What are your thoughts about DIVORCE?

[Hoshi, tantei-chan]

Okay. I need help on a term paper I need to get done for school. So if you have time, please lend a hand.

It's simple really. Are you for, or against, divorce, and please state your reason. I just have to come up with a proper stand for this matter.

If it's not too much of a hassle, you may also post some references on how you have come to that decision or whatnot.

Oh, by the way, this poll is only short-lived for I have to get it done by then. Don't blame me on the short time, it's my teacher's fault for only giving it to us now  .

Any kind of help is appreciated. Thanks in advance .

[Commi-Ninja]

For me, it really just depends on the situation.  If we're talking about celebrities who get married and then get divorced an hour or a couple days later, I think they shouldn't have been married in the first place or they should have to deal with it for a while at least.  If it's between regular people who really can't reconcile their differences and it's more detrimental to all involved parties, by all means get a divorce if it will make the situation better.

[mangaluva]

I really wish no couple would ever end in divorce, and that some people really took better stock of their relationships and the reasons that they're staying with their partner before they get married, but sadly many people do get married for the wrong reasons and end up in destructive or abusive households.

I'm for the option of divorce, because for some couples it's just healthier for all involved to end it, but I dislike how some people *coughKimKardashianI'mLookingAtYoucough* abuse the option of divorce to get married for funsies all the time. Maybe there should be a limit on how many times you can get a divorce. At least it would take Newt Gingrich out of the pool.

[Akonyl]

pro divorce. I honestly don't see any reason to be against divorce, really. Sure you can hope that everyone lives happily ever after, but the reality is that many people don't, and forcing them to stay together would only breed more bad blood between them in many situations.

As for hour/day-long marriages that quickly end in a divorce, while they're pretty stupid I don't think I'd say divorce laws should be changed because of them.

[aly_angelflight]

I support divorce to end unhealthy relationships since they're bound to form whether I like it or not, but I seriously hate when people use divorce as an excuse to marry whoever they fancy at a given moment. Marriage is supposed to be a promise of long-term commitment between a couple; put some actual thought into it.

(I feel like I'm making a comment about my relatives with this... )

[nomemory]

I am also pro-divorce, but I really think people should think before getting together and before divorcing. And really, it is better to be civil even after a break-up. I am not saying that people should be the best of friends but some are just too much.

[Aokochan]

I support divorce to end unhealthy relationships since they're bound to form whether I like it or not, but I seriously hate when people use divorce as an excuse to marry whoever they fancy at a given moment. Marriage is supposed to be a promise of long-term commitment between a couple; put some actual thought into it.

MTE

[Conia]

I really wish no couple would ever end in divorce, and that some people really took better stock of their relationships and the reasons that they're staying with their partner before they get married, but sadly many people do get married for the wrong reasons and end up in destructive or abusive households.

^ This.

Forcing them to stay together would only breed more bad blood between them in many situations.

^ And this.

Marriage is supposed to be a promise of long-term commitment between a couple; put some actual thought into it.

^ And this.

I am also pro-divorce, but I really think people should think before getting together and before divorcing.

^ And this.

[Callid]

I'm in favour of allowing divorce (there shouldn't be anything to discuss about this, really), and as long as only the ones being divorced are involved, it's all fine.
It is, however, problematic once children are involved (I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that yet), and I believe that, in this case, their parents, the adults, should try to cope with the situation, until either the child is somewhat grown up (~14-16) and only divorce earlier if there are really serious (i.e. medically notable) problems - not because of them, but because of the children.

[nomemory]

I'm in favour of allowing divorce (there shouldn't be anything to discuss about this, really), and as long as only the ones being divorced are involved, it's all fine.
It is, however, problematic once children are involved (I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that yet), and I believe that, in this case, their parents, the adults, should try to cope with the situation, until either the child is somewhat grown up (~14-16) and only divorce earlier if there are really serious (i.e. medically notable) problems - not because of them, but because of the children.

Not sure if I agree with that, at least if what you are saying is that they should stay together until the child's 14-16. Naturally this is all individual, but I believe it is in the best interest of the children too end an awful relationship before it goes too far. But naturally they should try to mend things and stay together and not just split up just like that, but it is just the same for couples without kids. The most important thing when children is involved is to think about them. It can not be good for children to grow up in a house where the parents just hate each other more every day. And even if they do divorce they should still communicate about the children and have the same rules and such. I know of parents that spoil their kids so that they will be the "best" parent, and no one wants that. But then again, that happens with happily married parents too.

