Archive for the 'Divorce' Category

The Leaver and the Left

Thursday, December 22nd, 2016

A vast emotional gap separates the spouse who leaves the marriage for someone else, or for the hope of finding someone else, and the one who has been left – the leaver and the left.

The leaver should not expect the rejected spouse to understand or agree. The leaver must be patient with the person rejected because he or she is hurt and anger. The person left needs time to catch up emotionally and assimilate the breakup of the marriage. When the leaver and the left are at the same emotional temperature, they can move forward much more easily.

Woman now initiate well more than half of all divorce. In a divorce, the leaver has emotionally taken the first steps to leave the marriage. She has already started working the process. She is emotionally detached at times, angry at times, nostalgic at times. She has probably been lonely and emotionally starved and dying for the intimacy for a long time. When she contacts an attorney or tells her partner that she wants to end the marriage, she feels relief (that often becomes a measure of regret). The rejected spouse reels because he never saw this coming. So often the rejected spouse is blindsided (although years later he will see clearly what happened and why).

Unlike death that has finality, however, divorce continues to have the chance of reconciliation. The grief cycle can extend as the couple hesitate in the good times and bad that encamp every failing relationship.

The type and intensity of feelings are different for each person. The leaver has less intensity and the person left has more. When the initiator leaves the marriage for another person, he or she is further numbed by the feelings of infatuation, making the divorce seem easier and more doable.

“What’s the big deal?” he may ask.

“It happens all the time,” she may think.

“My kids want to see me happy. They will understand, won’t they?” (No, not necessarily.)

The initiator justifies his or her departure by finding fault and seeing only the negative in the spouse. This confuses the rejected spouse since it seems he or she can’t, or never could, do anything right. Conversation may become tumultuous. In his or her mind, the initiating person compares the spouse of ten, twenty or thirty years with their new partner, who appears in the pink cloud of infatuation. The rejected spouse cannot measure up to the illusion of perfection and compatibility.

The person left endures a seemingly tougher time, and without emotional support, the pain feels more intense. He or she can’t understand the matter-of-fact and casual attitude of the leaver about ending a very significant relationship, often with children in the balance. It takes months and often years to pull oneself out of the emotional trauma, rebuild and become grounded again.

The emotions often follow along these lines: the hurt that comes when someone says he or she says he or she never really loved me the way he or she should have, the shattered sense of self. “My spouse is leaving me. I did not expect this. I am told that it’s mostly my fault I am being replaced. I am told that this other person had nothing to do with my spouse wanting a divorce. The marriage was over a long time ago. Of course, I don’t believe it. Now this outsider has met my in-laws and some of my friends.

Each of these steps is a setback for the spouse. The initiator feels this is a natural progression and moves too slowly. The spouse, however, feels like he or she faces one shock after another. Just as he or she may be adapting to the current situation, a new challenge on the list arises.

The initiator and his or her attorney may have little patience for the raw state of the one who has been left, who may be seen as weak, emotionally immature or dramatic. The longer the marriage, the longer it usually takes to come back up to normal functioning. The solution to the two widely different perspectives is time.

Eventually, the rejected spouse realizes that the past is gone and nothing can make it go back to the way it was. The most important focus is on life and the children now.

Grief Tips When A Marriage Ends

Friday, September 23rd, 2016

The end of a marriage is never easy, and whatever the reason for the split the breakup of a marriage turns the whole world upside down and triggers painful and unsettling emotions. The death of a marriage must be grieved, and here are tips for grieving after a divorce:

> The pain is very real. A rollercoaster of emotions — ups and downs, including anger, resentment, sadness, relief, fear, and confusion – are very normal, and these emotions can be very painful. Trying to suppress or ignore emotions only prolongs the grieving process.

> Emotions should be voiced. – Even if it is difficult to talk about feelings, it is very important to find a way to do so when grieving. Knowing that others are aware of feelings reduces the isolation that pain brings and helps healing. A journal is a good outlet for emotions.

> The goal is moving on. Expressing emotions brings a measure of freedom, but it is important not to dwell on the negative feelings or to over-analyze the situation. Getting stuck in hurtful feelings like blame, anger, and resentment robs a person of valuable energy and prevents healing.

> Tomorrow is the future. It’s hard to let these dreams go that a person brings to marriage. Grieving for a future that never happened is easier when a person envisions a time when new hopes new hopes and dreams replace lost ones.

> Know the difference between a normal reaction to a breakup and depression – Grief can be paralyzing after a breakup, but after a while, the sadness begins to lift. Day by day, and little by little, most people start moving on. Depression may warrant professional help.

