I Divorce You, I Divorce You, I Divorce You!

To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Samantha Friedman, an alumna of the University of California at Berkeley and Fordham University, and I am currently a doctoral clinical psychology student at Saybrook University (San Francisco). I am seeking adults between the ages of 20 and 35 who have experienced parental divorce in either childhood or adulthood to assist me in the completion of a study that examines the effects of parental divorce on marital attitudes and intimacy.

If you agree to participate in this study, please click on this link (http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TK8Q7GT) and complete the survey on SurveyMonkey.com. The online survey I am conducting is very easy to complete. The whole process is designed to take less than 15 minutes to complete. Participation in this study is completely voluntary and anonymous. You are free to not answer any question, to stop participating at any time for any reason, and to not have your information be part of the data set. All forms will be kept confidential; that is, no one will have knowledge of which questionnaire belongs to you.

The aim of my study is to learn about the psychological impact of parental divorce, particularly how the age at which parental divorce occurs influences attitudes towards marriage and intimacy. It is of particular importance to examine the effects of parental divorce on marital attitudes and levels of intimacy because they are indicators of relationship stability. The ultimate goal of this study is to acquire data that can be used to assist adult children of divorce in understanding the impact of mid- to late-life parental divorce and develop strategies that encourage healthy, lasting marriages.

Please contact me if you would like a summary of my findings when the project is finished. If you have any questions, please contact me at SamanthaFriedman@hotmail.com.

Thank you in advance for your time and assistance. I really appreciate your help and I am sincerely grateful.

Best wishes,

Samantha Friedman

Sorry, I caught to this after everyone's gone home! This is a hot button for me also.
I came from a broken home. DeAnna - my mom sounds a lot like yours. I joke that her married relationship with my father was the inspiration for "Sleeping with the Enemy." To this day it is still painful to even recall, but I will say she didn't discover the horror that awaited until after the honeymoon. She became my measure for strength.

I agree that it's too easy for people to get married, but it's also really easy for people to shirk personal responsibility, which seems to be a matching trend. Sometimes divorce is selfish. Sometimes it isn't.
I do want to make a point though: It wasn't so much my parents' divorce that affected me, it was my father who affected me. The screw-up parent who forsakes their kids to indulge themselves, who forsakes their wife/husband for another, who treats their wife/husband like crap, the person who doesn't realize that marriage is a compromise, a mutual sacrifice. I took the whole "I'm vowing my allegiance to this man before God" way seriously. Marriage was first a religious union, it became civil when the whigs of yore discovered that they could jack taxes on it and make it a commodity.

Anyway, I was thrilled when my parents divorced. I cried many times over what my father did but NEVER because my mother divorced him. For that I rejoiced.

I personally do not believe in divorce (only for myself) and this made me incredibly choosy with regards to men. When you get me, you've got me FOR LIFE. I'm thankful that I will not have to go through what my mother and other women have gone/are going through.

This is an exception to what I believe La Shawn was talking about. I don't feel that she was targeting people in my mom's situation, or Lisa's. However, I have a friend and a family member, both who married and divorced on a whim (one barely two months after. I spent $50 bucks on the gift! I wanted it back! My gawd I sound cheap). At least there weren't children involved, which would've been exceptionally sad.

Dana
www.mamalogues.com ( http://www.mamalogues.com )

That, Laura, is exactly what I mean to invoke when I fantasize about reality-checking my 20-year-old self. With something made by Acme ( http://home.nc.rr.com/tuco/looney/acme/anvils.html ).

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

Well said. It is often painful, and rarely is it done on whim, unless consumated on a whim. When love is what led two people there, it's hell on the way out, for all involved.

67% of divorces are instituted by women. I see this stat tossed at feminists frequently, but there is good and a myriad of reasons for it, no need to go there now, unless someone has desire to.

Our divorce was necessary. 27 years together, 23 years, 11 months of them married. Two daughters, one by then out of home, one not. And it was one of the more unusual reasons for divorce, it isn't often someone crosses a gender line, but do so I did. The pain and destructiveness of this I cannot even begin to outline here. Yet, it was necessary, there was no other path.

Divorce hurts everyone, but the alternative damn well could hurt more. The last months there were the stuff of nightmares, likely for her as well as for me. It will always haunt me, as will the guilt... that mountain will never leave me behind, it follows me as a shadow.