All I can say that my parents divorced when I was young (I was sevenish iirc) but I really believe that was for the best. I can not imagine those two together at all. And I had a happy childhood as I was too oblivious to notice anything bad about their relationship, but I think if they had continued to force themselves to stay together I would have noticed and that would have been awful. But I must say they did handle the divorce really well, they did everything they could to make our lives as happy and pleasant as possible. Not like some people I know of who refuse to talk to their former partner, always talk bad about them to the kids and are all like "No, I don't care if you have to be away because of work this weekend, it is your weekend, I can not take the kids. We had agreed on this." As well as "I don't care if it is a one-time opportunity to do that with the kids, this is my week so hands off!"

I know I am just rambling and not making any sense, but to stay together for the kids does not make sense in most cases, divorce is not bad if you handle it like adults and think of the kids first.

[Akonyl]

Although my parents didn't divorce, I knew a few kids who had parents that did, and although they thought it sucked a bit that their parents were getting divorced, it seemed like they weren't so sad at the divorce itself as how their parents felt about each other. Sure, one of them at times expressed his disdain for people with "normal happy families", but this wouldn't be the case for him even if his parents stayed together considering that his mom was basically insane. The only friend who really disliked the situation of his parents getting divorced had his parents divorce when he was ~18ish, and that wasn't even because his parents were getting divorced, but because with his mom no longer there, he didn't have anyone to convince his exceedingly rich dad to let him to have swanky get-togethers at his dad's mansion.

Also, to Callid: I'm a bit confused by your notion that they should cope with emotional issues for the kids, but that it's fine if they divorce due to medical reasons. I would think that emotional differences which can often lead to fighting etc would be more of a reason to divorce as it can lead to a kid growing up in an unhealthy environment than anything medical.

edit: Also, not entirely relevant to the conversation, but I can't ever talk about "staying together for the kids" without thinking about this
Oh, 90s.

[KangarooGirl]

Hmm...I put anti-divorce because I interpreted the question not as outlawing divorce completely, but kind of a last resort thing. Marriage is a big deal imo and people should really consider their partners carefully before getting married. Like people said, if something happens between them and it's going to hurt both parties worse if they stayed together and nothing would change that then by all means, get divorced.

[doublemoonlight]

I Honestly think Divorice will not be needed if EACH of the partner Choose who they will be married carefully BEFORE they were marriad. Like hoplessidiot said marriage is big deal and as such marriage itself should be considered quite carefully not as a care-free decision that you might regreat afterwards.

[Kor]

My parents divorced when I was 11, and I was completely fine with that; plus divorce rates are becoming extremely high these days. I don't agree, though, with the ideology of "staying for the sake of the kids" since if two individuals can't live with each other, they shouldn't be forced to live with each other. Kids aren't oblivious to the relationship between their parents, so the atmosphere in the house might be impossible and damaging for the children as well.

[sonoci]

What Kor said. In fact, I've learned in psychology that children are actually more aware to the moods around the house and can tune into those things...so it would be bad even if the parents were "coping" but really underneath it all they were miserable. The child could tell, and that would make them uncomfortable.

Anyway, as for the question, I am also pro-divorce. However, along with considering carefully before marriage what you're getting into and involving a limit to how many divorces one can have, I believe there should be some type of minimum amount of time a couple has to be married (lessened if they have good reasons, ie: for the sake of a child). For instance, if you got married the minimum time or whatever would prevent you from getting divorced in, say, a week, because - let's be real here - any marriage that lasted that little amount of time shouldn't have been there in the first place. The minimum time could prevent people from just marrying off lazily...perhaps. They could always get married, realize it's not gonna work and then live separately, but then that'd be even more ridiculous.

I always find really short marriages to be fascinating. I mean, if you're looking for a partner, try it out first. Move in with each other, maybe go on little getaways, see if it works. If you're looking for a wedding...why? I mean, if it's a marriage to someone you don't love long enough to stay with for a week, obviously the wedding wouldn't be that special. If it's just the dazzle of wedding life, have a damn party. 

Well, as someone who isn't interested in relationships, I guess maybe I'm not the right person to ask