Sadly, for all those fathers who suffer so much by being marginalized in their children’s lives, this legislation when it comes, will be too little, too ineffective and just another
example of  wasted rhetoric.  If the Government  means business and truly believes that our society, present and future would be better if children had a good, loving
unfettered relationship with both parents, then legislation needs to be
introduced which reflects that.  The evidence is there, it needs to be acted on.

 The article is here: http://bit.ly/H1fB8p

The article also details how cohabitation with and without engagement affects the divorce rates, however it would be really interesting to hear about how rates are affected by the different lengths of time people live together prior to marriage. 

There are several people who have come to Divorce Support Group whose wives or husbands have left within 2 years of getting married after they have cohabited for anything between 5 and 10 years before the marriage.  I think there is a correlation between the length of cohabitation and the statistics associated with divorce.  My view is that when people live together for a long time, they usually do so because one, if not both of them find the institution of marriage an intimacy too far. 

That is, although cohabitation is absolute commitment and meaningful, there is something about marriage which is a little more intimate and dependent and therefore potentially more claustrophobic than living together.  It is harder to extricate yourself.  Many people cohabit successfully for their lifetimes, but there is a question mark over why people then marry after such a long time of living together.  Living together for these couples somehow seems safer and less threatening to the relationship.  Taking the next step and marrying after a decade often is one step too far. 

Firstly, although we can assume that those couples booking into the divorce hotel already have the prospect of success on their side as they are both heading for the same goal,that doesn’t answer all of it. 

In therapy,as in many disciplines, the setting in which an event or a meeting takes place is an integral part of a desired outcome. I can see then, how an ambient environment which is a normalised familiar environment, one which provides good wine, good food and comfortable surroundings will go a long way to facilitating a harmonious outcome. Anything which makes the overwhelming painful event of divorce easier, has to be good, but I can’t help but think (mutually desired outcomes aside), that a weekend is insufficient to process and mourn an enormous loss. 

Perhaps dealing with the practical side of divorce – the assets and the children, takes away much of the worry and anxiety associated with the break up itself, but it won’t take away the overwhelming involuntary emotions, the sleeplessness, the lack of
concentration, the inability to think straight, the loss of self-esteem and the
feeling of being alone and isolated.  The practical aspects of divorce are only a small part of a bigger picture.  Getting a legal divorce is one thing, getting an emotional one is entirely another. 

I like the idea of the divorce hotel.  It can be a place where
divorce doesn’t need to be synonymous with hostility and acrimony.  It can be a place where the couple and all they own is split and they can exit as separate but amicable individuals. My only concern is that on exit as separate individuals, each person takes time to deal with their own personal experience of pain in order to achieve their
emotional divorce and see that divorce is not only an end it is also a new
beginning. A weekend may be enough time to divorce on paper.  It is nowhere near enough time to divorce emotionally.