Catholic and Enjoying It!
Mark Shea's Blog: So That No Thought of Mine, No Matter How Stupid, Should Ever Go Unpublished Again!
Follow Patheos Catholic:
…means that when a woman gets ill, her husband can ditch her for a younger model–and it’s not his fault!
No Fault Divorce: the Ultimate Oxymoron
CLICK HERE TO "LIKE" PATHEOS CATHOLIC ON FACEBOOK
Wait, I thought it was only considered cool by our culture when the lady dumped her ‘zero to find a real hero’. When I guy does it, I thought culture frowned on that.
Sheesh, I need to update my culture playbook. I’m way out of date, I guess.
No fault divorce in practice means that a husband may consider aging to be an illness and ditch his wife for a younger model — but pretty much the only actual fact reported in the linked article is that a study found more divorces when wives over 50 get ill than when husbands over 50 get ill.
The study author is quoted as saying she finds the confirmation of her own bias “encouraging.” I do not find that encouraging.
What I do find encouraging is that the reporter goes on to write, “Research presented at scientific conferences typically has not been published or peer-reviewed and results are considered preliminary.”
Still, it’s sort of funny, in a tragic way, how awkwardly she caveats that the interviews that began in 1992 were only with married *heterosexual* couples.
[And in 15 years, it'll be married heterosexual *couples*.]
I love the speculation that comes through when interpreting results of the study: “If the wife decides to exit the marriage after she becomes ill, it may be because she’s dissatisfied with how well her husband is caring for her, Karraker said. If the husband decides to leave, he may do so to pursue a relationship with a healthy partner.” Apparently, either way, men are dirty rotten scoundrels. Which may be true. But why do I get the impression that the study was really just to demonstrate this point?
Seems like a study designed to confirm the social scientist’s bias and provide her with a catchy headline so that she can have a platform to air her theories about how awful men are. When in reality, I would guess that a majority of these divorces are economically motivated. Especially in the older demographic studied, men are still the primary breadwinners. If the male spouse is a high earner, and the female has little or no income, then it makes perfect economic sense to divorce. The woman can qualify to file for bankruptcy to get rid of medical bills, qualify for assistance only available to lower incomes, or meet the expense to income ratio to be able to deduct ongoing medical bills on her tax return. Of course, I admit that I am only guessing (unlike the learned scientist), but seems like at least a reasonable conclusion to draw.
No-fault divorce was passed to allow abused women to get out of a toxic marriage without the expensive and drawn out process having to “prove” that their husband were cruel or unfaithful. Many didn’t have the resources. That women who become ill are abandoned in larger numbers than men is not surprise to anyone in the healthcare field. Old news.
Guys, there’s no defense for no fault divorce. If a spouse is being abused, they need to get out ASAP. Severing the legal ties can come later, even if the wait is long.
I remember Pat Robertson telling a man who had a wife with Alheimer’s that he should divorce her and marry the girlfriend he was seeing on the side, because the wife’s problems meant she was already “dead’ as far as marriage was concerned. I got to see what “in sickness and in health” means with my own parents. In 2008, my mom was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s. A few months later, she had a heart attack and a major stroke, leaving her paralyzed on the left side and completely unable to care for herself. My father’s care started when she was first hospitalized. My mom, before the stroke, had been leaning more and more to Christianity. The day of the stroke, when we didn’t know if she’d make it, my dad baptized her. When she went to the rehab center 20 miles away from my dad, he drove out there at least twice a day. He would go there early in the morning, when she was still sleeping, so he would be there when she’d wake up. He’d stay a few hours, and when she went to physical therapy, he’d go and do daily errands, then come back and stayed with her all day until she went to sleep. Their insurance (Tricare for veterans and their family)refused to cover a home health care aide for long term care, My dad was her sole caretaker – fed her, bathed her, cleaned up after her because she was incontinent, took her to appointments, went to bat for her when doctors did anything stupid. I live in a different state, but I always talked to my mom once a week. He got a headset for her so she could talk to me, and he made sure to keep me up to date on email. He got a laptop so we could set up Skype and they could see their grandson. When the doctors told him that she had an untreatable terminal infection, he immediately started making plans to have her transferred to a Catholic hospice. When she was transferred, he called a priest, who met him there and gave her the Anointing of the Sick and viaticum. She died two hours later, holding my father’s hand and holding a cross with a relic of Christ’s Sepulture. It was three days before their 40th anniversary. That’s what the marriage vows
Pat Robertson is very strange regarding women.
Have you heard of covenant marriage? It was something that several different states put into effect as a marriage option about a decade ago. Main difference? If a couple starts having problems and want to end the marriage, they have to have counseling and requires a year-long separation before a divorce is granted. The usual type of marriage is offered when getting a marriage license. You also have the option that, if you had a regular marriage in or out of state, you can apply to have the form changed to that of covenant marriage. Liberals absolutely exploded with rage. This was going to oppress women! Men would force their fiancées to agree to this kind of marriage! Churches would use it as a weapon. Women would be trapped in abusive relationships (never mind there’s an emergency clause that gets rid of that year-long separation in cases of abuse)! These type of marriages should be illegal because it’s just wrong! Nearly every single state, under all this pressure, got rid of the option of covenant marriage, even though none of the liberal “predictions” ever came to pass. Arkansas is the only state in the US that still has it as an option. It’s really rare – something less than 5% of couples pick that form of marriage. When we moved here, the priest at our new parish, when we brought up the topic, said that, in the past 5 years, only one engaged couple went with covenant marriage. The very people who say everyone has the right to be married however they choose, were the EXACT SAME PEOPLE who protested covenant marriage. Apparently “marriage equality” doesn’t apply in this case.
They don’t say what happens to the women who are ill after their husbands divorce them. As awful as that sounds we have no idea how these men treated their wives before leaving them. Perhaps they actively or passively blocked medical care for their wives and refused to help them as they got progressively sicker. Perhaps they steered off their wives’ helpful friends, and actively discouraged their wives at every turn. If a husband like that leaves the wife can now get the help she needs. Haven’t we all been surprised when a couple who seems to have it all together is suddenly divorced? While everything may seem normal to us we don’t know what goes on once the door to their house is closed.
Follow Patheos on