Institute for Marriage and Public Policy
Attn: Maggie GallagherP.O. Box 1231
Manassas, VA 20108
April 25, 2008
Dear Ms. Gallagher:
I recently discovered the website for the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. My interest was immediately sparked as I have spent the past several weeks researching divorce laws and statistics for my freshman research paper titled, Finding Fault with No-Fault Divorce.
Throughout the process, I have encountered statistics and read stories that make my stomach turn. With the divorce rate currently hovering between 43 to 50 percent, it is clear that the American family is in a state of crisis. Though I am aware that several factors can be attributed to the soaring rate of divorce, I agree with countless others that the no-fault divorce has had the largest amount of influence. Between 1960 and 1980, the divorce rate skyrocketed from 393,000 divorces and annulments to a staggering 1,189,000. Why is this? Because if a married man or woman wishes to divorce their spouse they are able to do just that, without any grounds for doing so.
With that being said, the current state of marriage is of serious concern to my generation as we are among the next to take the symbolic walk down the aisle. I cannot count the number of conversations that I have engaged in with my closest friends expressing how we do not want our marriages to end in yet another statistic.
However, after exploring your website at great length I feel a little less uneasy about the future. The fact that you have made it your goal to “[strengthen] marriage for a new generation” truly means a great deal. In addition, your frequent appearances on major television and radio networks can only assist in educating Americans on the importance of marriage.
It would truly be an honor to support the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy in any way that you deem effective. In a morally corrupt world, it is encouraging to come across organizations like yours trying to make a difference.
Sincerely,
Ashley White
Friday, April 25, 2008
My Letter to Americans for Divorce Reform:
Americans for Divorce Reform
Attn: Colleen Fannin Arnold
1300 North Utah Street
Arlington, VA 22201
April 25, 2008
Dear Ms. Arnold:
I recently discovered the website for Americans for Divorce Reform. My interest was immediately sparked as I have spent the past several weeks researching divorce laws and statistics for my freshman research paper titled, Finding Fault with No-Fault Divorce.
Throughout the process, I have encountered statistics and read stories that make my stomach turn. With the divorce rate currently hovering between 43 to 50 percent, it is clear that the American family is in a state of crisis. Though I am aware that several factors can be attributed to the soaring rate of divorce, I agree with countless others that the no-fault divorce has had the largest amount of influence. Between 1960 and 1980, the divorce rate skyrocketed from 393,000 divorces and annulments to a staggering 1,189,000. Why is this? Because if a married man or woman wishes to divorce their spouse they are able to do just that, without any grounds for doing so.
With that being said, the current state of marriage is of serious concern to my generation as we are among the next to take the symbolic walk down the aisle. I cannot count the number of conversations that I have engaged in with my closest friends expressing how we do not want our marriages to end in yet another statistic.
However, after exploring your website, I realized that through your organization I can personally make a difference. After all, Americans for Divorce Reform, comprised of ordinary members of society, has set out to inform the public, law makers, and the media with what is wrong with divorce.
It would truly be an honor to support Americans for Divorce Reform in any way that you deem effective. In a morally corrupt world, it is encouraging to come across organizations like yours trying to make a difference.
Sincerely,
Ashley White
Attn: Colleen Fannin Arnold
1300 North Utah Street
Arlington, VA 22201
April 25, 2008
Dear Ms. Arnold:
I recently discovered the website for Americans for Divorce Reform. My interest was immediately sparked as I have spent the past several weeks researching divorce laws and statistics for my freshman research paper titled, Finding Fault with No-Fault Divorce.
Throughout the process, I have encountered statistics and read stories that make my stomach turn. With the divorce rate currently hovering between 43 to 50 percent, it is clear that the American family is in a state of crisis. Though I am aware that several factors can be attributed to the soaring rate of divorce, I agree with countless others that the no-fault divorce has had the largest amount of influence. Between 1960 and 1980, the divorce rate skyrocketed from 393,000 divorces and annulments to a staggering 1,189,000. Why is this? Because if a married man or woman wishes to divorce their spouse they are able to do just that, without any grounds for doing so.
With that being said, the current state of marriage is of serious concern to my generation as we are among the next to take the symbolic walk down the aisle. I cannot count the number of conversations that I have engaged in with my closest friends expressing how we do not want our marriages to end in yet another statistic.
However, after exploring your website, I realized that through your organization I can personally make a difference. After all, Americans for Divorce Reform, comprised of ordinary members of society, has set out to inform the public, law makers, and the media with what is wrong with divorce.
It would truly be an honor to support Americans for Divorce Reform in any way that you deem effective. In a morally corrupt world, it is encouraging to come across organizations like yours trying to make a difference.
Sincerely,
Ashley White
My Letter to Attorney Fetman:
Fetman, Garland, & Associates, LTD
Attn: Attorney Corri Fetman33 W. Jackson Street, Ste. 200
Chicago, IL 60604
April 25, 2008
Dear Attorney Fetman:
I recently came across an article published on the ABC news website regarding a certain controversial billboard which your law firm designed last year. My interest was immediately sparked as I have spent the past several weeks researching divorce laws and statistics for my freshman research paper titled, Finding Fault with No-Fault Divorce.
Throughout the process, I have encountered statistics and read stories that make my stomach turn. With the divorce rate currently hovering between 43 to 50 percent, it is clear that the American family is in a state of crisis. Though I am aware that several factors can be attributed to the soaring rate of divorce, I agree with countless others that the no-fault divorce has had the largest amount of influence. Between 1960 and 1980, the divorce rate skyrocketed from 393,000 divorces and annulments to a staggering 1,189,000. Why is this? Because if a married man or woman wishes to divorce their spouse they are able to do just that, without any grounds for doing so.
This is, where I believe, your billboard stepped in. The sign, which read “Life’s short. Get a divorce,” featured images of a lingerie-clad, large-breasted woman and a six pack sporting stud, and yet you comment that you “are absolutely not trivializing [marriage].” Well, I beg to differ. The advertisement, which you intended to be lighthearted, succeeded in turning such a heavy topic into a ball of fluff.
As a child, I watched my father walk out on my mother not once, but twice. While staring at the images on your billboard, I cannot help but imagine a younger version of myself clutching onto my father as he is leaving the house. Going out and scoring a sexy partner half your age, as your sign clearly suggested, did not make my father any happier, nor can it possibly serve as a magic elixir to anyone else contemplating divorce. There are no “trade ups” in marriage.
Yes, when the “for worse” arises in marriages, divorce is the popular solution before either mate parts. Such an attitude as your billboard projected adds fuel to this rapidly increasing fire. On the contrary, being encouraged to rekindle the spark that was once flaming in the relationship is what can make rich.
Sincerely,
Ashley White
Attn: Attorney Corri Fetman33 W. Jackson Street, Ste. 200
Chicago, IL 60604
April 25, 2008
Dear Attorney Fetman:
I recently came across an article published on the ABC news website regarding a certain controversial billboard which your law firm designed last year. My interest was immediately sparked as I have spent the past several weeks researching divorce laws and statistics for my freshman research paper titled, Finding Fault with No-Fault Divorce.
Throughout the process, I have encountered statistics and read stories that make my stomach turn. With the divorce rate currently hovering between 43 to 50 percent, it is clear that the American family is in a state of crisis. Though I am aware that several factors can be attributed to the soaring rate of divorce, I agree with countless others that the no-fault divorce has had the largest amount of influence. Between 1960 and 1980, the divorce rate skyrocketed from 393,000 divorces and annulments to a staggering 1,189,000. Why is this? Because if a married man or woman wishes to divorce their spouse they are able to do just that, without any grounds for doing so.
This is, where I believe, your billboard stepped in. The sign, which read “Life’s short. Get a divorce,” featured images of a lingerie-clad, large-breasted woman and a six pack sporting stud, and yet you comment that you “are absolutely not trivializing [marriage].” Well, I beg to differ. The advertisement, which you intended to be lighthearted, succeeded in turning such a heavy topic into a ball of fluff.
As a child, I watched my father walk out on my mother not once, but twice. While staring at the images on your billboard, I cannot help but imagine a younger version of myself clutching onto my father as he is leaving the house. Going out and scoring a sexy partner half your age, as your sign clearly suggested, did not make my father any happier, nor can it possibly serve as a magic elixir to anyone else contemplating divorce. There are no “trade ups” in marriage.
