Marriage – why “no-fault” divorce is one of our most dangerous social experiments

No-fault divorce laws were introduced in Western Europe and other industrialised countries during the 1970s and are being expanded into other regions of the world today.

The spouse who divorces or otherwise abrogates the marriage contract incurs no liability for the costs or consequences, creating a unique and unprecedented legal anomaly. In all other areas of contract law those who break a contract are expected to compensate their partner, but under a system of 'no fault' divorce, this essential element of contract law is abrogated."

In fact, the legal implications go farther, since the courts actively assist the violator. The law generally supports the spouse seeking the divorce, even if that spouse was the wrongdoer." "No-fault" did not really remove fault, therefore; it simply allowed judges to redefine it however they pleased. It introduced the novel concept that one could be deemed guilty of violating an agreement that one had, in fact, not violated. According to therapeutic precepts, the fault for marital breakup must be shared, even when one spouse unilaterally seeks a divorce. Many husbands and wives who did not seek or want divorce were stunned to learn that they were equally 'at fault' in the dissolution of their marriages.

While lamenting the high divorce rate is conventional piety among family advocates, most have refused to challenge the divorce laws. The standard rationalisation is that to control divorce we must first change the culture. But no one suggests that changing the culture is a prerequisite for preventing, say, abortion. While cultural forces certainly contribute, the divorce epidemic has proceeded directly from a legal system which permits and even encourages it.

Furthermore, it is only because traditional understandings of marriage have already been severely undermined that homosexuals are now laying claim to it. Gays to do not want marriage in the traditional mold (1950 version marriage), only the watered-down version that exists today.

Custody rights

To truly reverse the decline of the family, the momentum must be carried forward to confront the current destructive matriarchal policies that have institutionalised “broken family” policies. Our current system produces broken families and prevents traditional norms based on discipline. The most direct threat to the family is “divorce on demand”. Sooner or later, if Western Europe is to endure, it must be brought under control.The father/patriarch must be given considerably more influence as this is the only way to ensure the survival of the nuclear family as it will enhance family integrity. The matriarchal supremacy within the modern households must seize to exist.

As of now, the mother will always be awarded child custody rights unless she is mentally ill or a drug/alcohol addict. The system must be reformed so that the father will be awarded custody rights by default. This will ensure that that divorce rate will be significantly reduced (by up to 50-70%) and will contribute to uphold the nuclear family.