When Can We Discuss This in A Stadium?

A new football season has begun, and like it or not, activism is now a part of it, from the jumbotron to the helmet to the end zone and beyond.  Therefore, I’m taking this opportunity to share a letter I wrote to the National Football League five years ago (in the wake of the Ray Rice domestic violence incident) for the sake of the half our nation’s children whose right to grow up with both parents under one roof is denied them.  I turned this into a petition and did not get enough support to cause the league concern.  Accordingly, the NFL did nothing.  At that time, petitions on behalf of Cecil The Lion, an animal shot in Africa by an American dentist on a hunting trip, garnered millions of signatures.  Telling.  

Commissioner Goodell,

Thank you for the work you have done in the past year to make it clear the NFL will not tolerate domestic violence. We ask that you now please address another behavior harmful to a family, adultery – also known as infidelity or cheating. While this is not illegal in thirty states - and not enforced where it is illegal, it is harmful nonetheless, and in as much as the NFL claims to demand a high standard from its employees, it is clearly within the scope of your authority to tackle this problem. In fact, a recent revision to your Personal Conduct Policy sought to improve upon that which already stated:

“While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct, and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime.”

Commissioner, we are empathetic to the difficulty you would face in delving into the interpersonal relationships of those in the league’s employ. Therefore, we ask that you begin to address adultery by disciplining Arian Foster of the Houston Texans who last year as the married father of two had an affair with a college student that resulted in a newborn and now a divorce. This is not the type of example we want to share with our youth, which is a definite role Arian Foster has stepped into.

Commissioner, the lives of the two children born of Arian Foster’s marriage will be forever harmed and the life of the child born of his affair will be complicated at least. Arian Foster’s behavior either promotes the values upon which the league is based, or it doesn’t. We ask that you make the expectations clear as to what is a higher standard of conduct and if adultery is not part of that higher standard, then please say so by disciplining Arian Foster based on conduct detrimental to the lives of the children born of his marriage, the child born of his affair, his now ex-wife, a student, and his community.

Our suggestion is to suspend Arian Foster for three games (one for each of the three children impacted,) or fine him as well as The Houston Texans, $300,000 ($100,000 for each of the three children impacted,) or preferably do both. It is certainly not our intent to quantify a child’s life with a number of games or with a dollar amount, and we certainly feel both a suspension and a fine should be significantly more than we suggest, especially in that Arian Foster has a five year and forty-three-million-dollar contract. Our hope though is to provide you a path so that you will use this case to send a message to those in the league’s employ that adultery, at the very least where children pay a price for it, is not consistent with the league’s values and will not be tolerated.

Commissioner, the integrity of the NFL is at stake when those who wear its logo cheat, on or off the field. Arian Foster's immoral, irresponsible behavior off the field reflects upon the NFL.  If the NFL is to benefit from its place in the fabric of our culture, then it must do what it can, wherever it can and as difficult as it may be, to address and help reduce divorce because family fragmentation hurts half our nation's kids!

Thank you for your consideration.

Friends, I’ve reached out to you in the past several weeks regarding what I believe to be the most important problem we face, the breakdown of the family.  When might this get the attention it deserves?  When will kids’ lives matter?  I have and continue to maintain The Marriage Education Act, legislation I created, can help and I’d greatly appreciate you promoting it.

Once Again, Not the Ceiling Everyone Is Focused On

Four years ago, as our country realized the barrier of a woman becoming President hadn’t been broken, I wrote A Glass Ceiling Was Shattered on Election Day, wherein I reminded us we had in fact crossed into uncharted waters, just not the one everyone was focused on. We’d elected the second ever divorced president and the first president on his third marriage.  We officially normalized divorce!  This wasn’t news to me.  In my book, Without A Chair, I’d already written, “Divorce, along with the blended families created in its wake, has been interwoven into our culture as an accepted standard; a dysfunction viewed as ‘normal’ in the timeline of life.”

So, as we turn our attention to whether we will have the first ever African American Female Vice President, I implore you to wonder if in Kamala Harris we will have the second ever Stepparent as Vice President, the first having been Nelson Rockefeller.  Are we going to officially normalize stepparents? The term probably goes unnoticed because in 2020 the word stepparent, or for that matter the phrases mom’s boyfriend, dad’s girlfriend, and / or a myriad of other combinations all roll off our tongue as easily as we say good morning.

In previous posts, I’ve expressed how discouraged I am that our President is someone with five kids from three marriages.  That’s not to say I don’t understand the reasons many had in voting for him, however, its long past the time for our nation to realize that the breakdown of the family is our number one problem.  Donald Trump has done nothing to address this.  Maybe if he had, his son would not have recently followed in his footsteps and the President wouldn’t now have five grandchildren of divorce, extending this legacy into the next generation.  By the way, Don Jr. is now with the ex-wife of California’s Governor.  Thousands of miles are between their child’s parents.

Joe Biden doesn’t seem to care or care enough about this issue either.  Andrew Yang was the only candidate to address it during the primaries when he promoted the idea of free marriage counseling for all.  At least the former Vice-President’s in his forty-fourth year of marriage to Dr. Jill Biden.  He’s actually in his fiftieth year of marriage all together.  Bravo, Joe!  Jill, in sharing the story of why it took her two years to finally say yes to Joe’s fifth marriage proposal admirably states her reasons had something to do with the pain of her divorce, but for the most part were about her concern that his children never experience a divorce because they’d already been traumatized enough.

Senator Kamala Harris, whose parents divorced when she was seven, married six years ago at age forty-eight.  I don’t doubt her love for her husband, so excuse my cynicism, however, it does rattle around in my brain that as she set out for a more national prominence she acquired the requisite family to parade on stage and accept a nomination, virtual as it is this year.  The Senator appears to have a nice stepfamily with her husband’s kids, however, in some regard, therein lie the problem.  The more we glamorize stepfamilies, the more we lower the bar future generations have for resolving marital issues, because they won’t see divorce as having a bad outcome.  For multi-million-dollar income celebrities like Candidate Harris and her husband there is a far greater likelihood of these so-called good outcomes.  For the rest of us, there are far too many bad ones.

Which brings us to Mike Pence, in his thirty-fifth year of marriage, and the only of the four on the major party tickets to not have their marital life directly touched by divorce.  As for the angst some have about the Vice-President’s values, consider this.  The seventy, eighty, and ninety-year old’s who pass on over the next thirty years take with them the last remnants of traditional family values. While not every aspect of this lifestyle is something we might want to hold on to, there are plenty of wonderful parts that we should, and each new generation is being pushed farther and farther and farther away such that eventually nothing will remain.

All this to say, please pause.  I’m not asking you to judge the candidates or their spouses.  There are so many layers to these people’s stories, far more than we know or can be adequately addressed in this short piece.  I’m asking you to please think about the damage the divorce culture of the past fifty years has done.  You can embrace or demur gay marriage and have the breakdown of the family be your number one concern.  You can be for or against taxing the rich and have it be number one.  You can support or oppose abortion rights and have it be number one.  And so on.  So, why isn’t confronting the breakdown of the family Donald Trump’s or Joe Biden’s or your number one priority?

I’m not afraid to say in the strongest way possible that KIDS LIVES MATTER.  All kids deserve to be under one roof with both their parents!  Senator Harris speaks of “that little girl…”  Well, there are still far too many little boys and girls, and older ones as well, who suffer the horrors of divorce which can have everlasting effects. Until we fix this, it doesn’t matter who’s in the oval office.  That said, I’m asking you to please take a few minutes and watch a short video of press coverage about The Marriage Education Act, legislation I created years ago.  It’s not perfect, however, it’s a step in the right direction and at least puts the issue on our collective radar. Additionally, as Election Day draws near, the next time you speak negatively about the candidate you’re against, please take a moment to also spread the word about what we can all agree on, and do something about, less children of divorce.

It's My Body, But It's Not My Choice

We’re well into the 2,000’s and I’m supposed to be understanding of a woman who feels more at home in a men’s bathroom or of a man who only enjoys being clothed in a dress and high heel.  I’m supposed to welcome men liking men and woman attracted to woman.  I’m supposed to care about African Americans who haven’t always had the same opportunity as Caucasians.  I’m supposed to be sensitive to Muslims who are profiled when in fact they are wonderful people.  I’m supposed to go to bat for woman who aren’t paid the same as men.  I’m supposed to stand up for woman who’ve been taken advantage of.  I’m supposed to defend people crossing a border because they are desperate to live a safe and secure existence.

I’m supposed to be compassionate toward all these people and I am!  As someone who’s endured so many struggles and hardships, I have enormous empathy for the plight of others.  When do I receive the same in return though?  In a world filled with ever-growing tolerance and affinity for all sorts of people in all sorts of situations, there’s no embrace for me, a man crippled by the pain of divorce.

