Wednesday, February 24, 2010

How to choose a mate in Kansas

The Kansas State House of Representatives recently added language to a bill to include the option of covenant marriage. If the bill is passed into law, Kansas will join Arkansas, Arizona and Louisiana as the only states with covenant marriage laws

You can learn something about your potential mate if he or she wants a "traditional" rather than a "covenant" marriage:
...under the "traditional" marriage, a couple is entitled to a no-fault divorce after a six-month separation.
When a couple opts for the "covenant" marriage, they agree to waive their right to the no-fault divorce. In the event that the marriage does fall apart, only adultery, abuse, abandonment or a lengthy separation will allow a divorce to take place.

See The Contractual View of Marriage on how relationship specific investment differentiates marriage from a series of meaningless spot market transactions.

1 comment:

  1. Personally, I like the fact that the Mexican government is even trying to tackle the problem of expensive and painful divorce proceedings.

    Each day millions of couples get married with the dream of happily ever after. And no matter what their experience elders tell them, that marriage is a constant negotiation, with highs and lows like any business transaction (which marriage is) they still believe they can beat the odds and be wildly happy, everyday forever.

    So yet another business, the business of divorce is a painful undertaking not to mention expensive. While it has been reported that the divorce rate has been declining in America, the cost of divorce is still very high.

    Marriage was once a spiritual union but is now regulated by the government. Therefore the government should have laws in place that protect each party from huge legal expenses and prolong court battles over money and property. (Custody battles are another manner).

    In New York, anything you bring into the marriage is yours. As long as you don’t co-mingle funds or property when you marry. Of course the courts allow couples to negotiate this point. That should not be allowed. The law is there and should be finite.

    All property and money that is garnered during the course of the marriage (much like business partners) is split, after expenses between both parties. This should include the expense of the divorce itself, but it doesn’t. Each can incur their own expense.

    I have a friend who was just divorced. Her husband’s lawyer rejected an offer last March, but after $25,000 in legal fees – on both sides – they accepted that same offer in December.

    I think when two people come into a marriage with considerable personal property and wealth, a contract is necessary – a pre-nup – to secure each other’s assets. This is very common with individuals marrying later in life. There is nothing wrong with protecting your assets. And it does not say anything negative about the person who asks for such an agreement to be signed.

    If the government wants to regulate marriage, then divorce not be difficult and expensive. It is inevitable that people will get divorced.

    ReplyDelete