buyingShould Marriage Be Converted into a Five-Year Contract
Marriage is one of the oldest institutions of human civilization. Forms of marital relations may vary in different cultures but the very essence of marriage is common for most people and nations. William Statsky (2003) states, that marriage is “the legal union of a man and a woman, as husband and wife, which can be dissolved by divorce or death” (p. 3). Nowadays, people have more freedom in their private life and they can decide and choose who they want to marry, how many times they want to marry, whether they want to have an officially registered marriage or cohabitation. Finally, people can choose between heterosexual and homosexual marriages, but there is one big problem which seems to be growing together with social freedoms. This is the problem of divorces which became a burning issue in the current American society. The statistics proves that, along with obtaining unlimited social rights and freedoms, most people fail in the primary task, i.e. to preserve their marriage for a long period of time. Nowadays American authorities try to find an effective alternative to a traditional marriage which, probably, will help to reduce divorce rate in the country and refresh people’s attitude towards the institute of marriage. A five-year renewable marriage contract may become one of the possible solutions to the problem.
The very idea of marriage contracts is no longer surprising or shocking. Nowadays, signing a marriage contract is not a privilege of the rich and famous. Most people, even if they have a very modest inheritance, still prefer to be legally protected in case of the marriage dissolution. Statsky (2003) points out, that “to an increasing degree marriage is viewed as an economic partnership that is subject to mutual modification, rather than an eternal union of love benevolently presided by a husband” (p. 3). Marriage contracts regulate financial issues, division of property, spousal support and other questions which arise after dissolution of marriage on the ground of divorce or annulment. But the spouses cannot withdraw from their marital status without the third party- the state. Very often divorce proceeding bring additional pain and discomfort to the parties, as the spouses must discuss all the unpleasant events which led to divorce. So, the state suggests implementation of a five- year renewable marriage contract which will help spouses to avoid painful divorce suit. Though other scholars have expressed the idea of a fixed-term marriage contract, the first to break the news was Australian academic Helen Goltz. She argued that a life-long marriage contract should be transformed into a fixed-term renewable contract by analogy with fixed-terms contracts for buying cars, property and insurance. Stephen Lynch (2009), a correspondent to New York Post, discussed Helen Goltz’s plan. According to it newlyweds would “sign 5-year or 10-year contracts, which would then be renewed at their expiration, “to encourage partners to work towards maintaining a good relationship — in effect, it opens communication akin to a marriage performance review”(Lynch n. p.). In case of spouses’ refusal to re- up they are free not to appear to the court for the contract renewal after its expiration date. The contract will dissolve automatically without “shame and stigma” associated with divorce” (Lynch n. p.). In Goltz’s opinion a five-year term would encourage couples to evaluate their relationships and take specific steps for improvement of their family life. If only fixed-term contracts were such a great way out of the current alarming situation! We all would give a sigh of relief. Unfortunately, there are many hidden rocks in this theory which will question the effectiveness of fixed-term marriage contracts.
The first argument of the proponents of marriage contracts is the high costs which the couple must pay for their divorce suit. With a five-year contract, if the couple does not apply for the contract renewal after the expiration date, marriage will dissolve automatically. The procedure of marriage annulment is absolutely free and the presence of the parties is not required. That is really a great advantage, but what about the contract renewal procedure? Is it guaranteed to be absolutely free as well as contract annulment? Everybody knows how much it takes to renew the driving license, for example. It is doubtful that the government would leave the marriage renewal procedure free of charge as well. In this case it seems that the government stands for dissolution of marriages rather than for their renewal.
The other disputable question is children and custody. What children’s fate will be after the expiration date? One may argue that divorces happen irrespectively of a family size. In Australia, for example, in 2007 “the proportion of divorces involving children was 49.3 per cent in 2007 (ABS)” (Goltz 2). Goltz does not think that fixed-term marriage contracts may increase the number of divorces among family with children. At the same time she also doubts that traditional marriage would make parents stay together for the sake of children. She also pointed out that, “By 2026, couples without children are projected by the ABS to be the most common type of family in Australia (44 % of all families)” (Goltz 6). Unfortunately, we must admit that children are no longer a deterrent to parents’ divorce. Modern people focus mostly on their own comfort and profit. Children become an unnecessary burden which causes a lot of trouble. Nevertheless, the couples with children will have to apply to the court, in order to decide on the future fate of their children. The myth about an easy way out without any troubles with the court system gradually dissolves. Again, it seems that government is more interested in having childless families, as for them the procedure of contract annulment will be the easiest of all.
Marcassa and Ponthière provide the data from National Center for Health Statistics, which states that, “In 2008, about 2,162,000 marriages were celebrated in the U.S. At the same time, the number of divorces amounts to 1,099,080.1” (Marcassa &Ponthière 3). Since the 20th century the divorce rate was multiplied by five. Statistics suggests that most divorces happen within the first 1-3 years. So, the rest of the five-year term may become a real challenge for the two people who cannot stand living with each other. From the other hand, it may be special time for the spouses to revise and evaluate their unsuccessful family life which may lead to the renewal of the marriage license.
Now I will speak about religious meaning of marriage. In Christianity marriage is an institution set by God. The Bible teaches us, “Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife” (1 Cor. 7:3-4). American society was initially established on the Christian principles. Due to this fact Americans became a strong and prosperous nation. Through centuries marriage has been a sacred social institution, based on mutual trust and respect, confidence and love. Religious Americans feel insulted by fixed-term marriage contracts, which deprive marriage of its solemnity and sanctity. Turning marriage into a formal contract with an easy way to quit the relationships will hardly solve social problems existing in American society. The rate of divorces will be replaced by the rate of couples who did not renew their marriage license.
First of all, government should reduce the costs of a divorce suit, so that people can break their traditional life-long marriage without enormous financial expenditure. At the governmental level the steps must be taken for preservation of the existing marriages and promotion of family values among the youths. When Goltz published her paper online one typical commentator said, “We should be encouraging married couples to stay together even when the road looks rough” (Lynch n.p.). From the early age parents should prepare children for their future family life, explaining that marriage is not an everlasting festival. It requires everyday hard work, enormous investment of people’s moral and physical powers. Teaching love, respect and forgiveness will help to refresh people’s attitude towards marriages.
At the end we may say that marriage contracts in general serve the purpose of regulating financial relations between the spouses and are very important in modern society. Nevertheless, turning a traditional life-long marriage into a five-year renewable contract does not seem to be very effective. Such contracts are unlikely to reduce divorce rate and may cause additional problems for a family with children after the dissolution of marriage. Finally, fixed-term contracts do not coincide with human moral and religious values. One of possible solutions to the problem may be cultivation of family relationships and promoting of high moral values at governmental level.