Simple - make marriage failure expensive for BOTH parents.

The divorce system creates a winner and losers. The mother usually gets the kids, and if you get the kids, you get everything!

Everything? You get the kids, and hence you get the bulk of the family assets (not 50-50 as many assume) and you get about 50% of your husbands after-tax income in 'child'-support, and you get to keep your ex-husband on a leash... because you decide if he can see his kids! The divorce court has no method of ensuring that it's custody orders are obeyed... so mothers can simply refuse to open the door when dad comes for a court-ordered visit.

Any wonder why 70% of divorces are initiated by the mother? She gets to keep everything, and looses nothing.

A presumption of EQUAL TIME, where kids would be shared equally between both parents new homes, has been shown to reduce divorce rates. In the US, divorce law is a state matter and as laws change in various states, so does the divorce rate. More shared parenting, less divorce.

But this doesn't help you or me... that's about the law.

What can I do so save MY marriage?

Pre-Nup!
Pre-Nup!
Pre-Nup!

Punish BOTH parents for divorcing
Pre-nup!
Pre-Nup!
Pre-nup
Pre-Nup!

In Australia these are called 'binding financial agreements' and any couple can draft one, at any time.

Use a suburban lawer and draft a simple pre-nup which says
1: What is mine today, stays mine. What is yours today, stays yours.
2: What we build up together gets split in THIRDS!

THIRDS?!?
Yep, one third for me, one third for you and one-third locked up until the youngest kid is 18.

This protects the kids!
This means that you usually will have to sell the house

This means that the parents BOTH lose two-thirds of the money/cars/house that they have when they are married.

Both parents get punished EQUALLY for divorcing, and that's fair.

More importantly, it's easy to agree on it. If she says "But a pre-nup means you don't love me" Simply reply that "Refusing a pre-nup means you don't love me"

It's about creating an incentive to protect the kids and make the marriage work.

A good grief response to PTP.

What a horrible reason to stay together and a terrible environment in which to raise children.

Prenups are fine but are no "incentive" to stay with someone despicable.

Your post and the attitude in which you deliver it is just sad.

Should really get back to work, but I couldn't resist this important question of yours Foxy . Well done for asking it !
Having been WELL tutored against using any religious or other jargon on OLO, it struck me that maybe a good way to summarize what we experience and observe with this , is that:

-long/good marriages have their focus OUTSIDE the partnership. Its certainly how i see it and I have really enjoyed 15 years of the tension that can destroy either party so easily .
I think many of the posts heresay the same thing , maybe in a different way.
If we assume that children too are one of those tensions that can tear , i think the same applies ; if they are taught just to "look after themselves" and their interests ( no genuine outside focus) then there can be very little to hold us together. Or if the role of a woman is "the only one that matters in nurture" ( her idea) then men can be forced out ( nurture is bigger than the sum of the parts)
The other very interesting question, because we are all so different is how can we can maintain a productive attitude to our differences ?( it does help to be compatible but good marriages partners aren't passive)see aggression - we need to find ways to share our passions . More than the 5 min a day kind mate !

- long/good marriages KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH AGGRESSION . The best way to see aggression is as natural instinct that must not be seen as morally deterministic (http://knowlove.blogspot.com )AGGR can go wrong, but can also be constructive( =ve and -ve ) Denying its +ve place or not dealing with it, is a way to depression / false guilt/avoidance/woosiness. Many see it in our society as only negative( incl Freud who didn't talk about it till after the war !)-irrational unmorality. Mums in particular ,need to yell sometimes !( and dads too!
I have one more thing to say - next post

Dear partTime Parent,

Your advice I'm guessing comes from experience.
And is a very sad reflection of the traumatic
experience that it can be for all concerned.

The picture that you describe is bleak.

Children inevitably suffer through the divorce of
their parents - particularly during the first year
or two - however many people believe that it may be
even more emotionally disturbing for them to remain
in a home where the marriage is deeply unhappy.

Emotionally, both divorcing parents may be in for
a difficult time. Most of our social life is tailored
to the needs of couples, and divorced partners may
experience great loneliness, isolation, and feelings
of inadequacy. Divorce ruptures one's personal universe;
it's no coincidence that men are much more likely to be
fired from their jobs after divorce, nor that the death
rate for divorced people is significantly higher than that
for married people at all age levels.

I agree that a pre-nup may help alleviate some of the
financial worries of a divorce. But I don't think that it
would encourage them to stay in an unhappy marriage.

"Love and marriage," as the old song tells us,
"go together like a horse and carriage,"
this is the compelling assumption in our society
that everyone will fall in love, will marry, will have
children, and will have an emotionally satisfying lifetime
relationship with the chosen partner. However, what we're
learning is that a great many, perhaps even the majority,
find that married life falls well below their expectations.

Dear Pynch,

I agree - staying in an unhappy marriage
is more emotionally disturbing for all
concerned.

Dear H,

Knowing how to handle aggression would help
any relationship, as would having an outside
interest. I definitely agree. The philosopher
Kahlil Gibran once wrote about marriage:
"Stand together, yet not too near together.
For the pillars of the temple stand apart."
That's a tough one though for a lot of people
to buy because, for some, there always has to
be a chief.

According to recent surveys the social characteristics
of divorce-prone partners have been well established.
Divorces are especially common among urban couples,
among those who marry very young, among those who marry
after only short or shallow acquaintance, and among those
whose relatives and friends disapprove of the marriage.

In general, the people who are most likely to get divorced
are those who, statistically, would be considered the
least likely to marry. And the greater the wife's
ability to support herself, the more likely she is to
leave an unhappy marriage. Partners who have been
married before are supposedly more likely to become
involved in subsequent divorce. Most divorces we're told,
take place within the first few years of marriage, half
within the first seven years - and the longer a marriage
has lasted, the less likely it is to end in divorce.

But as we all know - there are exceptions to every rule.
Just as there are many causes for the collapse of
marriages, as well as the reasons for their success.