I’m also supposed to champion woman’s reproductive rights and again I do. Pro-Choice supporters routinely maintain, and Supreme Court nominees concur, that no law exists which regulates a man’s body.  There is one though.  Divorce law regulates men’s and woman’s bodies.  I chose to be a married father; however, I’m forced to live as a divorced dad which is extremely painful for me daily and has all but destroyed my life. Just as a woman doesn’t want to be obliged to give birth, I shouldn’t be compelled to live as someone I don’t want to be either.

Simply put, Roe V Wade said a woman has the right to choose what to do with her body without government interference, however, Roe did not give a woman an absolute right.  It was conditional based on trimester.  Later on, Planned Parenthood V. Casey changed but essentially upheld the conditionality of this right.  Divorce should be treated the same, a conditional right.

Don’t misunderstand, I’m not saying an unhappily married spouse should be condemned to live in that body either.  Either person should always be free to terminate a marriage, however, it should be conditional based on whether or not there are children involved. Obviously, I realize it’s not as simple as this and merely mandating a spouse stay in an unhappy marriage is not an answer.  Neither is unfettered divorce though.  We need to reestablish the culture of commitment that existed decades ago, however, this time peer pressure should be to do whatever it takes, for as long as it takes, to fix a broken marriage, as opposed to the way it used to be when problems were swept under the rug and woman felt trapped. 

Many Pro-Choice supporters, including Presidential Candidates and other leaders, qualify their beliefs, expressing abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. Lots, however, don’t like the use of that last word, rare.  They contend it stigmatizes abortion and casts judgement on those who seek it.  I’ve been a part of two abortions and it’s not something to celebrate nor is it something anyone seeks to have on their life’s resume.  If it were, the entire birth control industry wouldn’t exist. Likewise, people don’t set out on their wedding day to get divorced.  It’s never a desired outcome, even for those who choose it.  Divorce, like abortion, should be safe, legal, and rare.

So, to Pro-Choice supporters, heads you win - tails I lose, is not okay. It’s my body but it’s certainly not been my choice!  By the way, Pro-life Supporters, it’d be nice when you speak of protecting the family that for once this would mean reducing divorce rather than outlawing abortion! How come you don’t have the same energy and passion for this?

As for me, I’ve been divorced ten years and I’m in just as much pain today as I was on day one.  I said to my wife when discussing having children that I don’t want to have kids if divorce is ever an option, that I want a family more than anything but not if divorce would ever be on the table, that I know myself and after all I’ve been through (which took a book to tell and will take a sequel to finish telling) I won’t handle it well.  My vision of the person I trusted most in this world giving me her word remains crystal clear!  Society doesn’t much care about her broken promise though.  Rather, the Rat Race says there’s something wrong with me because I haven’t gotten over it.  I say there’s something wrong with our culture.

Nevertheless, I’ll continue to have empathy for the disenfranchised.  I wonder if those same people will ever have empathy for me? 

People Who Divorce in Glass Houses...

With the holidays behind us, the first Monday in January begins another season (one I’ve previously written about here)-- the biggest time of year for divorce filings. In 2018, Merriam-Webster chose "justice,” one of the most looked up words, as it's word of the year. This year's group of divorcees, like those before them, probably won’t find justice in the courthouse. Certainly, their children won't!

Which brings to mind a phrase I’d like to see disappear from our vernacular this year. I saw it used again recently when HGTV star Nicole Curtis shared in People Magazine how devastated she was to have her three-year-old son picked up by his father on Thanksgiving Day. When stating her case for kids to spend holidays with both parents together, Ms. Curtis, who also has another child from a previous marriage, opined that the parent with the holiday, whether they want to or not, should always invite the other parent to their home, providing it was safe to do so. “Buck Up – it’s not about you,” she said.

But there is inherent danger in telling others to "buck up" or "man up" or otherwise shame someone into doing what you think is the right thing. The advice might sound good on the surface but not be practical or best or even possible. For instance, a holiday family get-together is not always in one particular person’s home and not just about one person. In-laws and extended family members each have their own unique circumstances. There may also be other divorces in the mix as well as the new partners of others. Divorce has woven so many entanglements into the fabric of our society. What if Ms. Curtis goes on to have a third child with yet another father? This is the never-ending conundrum brought on by the nightmare of divorce in our culture.

In putting forth a simplistic fix to the pain she and others experience during the holidays, Ms. Curtis has played into the fantasy of divorce as a nice neat little package with a bow on top, when in fact divorce is fueled by powerful emotions which more often than not complicate everyone's lives. Her solution is about as realistic as expecting intact families to resemble Ozzie and Harriet during the holiday season. Telling anyone to buck up lacks the same compassion Ms. Curtis claims she's due.

I’m not saying I think it's a bad idea for kids whose parents are not married to spend holidays with both their parents. In fact, I think all kids whose parents are not married or otherwise living together should grow up in one home. Let parents rotate in and out of that home as well as spend family time there together, instead of shuffling kids around. This scenario, known as “bird-nesting,” is not popular, however, because at its core it inconveniences parents rather than kids.

Experts agree that what’s best for a child is to grow up with both parents under one roof in a happy and healthy marriage or committed relationship. And if we truly put kids first, we’d all champion an environment that supports fixing broken marriages and relationships rather than simply discarding them and settling for all-together flawed custody arrangements. We’d care more about Nicole Curtis’ heartache at not spending Thanksgiving and so many other ordinary but just as important days with her son, too.  That’s not the way of our society though. Last month, a Heineken beer advertisement reminded us when they ran their “Tradition doesn’t always have to be traditional”commercial featuring mom’s boyfriend and dad’s new family all gathered together for Christmas. No, we generally want the short-term happiness right in front of our nose rather than working hard to repair relationships and secure what is truly best for present and future generations.

Consider this.  In “How Good For Children Is The Good Divorce: surprising findings on educational attainment and marital success” University of Texas Professor Norval Glenn surmises that a "‘good divorce" may be more harmful to children in their future relationships than a "bad one". Simply put, the better our divorces, the more desensitized future generations become to divorce. A couple's threshold for working through problems becomes less and they become more prone to split. Divorce becomes a legacy. Indeed, children of divorce are already more predisposed to divorce when they marry.

I have enormous empathy for the pain Nicole Curtis endured on Thanksgiving Day.  The continued fallout from my parent’s, my sister’s, and my divorces were at the root of the pain I experienced in the last few months when I spent the holidays alone, missing every family member I’ve ever had.  Indeed, the only thing worse for me than the days leading up to Christmas were the days after when I was constantly asked if I had a nice Christmas and felt obliged to give the socially appropriate "yes" when in reality it was horrible.

My situation, like so many others, is heartbreaking and so I understand the frustration which leads people to offer up simple solutions to complex problems, however, it’s never productive, and actually it’s quite hurtful, to tell me or anyone else struggling with the hardship of a family break-up to simply “buck up.” Better to try and understand the difficulties others face and try to walk a day in their shoes. Better still to fix our broken divorce system and encourage couples to work to reunite.

Does Getting Divorced Mean We Lied On Our Wedding Day?

As baseball season nears the home stretch, football is gearing up.  Sports, like entertainment in general, provides needed distractions from life’s difficulties.  It also mirrors what goes on in our relationships and, in particular, marriage.

I say this as I’m going through my annual ritual of mustering up the energy to face another season as a New York Jets fan.  Twenty years ago I moved from New York to California, but the New York Jets are still my team.  I married them forty years ago, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health.

Every time I thought they couldn’t play any worse – they did.  We’ve been victory poor and it feels like rooting for them has taken 20 years off my life.  They’ve let me down more times than I can remember.  Unmet expectations – I’ve got a ton!

Every year, though, they tell me things are going to be different.  I remember last year’s promise of a winning season, too.  The Jets traded for Tim Tebow whose unconventional style and knack for winning was going to breathe excitement into our team.  We were going to try new things, get wild and crazy, and recapture our youth.  It didn’t happen, and there was an ugly divorce.  Tim remarried our archrival.  But now at season’s start, once again, as always, I’ve recommitted myself to my team and am excited for the new season.

The fans of the Miami Marlins baseball team have had a rough go of it with their team as well this year.  The Marlins sit in last place with a beautiful new first place stadium.  As the story goes, the city spent a lot of bond money building the stadium and then the team shed its expensive payroll – its superstars.  Hence the team plummeted to last place, with low attendance and less tax dollars coming into the city than expected.  A once hopeful relationship soured into ugly words and lawsuits.  Marlins President David Samson defended criticism by saying that just because the team went through a divorce didn’t mean they lied on their wedding day.

And therein lies the problem.  I assume the Marlins had good intentions just like every bride and groom on their wedding day.  And so, at first glance, it seems David Samson was correct – divorce doesn’t mean the team lied on its wedding day.  However, the flippancy with which Samson remarked speaks volumes to the ever growing dilution of our word as our bond everywhere in life.  Today, when rationalizing away ownership of problems is as common as loyalty no longer is, when free agency in sports is only outdone by free agency in marriage, then yes, divorce does in fact mean we lied on our wedding day.

So what does all this mean for our marriages?  Someone once said professional sports is tens of thousands of people who need exercise watching a few who don’t.  The funny thing about being a fan is when we win, it’s just that, “we” won.  We are as much a part of the team as the players.  When our team is struggling and losing, however, somehow we become expert at telling “them“ all the things “they’ve” done wrong.  I can’t count how many times I’ve sat on the couch – potato chip crumbs all over my shirt and my unshaven face stained by mustard – yelling at my favoriteplayer: “ You idiot – how could you miss that play!”

Likewise, the slip-ups our spouse makes never seem to go unnoticed either and when things are not going well we’ve got easy answers for what ” they “ should do better.

But words from legendary football coach Vince Lombardi about football are as true for sports as marriage.  Like football, marriage requires “perseverance, self-denial, hard work, sacrifice, [and] dedication….”

Being a New York Jets fan has always been difficult, and this upcoming season has difficult written all over it.  Still, I’m never going to quit on my team.  I’ll just have to cheer harder.

Values; Easy To Have, Hard To Live By

By David Schel and Jennifer Graham*

J. Robertson McQuilkin was president of Columbia International University, a Bible college in South Carolina, when his wife Muriel was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease.

Determined to keep his wife at home, where she was safe and loved, McQuilkin made the decision to care for her by himself, and so, as the disease progressed, he juggled a demanding job with the even more demanding needs of his wife. The day came, however, when the balls started to fall and he resigned the university presidency. He later wrote a booklet about his decision, which he titled “Living by Vows.”

McQuilkin’s choice was a homage to his marital vows, yes, but also an expression of his deeply held values.  So why were so many people surprised and awed by what he did, an act of love which, as McQuilkin put it, “took no great calculation"?  It’s because values are easy to have and hard to live by.  And our inconsistency in the matter of values is what’s killing marriages today – not only inconsistency among flawed human beings, but inconsistency in the response of the supposedly stalwart Christian church.

When we live by values all of the time (or none of the time, for that matter), we are easy to know and understand. It’s when we live by values only part of the time – when they’re convenient – that we are inconsistent and things get complicated.  It’s when our institutions, both private and public, break down.

Where is the church in the epidemic that is our nations divorce rate?  In its desperate need to be all things to all people, so as to slow its increasing irrelevancy, the church has generally become a teeter-totter on divorce, wobbling between two extremes.

Many churches today stand strong like McQuilkin, unwavering in their support of marriage.  Programs like Marriage Encounter and Promise Keepers still thrive, even with divorce rates hovering around 50 percent.  But as divorce becomes more prevalent and accepted in our culture, there is a danger in the churches struggle to find balance between holding fast to their values and extending needed grace.  Many churches lose their balance.

From a purely biblical standpoint, divorce is in most cases as wrong as lying or theft.  Yet, it’s increasingly common to have churches offer programs about successful co-parenting, mimicking the cheerful “good divorce” chatter that makes up so much modern therapy.  Among even the most evangelical churches, divorce has become accepted in a way in which other social wrongs are not. Imagine a church offering a program on “Redemption through Stolen Goods:  How To Help Others With Things You Shoplifted.” You can’t. Theft is wrong;  no subsequent manipulation of stolen goods, even for “good,” can make them redeemed.

Within the sanctuary, therefore, a pastor may read gravely the apostle Paul’s words that he who divorces his wife and remarries is committing adultery, while in the social hall, a few days later, divorced parents sit around and discuss how to do divorce “the right way.”

Fact:  For a person living by values, there can be no “good divorce.”

Churches, if they are honest, if they live by vows and by values, would not offer co-parenting seminars, but programs on how and why divorced spouses should reunite.

New research shows that a “good divorce” may be more harmful to children and their future relationships than a bad one.   When churches encourage their divorced members to hold hands, smile brightly and talk about how wonderful life is now that they’ve abandoned their vows, they are contributing to a sorry statistic, that children of divorce are 89 percent more likely than their peers to become divorced themselves as adults.

Simply put, the “better” our divorces, the more insensitive future generations become to divorce and the problem grows worse.  By promoting “good divorces,” albeit in the name of grace, we do nothing to stop the incidence of divorce and everything to fuel it.

Grace can be a tricky thing. The church means well; she always does. But more and more, she blindly enables divorce, inadvertently leading the way to a culture best summed up by Rear Admiral Grace Hopper, often referred to as “ Amazing Grace,” who said,  "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission.”

Better the church remind us of this truth:  When living by values, you don’t need forgiveness.

*about co-author Jennifer Graham: Jennifer Graham is a writer and editor.  Her essays have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, The Boston Globe Magazine, Ladies' Home Journal, Salon, Family Circle, Runner's World and Parents magazines, as well as newspapers across the country.  Graham was a religion reporter and columnist for newspapers in South Carolina.  Graham holds a degree in journalism from the University of South Carolina and was a fellow at the Knight Center for Specialized Journalism. She has also been a press secretary and a speechwriter for the S.C. Attorney General.

Hey Kids, One More Thing: How About a “March for Our Families?”

I was intrigued by students walking out of class for seventeen minutes on March 14th as well as March for Our Lives on March 24th.  I wonder if their outrage might extend to another area of their lives where they’d be justified in feeling adults have failed them?

Just as all kids deserve a safe place to learn, they also deserve their two parents under one roof in a happy and healthy marriage.  At least half our nation’s children don’t have this.  Why aren’t kids as outraged about divorce, which happens up and down their block every day, as they are about something that happens in only a few places, and to only a tiny percentage of students, as horrifically tragic as it is in each instance?  Because sons and daughters have no voice in their parents’ marriage.  Yet they are the ones most hurt if that marriage ends.

Kids have always had a voice in their school through Student Council.  It hasn’t been an equal voice; however, it has been a voice nonetheless.  Students are feeling right now that this voice hasn’t been enough and so they are trying to have an even louder voice.  In the end though, they are still powerless and dependent on adults to enact their desires.  To even have their March for Our Lives, they needed adults to provide financial and logistical support.

So, what must happen for kids to speak up against divorce and organize a March for Our Families?  How many more kids must grow up with all the losses, hardships, and depravity of divorce?  The answer is simple, just as not one more child should ever again experience the devastation of a school shooting, not one more child should ever again experience the demolition of their family!  Just as kids needed parental support to March for Our Lives, they would need parental support to March for Our Families.  Are you ready parents?  Are you ready to give up the divorce culture which has hurt so many and allow your children to march for their families?  Have enough kids suffered yet?

To be clear, standing up against divorce is not being completely anti-divorce, per se.  Rather, it is to be against the reasons that lead a couple down the path to divorce. Moreover, it is about embracing responsibilities to families.  Divorce is a very sensitive subject in our culture.  It is difficult to make concrete statements regarding the issue of divorce because it’s extremely personal and emotionally driven. Every marriage has a combination of dynamics, which can create gray areas that make divorce seem justifiable. Truth be told, the only reason divorce is truly justifiable is domestic violence. This criminal behavior should never be tolerated.

So, what would it mean to March for Our Families?  Again, it’s simple.  Kids expressing their desire for their parents to demand of themselves what they demand of their kids.  That spouses get an education, keep their promises, and never quit!

Education is always the key to success, but when it comes to the two most important jobs of all – spouse and parent – no prior education is required.  Depending on your state, anywhere from one hundred to seven-hundred-fifty hours of education are required for a manicurist license where the worst that can happen is a broken fingernail.  Zero hours of education are required for a marriage license where the worst that could happen is a broken family.

Most people don’t want the government involved in their marriage.  Understandably so.  Unfortunately, the government is already involved in over half of marriages – through divorce – and at tremendous cost to taxpayers!  Government is also intimately involved in the breakup of cohabitating couples with children and these relationships dissolve at even higher rates.

For the government to be involved in marriage education though does not mean they would be teaching it.  They could just be record-keepers for 3rd party private educators of differing ideologies to freely teach from a broadly outlined curriculum addressing everyday marriage issues, including money, health, family, communication, intimacy, unmet expectations, conflict resolution, domestic violence, and the effects of divorce on children and adults.  Grading would be based on attendance and in as much as course providers would pay the state a fee as well as scholarship those who can’t afford the course fee, there would be no extra cost to the state and the government would ultimately become less involved in marriage with less divorce.

Even with an education, marriage isn’t easy and help may be needed along the way.  That’s okay.  When a student isn’t doing well, parents don’t encourage kids to give up, get an F, and have a party.  They encourage them to work harder, speak with a Guidance Counselor, get a tutor.  Parents need to do the same with a marriage counselor – for as long as it takes – to fix and continue their marriage.  Or else, stop teaching their kids to not quit their commitments.

