[Ageing Grace]

Raymond, I understand your vested interest in the concept of a father - and no-one could disagree that a stable, loving family (nuclear or extended) is the best possible grounding for tomorrow's adults.

However, governments cannot force stability or loving on their populations.

I posted in Surd's thread, about the changes in marriage that have occurred since the Sixties. Although what we now have is far from perfect: we are at least free of the legal & financial controls that made each home a private theatre, where horrible tragedies could be played uninterrupted as well as happy tales.

In the many reviews of family policy that took place from 1960-1980, the word "control" was used over and over. There is no doubt that family law, then, was implemented as a method of social & financial control - essentially, controlling the workforce.

I am amazed that so many people today imagine it's possible to control marital relations, in a helpful way, through law. What would you propose - that uncaring and selfish spouses be tried in court??!

The first stages of divorce liberalisation did, indeed, require the couple to air their grievances in court. The only people to benefit from that were lawyers! The 'automatic' divorce, after a cooling period, was introduced precisely as a response to the long-drawn-out (and expensive) damage created by those first attempts at 'reduced' legal control of marriage.

Mine is the only vote in Dave's thread, for government "picking up the pieces". Dave didn't include an option for a government role as educator, which would be my preference. After all, what are we forum members here doing, if not learning?

I think we'd gain more from improved relationship skills, and better-managed expectations, than from a swathe of legislation - which could never alter human behaviour.

AG