This would be my first debate thread on this forum, so welcome me:) First of all, I'm going to give some "truths" in this post that you might not want to read if you're actually a kid with separated or divorced parents. With that warning in mind, read on.
------
In the light of the rising divorce rates in the United States and Europe, I've started thinking that some kind of force needs to intervene to lower the rates: We simply can't let the families handle themselves anymore.
We cannot ban divorces, but I've got another idea on how to fight the divorce rate that I find intriguing: Education on running a family, and of the effects of separations and divorces.
First of all, education on how to divide responsiblities, handle stress and tensions, and how to avoid tension in the first place will lower the number of couples who "drift apart" and want divorces; and education on the effects of divorces (especially emotional effects) will make couples fight (as they should) to save their marriage.
Way too many parents make their decision to break up based on ignorance. They think, for example, that (this is a bit candid)if you separate, you can just come back together, and that divorce is a lot easier, emotionally, than it is in reality. A lot of couples who divorce regret it later.
For example, my school offers this course:
PERSONAL & FAMILY DEVELOPMENT
Grade: 9 - 12
Prerequisites: none
Credit: 1 credit; Ѕ per semester
This comprehensive laboratory course is designed to address a broad range of knowledge and skills related to personal development and management, promotion of strong families, and preparation for adult roles. Content includes a focus on interpersonal skills; decision-making; promotion of family strengths and well being; developing positive relationships with peers; child development and care; and clothing selection and maintenance. Other studies address nutrition and dietary practices; food selection and preparation; budgeting and consumer-buying practices; and management of family housing needs. Influences of societal and technological changes, career options, and the management of multiple family, community, and wage-earner roles are included.
This, if working along with education on divorces and the effects of them, sounds to me like a great way to increase knowledge of, and thus the number of, divorces.
I thus propose that everyone who go to schools suggest to the faculty that these classes are made mandatory to all students. In a country where Hollywood gives us most of the "education" on divorces (in a way that in the best case gives us the wrong impression, in the worst case promotes it), we need someone to set us straight and tell us that divorce is a last resort.
Welcome to the Senate, last stand for those who like to use their minds.
You offer some interesting ideas but I don't think people would ever allow this info to be forced on them. As long as it is not mandatory.
But why not? We have to take classes to learn to drive, why not for relationships.
Hey do you currently live in Norway? If so where? I have been to Bodo several times.
True, People might not like it or want that sort of class, but everybody is intitled to his or her opinion.
I'm my case I think it might be somewhat useful, but only for those familes who need it. Just incase a family doesn't need such counciling, it might provoke a separation even when everything is going well in that family. Oh the other hand, it would be useful for families, of course, need it.
last but not least it also needs to be a way to teach the teen to reliterate this to his parents (considering it might be a thing only at school (cus of how long it takes and how meny high school credits it will give the student...)
I come from a divorced family and I ended up with the bad parent. I really think should be done is making a licence to have children. Then most of the bad parents wouldnґt be able to mistreat their children. This idea is of course difficult in the extreme to implement and it raise all sorts of other problems.
But it does seem to be a good idea. And we do have cumpolsury school, why not make it a 1 year subject or something?
(Not enough time for a proper post.)
Solution: a 5 year compulsory period that you have to spend together before you're allowed to get married or have children.
Girl: "Let's elope! Let's drive to Vegas, honey!"
Boy: "Yeah! Let's do that, Catheri-...Carr-...Mabel..? Hop in Babe! VEGAS HERE WE COME, YIEE HAW!" :rolleyes:
The divorce rates should indeed be fought. Way too many couples are divorcing, and this is especially bad for their children.
There are many ways to fight these hig rates. Firstly, people shouldn't marry unless they know they want to marry. It's not like you can just jump out of the marriage if it isn't as fun as you thought.
Secondly, people should stop believing that they will find a perfect person with no faults. If you marry one who you later see isn't always how you want him/her to be, it's not like you just should find another.