Promises form the basis for our entire society.  They are reflected in everything we do.  Our contracts, our laws, even in every purchase we make, right on down to the smallest pledge – “I’ll pick you up from practice at five, honey!”  Some people say promises are made to be broken.  When they are, however, we know what happens every time.  Feelings get hurt, hearts get broken, people get sued.  Nothing good ever comes from a broken promise.  And no broken promise hurts greater or harms more than the broken ones made to our partners.  Wedding vows are more than just promises – they’re the most solemn pledges of all.

So, good for you kids, for speaking up because you feel adults aren’t listening.  Sadly, if you want your families intact, you’re going to have to March for Our Families just like your March for Our Lives because adults aren’t listening.  The dog didn’t eat our homework.  We, as parents, haven’t done it.

Something Continues To Be Missing From The Conversation

I was born in 1963, so I don’t remember where I was the day President Kennedy was assassinated.  I vividly remember the morning of September 11th though, and having coffee with my wife on the West Coast.  December 14, 2012 is another of those days I can’t forget.   Sitting at my desk, my heart broke a little more each time I heard the news from Newtown, Connecticut.

President Obama spoke eloquently that day of our nation’s collective sorrow.  He also said how eager he was to give his own children an extra hug that evening.  Parents across the country were thinking the same, only half of the population of divorced parents felt a disconnect -- they didn't get to hug their children that night.  Their kids didn't get the hugs they needed from both parents that night as well as so many others.

The incident brought on national conversations about guns and mental health just as they did about guns and race after the tragic death of Trayvon Martin.  As has become the norm, however, these discussions quickly fade into the background.  Trayvon’s parents released a book last week and if it’s time for them to speak again, I think it’s time to add divorce into these national conversations as well. In fact, we are remiss in our condolences for those affected by these tragedies if we do not.

The role divorce may have played in Newtown is simple to identify.  The divorce rate for parents with special needs children, like the parents of the young adult who hurt so many lives that day, is reportedly higher than the divorce rate generally for married couples with children.  The mother of the Newtown shooter was living with her son while his father was with his new wife a half hour or so away. That’s not to say the father wasn’t involved in the care of their son, but living with your troubled son and giving him the foundation of a family, versus living with your new wife a half hour away are very different situations.

The role divorce may have played in Trayvon Martin’s death is also simple to identify.  Trayvon lived with his Mother in Miami, and while serving his third suspension from school, was in Orlando spending time at his father’s girlfriend’s home – the girlfriend after his father’s second divorce.  We say “father’s girlfriend“ or ”mother’s boyfriend“ these days and don’t even blink an eye anymore.  It, along with second and third husband or wife, rolls off the tongue as easily as we breathe. 

My heart aches for Trayvon Martin.  My heart also aches for Trayvon’s parents and the pain they have and continue to endure. Call me cold, however, but five years ago I had a hard time watching Traci Martin, Trayvon’s father, portrayed as a victim on the television talk shows, at protests, and on Capitol Hill.  During the course of two marriages, he cheated on both wives and had girlfriends lined up before he left each marriage.  Regardless of what did or didn’t happen that fateful evening, divorce had a role in Trayvon acting out in school. If he’d come from a stable home, would he otherwise have been in the path of George Zimmerman in the first place whether guns were harder or easier to access and whether Trayvon was black, white, green or purple?

In addition to guns and race, the possible violation of Trayvon’s civil rights was a topic of conversation five years ago. Again, if we are to discuss Trayvon’s civil rights as they pertain to guns and race, we ought to discuss them as they relate to divorce.

On November 20, 1989, The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child went into effect.  To date, 196 countries have ratified it, including every member of the United Nations except the United States. The preamble reads in part:

 “Convinced that the family, as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all its members and particularly children, should be afforded the necessary protection and assistance so that it can fully assume its responsibilities within the community “

”Recognizing that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding,”

The reasons why the United States has not ratified the convention are complicated and the details of the Martin’s marital problems probably are as well. Regardless, the problems aren’t the problem. The real problem is we as a country have deemed it acceptable behavior to divorce in large numbers, thereby violating our children’s civil rights!  Billy Graham said a few years back: 

“The broken home has become perhaps the No. 1 social problem of North America, and ultimately it could lead to the destruction of our civilization.  The basic unit of society is the home – so when the home begins to break, the society is on its way to disintegration.  This problem does not make screaming headlines, but like termites, it is eating away at the heart and core of our social and moral structure.”

It’s been fifty-three years since our nation lost JFK, a visionary leader.  Husbands and wives, ask not what you can do for yourself, but what you can do for your spouse and for your kids and for your family! 

The First Monday in January

No sooner had the sun set on the busiest month of the year for retailers, when the most active season for divorce lawyers had its kickoff the first Monday in January on what has sadly become known as Divorce Monday. It commences the biggest time of the year for divorce filings.

Many parents typically decide during the preceding several months to wait until after the holidays to tell their kids they are splitting up. They want to give the children one last holiday of togetherness – their last meal so to speak. From that point forward, however, the word used for prisoners will be applied to these children– custody.  That’s always bothered me, applying the same word to our kids as we use on criminals. And yet the analogy fits. I won’t even get started on the word “visitation.”

So let’s get this straight. It’s okay to devastate kids in January but it’s not okay to crush them in December? It’s okay to wreck their world a month before Valentine’s Day, a time of love and romance, but it’s not okay to level them a month before a time of toys and games? Can someone say oxymoron! If parents hold off on the divorce because they know it will upset their family, they probably should be reconsidering the decision to divorce in the first place. Devastation is devastating no matter what day it occurs.

Take comedian Chris Rock for example. He and his wife waited until right after Christmas to announce their split – apparently during the open season for divorce. After the tree was taken down and the lightsput away. His wife’s press release announcing the split contained the same tired line: “My children remain at the center of my life and their well-being is my top priority.” While I have no doubt the couple feel this way, they’re trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. And it doesn’t fit. If your kids really were your top priority, wouldn’t you as parents be doing what children want?

And what do they want? According to Gwyneth Paltrow, who is on the cover of this month’s Harper’s Bazaar UK magazine promoting Conscious Uncoupling again, “Of course, there are times when I think it would have been better if we had stayed married, which is always what your children want….”

So if kids want their parents to stay married – then if parents don’t stay married – they’re not making their children their top priority. It’s that simple. Instead, parents are making themselves the top priority! This is far more serious than children not getting the pony they want – it’s about them not getting the family they deserve.

Before we know it, it’s going to be the Christmas season. In fact the stores were already gearing up for Valentine’s Day before New Year’s. That means parents need to tend to their marriages now and put a stop to Divorce Monday. It all starts with an attitude. And so as divorce papers are unwrapped during this month by too many unsuspecting husbands and wives – parents – please keep this in mind throughout the year:

The greatest gift a child can receive on Christmas morning is not found under the tree. Mom and Dad under the same roof on Christmas morning, sitting on the couch holding hands and sipping coffee together, having completed another year of hard — yet rewarding — work in their marriage is more meaningful to a kid than any toy, game or piece of clothing ever could be. 

Likewise, years later when those same little boys and girls are all grown up, the greatest gift they can receive on their wedding day would be to have mom and dad standing arm in arm, having done the hard work necessary to honor their commitment to each other and their children. Couples get lots of gifts on their wedding day, all of which with enough money they could buy on their own. Divorce strips them of the greatest wedding gift of all. A gift gone forever.                                               

Remember this, and the first Monday in January can go back to just being about the hope and promise signing up for a gym membership brings rather than saddling kids with the extra weight they’ll carry with them forever.

A GLASS CEILING WAS SHATTERED ON ELECTION DAY

It just wasn’t the one we were focused on.  America will now have a President with five children from three marriages.  A seventy-year-old President with a ten-year-old son.  Toto, we’re not in Kansas anymore!  On Election Day, Donald Trump put the final crack in a glass ceiling and divorce, which shatters so many lives, is now officially a dysfunction that is completely normal in the timeline of American lives.

Yes, Ronald Reagan had already conquered this frontier, however, this is far different in so many ways not the least of which is Ronald Reagan was the recipient of an unwanted divorce. Furthermore, in his book, Twice Adopted, Michael Reagan tells that before his father became ill, he told Michael his signing of the nation’s first no-fault divorce legislation as Governor of California in 1969 -  and now the law in all fifty states - was his “greatest regret” in public life.

While all Americans will benefit if our new President is successful, fixing the state of marriage is not on his agenda.  Therefore, it is up to us to do it.  The decline of marriage continues to be a “huge” and unaddressed problem.

I personally felt a loss on Election Day.  I had hoped it would be a day when legislation I sponsored would be passed.  In 2014, with one person’s help and working out of a Starbucks, I created and wrote The Marriage Education Act, a ballot measure, which was discussed on the The Today Show and many other national television & radio news programs.