Yes, when the “for worse” arises in marriages, divorce is the popular solution before either mate parts. Such an attitude as your billboard projected adds fuel to this rapidly increasing fire. On the contrary, being encouraged to rekindle the spark that was once flaming in the relationship is what can make rich.
Sincerely,
Ashley White
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Annotated Bibliographies . . .
The following is my reaction to the three sources which I chose:
After reading the ABC news article “Billboard Jungle: Chicago Divorce Ad Comes Down,” I was appalled. As a professional, Attorney Corri Fetman should act as such. Her sign, which was “supposed to be lighthearted,” succeeded in turning such a heavy topic into fluff. As my parents split three years ago, I saw first hand just how devastating divorce is to the couple in question. Going out and scoring a sexy partner half your age, as the sign suggests, cannot possibly bring true happiness to the table. Being encouraged to rekindle the spark that was once flaming in the relationship is what makes rich. There are no “trade-ups” in marriage.
I feel that the Americans for Divorce Reform online brochure is extremely effective because it does not point fingers at anyone for the rising divorce rate. For example, the brochure states that when no-fault divorce was presented, no one had the slightest clue as to what it would do. However, now that society has seen the effects of no-fault divorce, the Americans for Divorce Reform invites those who are opposed to join their ranks and fight for a change in the law. It is their goal to inform the public, lawmakers, and media what is wrong with divorce through statistics, analysis, and drafting. Americans for Divorce Reform hope to reach enough people so as to make a difference in every state, with your help.
Maggie Gallagher, President of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, has a motto which reads, “strengthening marriage for a new generation.” As my generation is next in line to walk down the aisle, I can really appreciate Ms. Gallagher’s mission to strengthen marriage as a social institution. With the divorce rate so high, I am personally afraid to get married. I do not want my marriage to result in a divorce as my parent’s did. Thankfully, Ms. Gallagher and the rest of the members of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy are constantly in the media educating Americans on the importance of marriage.
After reading the ABC news article “Billboard Jungle: Chicago Divorce Ad Comes Down,” I was appalled. As a professional, Attorney Corri Fetman should act as such. Her sign, which was “supposed to be lighthearted,” succeeded in turning such a heavy topic into fluff. As my parents split three years ago, I saw first hand just how devastating divorce is to the couple in question. Going out and scoring a sexy partner half your age, as the sign suggests, cannot possibly bring true happiness to the table. Being encouraged to rekindle the spark that was once flaming in the relationship is what makes rich. There are no “trade-ups” in marriage.
I feel that the Americans for Divorce Reform online brochure is extremely effective because it does not point fingers at anyone for the rising divorce rate. For example, the brochure states that when no-fault divorce was presented, no one had the slightest clue as to what it would do. However, now that society has seen the effects of no-fault divorce, the Americans for Divorce Reform invites those who are opposed to join their ranks and fight for a change in the law. It is their goal to inform the public, lawmakers, and media what is wrong with divorce through statistics, analysis, and drafting. Americans for Divorce Reform hope to reach enough people so as to make a difference in every state, with your help.
Maggie Gallagher, President of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy, has a motto which reads, “strengthening marriage for a new generation.” As my generation is next in line to walk down the aisle, I can really appreciate Ms. Gallagher’s mission to strengthen marriage as a social institution. With the divorce rate so high, I am personally afraid to get married. I do not want my marriage to result in a divorce as my parent’s did. Thankfully, Ms. Gallagher and the rest of the members of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy are constantly in the media educating Americans on the importance of marriage.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
The Final Three...
Ok, so after extensively reviewing the five organizations that I originally chose for project three, I narrowed it down to these few.
1. The first organization that I wish to contact is Fetman, Garland, & Associates. Chicago attorney Corri Fetman has been in the news a lot lately for her controversial divorce billboards. The slogan on these billboards read, "Life Is Short. Get A Divorce." Her viewpoint on divorce is completely different from that of my own, as well as that of the other organizations.
