Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

No fault divorce

kenny

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,859
The recent adultery thread quickly brought up the topic of no fault divorce.
The idea sounds simple, but a bit of research shows it's not.

... FWIW, I'm not looking into this for me personally.
It's just something I've heard of, never looked into but
I just became curious after its discussion in the other thread.
I suspect many here have understanding (and strong opinions) on this topic.
Let's hear it.

Does anyone disagree with anything in this link? ...

www.marriage.com

What Is a No-Fault Divorce and How to Get It?

Explore the concept of no-fault divorce: its meaning, advantages, and how it simplifies ending marriages amicably. Get insights into this modern approach.
www.marriage.com www.marriage.com
 
Last edited:
I searched for US state maps of no fault states and that wasn't simple either.
There are lots of variation when it comes to stipulations, like waiting periods.
 
Last edited:
I believe Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Nebraska, South Carolina and South Dakota have talked about doing away with no fault divorce. This topic has been brought up a lot this past year. It would make it more difficult to leave an unhappy marriage. My guess is being unhappy, falling out of love and Irreconcilable differences would no longer qualify for a divorce. It would also likely keep abused women stuck in horrible situations. It would also be horrible for the children in these marriages. My guess is more women would lose their lives trying to leave their husbands. I can’t imagine husbands that physically abuse their wives want that being public record.

My thought is no one should be forced to stay with someone they no longer want to be married to. It’s a marriage, not a hostage situation. You can’t make someone love you. In my opinion it’s yet another way to repeal woman’s rights.

I’m interested in hearing other’s opinions on this subject.
 
Last edited:
My ex-husband did all the paperwork for our divorce and saved us a fortune.

When completing the form, he must enter a reason in order to be able to proceed.

He reluctantly ticked the box for adultery.

He appreciated that we grew apart as husband and wife, and I met someone else when I was out and about without him. He did not believe it was entirely my fault. Hence it pained him to have to choose adultery as the grounds for the divorce.

Had the option to choose a "no fault" divorce back in 2004/5, I am certain he would have chosen that option.

DK :roll2:
 
This is a good topic thanks Kenny. There are no easy answers. I need to think about this more (luckily I never had to think about this) but at first thought I think it's better for the spouse who needs to heal emotionally from a marriage where let's say the partner cheated.

www.gavel.io

Why It Might Be a Bad Idea To Pursue No-Fault Divorce | Gavel

There are both legal and moral reasons to consider when choosing between filing a no-fault and an at-fault divorce. Read for a breakdown of how to think through this hard decision.
www.gavel.io www.gavel.io

"
A no-fault divorce may seem like a good idea on the surface, as it may be the more cost effective option when choosing between a no-fault and at-fault divorce, but there are multiple reasons that a no-fault divorce can be unfavorable to either spouse.

Some reasons against filing a no-fault divorce can include:

  • The unilateral nature of a no-fault divorce
  • Still needing to litigate custody, child support and alimony issues
  • Religious motivations
  • Effects on psychological healing




At-fault divorces can be psychologically healing​

Sometimes, a no-fault divorce can take away from the psychological healing that can occur when filing an at-fault divorce. If you are the non-filing spouse, you may feel that you were not heard throughout the marriage and cannot voice the reasons for the failure of the marriage to anyone.

In a no-fault divorce, your voice may not be heard again in court. Letting the court, your spouse, family, and friends know why the divorce is ending and final"


I can see both sides and as with many issues there is no black and white. And because I never had to deal with this I have not put in the time and energy to evaluate this as thoroughly as I would have if I had gone through a divorce
 
It appears that a contested no-fault is similar to an at-fault where court intervention may be necessary. I think the residue of any divorce regardless of how it happens is financial and emotional upset for all the parties involved. Children are going to be affected no matter how their parents split. If the marriage was contentious, the kids were exposed to it so I'm not sure an at-fault vs no-fault would shield them from the fallout.

No-faults came to be because otherwise, couples had to invent wrongdoing by the other when they did not meet the criteria for at-fault. I don't think anyone should be forced to stay in a relationship regardless of the reason. I also don't think that states should be meddling the private relationships of its citizens. We're seeing enough of that BS now so why go back to how things used to be when they used to be bad enough to cause the introduction of no-faults. We need to leave these personal decisions to the parties involved.

The issue of unequal splitting of assets, especially when one spouse may be a real horse's patoot is a concern. If there aren't kids 50/50 split if there's no prenup. With a prenup, 50/50 split of whatever isn't covered in the prenup. Child support according to state law.

The virtue signaling of the people who are pushing for an end to no-fault based on the idea that marriage is sacred and the end of one should not be easy are the same who want to be in our bedrooms and in women's uteri. They are afraid that caucasians will be usurped by those with brown skin and want as many white babies born as possible. Soon they'll be advocating for the number of children a couple is legally bound to have.

Marriage is a contract. Those who wish to be married should make thoughtful decisions before entering the contract. Instead of thinking the relationship is for life, approach it from the possibility that it will end and what will each person do if that happens. Contingencies should be thought about and established prior to the marriage.
 
I’m thankful they exist.
Painting anything with a broad brush is injustice.

It kept me safe in an unsafe marriage.

Reading an article that claims it devalues someone else’s marriage? I can’t help but think that’s similar to reading reasons for banning abortions is due to women get them frivolously.
 