The Marriage Education Act would amend marriage license laws such that a marriage license be treated as any other license and held to a minimal level of required education – to be administered by a wide variety of independent 3rd party providers with the freedom to teach according to their respective ideologies

Its premise was marriage rates are at an all-time low and trending lower and that while there are vast amounts of people not getting married, in part because of the failure rate over the past forty years, there are still plenty of people getting married and if they become a more successful group – by making marriage licensees educated as all other licensees - then more people will want to become a part of this group again.  It’s akin to repopulating a species on the brink of extinction rather than letting it become extinct.

While I certainly don't want the government involved in marriages, they’re already immersed in half of all marriages – through divorce - and at tremendous cost to taxpayers!  Government is also involved in the breakup of unmarried couples with children and these relationships dissolve at even higher rates.  My thesis was that while The Marriage Education Act would add a step to the process of getting married, through doing what adults teach their kids to do to succeed – to get an education - the government would ultimately become less involved in marriage, less kids and parents would experience divorce, and marriage itself would survive and prosper.

The measure didn't make it to ballots in 2014 or in 2016.  As with other things I’ve done, both times I got a collection of e-mails offering praise but very little willingness to get involved.  The MEA wasn't ideal but whether it succeeded or not, I feel our cause would have been advanced if people would have supported it.  I’m never going to stop climbing the uphill battle for the bedrock I believe in, but I’ve become increasingly frustrated with a marriage strengthening community I find so giving, caring and compassionate but too often so politically correct that opportunities to ignite people’s passion to save the institution of marriage are squandered.

I felt this again recently when an article I submitted for publication - If Elections Have Consequences, Then Marriage Matters - about how I felt both candidates were awful role models in marriage, was embraced for its perspective but after three rounds of editing I’d reached a point where I was tired of spending so much time trying to couch everything I say when it feels like not many people are listening.

SINGLE, MARRIED, or DIVORCED; Whether marriage exists for your children or grandchildren years from now, or not, depends on what we do today!

I neither endorse or condone what Donald Trump has said about many people, and I did not vote for him, or her, however, Donald Trump just proved that once in a great while problems have become so bad that as it relates to policy, what you have to say can be more important than how you say it.  Trump also proved Steve Jobs words that inspired me to create the MEA: “The people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do.”

So I am going to continue to have the courage to put forth new ideas that aren't necessarily flawless and I’m not going to wait to perfect them before I introduce them.  My latest effort is Tree Action which will launch in January.  The finishing touches are still being applied, however, I hope you’ll have a look and get involved.  Together, we can make a difference right away!

Hilary Clinton in her gracious concession speech, while touting her thirty years of tireless work for children and families, called on followers to continue to work to break down barriers that hold anyone back from achieving their dreams.  As someone very damaged by my parents’ divorce, I didn’t have a bucket list as an adult.  I had a pail with one thing in it: my dream to create an intact family.  A divorce I didn't want held me back from achieving my dream; precious, priceless, and irreplaceable.

Like it or not, Donald Trump will become my President and I hope one day those who voted for him and those who didn't will come to find he has helped make our lives better.  Regardless, Donald Trump will never be my moral compass and I hope during the next four years we can all get together and put the glass ceiling he put the final crack in and shattered back together.

If Elections Have Consequences, Then Marriage Matters

On October 3rd, President & Michelle Obama will celebrate their 24th wedding anniversary.  While I am a registered independent, did not vote for President Obama, and am not a fan of his job performance, I find him to be an outstanding man, husband, and father.  I feel the First Lady has done a wonderful job and in she too I see an outstanding woman, wife and mother.  They and their marriage are great role models!

On the contrary, neither major party presidential candidate can be seen as who we aspire to be in marriage.  Both do however provide us with insight into a problem affecting over half our nation’s children which has never truly been discussed on the campaign trail – divorce! 

I listened to Donald Trump’s (third) wife introduce him at the republican convention and while it was lovely, it didn’t wow.  Then, his son from this marriage came on stage to be with mom and dad.  After an awkward pause, the kids from the other two marriages joined them.  As Donald stood there with his five children from three marriages, I couldn’t help but remember not what he has said about other people, but rather, what he said about himself.

Regarding his marital history, he claimed he had been a lousy husband but a great father.  Yes, his kids appear to have turned out fine.  Never the less, while plenty of children of divorce do good in school and have successful careers, universally, the effects of divorce play out in their adult relationships.  Therefore, it’s possible that we really don’t know yet if Trump’s kids have turned out as well as they appear to have?

With a divorce rate still hovering around fifty percent, this notion of being a lousy spouse but a good parent is an often used rationalization, however, it’s an oxymoron and physically impossible, especially where cheaters are concerned.  Time spent in an affair is time that should have been spent with one’s kid(s).  That doesn’t mean a cheater can’t be a good father or mother but the term great father or mother is reserved for great parents who put their kids ahead of themselves and who start by being great spouses!

Ultimately, Donald Trump sends the same dangerous message all celebrities do when they divorce.  Not that divorce for these people doesn’t have pain, but generally speaking, both parties end up with lots of money and suitors lined up by the hundred.  Simply put, while getting over a divorce is painful for anyone, it’s a lot less painful for these people because of the ease with which they can build new lives - which also affects how well their kids do.

Ironically, Hilary Clinton also sends a dangerous message by having stayed in her marriage. 

When I watched Bill introduce Hilary at the democratic convention, I immediately noticed how different the introduction by a first spouse was to that of a third spouse.  There was an awe inspiring history of a life built together.  There was a gaping hole in the story though.  Serial cheating was the elephant in the room not mentioned!  Never the less, there was a daughter who by all accounts is a wonderful young woman proud of her parent’s marriage.

It’s not for me to speculate why Hillary stayed with Bill.  Many opine theirs is a relationship based on political ambition.  I don’t care why they have stayed married.  It’s none of my business why any couple get or stay married along with how they conduct their relationship.  What is my business are spouses honoring the lifelong commitment that separates marriage from other forms of relationships because divorce breeds more divorce.

Take Hilary’s close friend Huma Abadeen for instance.  Most were appalled she didn’t dump her husband, Anthony Weiner.  I’m guessing her friend Hilary having stayed in her marriage, working through humiliating problems, had a lot to do with Ms. Abadeen’s decision, which I believe was an admirable one. Unfortunately, in this case the problems worsened and Ms. Abadeen has now wisely separated from Mr. Weiner.

There’s always a fine line celebrating reconciliation where infidelity has occurred.  On one hand it sends a message that you can overcome even the most hurtful of acts.  On the other hand, it sends a message that you can cheat and you won’t necessarily lose your marriage.  I always choose to applaud the former while never forgetting the latter.

Nowhere is that fine line better illustrated then in the Abadeen / Weiner marriage.  It was none other than Bill Clinton who officiated their wedding ceremony.  Now I’m certainly not saying President Clinton bears any responsibility for Mr. Weiner’s behavior but if the person marrying you has practiced deviant behavior and not lost his marriage, then someone such as Mr. Weiner, consciously or subconsciously, can see a path where no consequences exist for crossing a line.  I don’t know if President Clinton ever counseled Mr. Weiner, however, officiants along with guests should take some measure of responsibility toward helping marriages they witness!

Fellow citizens, this election will have a consequence.  The percentage of married people recently fell below fifty percent for the first time ever and is trending downward at warp speed.  Come January, we will have a President who cannot be considered a role model in marriage which will only accelerate the downfall of marriage in our culture.   Interestingly, both Vice-Presidential candidates are on first marriages with no cheating scandals.  I hope our new one will see fixing the state of marriage as a national priority.

In closing, I want to wish the Obama’s a very happy anniversary and thank them for their service to our country.  As they leave office on Inauguration Day, they will be in their 25th year of marriage to one another.  Thank you for keeping hope alive.  Thank you also to Vice President and Dr. Jill Biden.  Their first year out of office will include their 40th wedding anniversary.  Two more great role models!

Getting What You Want The Most

On July 15th, Caitlyn Jenner will receive the ESPN Arthur Ashe award for courage and bravery. Many have said there are more deserving people to receive such an award. While that might be true, it’s really not for me or anyone else to say who is more brave or courageous than the next person when it comes to facing difficult things.

What I can say is that while I feel for the pain Bruce Jenner has endured throughout his life, and while right now Caitlin may in fact help kids struggling with their gender, I firmly believe he / she will in fact hurt far more children in the long run with the message of get what you want no matter how it affects others – my happiness trumps everything and everyone else!

Now I personally don’t care what Bruce / Caitlyn Jenner does nor is it any of my business to praise, condone or condemn it. However, when this person chooses to intentionally place their story in the public discourse so as to help others then my views are just as important and deserve to be heard as well.

I watched the Diane Sawyer interview the night it aired and was shocked – and yet not shocked at all – at how casually it was mentioned and glossed over, that Bruce Jenner twice left a marriage with a very young child because he wasn’t happy. He’s now left a third marriage because he wasn’t happy. Once again there are children, stepchildren and grandchildren that are affected regardless of their choice to support him or not.

