I would agree with Boaz in that the proposal by the author helps to open up the thinking about the situation, but ultimately the proposal would largely continue with the present divorce system, (if not encourage it further), and the present divorce system is basically a divorce industry. Some people make money out of this divorce industry, but most people lose money from it.

The cost of a case going to the Family Court is paid for by the taxpayer, as well as by the individuals involved.

Eg
The Attorney-General's Department estimates the average case filed in the Family Court costs taxpayers $21,000. Individuals often incur legal costs of many thousands of dollars.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/family-centres-to-stem-divorce/2005/07/30/1122144059147.html

As well as this, there is the longer term cost to society of the family breakdown. It has been estimated in the US, that each divorce costs the taxpayer about $30,000, mainly because of the negative emotional effects it has on children. This in itself could be underestimated, because divorce tends to become generational, and the children of divorced parents have a higher rate of divorce themselves, and so the process begins to go in a downward spiral.

Whatever costs there are to a divorce, multiply it by 1,000 divorces per week, year in-year out, and the divorce industry in Australia becomes a lucrative industry for some, but the vast majority of people pay for it, and have been paying for it for many years.

The majority of single parent families come from divorce and separation, and if there is to be increased taxes, I would much prefer to see that money spent on mediation and counselling, to try a repair the marriage in the first place.

Mildy astonished, spooning my latte down my neck, I'm musing on the stupefying range of opinion in and about James' ravings. Marriage is a minefield; if you read the fineprint you probably wouldn't have signed the contract. Women, especially, don't need it - it drives them mad and costs them money and health unless they are very lucky. Many men don't want it either - otherwise they wouldn't escape so fast and be so resentful. The conventional wisdom is that children need two parents. But one sane and healthy parent is probably better. Let's think about some more intelligent options. Let's make it easier for women to be single parents if they want to be. Better childcare, more flexible jobs. Let's have child-raising contracts so that people who want to be parents understand their obligations from the start. Let's have a more progressive tax system so that all of us in the village contribute to raising and educating the children who will be our fellow citizens. Let's make sure they go to schools which teach them to be democratic not unpleasant little things with religious and social foibles. Let's stop dumping on each other. Have a latte, James - it's really nice.

RObert,
Thank you for your reasonable and well thought out responses.
The Family Court is in a horrible position, really, isn't it? They are dealing with possibly the highest level of hot human hurt, anger and emotion. Human beings, of whatever gender, are at their worst when in the grip of such strong emotions and the Court must deal with it as best it can.
I have many stories of women who have been cheated and impoverished by their husbands in divorce. My sister-in-law, in a miserable and abusive marriage for 20 years, stuck it out doggedly until her sons were grown. Then, when her lawyer suggested she put a Sherriff's order on her husband's assetts, because he was self employed, refused to do so. Her husband then hid most of his assetts overseas and she ended up with the purchase price of a unit. He now owns a company, house, farm, shares and assetts in the US. He also married the mistress he had flaunted (she used to turn up to family Christmas's, I kid you not) for 8 years of their marriage.
Statistically 70% of people living below the poverty line are single mothers and their children, so while some mothers are no doubt exploiting the system, many are either not, or are not very good at it.
When people feel hurt and angry, they exploit what weapons they feel they have. Men often use money, women their kids, neither is honourable or reasonable, and the Court may or may not be biased in favour of one or other gender. It does seem to me that women's lives are much more affected, not just by having kids, but by their potential to have them. Still many employers are wary about hiring women of child bearing age. Maybe the Court is trying, albeit clumsily, to take the greater effect kids have on their mother's lifetime earning potential, into account.

The family law courts are full of people desperately trying to rebuild their lives from a divorce.
If fathers were treated as equals with mothers.
If the real needs of children – which includes the continued relationship with both parents was put first.
Then and only then will there be some “sense” in our divorce and child support laws.

“Typically, men still use the career route to construct their path to greater status.”
I thought it was just part of the expectation for men to be “bread winners” – this makes it sound like a cop out, which it is not.

