As a sometime divorce attorney, it bothers me not to be able to give marriage advice to my clients. For one, I'm not qualified to give advice, not having a suitable certification or sufficient personal experience, and for another, it's not my place as an attorney, even though the rules of professional conduct do allow us to give non-legal advice. But truly, who knows what is really going on in a marriage other than the two people involved? And attorney-client confidentiality is no guarantee that you will be given the whole story. Clients unfortunately often only tell you what they think you wish to hear.
That aside, it has always been my wish to do something to prevent many of the divorces that come to my door. To do something to build up the institution, the sacrament of marriage. To encourage these couples to hold true to their vows, to honor their word, to not break their promises so easily. And to spare them and their children the difficulties of divorce that frequently outweigh the difficulties of an unhappy marriage.
A recent
editorial in the Washington Post by Robert Samuelson (reviewing Isabel Sawhill's book "
Generation Unbound: Drifting into Sex and Parenthood without Marriage") laments the decline of marriage, and details a couple of important effects that divorce frequently has on children:
- Children of divorced parents are frequently less well off economically and emotionally: "Two low-income paychecks, or two good listeners, are better than one."
- Marriage now seems to belong to the wealthy, as the college-educated marry and have children, while those from lower-income classes continue to have children but not to marry.
- Children of divorced parents often observe their parents going through the dating scene, having multiple partners, and are therefore " 'subjected to a degree of relationship chaos and instability that is hard to grasp.' "
- Divorce harms children's emotional and intellectual development, and therefore society as a whole.
Catholics will be interested to note that he (or she - it's not clear) tie the origins of the decline of marriage to the availability of birth control in the 1970s.
And women will be interested to read that Ms. Sawhill appears to believe that the decline of marriage, along with the difficulties involved in balancing work and the home life, have led to the decline of satisfaction among women.
Neither Mr. Samuelson nor Ms. Sawhill offer much consolation or a solution for this "family deficit," other than an admonishment (from Ms. Sawhill apparently) to use birth control more effectively. But since that appears to have been a cause of the decline of marriage in the first place, I doubt marriage will be strengthened by its greater use. Instead both Mr. Samuelson and Ms. Sawhill acknowledge that the new "marriage" and the roles of the individuals within this new institution will likely look much different than they did in the 1950s. But what that will be, Mr. Samuelson is not sure:
"We Americans believe in progress, and yet progress is often a double-edged sword. The benefits and adventures of change often view with the shortcomings and disruptions, leaving us in a twilight zone of ambiguity and doubt about the ultimate outcome."
**Additional note: Ms. Sawhill appeared recently on the MPR Daily Circuit discussing "
How millenials could change concept of relationships, marriage."