When Only One Person Wants a Divorce

Thursday, September 15th, 2016

When only one spouse want to end the marriage, the other spouse can make the a divorce much more difficult, and no-fault divorce, which is now the law in all the jurisdictions, goes only so far when one spouse digs in and fights the divorce.

Before 1969, in most jurisdictions, divorce entailed proving fault, but when California adopted what be came known as “no-fault divorce,” it opened the door to a much easier way to end failing marriages. Today, all the jurisdictions allow no-fault divorce. Before 1969, the spouse who wanted a divorce had to show the court a good reason for ending the marriage, according to Dr. Charlene Wear Simmons, who has written a history of divorce. In California before no-fault, courts would grant a divorce on the grounds of cruelty, adultery, insanity, abandonment, intemperance, neglect or a felony conviction.

With no-fault divorce, neither partner need prove that the other spouse did anything wrong, so neither spouse must, for example, prove adultery or other wrongdoing, which in theory reduces the hostility and anger. However, no-fault makes it much easier for one spouse walk away, even if the other remains committed to the marriage. If one partner refuses to sign the papers, then it can take much longer before the divorce is finalized.

A reluctant partner can drag pout the divorce out for a long time, but he or she cannot prevent the divorce as long as the petitioner remains committed to it. Divorce laws vary from state to state, so the details vary. In Pennsylvania, for example, courts grant no-fault divorces in cases of mutual consent or irretrievable breakdown, according to divorce lawyer Michael Greenstein. In the absence of mutual consent, the court will not accept that the marriage is irretrievably broken until the spouses have been separated for at least two years. Even then, the court does not grant the divorce without a hearing. However, if the appellant attends the hearing and states that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, then the court grants the divorce.

Some states permit a traditional fault-based divorce. For example, Pennsylvania allows for divorce on the grounds of adultery, brutality or indignities. When a partner refuses to agree to a divorce by mutual consent and the other spouse does not want to wait for two years, she could petition for a divorce on one of these fault grounds. However, she would have to provide the court with evidence to prove the accusation.

There is no way to prevent a partner from getting a divorce, if he or she is determined to do so. When one spouse wants out, it’s better to accept it and move on, than to try to delay the process.

Until Sickness Us Do Part

Wednesday, August 17th, 2016

Couples promise to stay together in sickness and in health, but a recent (and revised) study finds that the risk of divorce among older married couples rises when the wife – but not the husband — becomes seriously ill with heart trouble.

A previously widely reported finding that the risk of divorce increases when wives fall ill — but not when men do — is invalid, thanks to a short string of mistaken coding that negates the original conclusions, published in the March issue of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior. The paper, “In Sickness and in Health? Physical Illness as a Risk Factor for Marital Dissolution in Later Life,” garnered coverage in many news outlets, including The Washington Post, New York magazine’s The Science of Us blog, The Huffington Post, and the UK’s Daily Mail . However, an error in a line of the coding that analyzed the data means the conclusions in the paper — and all the news stories about those conclusions — are “more nuanced,” according to first author Amelia Karraker, an assistant professor at Iowa State University and a National Institute on Aging Postdoctoral Fellow at the ISR Population Studies Center.

The miscoding error happened because people who left the study were actually miscoded as getting divorced. Using the corrected code, Karraker and her co-author, Kenzie Latham of Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, did the analysis again, and found the results stand only when wives develop heart problems, not other illnesses. “What we find in the corrected analysis is we still see evidence that when wives become sick marriages are at an elevated risk of divorce, whereas we don’t see any relationship between divorce and husbands’ illness. We see this in a very specific case, which is in the onset of heart problems. So basically it’s a more nuanced finding. The finding is not quite as strong,” said Karraker.

“Married women diagnosed with a serious health condition may find themselves struggling with the impact of their disease while also experiencing the stress of divorce,” says Karraker, a researcher at the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research (ISR).

For the study, she and Latham analyzed 20 years of data on 2,717 marriages from the Health and Retirement Study, conducted by ISR since 1992. At the time of the first interview, at least one of the partners was over the age of 50.

The researchers examined how the onset of four serious physical illnesses – cancer, heart problems, lung disease and stroke – affected marriages.

They found that overall 31 percent of the marriages ended in divorce over the period studied. The incidence of new chronic illness onset increased over time as well, with more husbands than wives developing serious health problems.
“We found that women are doubly vulnerable to marital dissolution in the face of illness,” says Karraker. “They are more likely to be widowed, and if they are the ones who become ill, they are more likely to get divorced.”

