No Fault Divorce
A Trojan Horse
Before 1970, all divorces were fault based divorces. That meant that someone had to be proved at fault before a divorce decree could be issued.
Courtroom battles were treacherous and costly because the spouse losing the battle could lose everything. People noticed how much hatred was built up between divorcing couples and how harmful this was for children, so no fault divorce legislation was proposed.
What a Beautiful Horse!
No fault divorce was a beauty to behold. As horrible as divorce is, no fault promised to reduce fighting over who was at fault. Most partners guilty of adultery or abuse would give in to the terms of the faithful partners rather than allow their divorces to become fault based.
One side effect of this is that couples would be more likely to reconcile than if they had gone through an ugly courtroom battle. A “marriage hospital” was promised as well to help couples reconcile and restore their marriages.
The Horse Enters the Gates
Legislation passes in California. It is seen as a big win, and people in all states love it, so it starts to sweep the nation. But, few know what terror lies inside the horse.
It’s Midnight
Enemies Climb out of the Horse
Enemy #1: One legislator falls for a beautiful young woman and decides to dump his wife of 25 years. He sees there may be a way to use no fault divorce laws for his advantage.
Suppose he asks his wife for a divorce. She might refuse. In fact, she might turn around and file for a fault based divorce suing him for all he has and support payments. And she will get it because he is guilty.
He could offer her a no fault divorce on her terms, but that would not be much better for him and his mistress. Either way he will lose because he is wrong and he knows it.
But, suppose he can hire a smart lawyer and demand a no fault divorce. If he can do that, he can split the community property, keep all property obtained prior to the marriage, and perhaps no support payments at all will be necessary.
Enemy #2: The divorce lawyer sees a lucrative future in winning this case. What if all divorces were no fault? What if any adulterer could get a cheap and easy divorce? What a windfall of profit this would bring to every divorce attorney in the land.
Enemy #3: The opposing attorney sees the same lucrative future in losing this case. Thus this legislator’s wife is without representation. She may be paying for an attorney, but her attorney has no motive for winning her case.
Enemy #4: The judge hears the arguments of two attorneys supposedly in opposition but not really. If he were to rule in favor of the legislator, he, too, could reap a huge windfall. Divorce attorneys and judges would both be in demand. And, the state legislatures would be forced to raise judge’s salaries
Stolen Vowsby Judy Parejko
Learn more about the fascinating history surrounding legislation that effectively rendered every marriage in America broken.