For more information on Fetman, Garland, & Associate's advertising campaign, visit the following site: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=3154874&page=1
2. The second organization that I would like to contact is Americans for Divorce Reform. I think the name of this organization says it all. They feel, as do I, that divorce laws undermine the sanctity of the marriage contract and they want to do something about it. Therefore, Americans for Divorce Reform informs the public, law makers, and the media with what is wrong with divorce. Not only that, Americans for Divorce Reform tries to get the public involved in changing these laws.
For more information on Americans for Divorce Reform, visit the following site: http://www.divorcereform.org/lea.html
3. Third, and finally, I am going to write to the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. Maggie Gallagher, the president of iMAPP, wishes to "strengthen marriage for a new generation." She focuses on research and public education that can strengthen marriage as a social institution. Gallagher's work is often featured throughout the media.
For more information of the Institute for Marriage and Public policy, visit the following site:
http://www.marriagedebate.com/.
1. The first organization that I wish to contact is Fetman, Garland, & Associates. Chicago attorney Corri Fetman has been in the news a lot lately for her controversial divorce billboards. The slogan on these billboards read, "Life Is Short. Get A Divorce." Her viewpoint on divorce is completely different from that of my own, as well as that of the other organizations.
For more information on Fetman, Garland, & Associate's advertising campaign, visit the following site: http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=3154874&page=1
2. The second organization that I would like to contact is Americans for Divorce Reform. I think the name of this organization says it all. They feel, as do I, that divorce laws undermine the sanctity of the marriage contract and they want to do something about it. Therefore, Americans for Divorce Reform informs the public, law makers, and the media with what is wrong with divorce. Not only that, Americans for Divorce Reform tries to get the public involved in changing these laws.
For more information on Americans for Divorce Reform, visit the following site: http://www.divorcereform.org/lea.html
3. Third, and finally, I am going to write to the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy. Maggie Gallagher, the president of iMAPP, wishes to "strengthen marriage for a new generation." She focuses on research and public education that can strengthen marriage as a social institution. Gallagher's work is often featured throughout the media.
For more information of the Institute for Marriage and Public policy, visit the following site:
http://www.marriagedebate.com/.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Five Organizations Whom I Wish to Contact...
1. Americans for Divorce Reform
1300 North Utah Street
Arlington, VA 22201
2. Institute for Marriage and Public Policy
P.O. Box 1231
Manassas, VA 20108
3. Fetman, Garland, and Associates
33 W. Jackson Street, Ste. 200
Chicago, IL 60604
4. Institute for American Values
1841 Broadway, Ste. 211
New York, New York 10023
5. American Academy of Matrimonial Attorneys
150 North Michigan Avenue, Ste. 2040
Chicago, IL 60601
1300 North Utah Street
Arlington, VA 22201
2. Institute for Marriage and Public Policy
P.O. Box 1231
Manassas, VA 20108
3. Fetman, Garland, and Associates
33 W. Jackson Street, Ste. 200
Chicago, IL 60604
4. Institute for American Values
1841 Broadway, Ste. 211
New York, New York 10023
5. American Academy of Matrimonial Attorneys
150 North Michigan Avenue, Ste. 2040
Chicago, IL 60601
Final Draft of My Research Paper...
Finding Fault with the No-Fault Divorce
On average, most Americans are married at the age of twenty six (The Knot). This means that within the next ten years, the majority of today’s college students will have already walked down the aisle. In reality, ten years is not long at all. In fact, this statistic can be quite frightening. Will the average college student know his or herself by then? Will he or she be ready to spend the rest of their life with this one person? Well, in today’s society practically nothing is permanent - marriage included. Unfortunately, over the past thirty years the divorce rate in America has soared. Why has the American Marriage been so greatly affected? Well, society’s blasé attitude towards marriage, coupled with changes in laws that undermine the power of the marriage contract, attribute to the extinction of the married-couple family.
At one time, traditional beliefs held that marriage was meant to be permanent. In fact, one biblical decree states that a married couple should stay together no matter what, for they are married by God, and to divorce would be to break that covenant with God. These days divorce has lost its stigma and has become widely accepted within American culture. In fact, the divorce rate currently hovers between 43 to 50 percent (Crouch). One factor behind the soaring divorce rate is that modern expectations of marriage are unrealistic. Clinical psychologist Derek S. Hopson states that conflict is precisely the reason “why couples are so quick to get divorced…many feel that it is not normal to have conflict” (Jet). And, in American society, disposing of something that no longer works is common, even when that something is marriage. When Dr. Hopson states that America is a “throw-away society” he is inferring that unrealistic expectations of marriage make it easy to feel that the relationship has failed if the couple’s dreams are not fulfilled. Sadly, “for better or for worse until death do us part” is beginning to seem as outdated as a Model-T Ford. Today when the “for worse” arises in marriages, divorce is the popular solution before either mate “parts”. However, this was not always the case.
