This is an idea that I read about and must say that it seems to work in theory:

"To have and to hold from this day forth for a term of 5 years renewable by mutual consent. Any and all terms of such contract may be up for negotiation. This does not negate any right of either party to terminate said contract before full term according to the termination clause set out herein in the annex."
<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

I think that would mean that BEFORE we enter into this contract/agreement we would have to negotiate the terms...ie set out what our goals and needs are and how they are to be met (performance of the contract). Gives us a clear idea of what would justify a breach...eg
1. not making that cup of coffee and bringing it to my bedside every morning etc <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

If a percieved breach....eg not enough affection is shown during anniversaries etc...occurs a contract would provide for mediation or at least an opportunity to redress the issue and COMMUNICATE our feelings/needs.

The 5 year limit would mean any major unresolved issues would then have to be addressed/reviewed/resolved before entering into a fresh contract. Keeps us all on our toes!!!

Major issues such as Christmas at mom's or who is to take the 2am feeds must also be negotiated to mutual benefit or a breach of the contract is a result. LOL

Any insights or comments on this?

Please take this in a lighthearted/serious manner it was intended. Thanks

It does make a practical sense. Most of the difficulty about marriage/divorce is expectations. We try to codify those expectations legally by making marriage a permanent contract, revokable only for cause (well, b4 no-fault anyways), effectively binding someone in a lifetime economic contract to you regardless of any change in circumstances. Anytime you mix up legalities with human rights to self-determination you are in for trouble (ie abortion for example). So if marriage was akin to other forms of licensing, it would expire/renew regularly. Thereby eliminateing the conflict of divorce, or people trying to "change" their mate (out of desperation cause they can't live the rest of their life like this). And it would serve notice on the more self-absorbed people they have to work at the marriage, or it won't be renewed, not depend on the "committment" of the more vested partner. For this to work though it would have to have ironclad provisions for child support and economic protection of the weaker party. I suspect that if money were removed from the equation there would be much more willingness to accept a marriage is emotionally unsound, and less conflict over divorce.

I think that year 5 would be hell as the uncertainity set in of whether or not you wanted to renew, or whether your partner would.

I base that on trying Dave Carder's 90 day affair recovery plan in TORN ASUNDER. H & I tried that, and my H saw the end of that time as when he would leave. I saw it as I wanted to keep trying to recover our marriage and doing anything to make him not want to leave...it made me nuts. And he did start our 3rd separation after that.

Who needs utter turmoil in their personal life every 5 years?

Lurking you sound very familiar, did you used to post under another name?

Babysteps, You been reading my mind? LOL I can't even tell you how many times I've told my H we should have 5 yr limits. At the end of the 5 yrs, it's over unless renewed!
While some might see it as an insecurity, I'd say it might keep both on their toes. It certainly might make some think before the A begins!
what the heck. They say 50% of marriages don't last. At least this would nullify the waiting and court battles. Just have the agreement drawn about asset division at the start of the contract. After all, isn't our marriage a contract anyway? Many break the contract all the time.So at least the 5 yr would give a light at the end of the tunnel!
Interesting to see how many would renew too.
I do like feeling my marriage is for life, but there are no guarantees no matter how you go about it. But I bet as that 5 yr term came close to the end, there would be a lot of people making efforts to gain brownie points! LOL
LouLou

Thanks for the replies.

Posted this elsewhere and some came up with the fact that a 5 year contract would certainly be the cure for the 7 year itch <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

The only thing is, that when you make a vow with God, it is not only for 5 years. He would definitely veto this action. I see what you mean, we all would work really hard on meeting each others needs, and be supportive to each other. But then how many would marry, they would probably just live together? Because there is no COMMITTMENT! There would be no need to do any legal contracts. Just live with the person, till you tire of them, and move on to another. Also, you would have to take in account there would be less pregnancies, cause who wants to bring a child into a world where there is only 5 years of 2 parents. I wouldn't, I wanted to have my husband be daddy like my vows stated, till death due us part. Not a split parent home.

I think, it would be better if there were seminars that couples needed to attend. Or something on that order. Where there was intervention every 2-3 years. If there were problems, we had a government that had medical coverage for these seminars. It would be mandatory, like many licenses professionals have. You have to take a test, see where you score, and work on where the efforts seem to be lacking.

It is so easy to get married, and so easy to divorce. Where is the committment of marriage anymore. It is so easy to say, I am tired of you, I want a new person in my life.

Remember the 'Little House On the Prairie' series. Husband and wife, worked their hands to the bones, in the fields, farming, she doing the wash, gardening, cooking, woodcutting, taking care of the children. Children went to school and came home and did chores of all types. By the time it was bedtime, all of the family was tired, exhausted and ready to sleep. Families back then worked together, became a family of oneness. Kids respected their parents. Kids knew without their help the family would have great difficulty.

Sure there were mistresses in town, where those that were not christians would go to get their sex. There was unappropriate sex in the families. But do you think, with all that you had to do, working and coming home to a homecooked meal, not microwave, and seeing the kids, and being exhausted, there was a need to find someone else. Sure there were disagreements. They seemed back in those days work things out. They seemed to be happy with each other. No one is going to find that perfect person. No two people are going to be alike. This is human nature. And when the reality of everyday stress gets put on all of us, that is when marriages break.

How do you think most marriages would of been, if in the first 5 years, everything was just how you planned it to be. Love, kissing, sex, money, friends, inlaws, everything perfect. Hey, we would be all happy. But this is reality, and that is where the marriage finds difficulty.

Marriages with 5 year contracts, could be positive and could be negative. Just my opinion.

<small>[ January 18, 2003, 05:25 PM: Message edited by: Faith4me ]</small>

The number of "divorces" ie. "contracts" NOT renewed at the end of 5 years would go through the roof.

There are a few books out & people talking about "starter" marriages. Those that end within 5 years, no kids, both working people.

Let's them practice at marriage so when it comes time to "really" get married, they know what to expect and can be "better" at it.

Bunch o' crapola.

Lor,

People told me I was wrong when I suggested that Lurking was an alter-ego of a previous poster:

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=37;t=021807#000011

Somehow I wasn't surprised to see his response to this post.

Certainly sounds familiar, doesn't it?