Now “First, the most important factor contributing to one’s happiness is being in a loving relationship”
well that will not be found in a marriage which is in the abyss. However, the continuing relationship with both parents is essential to children and a solution between parents, as individuals has to be found.
Easiest way to that end is the courts to start by treating both parents as equals before it, with neither having the unwavering support or being treated as a pariah because of gender.

Proposing an extra tax for the purpose of simply making the burden of child rearing easier for those who decide to have children is total bunkum and socialist emotional and meddlesome political drivel at its worst.

People taking responsibility for their own circumstances is the only option which works.

Going through divorces,
Dealing with issues of child support
Being a loving parent
Separating the emotional baggage between divorced parents from the children of the marriage

These are what individuals have to deal with and what only individuals can deal with.

They cannot be made a wider-society responsibility
They should not be made a wider society responsibility – even when targeted at the wealthier

I know because I am a father who separated 12 years ago.
I battled the CSA
I battled the Ex
But I never battled my children or blamed them.
I continue to have the best relationship with them any father could ever have.

Cathode,
I am wondering where you got all your information, about marriage, child raising, mothers, and fathers?

You seem to discount fathers as being parents, seem to believe that marriage is unhealthy, seem to believe that children should be raised by the “community “(ie. which is another name for the “state”), seem to believe that 1 parent is better than 2, and seem to infer that this parent should be the mother, because she is more likely to be “sane and healthy”

I am finding your thinking to be not at all uncommon, but very common indeed, and I am wondering where this type of thinking originates. Does it come from experience, books, University courses etc.

But have you ever thought about how you are going to explain such thinking to a young male?

Young male, your future life will be as follows:-

1.Find a woman who wants to become pregnant with your sperm.
2.Remove yourself from the woman after she has become pregnant.
3.Work, earn money, and pay this money to the woman.
4.Apply through the courts if you want to see the child after it is born (ie. normally visitation rights are granted to fathers to visits their children every second weekend or less, but the fathers must first pay money to solicitors for these visitation rights to be granted).
5. Believe that this system is “in the best interests” of children, and also of the father.
6.Find another woman who wants to become pregnant with your sperm.
Go to step 2

I think the above 6 steps would fit your belief system, and in many ways it is the system that has been operating for the past 30 yrs, but if you believe that this system is workable and sustainable, could you please provide the scientific evidence to support this (and not anecdotal evidence, gossip, hearsay etc).

So there would be 2 sets of questions:-
Where do your beliefs originate?
Are they workable or sustainable?

Not to speak for you Cathode, but I think Timkins has gone completely reactionary - I don't get that from your response at all.

I take it as a much more realistic and constructive view of modern marriage than those put forward by embittered divorce court fathers, for example.

I do agree though, that the current state of affairs is dismal at best. I *do* think fathers are generally badly treated in matters of child custody, I *do* think there are women who have no better way to empower themselves than by having kids and sharpening them to a point aimed squarely at the 'baby daddy' heart.

I think what might be more important than deciding what to do with the kids WHEN you get divorced (I agree with Cathode - marriage is unhealthy and unnatural state for humans to force upon themselves, therefore either misery or divorce are inevitable...IMO)is deciding whether to have kids at all.

I would like to see parenting contracts (good thinking Cathode!) so that men could be held accountable to actually do some hands on... (I know that isn't going to be a popular statement but it's true. Even in cases where the parents discussed, ad nauseum, the chore split before the baby arrives, it ends up falling to the female partner to do the lions share of both child-rearing and housework at least 80% of instances...)

You can't just 'donate' and still expect the kudos, no matter how much money you throw at the situation. You can't expect dollars earned 9-5 to make up for effort 24/7....

On the other hand - these changes to the family law court may go some way to preventing lazy women from 'opting out' of taking responsibility for themselves and their actions....maybe they'll think twice before 'forgetting' to take the pill and thinking "Oh, he'll get used to the idea...."