In fact, a few decades ago mates were not able to obtain a divorce so simply. Until 1953 the at-fault divorce was in effect in the United States. While in operation, the at-fault divorce kept the number of marriage failures to a minimum. This is because couples who wished to divorce were required to have court-recognized reasons for doing so, such as adultery, abandonment, abuse, alcoholism, etc. Irreconcilable differences was not among these. If he or she could not prove that their mate committed one of these acts, then they could not divorce. Once Ronald Regan (who was governor at the time) signed the no-fault divorce into California law in 1970, other states quickly followed suit (Divorce Reform). Since the no-fault policy states that one spouse can divorce the other for virtually no reason, the increase in the divorce rate has been greatly significant. From 1960 to 1980, the divorce rate soared from 393,000 divorces and annulments to an astounding 1,189,000; this figure continues to rise (Jet). Also, there are 10 percent more divorces overall because of no-fault divorce. Sadly, while in effect, the no-fault divorce will most likely wreak havoc on generations to come. Maggie Gallagher of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy states that no-fault divorce increases the divorce rate by “approximately 10 percent for at least the first ten years after the law is enacted,” therefore there are approximately 10 percent more divorces overall due to no-fault divorce (Scelfo). These statistics prove that instead of being encouraged to save their marriage, couples are able to walk away when the slightest problems arise.
However, even though the rate of divorce is lofty, this certainly does not mean that every marriage will result in yet another statistic. If Americans want to see more marriages last, they need to encourage couples to think seriously about the commitments they are making prior to getting married. One way to promote that consideration is to demand premarital counseling on the theory that up-front contemplation will reveal potential problems, forcing couples to nip them in the bud or call the whole wedding off (Paul). If after completing counseling the couple still wishes to be wed they should be able to do so, with restrictions. Mary Matalin, a CBS Talk Radio Network host, suggests that a waiting period should be instituted “between getting the [marriage] license and walking down the aisle” (Matalin). Once completely wed, couples would be wise to monitor their association with other couples. Domestic relations judge, Shelving Louise Mary Hall, believes that “when individuals see repeated failures in other marriages, they begin to wonder who has a successful marriage” and it becomes easy for them to assume that everyone is getting divorced (Crouch). Of course, if the divorce rate is ever to subside, major changes must be made in divorce law.
One of these major changes includes abolishing the no-fault divorce and re-instating the at-fault divorce. Critics of the at-fault policy, however, argue that the restrictions of the at-fault divorce do not fit well within today’s culture. These days, they believe, people regard a promise not as something unchanging and absolute, but as an expression of commitment for the time and circumstances under which the vow was made. But is this morally acceptable? Not at all. Similarly, another popular opinion holds that if a man or woman is unhappy in their marriage then they should be able to end it without court recognized reasons for doing so. Yet, as previously discussed, such a mindset often leads to a hasty dissolution of marriage instead of trying to work the problem out (Jet). The negative effects of the no-fault divorce will forever effect future marriages while legalized . According to Gallagher in seventeen out of twenty-four studies, “there [was] a long-term increase in divorce rates after no-fault laws [were] implemented, most between 5 and 30 percent” (Scelfo). This proves once again that despite what the critics of at-fault divorce have to say, no-fault divorce will continue to wreak havoc on society while in effect.
Yes, as a result of this culture’s nonchalant outlook towards marriage and the rise of the no-fault divorce, the American family is in a state of crisis. As the next generation waits in the wings for their moment to walk down the aisle, many are likely to experience cold feet due to the current state of marriage. It is undeniable to them and the rest of the population that Americans live in a throw-away society where they are likely to discard something if it does not live up to their standards, marriage included. The no-fault divorce in particular allows couples to throw in the towel at the first sign of conflict instead of working at something that was once deemed sacred. However, re-instating the at-fault divorce will inevitably guide society back towards that mindset. No one ever said that marriage was easy; then again, the best things in life usually are not.
