Questions for Policymakers
During the 1970s, one state legislature after another enacted all or part of this new law. But, did they know what they were doing?
Ask your state policymakers (legislators, attorneys general, governors, justice department officials - all those who write, sign, or uphold state laws) whether they know the following......
Did you know that 'No-Fault Divorce'...
...is still considered a lawsuit, just like any other lawsuit heard in the courtroom
...still has a 'Plaintiff' and a 'Defendant' even though these terms were changed to 'Petitioner' and 'Respondent' to make the process sound more cordial
...changed the name of the action from 'Lawsuit' to 'Petition' to disguise what it was
...permits the filing party (Petitioner) to 'win' the case every time
...means the 'accused' party (Respondent) will 'lose' every time
...stripped the Respondent of any 'defense' against the accusation in the lawsuit
...means that a 'claim' or 'cause of action' is no longer part of the process
...uses a claim of 'Irretrievable Breakdown' - a legal term that doesn't have a definition
...means the State's Police Power can be deployed in the 'taking' of the marital status
...means that the Respondent can be fined or jailed for trying to protect their marital status
...means the Petitioner can to come to court with 'unclean hands'... and it won't matter
...means the mental health status of the Petitioner will not be taken into account
...increased the divorce rate when, in fact, a region's divorce rate is positively correlated with the homicide rate
...is typically not a 'mutual consent' process
...was promoted as a 'mutual consent' process even though most of the time it wasn't.