In a recent article by David Lapp, he takes an interesting look at the issue of young marriages.

Mr. Lapp states that social scientists frequently note that "early marriage" is the No. 1 predictor of divorce. However, he cites that the median age at marriage today is 28 for men and 26 for women.

Mr. Lapp asks "so what's a young couple, in love and committed, to do? He wonders if his own decision to marry in his early 20s was shortsighted and irresponsible?

First, he takes a closer look at that term "early marriage." He says "while it's true that teenage marriages are a significant predictor of divorce, it turns out that marriages of people in their early to mid-20s are not nearly as much at risk."

According to a 2002 report from the Centers for Disease Control, Lapp says that 48% of people who enter marriage when under age 18, and 40% of 18- and 19-year-olds, will eventually divorce. But only 29% of those who get married at age 20 to 24 will eventually divorce—very similar to the 24% of the 25-and-older group.

Additionally, Lapp cites a recent study by the University of Texas finds that people who wed between the ages of 22 and 25, and remained married to those spouses, went on to experience the happiest marriages. While the authors caution against suggesting that 22 to 25 is the optimal marrying age for everyone, their finding does suggest that "little or nothing is likely to be gained by deliberately delaying marriage beyond the mid twenties."

Lapp explores: What about the money? He says that social scientists use the term "marriage premium" to describe how, over time, married couples save and build more wealth than otherwise-similar singles or cohabiting couples. According to Lapp "Part of the reason is simply that married couples have two incomes to pool and draw from. But as a group of leading family scholars notes in 'Why Marriage Matters,' a report published by the Institute for American Values, marriage itself appears to encourage thrifty behavior." I appears that married couples value the family members and want to protect the future of the family. Therefore, they tend to save more.

Of course, it's not just adults who are skeptical about early-to-mid-20s marriages. As psychologist Jeffrey Jensen Arnett notes in his influential book "Emerging Adulthood," many young people today delay marriage because they are afraid it will deny them the leisure of "identity exploration" and "self-focused development." I describe this more as "sewing the wild oats" in life before settling down.

A lot of young people sense entering into a marriage relationship closes the chapter in life on adventure and opens the chapter on routine and monotony.

Lapp asks, why does marriage earlier have to end the adventure in life. He asks "Instead of trekking to Africa or exploring Rome alone, why not marry the person of your dreams and take him or her along?"

He asks "What about discovering, as the characters Carl and Ellie in Disney Pixar's 'Up' do, the good of marital friendship? While they never fulfill their dream of traveling together to South America (their jug of nickels and dimes labeled 'Paradise Falls' is shattered with every flat tire and emergency-room visit), they do experience the joy of life together: renovating their home as newlyweds, picnicking and cloud-gazing on lazy summer afternoons, dancing in their candlelit living room after 50 years of marriage."

As much as young adults focus on self-exploration, what if the path to that exploration is actually learning to live with and love another person? What if we are startled to find that the greatest adventure lies not in knowing oneself as much as in knowing and committing to another person? What if we learned to put the needs of other in front of our own wants and desires? I suppose that would make us more Christlike in our approach to relationships.

Proposed Changes to Family Law In Ontario – Focus on Mediation, Arbitration and Collaborative Law

Ontario is taking a look at it's family law system and making changes. A recent Canadian Press article explores these changes. Attorney General Chris Bentley announced the long-promised changes Thursday, saying they should make divorce proceedings faster, less expensive and less combative. "These are very emotionally wrenching situations," Bentley said in an interview. "You don't want to pile on top of the emotion a long, protracted, bitter fight that studies all say is very bad for the kids, very bad for the parties and uses up whatever money you're going to have to live on in the future."

Philip Epstein, a veteran family lawyer in Toronto, says the changes show the government understands the system isn't working. He's encouraged by a push toward more mediation and a streamlining of the court process, saying it could keep parents away from adversarial court battles that often harm children. Bentley said the changes will mean a "much faster and clearer way" to resolve disputes. "It will mean you're going to get a lot more support early on."

Under the changes, people will have more access to legal advice from the outset, as well as to options like mediation, arbitration or collaborative law, which are much less combative than the court process. That will also free up court time for cases that must be argued through the system, although those will now have less paperwork and fewer steps so that people can get to a judge, and a decision, sooner. "It takes the time and expense that we spend on cases that shouldn't have that time and expense, and moves those resources to the cases that need more attention, helping them to be resolved faster and better as well," said Bentley.

Last year, Bentley pledged to review the handling of child custody cases following the death of Katelynn Sampson, a Toronto seven-year-old who was allowed to stay in the care of a woman who had a criminal record for drugs, prostitution and violence. A report from the Ontario Bar Association that same year found the province's legal system had reached a "breaking point."

They've also said there's an increasing number of people who don't have a lawyer, meaning judges are forced to spend valuable court time giving basic advice and help. Georgina Carson, who chairs the family law division of the bar association, says one of the best ways to keep people out of court is to inform them about their options from the start. She adds the changes announced Thursday will keep the parties from jumping directly into the court system. The family law changes will come into effect on March 1.

Recession: Is Delaying Divorce Good?

We all know that the recession has had an effect on everything from retail sales to new home construction. In fact, the recession has even caused people to delay in filing for divorce. It seems that when a broken marriage relationship is paired with uncertain financial times, many couples opt to delay filing for divorce. A survey by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (AAML) showed that 57 percent of lawyers surveyed nationally have seen a drop in divorce filings between fall of 2007 and fall of 2008. The new divorce filings in 2009 and 2010 have certainly fallen further.

Isn't a drop in the divorce rate good news? Not necessarily. If the drop in the divorce rate is a result of couples truly trying to salvage the marriage relationship, then certainly, a drop in the divorce rate is a positive thing. When spouses seek to repair a broken marriage, the positive impact can be tremendous. The crux is that this repair takes responsibility and a commitment to positive change. It takes a look inward. It takes involving third parties (therapists, budgeting partners, pastors, etc.) Sadly, most couples aren't willing to take the look inward and aren't willing to seek the help from others.

A drop in the divorce rate is not good news if a couple is just delaying the inevitable; if there will be continued dramatic decline in the marital relationship. Lawyers and therapists are seeing the emotional and financial toll that a delayed divorce is causing on couples who are just staying together because of a financial recession. From the financial side, waiting on a change in the economy before divorcing might just result in even less equity in the house to split or even more credit card debt to divide when it is all said and done.

In deciding whether to stay in the marriage relationship or file for divorce, couples need the ability to explore all options available. A collaborative approach to divorce might be the solution. With collaborative divorce, spouses commit to using a team approach to solving problems. Sometimes, the result is a marriage reconciliation. Sometimes, the divorce moves forward but positive change is made.
Either way, a collaborative divorce is certainly a better choice than traditional contested litigation.