Family values and divorce


A family value is a term that is extremely common with politiciansespecially when campaigns are close. But in general meaning, the termhas been used by politicians to refer to aspects such as familyhealthcare, abortion, divorce, morality and health insurance. Theseare terms which relate to the family structure, roles, beliefs,attitudes and functionality (Brighouse &amp Swift, 2014). By lookingat the various family policies in USA today, it is clear that thecountry is neither favorable nor friendly to the family. Policiessuch as the income tax policies which put taxes at between 20-40%affect the families’ economic status negatively. Additionally, theno-fault divorce laws have affected the families to a great extentand have lead to a very high rate of divorce hence affecting thefamilies (Self, 2012). Comparing France to America in terms offamilies, it is clear that France has much more friendly familypolicies especially for women and children than the US. France has anallowance system for families and subsidized child services henceencouraging fertility. The US has no tax shelter for the stay-homemoms hence making family life extremely expensive (Brighouse &ampSwift, 2014). Politicians in the US who support family values duringtheir campaigns end up supporting policies that are against thefamilies. For instance, Jeb Bush, despite being a Republican which isa party known for family values, opposed of leave for family memberswith a new born or a sick family member (Self, 2012).

Divorce is one of the biggest problems in US families today. Nearly50% of the new families formed end up divorcing. This contradicts thepermanence value of every family. Although divorce was stillprevalent, it gained momentum when the no-fault divorce policy waspassed in the 1970s (Feydeau &amp Shapiro, 2010). The rates ofdivorce increased significantly. Divorce started up after the 1857Matrimonial Causes Act which allowed even the poor people to divorce.Before the, any divorce had to be approved by parliament and it wasvery expensive. A divorce can be advantageous if one of the partnersgoes insane and becomes a drug and alcohol addict (Feydeau &ampShapiro, 2010). For security purposes, a couple may divorce where oneof the parties becomes violent. On the contrary, divorce is not fairto the children who will end up lacking the care of one of theparents. It is also against the family value of permanence (Feydeau &ampShapiro, 2010). There are assumptions on the significant financialand emotional effects of divorce. The emotional effects affect boththe parties and the children. Technology has affected the family inboth positive and negative ways.

Technology has made communication easy between partners in a family.Technology has also enhanced honesty between partners sincecommunications of a cheating partner can be tracked (Feydeau &ampShapiro, 2010). On the contrary, technology has also affectedfamilies negatively. Cheating partners can use certain mobile appswhich cannot be tracked. Children are also being exposed to adultcontent through the internet at an early age hence affecting theintegrity of the family.


Brighouse, H., &amp Swift, A. (2014).&nbspFamily values: Theethics of parent-child relationships. Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Feydeau, G., &amp Shapiro, N. R. (2010).&nbspTake her, she`syours, or, Till divorce do us part = A qui ma femme?:Comedy in three acts. New York: Applause.

Self, R. O. (2012).&nbspAll in the family: The realignment ofAmerican democracy since the 1960s.