While the study did not assess why divorce is more likely when wives but not husbands become seriously ill, Karraker offers a few possible reasons.

“Gender norms and social expectations about care giving may make it more difficult for men to provide care to ill spouses,” Karraker speculates. “And because of the imbalance in marriage markets especially in older ages, divorced men have more choices among prospective partners than divorced women.
The study did not examine why a woman’s illness was more likely than a man’s to lead to divorce, but Karraker suggested that because women tend to be caregivers, it can cause extra strain when a man has to assume the role. By contrast, a study found a couple was no more likely to divorce if a husband got sick.

In fact, care giving can be such a strain that it can lead to illness or even death for the caregiver, Karraker said.

Dr. Jacob Ham, a clinical psychologist and Director of Mount Sinai Beth Israel’s HEARTS (Healing Emotions and Achieving Resilience to Traumatic Stress) Program, calls illness a “huge threat” to a person’s sense of attachment.

“Any time we feel threatened with trauma or loss, the desire to seek comfort and security from someone we love gets triggered. If the threat means you’re going to lose the person you turn to for that, it’s devastating,” Ham said.

“We did not have information on who initiated divorce in this study. But it’s important to keep in mind that in most cases, it’s women who do so. So it could be that when women become ill and their husbands are not doing a very good job caring for them, they would rather that he just go and they rely on friends and family who will take care of them.”

Increasing concern about healthcare costs for the aging population means policymakers should be aware of the relationship between disease and risk of divorce, Karraker believes. “Offering support services to spousal caregivers may reduce marital strain and prevent divorce at older ages,” she says. “But it’s also important to recognize that the impetus for divorce may be health-related and that sick ex-wives may need additional care and services to prevent worsening health and increased health expenditures.”

Dating While Divorcing

Wednesday, July 20th, 2016

Many divorcing people – particular those who are also parents — wonder whether they can or should date new people while the divorce is pending.

Legally, “dating,” means one-on-one social contact with another person. There is no distinction between platonic contacts and ones that are romantic or sexual, although from a practical standpoint, the romantic/sexual relationships are the ones that draw scrutiny and cause complications. Dating has the potential to increase both the cost and the stress of the divorce trial. Put simply, even if separated, married people are not supposed to date. Judges rarely punish someone who begins dating – sexually or otherwise – once they have physically separated from their spouse.

The smart money – the lawyers who handle divorce actions – say dating during a divorce should be avoided because the benefits rarely justify the liabilities on someone personally or on his or her legal position.

When someone ends a marriage, for many months thereafter, he or she goes through tremendous emotional, mental and psychological upheaval. Divorce is one of life’s most stressful and painful experiences. Regardless of whether someone is the petitioner or the respondent – the person who wants to end the action or the person who replies — the shocks and aftershocks can devastate a person’s sense of well-being. This is true even the person initiates a necessary divorce to end a bad marriage. A person’s world view and perspective on life and human relationships may change every few weeks. This is no time to make major life decisions, and no time to begin a new long-term relationship. Rebound relationships during this time almost always wind up in a dead end. There is no reason to get into another situation that promises disappointment and despair.

Dating during the divorce can become a minefield when the angry wife or husband – who is still the legal spouse – blows up. A case that might otherwise have been settled easily, amicably and inexpensively can transform into a difficult, acrimonious and very expensive battle when a spouse starts dating. Yes, he or she may have the right to date, but he or she also must accept the significant consequences of that decision.

The presence of someone new, particularly when paraded in front of the spouse and/or children, can enrage the soon-to-be former partner, and also create the suspicion that the relationship began as an affair before the separation. The innocent new friend can be deposed, that is, asked questions under oath and recorded by a stenographer and subpoenaed to testify to determine exactly when the relationship began, whether it is sexual, whether any marital property has been transferred to the new friend, such as by gift, how much money was spent on dating this person, and whether the spouse has said anything that could be used against him or her at trial. Even if everything is on the up-and-up, the result is a lot of unnecessary aggravation and cost.

Dating a new person may cause the lawful spouse to become irrational and filled with a desire for revenge. Dating becomes evidence the new friend is the cause of the divorce even if it is not true and even if the relationship did not begin until after the spouses separated. Fair or unfair, anger makes the case much more difficult to settle. An angry spouse may openly or subtly work to alienate the children, relatives and friends.

Dating during a divorce can alienate children who feel abandoned and who sympathize with the other parent. Young children tend not to accept a new friend even though they might have willingly embraced that person later, after the divorce.

