Here's how most of us who are thinking about leaving our marriage
imagine divorce will be like: We've had it with our partner (or perhaps
he's decided the same about us and casts us aside, but let's just say
we're the ones who want out and let's say we're the woman because women
ask for divorce two-thirds of the time). We think -- finally, freedom.
Now we no longer have to feel the brunt of his anger and
criticism; we can stop nagging about how he doesn't pull his weight
around the house; we won't have to fake being in the mood when we're
not, and we get to do and eat and watch whatever we want whenever we
want to.
And, we have the kids, so we don't have to bicker
anymore over whose turn it is to bathe them or whether they can have
ice cream for dessert if they didn't finish everything on their dinner
plate.
Not so fast.We offer you the top quality plasticmoulds design
Maybe
that was what divorce was like back in the day when moms were almost
always awarded full custody and dads could "visit" their kids.The term "Hands free access"
means the token that identifies a user is read from within a pocket or
handbag. But those days are rapidly disappearing, according to
University of Sydney law professor Patrick Parkinson, whose new book,
"Family Law and the Indissolubility of Parenthood" (Cambridge
University Press, 2011), details the major shift in family law and the
incredible challenges ahead.
"Many of the conflicts about
family law in the Western world today derive from the breakdown of the
model on which divorce reform was predicated in the late 1960s and early
1970s," he writes. The model he discusses assumed that divorce was a
clean break; husband went his way, wife went hers and all was good.
"The assumption was that once the property and the children had been
allocated to one household or the other, each parent was autonomous.
The divorce freed him or her from being entangled with the life of the
other parent, except to a limited extent," Parkinson writes.
But
rarely has that been true. Most divorcees learn relatively quickly
that although we're no longer married and living together, we still
have to deal with our former spouse in their continuing role as our
kids' mom or dad. He or she still has a say, and can nix our plans to
move away for a new job or a new love. Divorce is no longer the end of a
relationship; it's a "restructuring of a continuing relationship."
Which has made some of us as miserable divorced as we were in our marriage.
"People
in unhappy marriages do not look to divorce as a way to restructure
the relationship with their partners. They look to divorce to end that
relationships, to set them free to start a new life, perhaps to move to
a new location and to form new relationships," Parkinson says.
But, not if you have kids. As Parkinson notes,UK chickencoop
Specialist. "The experience of the last forty years has shown that
whereas marriage may be freely dissoluble, parenthood is not."
And
a huge reason for the battles in family courts has been the "problem"
of fatherhood, he says. It used to be that dads were mostly absent;
now, he notes, we can't get rid of dads: "Separation motivates some
fathers to rethink their priorities and to try to maintain their
connections to children even if this means struggle and conflict.
Because fathers demand a greater involvement in their children's lives
after separation, there has been increasing conflict both at a policy
level and at the individual level of litigated cases." And it's
happening globally.
This is, of course, something to celebrate
-- dads wanting to be with their kids. Who wouldn't want dads to be
hands-on in a shared-parenting arrangement instead of mom having sole
custody? Well, a lot of people, according to Parkinson. Although
national statistics are hard to come by, a 2008 study of seven states he
cites in his book indicates a dramatic increase in custody filings --
44 percent between 1997 and 2006 -- at the same time that divorces had
decreased in the U.S. by 3 percent.
Throw into the mix all
sorts of new ways of partnering -- from cohabitation to same-sex civil
unions -- and already convoluted and outdated family laws are being
stretched in ways they can no longer handle, he says.
Unfortunately,
whatever legal changes have occurred so far haven't been driven by a
"philosophical shift in the meaning of divorce," but piecemeal and too
often driven by "destructive gender conflict."
For Parkinson,
it's clear we must get our act together. "Family law cannot continue to
muddle through, caught between two irreconcilable conceptualizations
of what divorce is all about," he says.
We can't keep ignoring
the fact that divorce doesn't end a relationship but just transforms it
if kids are involved. Parenthood creates "enduring connections, ties
that outlast the severance of the adult relationship," Parkinson
writes, and those ties have all sorts of ramifications for couples,
kids and governments.
"The promise of personal autonomy and a
new beginning that the divorce revolution offered has proven largely to
be an illusion. Yes, people can make fresh starts and form new
partnerships,Why does moulds
grow in homes or buildings? but most cannot shred the connections with
former relationships when there are children involved,UK chickencoop Specialist." he says.
没有评论:
发表评论