Works Cited
“Bridal Industry Statistics.” The Knot. 2007. 23 Mar. 2008.
On average, most Americans are married at the age of twenty six (The Knot). This means that within the next ten years, the majority of today’s college students will have already walked down the aisle. In reality, ten years is not long at all. In fact, this statistic can be quite frightening. Will the average college student know his or herself by then? Will he or she be ready to spend the rest of their life with this one person? Well, in today’s society practically nothing is permanent - marriage included. Unfortunately, over the past thirty years the divorce rate in America has soared. Why has the American Marriage been so greatly affected? Well, society’s blasé attitude towards marriage, coupled with changes in laws that undermine the power of the marriage contract, attribute to the extinction of the married-couple family.
At one time, traditional beliefs held that marriage was meant to be permanent. In fact, one biblical decree states that a married couple should stay together no matter what, for they are married by God, and to divorce would be to break that covenant with God. These days divorce has lost its stigma and has become widely accepted within American culture. In fact, the divorce rate currently hovers between 43 to 50 percent (Crouch). One factor behind the soaring divorce rate is that modern expectations of marriage are unrealistic. Clinical psychologist Derek S. Hopson states that conflict is precisely the reason “why couples are so quick to get divorced…many feel that it is not normal to have conflict” (Jet). And, in American society, disposing of something that no longer works is common, even when that something is marriage. When Dr. Hopson states that America is a “throw-away society” he is inferring that unrealistic expectations of marriage make it easy to feel that the relationship has failed if the couple’s dreams are not fulfilled. Sadly, “for better or for worse until death do us part” is beginning to seem as outdated as a Model-T Ford. Today when the “for worse” arises in marriages, divorce is the popular solution before either mate “parts”. However, this was not always the case.
In fact, a few decades ago mates were not able to obtain a divorce so simply. Until 1953 the at-fault divorce was in effect in the United States. While in operation, the at-fault divorce kept the number of marriage failures to a minimum. This is because couples who wished to divorce were required to have court-recognized reasons for doing so, such as adultery, abandonment, abuse, alcoholism, etc. Irreconcilable differences was not among these. If he or she could not prove that their mate committed one of these acts, then they could not divorce. Once Ronald Regan (who was governor at the time) signed the no-fault divorce into California law in 1970, other states quickly followed suit (Divorce Reform). Since the no-fault policy states that one spouse can divorce the other for virtually no reason, the increase in the divorce rate has been greatly significant. From 1960 to 1980, the divorce rate soared from 393,000 divorces and annulments to an astounding 1,189,000; this figure continues to rise (Jet). Also, there are 10 percent more divorces overall because of no-fault divorce. Sadly, while in effect, the no-fault divorce will most likely wreak havoc on generations to come. Maggie Gallagher of the Institute for Marriage and Public Policy states that no-fault divorce increases the divorce rate by “approximately 10 percent for at least the first ten years after the law is enacted,” therefore there are approximately 10 percent more divorces overall due to no-fault divorce (Scelfo). These statistics prove that instead of being encouraged to save their marriage, couples are able to walk away when the slightest problems arise.
However, even though the rate of divorce is lofty, this certainly does not mean that every marriage will result in yet another statistic. If Americans want to see more marriages last, they need to encourage couples to think seriously about the commitments they are making prior to getting married. One way to promote that consideration is to demand premarital counseling on the theory that up-front contemplation will reveal potential problems, forcing couples to nip them in the bud or call the whole wedding off (Paul). If after completing counseling the couple still wishes to be wed they should be able to do so, with restrictions. Mary Matalin, a CBS Talk Radio Network host, suggests that a waiting period should be instituted “between getting the [marriage] license and walking down the aisle” (Matalin). Once completely wed, couples would be wise to monitor their association with other couples. Domestic relations judge, Shelving Louise Mary Hall, believes that “when individuals see repeated failures in other marriages, they begin to wonder who has a successful marriage” and it becomes easy for them to assume that everyone is getting divorced (Crouch). Of course, if the divorce rate is ever to subside, major changes must be made in divorce law.