The Legal Impact

Dating during divorce can have an legal impact on the terms and conditions of the marital settlement because the spouses and children can become inflamed and alienated, which can influence judges who often make decisions influenced, however subtly, by the received impressions that the parties make.

Custody and visitation. A spouse may become less likely to settle custody and visitation issues on a reasonable and rational basis. Children may be less likely to want to be the custody of the dating parent and will be less likely to want to spend time with him or her. Frequently, children refuse to spend time with a person if his or her friend is going to be there for visitation. The parent-child relationship can breakdown when children become so alienated.

Judges making custody and parenting time determinations are not impressed with a person who dates during a divorce because dating shows a callousness and a lack of empathy. Dating can be considered poor role modeling for children. Dating during the divorce can tip the scale in favor of the other parent in a custody fight and result in less parenting time than otherwise would have been awarded. Cohabitation during a divorce often is a disastrous action for all of the reasons just mentioned.

Child support and spousal support. Dating does not normally have an effect on an award of child or spousal support; however, cohabitation almost certainly has an adversely impact on support.

The decision to live with someone while a spousal support case is pending could cost a great deal over the duration of the award. That can work both ways. 
The person likely to receive a spousal support award, living with a friend and sharing expenses may suggest to the court that he or she does not need as much spousal support.

In the area of child support awards, when a person lives with someone else and shares expenses, the court can use that fact (and often does) as a basis to set the child support obligation higher (when the obligor is living with someone) or lower (when the obligee is living with someone). The change is called a “deviation” from the presumed level of support according to the state guidelines. The court does not actually add into the support calculation the income of the parent and the live-in friend. The court considers that an obligor with a live-in friend has more money available to pay support and an obligee with a live-in friend does not need as much support.

When children are involved, judges are not necessarily impressed with someone who begins dating shortly after the parties separated. Judges try to be fair, but a judge’s gut reaction towards you could possibly sway him or her in making his final decision about the level or duration of support or about property division issues.

Property Division. During the course of a divorce, the judge is required to make many decisions about many different topics. The slightest nuances can influence the judge’s decision. A judge may never explain his decision, but it is in a party’s best interest to do everything possible to make sure the judge looks favorably on a person, and dating during a divorce harms a party’s position with the judge.

Cohabitation can be a factor in the property division. Living with someone and sharing expenses places someone in a better financial position than a person living along and paying all expenses. A judge may conclude that, as a result of improved financial circumstances, certain property division issues should be resolved in favor of the other spouse. A judge might conclude that a party can afford to pay more money in a property division judgment because of improved financial circumstances. Or a judge might conclude the other spouse should pay less money as property division because the live-in partner improves circumstances.

A person should not even consider dating until he or she has physically separated, even both spouses agree that the marriage is over because, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction, dating can be cited as a reason the marriage failed and it can lead a judge to award more of the marital assets to your spouse. Once separated, party should date “with the utmost propriety, particularly around … children.” Needless to say, care should be taken to avoid becoming pregnant or impregnating someone before the divorce is final. A pregnancy will prolong the case until the baby is born so that the court can verify paternity and determine custody and support requirements.

Women are Happier After Divorce

Friday, May 13th, 2016

A study by Kingston University in the United Kingdom meant to analyze the negative impact of trauma on men and women concludes that women are happier after a divorce than men.

In the study researchers surveyed 10,000 people in the U.K. between the ages of sixteen and sixty. In the survey 10,000 participants between 16 and 90 rated their happiness before and after their divorce. Over a 20- year period, researchers found that women were happier and more satisfied with their lives after divorce. “In the study we took into account the fact that divorce can sometimes have a negative financial impact on women, but despite that it still makes them much happier than men,” said Professor Yannis Georgellis, Director of the Center for Research in Employment, Skills and Society (CRESS) at Kingston Business School.

Some suggest that women are happier because more women file for divorce than men, and that they are getting what they want. However, others suggest there are many reasons women file for a divorce that have nothing to do with falling out of love or no longer being happy.

A woman may file for divorce because she has been abandoned and left with no recourse but divorce to pursue child support via the family court system.

In addition, other reasons come into play. A husband’s midlife crisis may endanger her financial and emotional security when he behaves in a destructive manner to her and her future welfare. An abusive husband may leave her no recourse other than to file for a divorce and put distance between herself and the abuser. A husband’s extra-marital affair may leave her responsible for financial maintenance of the home and family.

