USA – DELAWARE Trends and Developments Contributed by: Curtis P Bounds, Bayard
for allowing the patricidal-/matricidal-like behav - iour that is commonly associated with divorce litigation. Cue here society’s and media’s lam - pooning or deriding divorce as in the film The War of the Roses . Making divorce the bogeyman for a failed marriage creates a pattern of letting the parties to the divorce off the hook when they could have obtained a suitable outcome had they been given the proper guidance from their counsellors, both legal and otherwise. Even – and especially – in cases of particularly contentious divorces, lawyers serve as a sub - stitute for the trust and communication that have broken down between the parties. While the divorcing spouses may no longer be able to negotiate directly due to mistrust or conflict, their attorneys function as intermediaries. By channelling their clients’ needs and expecta - tions through professional dialogue, lawyers can establish a framework for resolution. This process relies on trust and communication between the attorneys, which effectively replac - es the trust and communication that no longer exists between the parties. When attorneys col - laborate effectively, they create an environment where their clients can achieve a fair and sus - tainable outcome. However, when adversarial tactics dominate, the process can exacerbate conflicts, prolonging the resolution and increas - ing the emotional and financial toll on the parties. Ultimately, when the parties and their lawyers are not capable of providing a substitute set of contracts for the parties to engage with and even enrich the rest of their phantom marriage, the court of jurisdiction steps in to provide the par - ties with their last set of contracts. Litigants may view the court’s actions as a form of public tak - ing– ie, “the court is telling me what to do/what I can keep/what I am to receive”. But, really, the court is giving the parties what they cannot do
for themselves because they presently lack the ability to form any new contracts and are without the necessary trust and communication required to do so. In time, many formerly married couples do learn a new basis of trust and communication that allows them to separate themselves from the authority of the court. The importance of divorce law becomes appar - ent when considering its role in maintaining societal stability. Without fair and enforceable divorce laws, individuals might avoid marriage altogether, fearing the potential consequences of a contentious break-up. This fear of marriage is in part becoming true as young people hesi - tate to marry, fearing the possibility of a difficult and painful divorce. They fail to realise that a long and healthy union – particularly in a soci - ety such as the USA, which may not have the strong social safety net of other Western coun - tries – is unsustainable without remedies if that relationship ends. It calls to mind two famous Hollywood actors who have maintained a long relationship and also famously without mar - riage – the difference being that each of these individuals is independently wealthy from one another and can maintain their relationship free from economic entanglements and solely on the bonds of human love and affection. Divorce should not be viewed as the enemy of marriage, but as its necessary counterpart. By providing a pathway for resolving irreconcil - able differences, divorce laws ensure that mar - riage remains a viable and respected institution. Without the option of divorce, marriage could become a trap rather than a partnership, dis - couraging individuals from entering into it or causing them to stay in harmful relationships. Divorce law, when applied with fairness and compassion, offers couples a way to untangle
362 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook