Opinion

THE FIVE-YEAR MARRIAGE

‘Til death do us part — or at least until the contract expires.

Australian academic Helen Goltz has proposed a shortening of bonds of matrimony, arguing, “We have fixed term-contracts for the buying of property, cars and insurance, but there is only one contract available for marriage and it is for life. Is it time to consider introducing fixed-term marriage contracts?”

Under her plan, newlyweds would instead sign 5-year or 10-year contracts, which would then be renewed at their expiration, “to encourage partners to work towards maintaining a good relationship — in effect, it opens communication akin to a marriage performance review.”

If the husband and wife decide not to re-up, the union would simply dissolve, without the “shame and stigma” associated with divorce.

With 45% of US marriages ending in divorce, Goltz believes that “life” is an unrealistic goal, one that can actually put more pressure on a marriage. Instead, an expiration date puts the focus on making recommitments instead of the emotional turmoil of deciding to tear a union apart.

While Goltz’s musings would put a fleet of divorce lawyers out of business — not necessarily a bad thing — it would cause considerable new problems when children are involved. Would the end of a marriage contract mean someone could lose custody?

The biggest objections, though, come from the religious. “As a society we should be building up the marriage institution not knocking it down,” one typical commentator said when Goltz published her paper online. “We should be encouraging married couples to stay together even when the road looks rough.”