Divorce law reform has already been a contentious issue both in France and in the U.S. Rational secular values is conducive to reconsiderations of the divorce option and makes it expedient for the partners to separate quickly. Now another option has come up to make it further fast paced by allowing the court clerks to complete the process. In effect, it is understood that whatever the attorneys have agreed through their clients would be the final and there would be no judgment to be pronounced.
The struggle over the divorce policy was always over the central fact that divorce was to be made available in certain circumstances and the concern was over the stability of social order. The point to be considered is whether the court clerk is to sit in judgment of the cases being presented or just provide the necessary seal of authority to let the process of divorce through.
There are several aspects to be considered in a divorce and that would include the well being of the children and parents as well. Just as marriage has a regulatory function that benefits both the parties, divorce should also perform a beneficiary function to justify the state of separation. Unions do not exist in a vacuum and any argument that absolves the partners in marriage of any further obligations if they so exist, would be skewed and will tend to undermine the institution of marriage in very many ways.
Marriage is a protective barrier to many ills and, therefore, has gained the status of an institution. There will be an argument that marriage is not soleminised by a judge and so why should s/he grant the seal to separate. Marriage begins with a promise and necessarily supports regulatory conditions in the interest of not only the family that has been created but also the society. Dissolving the marriage would require a considered judgment on the implications that would go beyond the two partners.
This thought could be branded as relatively conservative in a progressive and enlightened world but truth of the matter rests not only on mere statutes but a considered interpretation of those specifics in law. Yes, if the court clerk is found to posses the appropriate understanding and qualifications then there is strong ground in not limiting the pace with which the process can be gone through.