In law school we learned how to “frame” the facts to make a winning argument. This basically requires viewing things from a different point of view. The framing of facts, however, is not limited to the practice of law. In fact, how you frame (or view) “success” and ”failure” is an essential element in achieving happiness and success in life.
The New York Times has an article on about a man whose son, Sam, was so uncoordinated that in elementary school he fell out of his chair if he tried to get something from his backpack. Sam grew up to play varsity football in high school — And lost every single game.
Still, Sam didn’t feel bad at all. He played his best and that is all that mattered.
Psychologists who study the effects of optimism and pessimism will often try to help depressed patients “reframe things” to see loss more positively. That might mean encouraging them to take pride in getting through an awful experience, or saying ‘you didn’t fail, you found something that didn’t work.’”
Conclusion: Divorce is not failure. Through your marriage you learned about love, loss and negotiation. In the end, it didn’t work out. You still have these skills. They’ll be useful later on.
The Professor believes that the men should be held financially responsible for their offspring. However, she sees no benefit in “roping” the man in as the “father” and forcing him to co-raise the child. She believes that the child would be better off raised alone by the mother or by man of the mother’s own choosing.
This is my response to her article (assuming Illinois law applies):
No one will force a father who does not want custody into joint custody. This means that the “father” does not need to do any “raising”.
If the father doesn’t want visitation and the mother agrees, this can be included in the parenting agreement. Anyway, there is very little that a court or judicial system can do to force a non-custodial parent to visit with their child.
If the mother finds a husband who is a better “father” for her child, then the biological father can waive his parental rights and give up the child for adoption.
Recognizing the reluctant biological father as the “father” of a child encourages the man to pay child support and take responsibility for his child.
In essence, apart from child-support, there is very little that the law requires from a reluctant father. However, changing the law to take away the rights of any father would create devastating results for caring, loving fathers and their children.
I will cut the Seattle Professor some slack though, she’s not a divorce lawyer and hasn’t seen the harm that children suffer from a distant relationship with their fathers.
Time.com has a an great article titled Will the Market Kill Your Marriage?that discusses why economic recessions increase divorce rates. Possible theories include:
Lack of money exposes fundamental flaws in the marriage,
Couples who had fundamental differences about money now have irreconcilable differences about it, and
Financial worries cause stress, stress causes depression, and depression causes divorce.
The most interesting quote of the article:
A study that correlated Playboy centerfolds with market conditions found that men like fuller-figured women more in lean times than in boom times. The APA study showed that when stressed, women liked to eat. Bingo!
For those who don’t want to overeat to save their marriages, the article offers this suggestion:
A lot of counselors suggest sitting with your spouse and putting your fears on the table. If partner A does not know the full lay of the dire financial land, partner B should map it out while partner A makes a robust attempt not to scream. Then figure out how to address your liquidity issues as a team.
Although the advice above is meant for people who are trying to save their marriages, I would extend it to those who are facing divorce. In my family law practice here in Chicago, I have seen that those couples who face their financial problems together – as a team – are the ones who are able to reach the best outcomes.
In January 2, 1912, Viola Hudson — a Chicago native in Reno for a divorce — made the New York Times headlines for dancing the “bird trot” and “turkey trot” with an unrelated man.
It seems extreme to make a scandalous New York Times appearance for dancing. On the other hand, if the dancing was as racy as the cha-cha in this video, maybe it’s not so shocking Ms. Hudson made the news.
“While you can’t leave it behind, you can look at the events of your past from a new point of view. Turn them around. See all the angles. Consider it your second chance. Second chances do come your way. Like trains, they arrive and depart regularly. Recognizing the ones that matter is the trick.”
In law school we learned how to “frame” the facts to make a winning argument. This basically requires viewing things from a different point of view. The framing of facts, however, is not limited to the practice of law. In fact, how you frame (or view) “success” and ”failure” is an essential element in achieving happiness and success in life.
An associate law professor at the Seattle University School of Law argues that 