Thirdly, people should fight to get their relationship working if it's faulty. I think far too many people just solve their problems by doing it the easy way, by divorce. But this will also remove all the things that are good by marriage, and if you have kids, they will suffer badly.
Divorce shouldn't be made illegal. But people should start fighting for their relationships instead of divorcing.
Originally written by griff38
Hey do you currently live in Norway? If so where? I have been to Bodo several times.
Bodш, that is. ;)
Ever been to Bergen?
First of all: Welcome to Eagle. May your stay be long, enlightening, pleasant, and rational.
Just incase a family doesn't need such counciling, it might provoke a separation even when everything is going well in that family.
Hardly. Knowledge never hurts, and might actually be useful (see below).
last but not least it also needs to be a way to teach the teen to reliterate this to his parents (considering it might be a thing only at school (cus of how long it takes and how meny high school credits it will give the student...)
RULE ZERO OF RUNNING A SCHOOL SYSTEM:
NEVER, EVER TRY TO MAKE THE KIDS EDUCATE THEIR PARENTS.
Anyway, I don't support government intervention into how people run their own families, more than absolutely neccessary. Thus I am opposed to the suggestions offered up by Luc Solar and Bonedeamon (and Bonedeamon's suggestion is unmanageable, unless we want Chinese conditions (I don't)).
I am also opposed to making compulsory courses especially for the 'divorcing' (how would you define that anyway? When it's obvious, it's too late anyway).
However, I do think that familiy planning classes in High School would be a good idea. Knowledge of how to organize a semi-self-governing body (like a home), which includes listening to each other, finding a way to make decisions, and generally avoiding behaving like an idiot, can be used in many different situations, not just home-running.
BTW: I dug this (
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000036CD-B004-1C83-B0DB809EC588EF21&catID=2) out of Scientific American (
www.sciam.com)'s) archive. It may not be bang on topic, but it's related.
I have only one issue with the article: Scandinavia is not a strong Protestant region, it's a strong Atheist/Skeptic region.
Originally posted by Luc Solar
(Not enough time for a proper post.)
Solution: a 5 year compulsory period that you have to spend together before you're allowed to get married or have children.
Girl: "Let's elope! Let's drive to Vegas, honey!"
Boy: "Yeah! Let's do that, Catheri-...Carr-...Mabel..? Hop in Babe! VEGAS HERE WE COME, YIEE HAW!" :rolleyes:
I like this idea.
Friendly chatter on my fatherland:
Hey do you currently live in Norway? If so where? I have been to Bodo several times.
I currently live in Houston, TX.
Yes, it's Bodш, but if you've got a non-Scandinavian keyboard you've got a non-Scandinavian keyboard;).
I have only one issue with the article: Scandinavia is not a strong Protestant region, it's a strong Atheist/Skeptic region.
Yes, it's 90% atheist, thanks to the lack of diversity I think, or maybe the state religion makes children feel that religion is force upon them so that they accosiate it with something bad?
Topic:
You offer some interesting ideas but I don't think people would ever allow this info to be forced on them. As long as it is not mandatory.
But why not? We have to take classes to learn to drive, why not for relationships.
I'm in 11th grade, and I've learned how to have a child +-6 times. I've NEVER been instructed in how to raise one. Stupid? I think so.
It's like being thaught over and over how to buy a car, but not receiving a Driver's Ed course.
We're not really "forcing" that onto anyone. And there is a misconception here: What I have in mind is not a "relationship class". The idea of a class in HS which teaches kids how to date/make out, for example, as you said, is ridiculous. A family development class teaches kids stuff not related to sex and love, but on how to make the family stronger (as much to make it happy as to prevent love from falling apart).
Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle
I'm in 11th grade, and I've learned how to have a child +-6 times. I've NEVER been instructed in how to raise one. Stupid? I think so.
It's like being thaught over and over how to buy a car, but not receiving a Driver's Ed course.
That's quite possibly one of the best quotes i've heard in some time........
So, should I write a letter to my principal telling him that I'd like the course to become mandatory? I'm heavily considering it:).