We seem to be living in an unparalleled age of narcissism wherein people who have so much can never seem to get enough. I look at what Bruce Jenner’s life was like without that thing he seems to have wanted most and I see a man blessed with an abundance of family – the thing we all seem to say is most important. He was also blessed with fame and fortune and able to indulge in comforts and pleasures not available to most. He was also blessed with a platform through which he could dramatically affect the lives of others.

I see the lives of children of divorce, over half our nations children, and they don’t get the one thing they want most - their family. Rather, they get a bi-nuclear family that deprives them of the ability to enjoy both of their parents each and every day. They don’t get to indulge in and enjoy the comfort of living in one world with both of their parents and the lifelong stability derived from this. They also don’t get a platform on which to speak because their voice is generally drowned out by the chorus of applause given to the adults in their life – people who place their own personal happiness above everything else!

Lets be clear on the happiness issue as some distort this to support the narrative in which they’ve heavily invested themselves. People of all ages make statements regarding divorce that tend to be relative to the disaster of the divorce itself. When someone says, “it’s better for the kids to see us divorced than to see us unhappy together “ or “I am glad my parents got divorced because they are much happier now.” these statements are about the parent’s happiness.

The parent’s level of happiness post-divorce is not comparable to the level of happiness the children would have achieved if their parents, who were in love enough to get married and in love enough to choose to bring kids into the world, were willing to put their kids needs ahead of their wants. A conscious decision to work hard enough to fix marital problems and find that happiness again, giving their kids the family they want, deserve, and are entitled to is the most responsible decision.

So, ESPN, give Caitlyn Jenner an award for having the courage and bravery to go out and get the one thing that mattered most. Just be honest that in so doing, for whatever good Caitlyn Jenner does, Bruce Jenner has negatively impacted the lives of far more children through his contributions to the divorce culture that permeates our society. And if you’re going to show what Caitlyn’s life looks like with the thing she wanted most, then show what the lives of children of divorce look like when they don’t get the one thing they want most.

Quad Skinny Double Pump Mocha Chino - MARRIAGE ADVICE - with foam…

Like so many other mobile aficionados, I office out of a Starbucks location. It’s a great set-up. Nice working atmosphere, great music, and a full coffee bar. Best of all, free rent! I still get the full breadth of office chatter too. My landlord Howard actually stirred up some of the office banter recently encouraging baristas and customers to discuss race relations. It didn’t go over so well, but I applaud the effort. It’s an important topic and Starbucks, at least on paper, seems like it could be a place that could foster respectful dialogue that leads to improvement in the lives of people on all sides of the issue.

I’ve got another idea for Mr. Shultz that might go over better. Tackle an issue that’s already being discussed in your stores: the state of marriage in our country. Indeed, that topic plays itself out at your locations all day every day.

I see the affairs first-hand. Now I’m a romantic. And yet I still know what it means when a middle-aged man and woman pull up in separate cars and hug and kiss in the parking lot -- like my girlfriend and I in the back of my car in high school.  They’re probably not going on 40 years of marriage. Thankfully, I can also spot the couple who probably are going on 40 years of marriage oozing intimacy in their just being together. I also see people who met on-line having their first get together and discovering how much each lied on their profile. I see the divorced parents exchanging the kids at a neutral location barely making eye contact with each other. I hear one divorce story more astonishingly horrific then the next. And the divorcee who’s dating? Well that’s a whole other story.

What I see more than anything, however, is the pain and suffering of spouses discussing marital problems with a friend or relative. I can find those blindfolded. Even with the blender going full speed, I can hear a husband or wife tearing apart their spouse like beans going through a grinder, much of the time not saying one syllable about their role in the problem. And then there are the discussions which have gone beyond that. Ex-spouses are even more brazen speaking of each other, again, much of the time ignoring their role in the situation. Every so often, thankfully there is someone actually helping save a marriage or even turning a divorce into a reconciliation. For the most part though, the advice, while well meaning, makes Lucy’s counsel to Charley Brown seem insightful and sophisticated.

And the rationalizations coming from the advisee and the advisor? Let’s just say some defy gravity. Believe me, I understand rationalizing behavior - I’m not eavesdropping on these conversations, rather, I’m doing research. Through my investigations though, I have discovered one key to solving our nation’s tragic divorce problem.

Ladies and Gentleman, the fight to save marriages isn’t being won or lost at the marriage counselor’s office or the church or in the bookstore. It’s at your local Starbucks where spouses sit with amateur psychologists and therapists, aka a friend or relative, and get advice ranging from the relevant to the absurd to the ridiculous.

Just how much are the coffee counselors influencing the suffering spouses? Starbucks serves on average 500 people per store each day in the USA. Let’s say 250 of those are a single customer not involved in a multi-person conversation. Of the remaining 250 people, let’s say, 100 conversations occur. Actual statistics aren’t known for this but let’s continue on and say at least 10% of those are about marital problems. Starbucks has 12,200 locations in the USA, which means, based on my personal estimations, there are probably around 45 million marital problem discussions being held at Starbucks each year. Add in other coffeehouses, cafés, restaurants and bars, and we’re in the hundreds of millions of conversations.

While authors, counselors and educators may believe they’re on the front line in the battle to save marriages, in reality they are back at HQ designing brilliant battle plans that don’t survive the first shot fired. Not in any way to knock their efforts, but could there be new, untried and better ways of influencing those 45 million conversations? If so, we’ll change the course of marriage!

My advice to Howard Schultz, my gracious landlord: hire the best marriage professionals in the country to set up booths in your locations and throw a jolt of caffeine into saving marriages!

Okay, that might be unrealistic, however, maybe a good start would be for Howard Shultz to contact professor Bill Doherty at The University of Minnesota, widely regarded as one of the country’s foremost experts on marriage and family relations and a pioneer of new ideas such as Marital First Responders. He might want to also give Michele Weiner-Davis a call. She founded and runs Divorce Busting and is another widely regarded expert in helping to repair marriages.

One more thing: my favorite Starbucks moment. Picture this, a true story: a couple wheeled in, each in their own wheelchair, and reached over to give each other the sweetest kiss you ever saw. When I told them how beautiful the sight was, she told me they’d been married 45 years and can’t understand what everyone married was fighting about?

I Didn't Realize We Were Living Together

A big divorce story last year was the Conscious Uncoupling of actress Gwyneth Paltrow and her rock-star husband Chris Martin. It bothered me when I first heard they were divorcing, I mean consciously uncoupling. I found the term dismissive. Thinking through it more, I do think it a wise use of words.

In order to get divorced you need to be married and if the term marriage is to mean something different than cohabitation there has to be some difference – a lifelong commitment as opposed to a continually renewable living arrangement with an op-out clause. And if you don’t honor the commitment, you never really had the commitment, and all you had was a living arrangement – cohabitation.

So, were Paltrow & Martin merely cohabitating – living together – until deciding not to live together? Were they just a couple that uncoupled? If you’re married, unless there is some unusual circumstance - like someone violating the law and hitting someone else – divorce shouldn’t happen. Divorce is by design to be the exception and not the rule. When half of marriages end it’s no longer the rarity.

I was married. We made a commitment to each other for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health – till death do us part. I honored this but my wife didn’t. So apparently, we really just lived together for seventeen years, because if we were married - we’d still be married! It’s that simple.

Now I realize I don’t have a right to say who is or isn’t married, however, I do feel within appropriate bounds to raise this issue because every marriage affects not only a couple, but their neighborhood, town, city, state and our country. The definition of something ultimately becomes what we collectively choose to accept as its meaning, which may or may not be its actual meaning, and like any feeling, isn’t always accurate. Call a tulip a daisy long enough and it becomes known as a daisy, however, that doesn’t mean it’s not still a tulip.

Simply put, it is clear that by and large we do not know how to be married or more people would be doing it and more would be successful at it. Therefore, it’s not unreasonable to assert that with all the focus on how to succeed at it or how to get out of it, too many people don’t even know the meaning of it.

Marriage wouldn’t be the first word not everyone clearly understood. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld illustrates this in the famous scene from his hit TV show when he goes to pick up his mid-sized rental car:

I’m sorry, we have no midsize available at the moment.

I don’t understand – I made a reservation. Do you have my reservation?

Yes, we do. Unfortunately we ran out of cars.

But the reservation keeps the car here. That’s why you have the reservations.

I know why we have the reservations.

I don’t think you do. If you did, I’d have a car. See you know how to take the reservation. You just don’t know how to hold the reservation. And that’s REALLY the most important part of the reservation – the holding. Anybody can just take em"

You see, anyone can say they’re married, but to be married – is to be married – for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do you part! I’m still unclear as to which part of this people don’t understand?

