Who is a Third Party to Your Marriage?

“A lawyer is a learned gentleman who rescues your estate from your enemies and keeps it for himself." - Lord Brougham

--------------------------------

Did you know the State of Florida's interest in your marriage is greater than you or your wife's?

When you were married, you probably assumed that the only parties to your marriage were you and your wife. You are correct. But if you go to get a divorce, you will be pleased to know that the state joins your little family and has made themself a third party without your consent. Not only that, the state ‘s interest takes precedence over both spouse's interest.

How is it that governments can make a self-appointed intrusion into what is supposed to be an area of your right to privacy? Decisions relating to marriage are included under the umbrella of the rights to privacy. Divorce is one of those decisions you make in your marriage which is covered under this umbrella, yet the state feels their interest outweighs yours and then they take over.

Somehow this seems to defy the image the government gives us that they are representing the will of the people. Unless, by popular demand, the people (meaning you) have requested their assistance in their private affairs. Since when has the government ever represented the will of the people?? The will of the lobbyist…of course! The will of the people…well. that is questionable.

Here is the way the State of Florida feels they have a right to this intrusion and justifies it:

Posner v. Posner 233 So.2d 381 (Fla. 1970) states:

“Since marriage is of vital interest to society and the state, it has frequently been said that in every divorce suit the state is a third party whose interests take precedence over the private interests of the spouses. See Underwood v. Underwood, 1868, 12 Fla. 434; Light v. Meginniss, 1945, 156 Fla. 61, 22 So.2d 455; Pickston v. Dougherty, Fla.App. 1959, 109 So.2d 577; Wall v. Wall, Fla.App. 1961, 134 So.2d 288.”

In Wall v. Wall, 134 So.2d 288 (Fla.App. 2 Dist. 1961), it states:

“In the interest of public welfare, the state becomes a third party to any divorce proceeding. From the objective position of the state and its concern for stability of marriage and family, a court's power to dissolve a marriage carries the responsibility for close scrutiny before so serious a matter as divorce and custody should be resolved. See Martin v. Martin, Fla.App. 1958, 102 So.2d 837.”

In a contract with participating parties, each party normally makes promises to do something and has obligations along with responsibilities to the other parties. It would appear that here’s a situation where the state makes no promises, has no obligations and no responsibilities other than to interfere with your divorce under the pretext of being concerned with the stability of your marriage and in the interest of the public welfare.

The state had no such concern when you got marriage. All they wanted out of the deal was the fee for the marriage license. They could have cared less whether or not you were compatible and “stable.” If they were, there would have been more qualifications required to get married other than just having the price of the license and being of age.

Of course, if you look at it from a financial standpoint and follow the money, the governments know that a lot of money can be made from the breakup of your marriage and that if they make themselves a party and control it, somehow they and/or their associates in the legal field will financially benefit from it. Could that really be the real interest the state has in becoming a party to your divorce?

It reminds me of the following quote:

“A lawyer is a learned gentleman who rescues your estate from your enemies and keeps it for himself.” -- Lord Brougham

In the traditional, adversarial divorce, in which you and your spouse go at it toe to toe (with the aid of an attorney of course), the goal is for one person to win, and for the other to lose. The strategy is to assign as much blame as possible to the other person. The tactics include costly legal battles. Hence, the attorneys win no matter what the outcome and you end up all the poorer.

By facilitating divorce through lenient no-fault divorce laws, it is hard to understand the rationale of the state being concerned with the stability of your marriage. In essence, by making divorce easier, they are only promoting or creating more business for the family law legal profession. Job security if you will.

CASUALTIES OF STATE SPONSORED VIOLENCE
* Cade Speaks Out About October Attack

EXAMPLES OF A JUDICIAL SYSTEM AND JUDGES GONE AWRY:
* Court: Queens Judge Abused Contempt Power
* Trail Of Accusations Uncovered Against Local Judge

LEGAL INFORMATION AND RESEARCH CORNER:
* Legal Research Guide: Starting Points

Be sure to visit these sites: www.abolish-alimony.org/ and www.alimonycentral.org