Combat Divorce
 

“An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind.” Mahatma Gandhi

“In all that is decent…in all that is just, the framers of our Constitution could never have intended that the “enjoyment of life” meant that if divorce came, it was to be attended by throwing the two unfortunates and their children into the judicial arena, with lawyers as their seconds, and have them tear and verbally slash at each other in a trial by emotional conflict that may go on in perpetuity.  We have been humane enough to outlaw cockfights, dogfights and bullfights; and yet, we do nothing about the barbarism of divorce fighting, and trying to find ways to end it.  We concern ourselves with cruelty to animals, and rightfully so, but we are unconcerned about the forced and intentionally perpetuated cruelty inflicted upon the emotionally distressed involved in divorce.  We abhor police beating confessions out of alleged criminals, and yet we cheer and encourage lawyers to emotionally beat up and abuse two innocent people and their children, because their marriage has floundered.  Somewhere along the line, our sense of values, decency, humanism and justice went off the track.”


From a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari submitted to the Supreme Court of the United States of America by Cleveland, Ohio, attorney Sanford J. Berger on behalf of a divorced client’s request for protection from cruel and unusual punishment (associated with penalties suffered in divorce litigation) as guaranteed by the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”


-Richard A. Gardner, M.D.

Family Evaluation in Child Custody Mediation, Arbitration and Evaluation.

Divorce Peacemaking offers you Collaborative Divorce and Mediation as No Court Divorce avenues for you to resolve the emotion driven conflicts arising in your divorce in constructive, solution focused ways, so you can reach durable agreements without involving costly litigation.  You maintain the power to make the decisions which will affect your life, rather than turning that power over to a complete stranger wearing a black robe.

In 1975, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) Review Editor Meyer Elkin, editorialized on the language of family law:

“Why do we continue to use the language of criminal law in family law? Is it primarily tradition that causes us to continue to use the old words in family law? Or is it something else? Is it a reflection of the prevailing ambivalence of this society which, on the one hand, tells people that divorce is okay, but by its actions, or lack thereof, shows that many still do not accept the idea of divorce in a pair-oriented society? We need to develop new words that will alleviate stress on the divorcing family rather than add to stresses already present…. Family law is entering a new period. There is now present an opportunity for introducing new practices and procedures—and words that will represent the combined expertise of both law and the behavioral sciences who, after all, are equally concerned and have similar goals regarding the strengthening of the family. Lets us now start the search for the words.”


And in the 20th Anniversary issue (1983) of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Review, Elkin commented on the ripple effect of transforming divorce from a battle into a process of healing and growth:

“Let all of us, in our own unique way, recommit ourselves to the search for the pebbles of change that can be cast into the social pond. Let us create a divorce process that recycles divorce pain into new patterns of personal and familial growth, which, in turn, will also strengthen our entire society. Let us protect our children from the unnecessary hazards of the divorce experience so that they, like their parents, can be strengthened by divorce rather than defeated by it. And let us never forget that if the lights go out in our children's eyes, be they children of divorce or any other children, we will all live in darkness.”