I will resist any restriction on the right to divorce. We need to always remember - before and after marriage - that all relationships take two to form, and one to end. It is a fact of life that is essential to being free to follow the life path best suited to that individual... and to equality for women. Being trapped in ugly relationships is a horror generations prior to ours knew all to well. Crying in silence night after night is no substitute for a troublesome divorce rate.

And children, those most trusting of us, those most hurt... are also harmed by relationships gone sour, because they frequently are the first to sense the trauma and worry on it. They sometimes know before we ever admit an issue exists.

Nelle ( http://liberalfeministtranniedyke.blogspot.com/ )

1) What effect does an annulment have on the legitimacy of one's children?

It seems to me that children are still children, whether their parents are married or divorced or never hitched in the first place. What is "legitimacy"? That could mean a lot of things. Historically the implications of that label have led to treating kids as less than because their parents could not get along or did not marry or stay married for whatever reason. Now that is sad.

2) If a couple has been married for...75 years, let's say...is it really possible for one spouse to have the entire marriage declared null and void in the eyes of the church?

That is a religious question, isn't it? Whose religion? Whose church? It seems to me that divorce exists because marriage is a civil contract governed by the state, and there's no reason to make such contracts unbreakable -- especially since a bad marriage can be worse than any divorce. (Know any abused women or children? I can't count how many I've known. What would forcibly perpetuating the marriage accomplish?) As to what divorce or annulment means in one's church, I would suggest one ask one's minister or priest. There are no universal truths on this -- especially in this country, which was founded on religious freedom and not government-enforced religious doctrine.

Here's a radical idea: Maybe the divorce isn't the problem, but rather the relative ease of getting married. I don't know. I tend to be a romantic, but the scales have long since fallen from my eyes, and I don't see marriage for the wrong reasons as any sort of true partnership at all. Maybe it's getting married that should be more difficult.

Laura

NB. I was raised by my father, unusual in those times when custody was usually automatically granted to the mother.

1. From the church's perspective, annulment has no legitimacy on the children of the annulled union. It actually improves the status of the formerly married partners; as divorced people they could not receive communion or remarry within the church.
2. Length of time of the marriage does not affect whether or not that marriage can be annulled. Annulment is based in very large part on an assessment of the state of mind of the couple prior to marriage by a tribunal composed of clergy and canon lawyers (canon lawyers are experts in canon law, the internal system of laws of the church). The tribunal assesses whether both halves of the couple understood and came to accept the duties and the vulnerabilities inherent in the church's definition of the marital sacrament.

It's a common misconception that all annulments are for marriages of short duration or marriages in which no sex occurred, although such marriages would be candidates for annulment if one of the partners applied. Also, annulments can be granted with the consent and participation of only one partner. I believe that the partners must be civilly divorced first.

My parents were married for seventeen years, although they separated many years before their divorce. Their separation improved my childhood immensely, because my home became a safe place to be.

The annulment of their marriage took place many years after their divorce; it was something my father, who is now deceased, pursued, because he wanted to be an active member of his church again. Once completed he became a eucharistic minister and brought communion to hospitalized people, including at our local mental hospital, including locked wards. This gave him and them a lot of peace, and would not have been possible without the annulment.

I think it's really interesting what generates wicked comment action. It's usually the stuff I end up discussing with my bestie over ham and eggs on a sunday morning.

I think that like any other human enterprise, marriage carries the risk of failure. It's better not to blame people for trying and failing.

You can blame parents for behaving selfishly, but if a parent is being selfish they are going to be that way whether they stay married or not.

Miriam
The Flink ( http://www.flinknet.com/theflink )
"like harnessing a unicorn to harvest potatoes"

Tip of the hat to Lisa for saying so calmly and cogently what I would've said if I wasn't sputtering over the phrase "little regard for how their selfish actions may affect children." La Shawn, I'm sure there are folks for whom that characterization is accurate. I'm equally certain those people comprise a tiny minority of divorced parents.

And I don't mind telling you that for those of us who find ourselves divorced in part BECAUSE we are putting our children first, have enough to deal with already without adding that sort sweeping judgement to our plates. (Besides, the last time I checked, it was something about do unto others, not judge unto others.)

Sorry; this is sort of a hot button for me.

Mir

--
Personal: Woulda Coulda Shoulda ( http://wouldashoulda.com/ )

At Ty's Toy Box: Listen to your Mommy! ( http://tystoyboxblog.com/ )

...to my list of role models. Thanks DeAnna.

