Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review Feb. 4, 2002/ 22 Shevat, 5762

Kathleen Parker

Kathleen Parker
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

A great notion from the Vatican

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com -- ONE thing about being pope: You can call a spade a spade and not lose a wink over your popularity ratings. Thus, Pope John Paul II came right out and uttered the G-d's-awful truth: Divorce is a plague ripping apart modern society.

He made these remarks at a Vatican magistrates meeting, during which he also urged lawyers and judges to become conscientious objectors to divorce by refusing to participate in them. John Paul acknowledged that his recommendation would be tough to follow -- judges can't really refuse to hear divorce cases -- but popes are idea guys. It's up to someone else to sort out the details.

Not everyone cheered the pope's observations. Radicals chastised him for being a "fundamentalist," while others accused him of wanting to "turn back time." Alessandra Mussolini, a Parliament member and granddaughter of you-know-who, defended divorce as the often-best option for warring couples.

She's right, of course, if by warring parents she means somebody's getting a pizza pan upside the head. But John Paul is also right when he says that divorce has had "devastating consequences that spread in the social body like a festering wound."

The pope's assault on divorce is practically stepping on the heels of a more popular recent assessment of divorce by psychologist Mavis Hetherington, who made national headlines of the "divorce-ain't-so-bad" variety, earning her the adoration of millions of guilt-ridden divorced parents. Hetherington found that three-quarters of children of divorce are "functioning in the normal range" two decades after their parents' divorce.

(Full Disclosure Paragraph: I myself am a recovering guilt-ridden, erstwhile divorced single mom, now-remarried stepmother as well as the daughter of five mothers, including four stepmothers, so I figure I'm sufficiently screwed up to qualify as an expert. My only agenda is to save others oh-da-troubles I've seen.)

First, I have a huge problem with phrases like "functioning in the normal range." On the "normal" continuum, there's a vast distance between Point A (converted to Islam, moved to a cave in Afghanistan and plotted mass murder), and Point B (is deliriously happy and grateful that his parents divorced when he was a small child).

According to Hetherington's study, "normal" means things like establishing careers and building intimate relationships, which, admittedly, is better than finding out that thousands of adult children of divorce are living in Dumpsters, just as the Vatican always predicted.

But functioning normally as an adult doesn't minimize the suffering children endure when, wholly dependent on the unconditional love of their parents, their lives are suddenly eviscerated.

Hetherington acknowledges as much. For the children in her research, she says, divorce was "usually brutally painful . . . cataclysmic and inexplicable. How could a child feel safe in a world where adults had suddenly become untrustworthy?"

Excellent question. Do children get over these cataclysmic events? Of course they do, just as children "get over" war, disease and famine. Yet no one ever suggests that functioning normally as adults diminishes the damaging, if not quantifiable, effects of such early childhood experiences. Likewise, the good news that divorced kids function normally as adults without regular electroshock therapy shouldn't be construed to mean that divorce is OK.

It's not OK. It may be necessary or unavoidable, but it's not OK. I'm a normally functioning adult, too, thanks to that padded room we installed in the basement. And while growing up with multiple mothers has its pluses -- a new religion and new décor every few years -- I'm guessing I could have avoided some history-repeating traps had my father pursued fewer personal-fulfillment paths.

And though it is true, as Hetherington points out, that divorce can be an opportunity for growth, healing and personal fulfillment, those are strictly adult talking points. Kids just want the same mother and father arguing at breakfast every morning. They're fundamentally not interested in whether Mom and Dad are happy 'n fulfilled, but rather whether they, the children, are happy and fulfilled, i.e. fed, clothed, hugged, tucked in and -- huge item here -- 1,000 percent sure of not bumping into a stranger in the bathroom.

OK, here's the crumb you've been waiting for. No, not everyone should stay married. I'm with Dr. Laura on this one: Abuse, adultery and/or addiction are legitimate reasons to dump one's bad choice. But otherwise, marriage is a promise to your children that you'll behave like a grown-up and put their well-being first.

The pope has the right idea; it's up to us to sort out the details.


JWR contributor Kathleen Parker can be reached by clicking here.

Kathleen Parker Archives

© 2001, Tribune Media Services