Interestingly, what was unusual about what Gwyneth Paltrow & Chris Martin did – consciously uncouple - wasn’t in the label they put on it but rather that it was a mutual decision.  In as much as almost all divorces are unilaterally decided, the most overlooked thing Gwyneth Paltrow said last year was the most important:

On when to throw the towel in: "I asked my dad once, 'How did you and mom stay married for 33 years?' And he said, 'Well, we never wanted to get divorced at the same time'. And I think that's what happens. ... When two people throw in the towel at the same time, then you break up, but if one person's saying, 'come on, we can do this,' you carry on." ~ Gwyneth Paltrow, USA Today-March 26, 2014

If we’d all listen to Gwyneth Paltrow’s father, marriage would look more like marriage and less like cohabitation and we’d all be a lot better off.

New Year's Dissolutions

No sooner had the sun set on the busiest month of the year for retailers, when the most active season for divorce lawyers had its kickoff the first Monday in January on what has sadly become known as Divorce Monday. It commences the biggest time of the year for divorce filings.

Many parents typically decide during the preceding several months to wait until after the holidays to tell their kids they are splitting up. They want to give the children one last holiday of togetherness - their last meal so to speak. After all, from that point forward the word used for prisoners will be applied to these children– custody. That’s always bothered me, applying the same word to our kids as we use on criminals. And yet the analogy fits. I won’t even get started on the word “visitation.”

So let’s get this straight. It’s okay to devastate kids in January but it’s not okay to crush them in December? It’s okay to wreck their world a month before Valentine’s Day, a time of love and romance, but it's not okay to level them a month before a time of toys and games? Can someone say oxymoron! If parents hold off on the divorce because they know it will upset their family, they probably should be reconsidering the decision to divorce in the first place.  Devastation is devastating no matter what day it occurs.

Take comedian Chris Rock for example. He and his wife waited until right after Christmas to announce their split, – apparently during the open season for divorce. After the tree was taken down and the lights are put away. His wife’s press release announcing the split contained the same tired old line: "My children remain at the center of my life and their well-being is my top priority….." While I have no doubt the couple feel this way, they’re trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. And it doesn’t fit. If your kids really were your top priority, wouldn’t you as parents be doing what children want?

And what do they want? According to Gwyneth Paltrow who is on the cover of this months Harper's Bazaar UK magazine promoting Conscious Uncoupling again, “Of course, there are times when I think it would have been better if we had stayed married, which is always what your children want..."

So if kids want their parents to stay married – then if parents don’t stay married – they’re not making their children their top priority. It’s that simple. Instead, parents are making themselves the top priority! This is far more serious than children not getting the pony they want – it’s about them not getting the family they deserve.

It’s going to be the Christmas season again before we know it. In fact the stores were already gearing up for Valentine’s Day before New Year’s. That means parents need to tend to their marriages now and put a stop to Divorce Monday. It all starts with an attitude. And so as divorce papers are unwrapped during this month by too many unsuspecting husbands and wives – parents – please keep this in mind throughout the year:

The greatest gift a child can receive on Christmas morning is not found under the tree.   Mom and Dad under the same roof on Christmas morning, sitting on the couch holding hands and sipping coffee together, having completed another year of hard — yet rewarding – work in their marriage is more meaningful to a kid then any toy, game or piece of clothing ever could be.

Likewise, years later when those same little boys and girls are all grown up, the greatest gift they can receive on their wedding day would be to have mom and dad standing arm in arm, having done the hard work necessary to honor their commitment to each other and their children. Couples get lots of gifts on their wedding day all of which with enough money they could buy on their own. Divorce strips them of the greatest wedding gift of all.  A gift gone forever.

Remember this, and the first Monday in January can go back to just being about the hope and promise signing up for a gym membership brings rather than saddling kids with the extra weight they’ll carry with them forever.

It Sure Will Be A New Year...

A primary reason I created The Marriage Education Act is to prevent marriage from becoming obsolete in the coming decades as current trends suggest could happen with marriage rates at an all time low and continuing lower.  Some might think marriage becoming obsolete a far-fetched notion.  As a native New Yorker who twenty years ago was in The World Trade Center every day, I would have said those buildings being taken down was beyond far-fetched.

Regardless of your opinion on same-sex marriage, thirty years ago most people would have thought it was not even in the realm of possibility this would be legal.  Right now, something you might find unbelievable which affects you and how your kids and grandkids get married becomes law in California on January 1, 2015.

Six months ago, on July 7, 2014, with the power vested in Governor Jerry Brown by the people of the State of California, the Governor signed Senate Bill 1306, which takes effect January 1, 2015.  As stated in the official California Legislative Digest, amongst other things, SB 1306 will “delete references to “husband” or “wife” in the Family Code.”  For instance, as of January 1st, a wedding officiate who performs (solemnizes) a wedding no longer has power vested in them to pronounce anyone husband and wife. Here’s some of the actual language:

SEC. 8 Section 420 of the Family Code is amended to read: 420. (a) No particular form for the ceremony of marriage is required for solemnization of the marriage, but the parties shall declare, in the physical presence of the person solemnizing the marriage and necessary witnesses, that they take each other as spouses."

This article isn’t about same-sex marriage and quite frankly I think most gay people - who comprise less than three percent of our population - wouldn’t want their family and friends to unnecessarily lose something so precious in the coarse of them receiving what they value.  Additionally, I believe all of the focus on same-sex marriage has allowed everyone to ignore the decay of marriage in America.  In fact, the women behind the first same-sex marriage case in Massachusetts are already divorced as are women behind the famed California Prop 8 legal case.

This is simply about marriage and I bring this up to substantiate the notion that marriage could become obsolete in the not too distant future.  I find it sad that on New Years Day if you are already married in California you are no longer husband and wife in the eyes of your state.  Rather, you become Spouse # 1 and Spouse #2. I guess at halftime of the New Years Day Bowl Games you can figure out which one of you will be #1 and who will be #2?  It seems Dr. Seuss was a visionary after all with Thing 1 and Thing 2.  Oh, and by the way, don’t blink, because by the time you do, the terms Mom and Dad will be replaced by Parent #1 and Parent #2.  By the logic used to pass this law that is inevitable!

I’m guessing that clergy, who still perform most weddings, will make a noble stand and simply just continue to ask couples to take each other as husband and wife and accordingly pronounce couples husband and wife.  After all, in the bible, the word husband is mentioned approximately 120 times, the word wife approximately 400 times, and the word spouse mentioned zero times.  As a proponent of civil disobedience where God and man’s authority conflict, I will applaud clergy for taking a stand.

Never the less, attempts at civil disobedience likely will unravel a few years from now when a crafty lawyer gets a divorced spouse off from paying a large spousal support or other financial order by proving the couple were never legally married in the first place because clergy violated the law.  People have gotten off of far worse things on a technicality.

All this to say that if we don’t develop a sense of urgency and fix it now, there’s a good chance marriage will become obsolete in the coming decades and the hopes and dreams you have for your kids and grandkids to be married will be a distant memory!  This is not a far-fetched statement. As of January 1, 2015, the terms husband and wife begin their journey down memory lane.  Please join me now in The Marriage Education Act and let’s take a bold step now to fix the state of marriage in America!

On My Father's Passing

I was saddened to learn about my father’s death in the newspaper earlier this week.  He had a larger than life personality and lived what society would consider a wildly successful life. I imagine his funeral was standing room only.

Despite my numerous pleas for it to be otherwise, my father refused for us to be in each other’s lives ever since I married my now ex-wife and the first of our two daughters were born. Sadly, the pain of this was not a new experience for me. Since my father left my mother forty-four years ago when I was seven, I never had a secure place in the family he created with his new wife. Over the course of my life we’ve been out of each other’s lives as much if not more than we’ve been in them.  Too often I’ve felt like the part of his past he’d like to forget, but can’t.

I’m glad that so many have such wonderful memories of him as a husband, a father, a stepfather, a grandfather, a business partner, a customer, philanthropist and friend.  My memories of him are the ones only a son from his first marriage who felt loved in an obligatory kind of way, but moreover felt non-essential and disposable, could have.

Nobody else knows what it was like to be his son. Nobody else knows the pain of craving a relationship with him for my entire life.  Nobody else felt the rejection I’ve felt from him. Nobody knows the physical and mental pain I’ve endured while you’ve enjoyed his presence. His obituary says “ He did it his way.” Well, given that and all he knows that happened to me, I did the best I could at being his son – and if I could have done it any better I would have. I shouldn’t have had to do it any better.

My life is already full of so much pain and the pain of finding out by accident on Google of his passing ten days after he died is excruciating and indescribable.  The pain of not being able to say good-bye trumps only the pain of not being able to say hello. Mourning alone, this is the only way I have to express my love and grief.

There are parts of my father's life he buried and I could never imagine a good enough reason why. While his obituary states, “he was adored by his nine grandchildren,” he in fact had eleven grandchildren.  There are two beautiful little girls, my daughters, he chose to never meet, to never know, to never love, to never be loved and adored by. Several years after my second daughter was born and my father continued to not want to meet or know the girls is when I changed our last name.