Rfisher said:
Reading an article that claims it devalues someone else’s marriage? I can’t help but think that’s similar to reading reasons for banning abortions is due to women get them frivolously.
Click to expand...

These and similar attitudes are but a few reasons why the 4b Movement has gained popularity in the US. Women are fed up and fighting back.
 
I think no-fault divorces have a lot more pros than cons. Unhappy married people can make for very unhappy children too. There of course can be cost savings in a no-fault, but just because the divorce is no-fault doesn't necessarily mean that 1) it can't be contested by the non-filing spouse ; 2) that the division of assets or alimony can't be litigated; or 3) child custody and/or support can't be litigated.
So they aren't always a cheaper way to go unless both parties can agree on everything.
I don't think having to assign fault publicly does anything to help, and generally can make things more acrimonious. Being trapped in an unhappy marriage, for whatever reason, is no picnic, and as @Calliecake said, marriage shouldn't be a hostage situation. And I also agree that it seems to be one more swipe at women's rights.
 
I think we'd be so much better off if we recognized a marriage as contractual by law, and therefore let the parties dissolve that privately through no fault. It would also keep marriage contracts between two people, period. As someone who was divorced years ago with no estate or child custody to argue over, I cannot imagine going through a "he said, she said" public spectacle.
 
Daisys and Diamonds said:
i think lawyers probably hate a no fault divorce
Click to expand...

Bad lawyers maybe.

A lawyer's job is to act in the best interest of their client. Not in the best interest of the lawyer's own wallet.

If a certain goal can be accomplished in a way that's quicker, easier and cheaper for the client, a good lawyer would recommend that option.

Since a marriage can be entered into simply by the free will of the parties, it should also be dissolved in the same way. Anything else is going backwards, away from the civilization we're all so proud of.
 
.
Daisys and Diamonds said:
i think lawyers probably hate a no fault divorce
Click to expand...

Maybe not.
Apparently a simple no fault divorce take less of a lawyer's time, which means they can take on more clients. :$$)::$$)::$$):

So, maybe it's a wash.
Plus, maybe the work for a no fault divorce is less stressful.
 
Last edited:
kenny said:
.


Maybe not.
Apparently a simple no fault divorce take less of a lawyer's time, which means they can take on more clients. :$$)::$$)::$$):

So, maybe it's a wash.
Plus, maybe the work for a no fault divorce is less stressful
Click to expand...

Well, in my state, you don't need a lawyer at all if things are amicable with no arguments. You can fill out some forms and get some affidavits. I helped a friend do that years ago. There were no children and no issues with money or property.
 
The public library has all the instructions and paperwork to do it without a lawyer.
Obviously a straightforward division of assets and debt, no children.

Thing is - whatever the judge grants
If one party doesn’t follow through (as in refinancing the mortgage in their own name)
The partitioner will need to go back to court (with a lawyer) to enforce it with a new case.
Enforcing isn’t done by that initial divorce court case.

This may vary by location- but that’s my experience, back then.
 
The lawyers stay plenty busy in a no fault divorce states.
I had a lot of law office customers and they all had horror stories.

Spend 10k fighting over who got the dog;
Fighting over furniture for months.
Vicious fighting over the kids with neither parent wanting them.
Both ended up doing jail time and a relative ended up with the kids with no visitation rights for the parents with order of protection\no contact order. Both their lawyers fired them once the kids were safe;
Lots of sleepless nights for the lawyers.
 
Rfisher said:
The public library has all the instructions and paperwork to do it without a lawyer.
Obviously a straightforward division of assets and debt, no children.

Thing is - whatever the judge grants
If one party doesn’t follow through (as in refinancing the mortgage in their own name)
The partitioner will need to go back to court (with a lawyer) to enforce it with a new case.
Enforcing isn’t done by that initial divorce court case.

This may vary by location- but that’s my experience, back then.
Click to expand...

Partitioner -
:lol:
 
We have “no fault” divorce in Oz and thank goodness for that. As someone who was divorced, having to prove his infidelity would have been incredibly painful and probably wouldn’t have improved my situation financially either. Better to be done as quickly and efficiently as possible without further trauma to me so I could move on in life.

(Side note: I did and 6 years later I’m happily remarried and have a baby with a wonderful man).
 
Matata said:
...
The virtue signaling of the people who are pushing for an end to no-fault based on the idea that marriage is sacred and the end of one should not be easy are the same who want to be in our bedrooms and in women's uteri. They are afraid that caucasians will be usurped by those with brown skin and want as many white babies born as possible. Soon they'll be advocating for the number of children a couple is legally bound to have ...
Click to expand...

This notion that banning abortions and trapping white women into having more babies is whack. Even the records exposed by the so-called Centers for Medical Progress in its witch hunt of Planned Parenthood for "selling baby parts" showed that whites weren't the ones having all the abortions. Whites, Asians, and Eurasians finding themselves with an unwanted fetus have a money-making option: They can (sell) put the baby up for a private adoption to some affluent couple and get all of their "expenses" paid plus maybe get college tuition and a new vehicle out of it.
 
No-fault divorce is way more complicated than it sounds. Each state has its own quirks and rules. Definitely not a one-size-fits-all situation.
 
worljewels said:
No-fault divorce is way more complicated than it sounds. Each state has its own quirks and rules. Definitely not a one-size-fits-all situation.
Click to expand...

Sure, but still generally easier, cheaper and faster than a contested divorce, or one where a spouse has to claim fault and prove it and then wait for the defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top