If you want less divorces, what about having less marriages? :)
As was stated earlier, the Family Development Class sounds like a good idea. I come from divorced parents (who stayed together for around 18 or so years) and sometimes divorce is just something that happens when people grow apart. And sometimes it is better for the children not to always see or hear their parents fighting. But there isn't enough stress on strengthening the family at an early age, you are right. You have all those homemaking classes and those classes where students have to carry around an egg taking care of it as if it was a baby (please tell me someone else's school did this), but they don't really focus on marriage and how to make it work. It couldn't hurt, right?
Edit: Or less marriages. That is also a good suggestion. ;)
Luc Solar's idea of having a 5 year period together, before having children, is a great and sound idea. I personally want 5 years just to be with my wife and learn more and share with each other as a unit, before we carve little creatures into the eqaution. I don't think a law on this would work, however, because what do you do to the people who 'accidentially' get pregnant within the first five years? Jail, probation, abortion? All of these things are very severe and unethical to the minds of many (especially the forced abortion part). Otherwise it's just a slap on the wrist and send the kid to an orphanage, that doesn't seem to solve any problems either.
The problem with doomed marriages ultimatley lies in two very broad categories: Many people get married because they feel like they 'have' to, whether their pressured by friends, family, society, spouses(for having a fast ticking biological clock) or themeselves (for not having a self fufilling life ). We need to teach human beings that now, in a world where we have instant communication and travel and therefore access to multitudes more variety of interesting potential mates, that it's okay to not settle down until you truly want to and feel it's right.
The second reason is that monogamy as a whole is very difficult. To spend one's life sharing love with a partner is one of the most beautiful overall experiences in the long run. But to expect one not to lust, fantasize, or act out with another 'outside' attraction, is almost unreasonable.
I believe that couples should be open and honest about all their desires, thats the only way to keep things true. And if by chance an unconrollable urge turns into a 'sinful' act, then people should understand that we're humans and we're born curious to experience new and exciting things as much as we can.
I have yet to do anything outside my sacred bond of marriage, and the truth is I don't plan on it, but the fact that I feel free makes living with desire alot easier. We just tell each other that if in the event during the rest of our 60 or so years together, something ever happens, don't do anything that could spread diseases, and don't get into a whole separate relationship with someone else, because then we need to sit and really discuss and decide how it effects us. We love each other so much to know that flirting, or a crush, or a kiss, or more, are the little things that make being alive and human so great. So why deny it to the person we love most and share everything with?
Even if you don't agree with me, my wife does, and that's all that counts: to find someone with the same worldview as you....(who you also happen to want to eat sleep breathe bathe have passionate animal sex and grow old with)...
As my wife says, "Love is long, life is not."
God bless her, and me for finding her.
(although the real proof will be in how our kids turn out 20 years from now, with parents who truly love and respect and honor each other as role models....:)
Many people get married because they feel like they 'have' to, whether their pressured by friends, family, society, spouses(for having a fast ticking biological clock) or themeselves (for not having a self fufilling life ). We need to teach human beings that now, in a world where we have instant communication and travel and therefore access to multitudes more variety of interesting potential mates, that it's okay to not settle down until you truly want to and feel it's right
I feel the same way about virginity. I'm seventeen and a virgin, and because of that I'm "supposed to" feel like an outsider.
Well, you're not "supposed to" have a child while in HS anyway, so why risk having one?
I believe that couples should be open and honest about all their desires, thats the only way to keep things true. And if by chance an unconrollable urge turns into a 'sinful' act, then people should understand that we're humans and we're born curious to experience new and exciting things as much as we can.
I saw this great cartoon once: A boy and a girl walk hand in hand down a sunny, idyllic mountain trail.
The boys thinks "if I don't want to have sex, she'll probably think there's something wrong with me." The girl thinks "if I don't want to have sex, he'll probably think there's something wrong with me." Above them is Amor (the angel of love) saying "wouldn't it be easier to just talk about it?"
Wish me luck now, I'll try to get trough to my "this school is a dictatorship"-principal.