| |||
|
By Jim Coggins
Vancouver family lawyer Georgialee Lang welcomed many of the proposed changes, telling the Vancouver Sun they were "absolutely groundbreaking." On the other hand, while welcoming some of the changes, Dave Quist suggested the changes are "not going to solve all the problems." Quist is executive director of the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada (IMFC), a Christian research agency based in Ottawa. A 182-page white paper outlining the proposed changes was released July 19 by Attorney General Michael de Jong. It is based on four years of study and consultation. The government is inviting further feedback until October 8, after which it will develop the white paper into proposed legislation.
The goals set out for the process were to modernize the 30 year old law, to encourage co-operative approaches to resolving family law disputes and to make the law easier to understand.
When contacted by CC.com, Quist was in the process of carefully analyzing the white paper, for the purpose of writing a formal response which will be submitted to the BC government as part of the feedback process. He agreed to answer some questions on a preliminary basis.
CC.com: Is it a good idea to make the divorce process less adversarial?
Quist: There is no doubt that there are problems in the family court system. Most men in a divorce feel they have been put out to pasture and are financially stressed. Where there is a family breakdown, we need to find better ways to make the process less adversarial and to make sure people are treated fairly.
However, the real problem is the basic premise many such laws are based on -- that we should make family breakdown easier. I wish we as a society put as much effort into making marriage work.
Divorce is extremely costly. The B.C. government spends $694 million a year in direct costs of divorce, and that does not include indirect costs such as increased medical expenses and declines in work productivity for those going through a divorce.
There is also a huge social cost. It creates a huge stress load. The period after a divorce is when kids often go off the tracks -- into drugs, alcohol and gang activity.
CC.com: Is divorce necessary in some cases?
Quist: There are only a few cases where divorce is the best option, and those are usually cases where there is abuse of some kind -- such as physical abuse, sexual abuse or alcohol abuse. But those only amount to about four percent of the total. The other 96 percent of troubled marriages are salvageable.
Studies show that, while people think they will find happiness after a divorce, over 85 percent aren't any happier five years later. On the other hand, a majority of couples who get counselling and other help to stay together are much happier five years later.
IMFC will be making recommendations to the B.C. government in this area.
CC.com: You said you agreed with the proposed legislation's goal to make divorce less adversarial and to have the couple reach agreement outside the court system.
Quist: Once the lawyers get involved, it becomes more adversarial, and no one wins but the lawyers. Statistics show that often the assets don't go to either partner but to legal costs. |
However, by making the process less adversarial, I hope it will help the couple realize their problems are solvable -- and if they can resolve the issues involved in splitting up, then why can't they resolve their other issues and stay together?"
CC.com: The white paper also proposes changing language to be less adversarial, by replacing terms such as "custody" and "access" with "guardianship" and "parenting time."
Quist: I don't see how changing language will make much difference. What really matters is a change in attitude.
CC.com: The white paper also proposes allowing children to have more than two legally recognized parents, for instance, for homosexual and lesbian couples who need a third party to help them produce a child.
Quist: The whole issue has become more prominent not just for same-sex couples but also for heterosexual couples who are having infertility problems. This is due to couples delaying having children until they are older and less fertile, but also due to promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases and abortion, which change the cellular structure of the cervix and womb and make women less fertile.
When a sperm donor, an egg donor and a surrogate mother are added into the mix, a child could end up with five legal parents. That will not make matters easier. Adding more people will make it more complicated. And the idea that if [those involved] can put it in writing before the birth, it will prevent an adversarial situation is a pipe dream.
The proposed legislation has not addressed the complications involved in processes such as in vitro fertilization. A recent study supported by the IMFC, called 'My Daddy's Name is Donor,' showed that children who find out that one of their natural parents was a donor often have a strong negative reaction, with higher rates of mental illness and involvement in crime. These children may be loved, but as they grow up, they sense something is missing. Something is intrinsically built into us that makes us want to know who we are.
The law needs something else. Donor anonymity needs to be addressed.
CC.com: The proposed law treats unmarried couples who have lived together for two years or who have a child together the same as married couples, including provisions for the dividing of property. Is this a good approach?
Quist: Society assumes there is no difference between cohabitation and marriage. But children do much better when raised by their married biological parents. In our submission, we will stress the difference between cohabitation and marriage. Cohabitation is not a practice marriage, but a practice divorce. The couple are only partly committed. Marriage is much more than a contract. It includes commitment, covenant, teamwork and love.
Often we don't realize the repercussions of legal changes until five or ten years down the road. No-fault divorce was brought in 1968 with the expectation that it would make things better. Now we know that there is no such thing as a good divorce. Let's figure out how to stop the negative cycle. That's not in the white paper.
CC.com: What should churches be doing?
Quist: Marriage is hard work, but very worthwhile work. And helping people make marriage work is one of the roles churches should have. I've talked to community helping agencies around the world, and the most successful programs are not government-run but community-based. This represents a real opportunity for local neighbourhood churches to have an influence. Churches can offer the Alpha marriage course, counselling sessions, books and DVDs. There are a lot of good materials to help couples improve communications and work as a team.
Being involved in a church community is a great help to married couples. The pastoral staff usually have some counselling training, and there are care groups where people care for each other. Being able to recognize that there are problems and have people care for you is something that many people outside the church don't have access to. July 29/2010 | ||