The reason for the divorce is not a factor in how well a woman heals and moves on with her life once she is divorced.

Women are happier after divorce because they are more likely than men to seek help for the emotional trauma caused by divorced for a therapist.

They are more likely than men to surround themselves with a positive support system such as, friends and family.

Women cope better than men. Men look outward when seeking comfort from emotional pain; women look inward. They inventory of the role they played in the demise of the marriage and work at getting their emotional stable and letting go of the past so they can focus on the future.

Women are less likely to turn to alcohol, drugs, new relationships and casual sex to distract them from the trauma of divorce.
Women are more likely to seek out new experiences after divorce, experiences that enrich them and give them hope.

Women are more likely to prioritize their needs. They make an effort into staying physically healthy during the trauma of divorce. They focus on eating properly and working out in an effort to stave off illness and depression.

Divorce can be a hard choice to make but once it is made a woman has choices she can make. She can give into the trauma of the divorce or rebuild her life and get on with the business of living. Most choose to get on with the business of living. Women are no stronger emotionally than men. They do however use different coping skills than men when dealing with emotional trauma and, based on the study, those skills make it possible for women to move on and be happier than men after divorce.

Millennial Marriages

Monday, April 25th, 2016

According to research, nearly 70 percent of the miillenial generation wants to be married but cannot afford it.

Members of the miillenial generation — Americans born after 1980 and before 2000 — are much less likely to be married by age 32 compared to previous generations. Research shows that only 26 percent of Millennial are married by 32, compared to 36 percent for Gen X-ers, 48% of Baby Boomers and 60 percent of the members of the Silent Generation at the same age.

The marriage patterns of the millenial generation have a impact on American life because this giant cohort, which is estimated to be at least 80 million Americans, — is even larger than the Baby Boom generation, which has 75 million members.

Interestingly, researchers estimate that 69 percent of the unmarried millennial would like to be married but feel that they are lacking the financial foundation to make it a possibility.

Millennials as a cohort are more educated than previous generations: 34 percent of those 25 to 32 years old hold at least a bachelors degree, compared to 25percent for Gen X and 24 percent of Baby Boomers at the same age.

Parental Autism

Tuesday, April 12th, 2016

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) affects married adults and can remain undiagnosed. ASD can contribute to significant and unexplained challenges in all spheres to family life, particularly when a family is stressed by a divorce.

Healthcare professionals, educators and lawyers who cannot identify ASD and its impact on families in crisis risk aggravating the problems of the domestic situation. In particular, coparenting with a former spouse who has ASD challenges the most cooperative of former spouses.

The majority of married adults with ASD remained undiagnosed.

ASD creates social impairment and communication difficulties. 
Many people with ASD find social interactions difficult. The severity of ASD varies greatly depending on the degree to which social communication and repetitive patterns of behavior affect the individual. The mutual give-and-take nature of typical communication and interaction is often particularly difficult. People with ASD may have very different verbal abilities ranging from no speech at all to speech that is fluent, but awkward and inappropriate. The term “spectrum” refers to the wide range of symptoms, skills, and levels of disability in functioning that can occur in people with ASD. Some children and adults with ASD are fully able to perform all activities of daily living while others require substantial support to perform basic activities.

Autism spectrum disorders are lifelong, according to Teresa J. Foden of the Autism Interactive Network. The core disabilities of ASD — communication and social deficits and repetitive behaviors and interests — can improve over the course of childhood and adolescence. In fact, higher-functioning ASD is sometimes deemed more a different way of approaching the world than a disability. Although researchers caution that the symptoms rarely subside sufficiently to withdraw adult support services, there is reason to hope for some improvement in day-to-day life.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) includes a group of complex neurodevelopment disorders characterized by repetitive and characteristic patterns of behavior and difficulties with social communication and interaction. The symptoms are present from early childhood and affect daily functioning.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders includes Asperger syndrome, childhood disintegrative disorder, and pervasive developmental disorders not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) as part of ASD rather than as separate disorders. A diagnosis of ASD includes an assessment of intellectual disability and language impairment.

ASD occurs in every racial and ethnic group, and across all socioeconomic levels. However, boys are significantly more likely to develop ASD than girls. The latest analysis from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 1 in 68 children has ASD.

Disrupted Parent-Child Relationships

Tuesday, March 22nd, 2016

Early intervention in high conflict and disrupted parent-child relationships can head off the extreme risks of maladjusted children. Such intervention, experts agree, can prevent much of the damage. Delay compounds both the cost and the complications as we as reducing the chance of success.

