for a separation to happen.
The Misleading Nature of the “No Fault” Divorce Concept
This terminology is misleading and damaging for several reasons:
- It Ignores Consequences
The “no fault” label suggests divorce can occur without any negative effects, which is far from the truth. Divorce often leads to emotional trauma, financial strain, and long-lasting harm to children. The idea of “no fault” implies these consequences either don’t exist or aren’t important. - It Undermines Accountability
By removing the need to prove wrongdoing, the no-fault approach encourages individuals to walk away from their commitments without taking responsibility. This weakens the sanctity of marriage and downplays the importance of working through challenges together. - It Promotes a Culture of Disposability
The ease of this legal dissolution fosters a mentality that relationships are disposable. Instead of encouraging couples to fight for their marriage, it offers a convenient exit, which leads to more divorces and undermines the institution of marriage. - It Disregards the Impact on Children
Divorce is rarely without fault when children are involved. This “no fault” label overlooks the deep and often harmful impact divorce has on children, such as emotional distress, academic difficulties, and long-term relationship issues. - It Creates a False Sense of Amicability
The phrase suggests that separations can be amicable and conflict-free. In reality, many divorces involve significant conflict over assets, custody, and finances. The term downplays the emotional and legal struggles that frequently accompany a split. - It Diminishes the Value of Marriage
By making divorce easily accessible and seemingly free of consequences, this system reduces the value of marriage. It sends the message that marriage isn’t a lifelong commitment but something that can be undone when inconvenient. - It Fails to Address Root Problems
The no-fault framework allows couples to separate without resolving their underlying issues. This can result in repeated patterns of behavior in future relationships, perpetuating the cycle of divorce.
These points illustrate why the concept of a “no fault” split is damaging and misleading. It fails to acknowledge the true complexities and consequences of ending a marriage.
here’s a form within a post