Are Short Term Marriage Contracts The New Way To Go?

There are fixed term contracts for cars, insurance and property purchases but what about marriages? Some countries, such as Australia, are considering the concept of introducing fixed term contracts for marriage to help stymie the divorce rates. The fixed term contract would allow couples at the end of a set term- 5 or 10 years-to renew their vows or simply allow their marriage to dissolve without the shame or stigma of divorce.

Now, I’m one for creative solutions to fix a problem but short term contracts with an option to renew for marriage? Come on. I don’t know about you but I really wonder has the institution of marriage really become this devalued? Is a marriage really the same as buying a house or a car? Yes, I know supporters of fixed term marriages believe this concept will solve many problems in marriage because it allows the parties to get out of marriage if it isn’t working. But for me, the question is whether the fixed term marriage concept is more about strengthening marriages or is it an escape mechanism that allows individuals to easily get out of a difficult marriage?

I tend to believe it is an escape mechanism and in a society and generation where marriage is already being devalued we need to continue to instill the notion that marriage is a cherished institution that strengthens the families. As such, it is an arrangement that should be entered into seriously and not one where the parties can merely say if it doesn’t work I just won’t renew in 5 years or 10 years. Certainly, couples can chose to terminate a marriage after 5 or 10 years anyway, but I think we would all agree the process of divorce is much more difficult than simply allowing a contract to renew. But for those who still insist that marriage should have a fixed term contract, I think we should remind them that it does: until death does us a part.

What do you think? Do you think fixed term marriages are a good idea? Are they a good way to lessen the divorce rate?

Should Plan B be available to minors?

Seventeen year olds can’t vote, buy beer or even legally purchase cigarettes. However, in a sudden change, the FDA has signaled it will now make Plan B, otherwise known as the “morning-after” pill available to minors for the first time without a doctor's order.

Plan B is emergency contraception that contains a high dose of birth control drugs and will not interfere with an established pregnancy. It works by preventing ovulation or fertilization. In medical terms, pregnancy begins when a fertilized egg attaches itself to the wall of the uterus. According to experts, if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, it can reduce a woman’s chances of pregnancy by as much as 89 percent.
The FDA’s decision has led to a firestorm of criticism in which many critics allege the decision has dealt a blow to parental approval and/or supervision of their teen children. Supporters of broader access argued that Plan B is safe and effective in preventing unwanted pregnancy and could help reduce the number of abortions.

Do you believe minors should have access to Plan B? If no, why not? If yes, do you think parental consent should be required? Do you believe this decision interferes with the role of parents in monitoring and communicating with their children?

Who Cares About Marriage?

I couldn’t possibly be the only person who believes marriage is a worthy institution these days. But, I am starting to feel precisely that. In the recent issue of Jet, I read an article with singer Jill Scott, who is expecting her first child with her fiancée. I love Jill Scott and have found her to be an inspiration to women. However, what was fascinating about the story was to read Jill Scott say that she and her fiancée planned to get married but once she got pregnant they’ve decided to take things slow because you can’t do too many things at one time such as get married and have a baby and that they may or may not get married.

What? Maybe it’s me but it would seem that if two people were already planning to get married and then they learn they are expecting they would push up the marriage not put it off or cancel it totally. I wish I could say this attitude was only limited to some Hollywood person but I've read article after article with people, especially those of color, saying the same things. I've also talked to countless friends who share the same beliefs to know that this attitude regarding marriage is a growing trend. It would be easy for me to write this off as the modern view of marriage but I am starting to believe it really speaks to more of a core belief about what we value.

Now don’t get me wrong. I’m not a self righteous person who believes that marriage is the holy grail but I have started to become extremely concerned about the casual nature and the dismissiveness of how people speak about marriage. Many people have a take it or leave it attitude. I think our society is sending the wrong message to our kids. Consider it old fashioned of me, but in an era where the family in our communities are being decimated, I think we need to refocus on the concept of marriage and not treat it as something that is outdated.

As a mother, I am particularly concerned about societal’s attitudes about marriage because I think we are reinforcing to our kids that good family structures are ones that don’t include the concept of marriage and I simply do not know how with that attitude we can ever expect to rebuild the family structures in our communities.