A loss for no-fault divorce

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

For the first time in decades, a divorce order was reversed last week. Texas' Appeals Court said, "The judgment of the trial court is reversed" and ordered a new trial.

This was a victory for attorney David Moody, one of a handful of lawyers fighting to preserve marriage, on behalf of his client, Doak Runberg.

This is a stunning development. Since "No-Fault Divorce" or unilateral divorce became the norm in the 1970s, those who file for divorce always win. Divorce law is a scandal. In divorce cases, there is no "due process" as supposedly guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Thirty-eight million divorces have been granted since 1970. Lawyers are hired by both sides. Some argue the divorce should be granted, usually on grounds of "irreconcilable differences." Other attorneys are hired by defendants who opposes a divorce, arguing their differences are reconcilable.

How many cases have been won by the defendant? None, until this case. The defendant in a divorce case always loses.

How can that be justice?

Thirty-five million children have divorced parents. While many do well, such children are 3 times as likely as those from intact homes to be expelled from school or to have a baby as an unwed teenager, and are 10 times likelier to live in poverty.

Yet according to a recent poll by George Barna, 39 percent of all Protestants have divorced vs. only 38 percent of atheists/agnostics and 35 percent of "born again" Americans. (Only Catholics divorce at a lower rate of 25 percent.)

Mr. Moody notes that no-fault divorce was begun by Russian communists who wanted to destroy the family because it is a source of traditional values. He wrote an article for the Lubbock, Tex., newspaper saying divorce lawyers have a conflict of interest. In 55 percent of cases, they take the plaintiff's side who files for divorce. And in 45 percent of the cases, they represent defendants who don't want a divorce.

By contrast, in health care, attorneys work for one side or the other. Some represent insurance companies and are loyal to the defense side. Others (like John Edwards) represent plaintiffs and are paid on a contingency basis when they win cases. But if a defense attorney took a case of someone injured in an accident, he would be fired by insurance companies as untrustworthy.