Too often, however, children and parents caught in the vortex of conflict and disrupted relations, do not receive the specialized intervention they need. The parent-child relationship is fractured, exchanges between parent and child is disrupted. Often the child exhibits entrenched dysfunctional behavior.

In intervening in these situations, experts suggest an emphasis on community-based interventions, including recreational, educational, therapeutic and judicial management.

Empty Shell Marriage and Divorce

Wednesday, February 17th, 2016

Leo Tolstoy’s classic novel Anna Karenina begins with this often quoted sentence: “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.” This sad observation rings true with millions of couples living in what sociologists and psychologists call “empty shell marriages.”

An empty shell marriage is a marriage in name only, one where the spouses continue to live under the same roof but live as separate individuals. When divorce is difficult for legal, religious or financial reasons, or when a couple decides to stay together for the sake of the children, their failed marriage can desiccate to a shell.

Although they may share a home and may have been married for years, the spouses are not emotionally connected and often are lonely and emotionally distant. On the surface, an empty-shell marriage often appears happy and healthy, successful and serene. The relationship is stable and often little conflict is visible. Outsiders get the impression the marriage has no problems but are often very surprised when the marriage finally caves and ends in divorce.

Empty-shell marriages have lost or never had the passion needed to make the marriage vital because the relationship may never have had depth and often may have been formed for superficial reasons, says Charles Lee Cole in the Cultural Sociology of Divorce: An Encyclopedia by Robert E. Emery.

Generally, in empty marriages the spouses either 1) never had emotional and sexual passion or 2) they once had a strong attraction and lost it.

Empty shell marriages have no vitality - only the outside shell remains. Shells can appear pretty - even when they are empty. Sadly, too many marriages end up in this state after a few years.

John F. Guber and Peggy B. Hanroff have identified three types empty-shell marriages.

> In a devitalized relationship husband and wife lack excitement or any real interest in the other spouse or their marriage. Boredom and apathy have drained the marriage but serious arguments are rare. Arguing takes energy and the spouses do not think it is worth the effort.

> In a conflict-habituated relationship husband and wife frequently quarrel in private. They may also quarrel in public or put up a facade of being compatible. The relationship is characterized by considerable conflict, tension, and bitterness. The couple cannot live together – or apart.

> In a passive congenial relationship both partners are not happy but are content with their lives and gradually feel adequate. The partners may have some interests in common, but these interests are generally insignificant. The spouses contribute little to each other’s real satisfaction. The couple exists in a state of détente.

Marriages that become empty shells often drift through a progression. A loss of respect segues to a failure to communicate that reinforces withdrawal and apathy. Each spouse turns to his or her own separate interests, hobbies, careers, and friends. Personal advancement triumphs over the well-being of the other spouse.

In empty-shell marriage the spouses feel no strong attachment to each other, but outside pressures keep the marriage together, writes Angelia Davis. These include the desire to convey a stable family image, the need to maintain a place in the community, and the desire to avoid the financial consequences of divorce. Sometimes a couple may believe that ending the marriage harms the children or that getting a divorce would be morally wrong.

Only the spouses in a marriage genuinely know the marriage, so for obvious reasons, the number of empty-shell marriage is unknown. It may be as the number of happily married couples.

In an empty shell marriage, the spouses find many ways to be unhappy. Home life is without fun or laughter. The spouses do not share and discuss their problems or experiences with each other. Communication is at a minimum as is any spontaneous expression of affection or sharing of a personal experience. Children are usually starved for love and reluctant to have friends over because they are embarrassed about having their friends see their parents interacting. The couples in these marriages engage in few activities together and display no pleasure in being in one another’s company. Sexual relations between the partners, as might be expected, are rare and generally unsatisfying.

William J. Goode compares empty-shell marriages to marriages that end in divorce. In most families that divorce, the husband and wife pass through a state where each feels unbound of the other. They cease to cooperate or share with each other and look on one another as almost strangers. The empty-shell family is in such a state. Its members no longer feel any strong commitment to many of the mutual role obligations, but for various reasons the husband and wife do not separate or divorce. The number of empty-shell marriages ending in divorce is unknown. It is likely that a fair number eventually do. Both spouses have to put considerable effort into making a marriage work in order to prevent an empty-shell marriage from gradually developing.

In his book, The Road Less Traveled, M. Scott Peck defines love as: “The will to extend one’s self for the purpose of nurturing one’s own or another’s spiritual growth.” Love as an investment of myself in order to promote the spiritual health of others. In an empty shell marriage, such generosity does not bloom.