When the parties are getting divorced, surely one is right and the other is wrong! One even has less power than the other party.
The theory underlying our legal system is that each person will hire a bright, skilled lawyer who will see the situation completely from the perspective of the client, and then present the strongest case possible to the judge. The judge will get the best information from each side, but will be neutral. The judge will see the situation from above and will make decision with his justice and wisdom.
Since our court system is filled to capacity, most judges do not have the time for DINKS. People who go through the court system often end up feeling that the judge did not have time to hear their story enough and that people were not given a chance to speak their mind. If you don't have children, no one actually listen to your dispute. I don't think this is right. DINKS usually contribute more tax to the government and obtain no support just becuase you don't have children.
Tell me what you think!!!
I am interested in research regarding getting divorce without kids within the ADR process. I would like to prove this by collecting people’s experience. When I divorced, the merely the interest for the conciliator in the court was persuading us not to proceed to the litigate case. Sadly, because of our over-loaded and burdened court system, most judges do not have the time to handle the family court case which children/ AVO are not involved. She did never care about how much my ex husband lied about the contribution claims. I still argue that the system was wrong. People who go through the court system often end up feeling that they did not have their story heard by the judge, and that they were not given a chance to speak. Therefore, people intent going through mediation process, more and more these days. If few intervenors could stay neutral, we could do more about this at the pre-mediation stage. That’s what I am aiming for.