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

Just throwing in my 2 cents here that I wouldn't want to erase my parent's divorce, even if I could. They divorced when I was 8. And, yes, it was very traumatic for all involved including my siblings and me. Both of my parent's were really great through it all, never talking bad about the other to us, and doing everything they could to make the transition less traumatic.

And I would not give up for anything the role model my mom became. She had dropped out of school in the 8th grade, grew up mostly in Juvenile Hall and on the streets of Miami, got married young, spent 10 years exclusively as a housewife, and all of a sudden found herself single and with primary custody of 3 kids, ages 4, 6, and 8. So she just up and took herself to college, got her Master's degree in Clinical Social Work in less than 5 years while also working full time or more than full time and taking full time college credits year round, never taking the summers off. She now runs her own business in Montana where she has the county contract for therapy in a three-county area, owns a small ranch with horses, and pursues a side business as a very talented artist.

I suppose that if she had been "putting the kids first" she would have stayed in the marriage, or maybe spent the next 14 years working full time as a housekeeper in order to support all three of us kids while we grew up. But by putting herself first, she gave us the example of a woman who can do whatever she sets her mind to, who accomplishes important things, who makes the world a better place, even when that means sacrificing a bit in the short term. Ultimately, she gave us the example of a woman who values her own self immensely, an example that is grossly lacking in a lot of young women's lives.

I wouldn't change that for anything.

DeAnna
http://www.whoaphotos.com/blog

Judy, that's agonizing. As a mother who sought divorce as a last resort, well I know how devastating are the consequences to all involved. The children have to come first--that includes adult children. And even if one partner isn't big enough to put the children first, the other parent has to and can make all the difference.

I want to offer a personal perspective on this paragraph--and fully acknowledge that my filter on the subject is utterly subjective and probably borderline defensive! Here goes:

Despite statistics showing that divorce has a greater impact on children than previously thought, people continue to leave marriages and enter into new ones with little regard for how their selfish actions may affect children.

I talk with separated, divorcing, divorced and single parents all the time, and most of us are obsessed, even tortured by how our actions affect/affected/will affect our children. These are people who, unlike some celebrities ( http://www.popsugar.com/6118 ), would never make out with a date in front of the kids. Indeed, I know many people who decide not to date at all.

I don't know any couples who got divorced on a whim -- on the contrary, I know how hard many people work to keep from getting divorced and then work to put the kids first.

I'm not familiar enough with various liturgies to comment on grounds for annulment. However, I will weigh in on this: I am willing to own my divorce. I married for the right reasons. I tried. Like hell. I have learned that even though I was divorced when my son was one, the marriage and its two members are still a huge factor in his identity. Always will be. And that has made me all the more determined to do a better job of raising my child, every single day.

Unfortunately, some days are better than others. If I could turn the clock back and talk with my 20-year-old self I think I would deliver a four-day lecture on what a married partnership truly is. On what two people need to bring to the table in order to grocery shop and change diapers and care for dying parents and deal with taxes for the next 1,000 years together. And then I'd talk about the awful shocks life throws couple that no could or would ever predict or even want think about. That's where praying comes in...

Lisa Stone
BlogHer Co-founder ( http://www.blogher.com/member/lisa-stone )
Surfette ( http://surfette.typepad.com )

When my husband and I were divorced, he started dating a widow who was Catholic. When they planned to marry I asked him how "she" could marry a divorced non-Catholic. He said that OUR marriage wasn't recognized by THE CHURCH so she could marry him in good faith--as if he had never been married.

I asked him if that meant our four children were bastards?

He had no answer.

Judy

I am Catholic, albeit non-practicing, but recall a fairly recent Dr. Phil ( http://drphil.com/shows/show/631/ ) where a family was being torn apart after the father requested and received an annulment of his marriage. The adult daughters were devastated and at least one of them just could not get beyond it and forgive him. They felt as though, after 31 years of marriage to their mother, his annulment was a betrayal of their existence as well as the values he had taught them. I had my doubts about him too because he got the annulment so that he could marry a non-Catholic woman so it just seemed passively and slyly vindictive to me and caused more harm to his children than it showed commitment to his faith. I don't know all of the rules and regulations of annulment but, cynically I guess, have always seen it as one of those "loop holes" where people with money or favor could escape the rules of the church.