My father had so many wonderful qualities, however, like all of us, he had his flaws.  Someone paid a price for everyone’s fond memories.  His family and friends feel real pain at his passing. I know that pain well. I’ve been missing him for my entire life.

Love, David

America's Invisible Children

A few weeks ago, a wave swept the nation as over 80 million people watched The Invisible Children video on YouTube. It tells the story of Joseph Kony, an African rebel leader who mutilated and enslaved thousands of children during the past 25 years. I’ll leave the criticism of this effort to stop atrocities to others; to me, Jason Russell made a promise to do something about the silent voices of children, and he kept it. Bob Goff, Founder of Restore International, whose lecture I attended the other night, too, is daring and audacious in combating violence and injustices committed against children, including forced prostitution and slave labor. And then there’s my all-time hero, the everyday, yet extraordinary, woman who simply refused to sit in the back of the bus: Rosa Parks.

The courage of these and other people inspires me to spend my days standing up for children who are invisible – children whose best interests are often ignored and lives scarred by divorce. But their courage also gives me pause. I am a big proponent of marriage education, marriage counseling, legislative reform, and every other tool available to help repair marriages. I wonder, though, if there might be a missing component. Like perspective?

According to the United Nations Development Program, approximately 1.4 billion people live under the international poverty line of $1.25 a day. Billions more barely cross it. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN estimates that 925 million children will suffer from chronic hunger this year; every six seconds a child dies from hunger-related causes. Billions of people suffer each day in a variety of other ways, too, both here and abroad.

Problems within a marriage are very real to those experiencing them; however, might perspective be another tool to help repair “irreconcilable differences?” To the spouse who cheats on his or her partner, I would ask: Is what’s “missing” in your marriage so monumental compared with people in our world who don’t even have a roof over their head or food in their body? To the spouse who ends a marriage because they aren’t happy or fulfilled, I would say: Have you seriously thought about the suffering that divorce will create for your family and the billions of people in this world who would give anything to have a fraction of what you do?

Perhaps spouses considering divorce should spend time with those less fortunate first, before ending their relationship. I don’t mean volunteer somewhere for a few hours. I mean go be with those who only dream of having what is about to be terminated. Spend time with children suffering and consider the suffering about to befall to your own children. Go to the other side of the world or to the other side of your county. If you can find money for divorce lawyers, wouldn’t it make sense to spend your money on this instead?

During Bob Goff’s jaw dropping and inspiring presentation the other night, a simple innocuous line caught my attention. He said his marriage and his family were enhanced by his devotion to his cause.

Pause for a moment and realize by the time you go to sleep tonight more sons and daughters of divorce will have died from suicide today, cut themselves, downed a six pack. More daughters of divorce will have become sexually active at a young age; more sons of divorce will have been in fights rather than reading books. Those who fare better will be sad and depressed and carrying their belongings back and forth between households, dealing with a myriad number of problems they will carry into adulthood.

Approximately 3,000 kids, some of whom might be your own kids, will become children of divorce tomorrow and each and every day thereafter unless and until we treat this manmade disaster with the same sense of urgency with which we treat natural disasters. The best way just might be with perspective gained from treating one problem by helping to solve another. Doesn’t true perspective come from comparing yourself with those less fortunate? And there are always many more of those.

If your kids have an intact family, and you and your spouse, with a heart of love, continuously work on resolving whatever problems come your way, don’t you and your family truly have everything?

Children Of Divorce Are Anything But Resilient

As election season gets going and both parties put their spin machines into high gear, I am reminded of the happy talk divorce advocates have been spinning for over 40 years - kids are resilient.  Generally speaking, we all know that kids are resilient when it comes to many of the knocks and bruises in their lives.  When it comes to divorce, however, history has proven otherwise.

Merriam-Webster defines resilient as:

• tending to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change

• able to become strong, healthy, or successful again after something bad happens

• able to return to an original shape after being pulled, stretched, pressed, bent, etc.

• capable of withstanding shock without permanent deformation or rupture

After divorce, large numbers of children of divorce turn to drugs, alcohol, sex and suicide.  Many end up in poverty.  Those who fare better still carry heavy emotional scars into adulthood, with 89% more likely to divorce than peers from intact families.  And, they have a life expectancy that’s five years shorter, too.

Just as politicians often try and spin the truth, attempting to show that a bad thing was really a good thing, divorce advocates do the same.  I married in my mid-twenties, and divorced after two years, before my wife and I had kids.  On one hand, it was great we parted before we had kids.  On the other hand, we should have figured things out before we got married.  We should have worked harder to continue our marriage, too, because our divorce contributed to the cheapening of marriage.  I read somewhere we had what is now called a "starter marriage."  As if a "starter marriage" is a stepping stone to something better.  Yet another spin of misconception in our society-- second marriages fail at higher rates than first ones.

Just as politicians disguise things with fancy names, I recently read about lawyers and judges who refer to divorcing spouses as the" leaning out " spouse – the one who wants out period --  and the " hopeful" spouse, the onewho wants to reconcile.  In simple English, we’d call these spouses the "quitter" and the "committed."   In any other context, you’d think it would be positive to be "hopeful." I’ve read that in divorce court, however,  "hopeful " clients are held in disfavor and considered"difficult."  In the real world, though, this " difficult " spouse is hurt by the unilateral ripping out of their marriage from under them, thelifelong commitment they made and the foundation upon which they brought children into the world.

And when it comes to these children of divorce?  They merely "manage."  If they’re lucky.  They navigate through the world with varying degrees of success.  But all are changed.  They’re not resilient.  Children of divorce do not withstand the shock of divorce without permanent deformation or rupture.  They do not recover from or adjust easily to the misfortune or change divorce produces in their lives.  After their parents’ divorce, many are not able to become strong, healthy, or successful.   They are not able to return to the life or children they once were after being pulled, stretched, pressed and bent through the machinery of divorce, new again as if nothing ever happened.  We can only guess, and weep, at their potential had the trauma of divorce not occurred.　   

I know I wasn’t resilient.  My wife’s parents divorced five times.  She got a college degree and other achievements, yes.  But she had left one marriage and was divorced with a child when we got married.  And now she’s left me, even though we have two young children.  I wouldn’t call her resilient either.

Anyone can spin our marriage as another fixer upper.  To me, and more importantly to our daughters, though, it was our dream home.

And so as election season gets underway and politicians on both sides get fast and loose with the facts, one thing is for sure.  It’s far too easy and not necessarily true to say kids are resilient, especially children of divorce.

When You Work Hard For Something You Appreciate It That Much More

My trip back east hasn’t gotten going yet.  I wrote about a friend who was injured in a previous blog, Involuntarily Disabled, and how she and her family have needed my help.  Quite frankly, helping them has also helped me.

Another friend, who is in the process of adopting a child, came to visit my injured friend the other day.  My injured friend has adopted children, too.  As I listened to the two women discuss the classes both had taken, it became clear to me just how hard these couples worked to have their children.  I began to wonder how the divorce rate for adoptive parents compared with that of biological parents.  I did some research and found that it was lower.  And the most plausible explanation was so obvious:  When you work so hard to have a family you appreciate it so much more.

Sure my wife and I planned for our children and worked hard at the process of having our two daughters.  We had a lot of discussions and made the obvious plans.  We had fun and spent beautiful evenings together.  We learned as we went.  In my view, however, we didn’t work anywhere near as hard as my friends who first went through the physical, emotional, and financial struggles of infertility.  Next, they had an "autopsy" performed on each of them and their marriage to determine if they would be acceptable parents.  And then they had to wait on the unknown – a decision on whether they had made the grade and when a baby would be available.  Except for the physical process of giving birth, my wife and I, on the other hand had to go through more to get a gym membership then we did our daughters.

The difference between adopting and divorcing parents, however, are even more stark.  They’re both scrutinized to determine their fitness as parents, yes, but what’s different about them is that adopting parents are working together to give a precious innocent fractured child a whole and beautiful life.  Divorcing parents on the other hand, generally speaking are working apart, taking a whole and beautiful life away from a precious innocent child and replacing it with a fractured one.

And couples who biologically have children and stay married?  They don't have to go through a dissection of them and their marriage and at the very least; they’re giving their children a fighting chance for a happy, healthy future.

It’s hard going through the holidays in the process of becoming divorced, especially in the extremely contentious divorce I am in.  I’ve been at my friend’s home a lot these past four weeks.  I’ve had the time to help them when I don’t have my own family to tend to.  It’s been painful watching them care for each other and be cared for by each other, the one in the hospital bed and the one not.  When my wife was ill, I remember how difficult, but joyous and rewarding it was to care for her.  I miss going to all ends of the earth for her.  I miss being cared about, too.  But I also appreciate my friends and their family adopting me during this time and letting me care for them.

Ultimately, it’s not about how our children get to us.  Each route has different struggles and joys.  Each give us the opportunity to appreciate the blessings our children bring to us and the best way we can demonstrate that is by treating our marriages as though they are the most important things in the world to our children.  Because they are.