One of these major changes includes abolishing the no-fault divorce and re-instating the at-fault divorce. Critics of the at-fault policy, however, argue that the restrictions of the at-fault divorce do not fit well within today’s culture. These days, they believe, people regard a promise not as something unchanging and absolute, but as an expression of commitment for the time and circumstances under which the vow was made. But is this morally acceptable? Not at all. Similarly, another popular opinion holds that if a man or woman is unhappy in their marriage then they should be able to end it without court recognized reasons for doing so. Yet, as previously discussed, such a mindset often leads to a hasty dissolution of marriage instead of trying to work the problem out (Jet). The negative effects of the no-fault divorce will forever effect future marriages while legalized . According to Gallagher in seventeen out of twenty-four studies, “there [was] a long-term increase in divorce rates after no-fault laws [were] implemented, most between 5 and 30 percent” (Scelfo). This proves once again that despite what the critics of at-fault divorce have to say, no-fault divorce will continue to wreak havoc on society while in effect.
Yes, as a result of this culture’s nonchalant outlook towards marriage and the rise of the no-fault divorce, the American family is in a state of crisis. As the next generation waits in the wings for their moment to walk down the aisle, many are likely to experience cold feet due to the current state of marriage. It is undeniable to them and the rest of the population that Americans live in a throw-away society where they are likely to discard something if it does not live up to their standards, marriage included. The no-fault divorce in particular allows couples to throw in the towel at the first sign of conflict instead of working at something that was once deemed sacred. However, re-instating the at-fault divorce will inevitably guide society back towards that mindset. No one ever said that marriage was easy; then again, the best things in life usually are not.
Works Cited
“Bridal Industry Statistics.” The Knot. 2007. 23 Mar. 2008.
“Divorce Rates.” Divorce Reform. Jan. 2008. 21 Mar. 2008.
Furstenberg, Frank F., and Nancy T. Kate. “The Future of Marriage.” American
Demographics June 2006: 34-41. General OneFile. 21 Mar. 2008.
Matalin, Mary. “Should We Make It Harder to Divorce?” Cosmopolitan Jan. 1998: 44.
General OneFile. 21 Mar. 2008.
Paul, Pamela. The Starter Marriage and the Future of Matrimony. United States:
Villard Books, 2002. 3-267.
Scelfo, Julie. “Split Decisions (No-Fault Divorce According to Institute for Marriage and Public
Policy).” Newsweek 23 July 2007: 10. General OneFile. 21 Mar. 2008.
“Why More Couple are Getting Divorced.” Jet 24 Feb. 1997: 15-18. General OneFile.
21 Mar. 2008.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Ethos, Logos, and Pathos...
So our latest assignment for project two was to post a message indicating where ethos, logos, and pathos is present in our research papers. After re-reading my paper several times, I found the following...
1. Ethos- My paper uses ethos every time I support my claims with material that comes from credible sources. For example, my information comes from such reliable sources as Newsweek and Jet magazines. I also quote clinical psychologists and judges who practice family law, which also gives my paper an ethos feel.
2. Logos- For the most part, my entire research paper is logos-based. It definitely appeals to the reason of those who are reading it. My evidence for why the married couple family is becoming extinct appeals to the logic of my audience.
3. Pathos- Pathos is lacking from my paper. A trace of it can be found in the introductory paragraph as I try to emotionally connect my audience to the topic by relating it to them. I also attempt to alarm my audience of society's unfortunate attitude towards marriage throughout my paper by utilizing disturbing facts.
1. Ethos- My paper uses ethos every time I support my claims with material that comes from credible sources. For example, my information comes from such reliable sources as Newsweek and Jet magazines. I also quote clinical psychologists and judges who practice family law, which also gives my paper an ethos feel.
2. Logos- For the most part, my entire research paper is logos-based. It definitely appeals to the reason of those who are reading it. My evidence for why the married couple family is becoming extinct appeals to the logic of my audience.
3. Pathos- Pathos is lacking from my paper. A trace of it can be found in the introductory paragraph as I try to emotionally connect my audience to the topic by relating it to them. I also attempt to alarm my audience of society's unfortunate attitude towards marriage throughout my paper by utilizing disturbing facts.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)