GOV/MIL Alabama lawmaker proposes mandatory conflict resolution training before couples can marry

gunwish

Senior Member
**OP rant on:
What kind of commie stuff is this? With all the problems in this country and that state, the AL congress is wasting time on this bill. It's already bad enough that people must pay a fee and get permission from a government entity to marry, now this. How much will the conflict resolution class cost? Who pays for it? The government shouldn't be spending one dime on the class. Nor should the same government force people to attend and pay for it, just to get married. This is just one more nail in the coffin on freedom. This bill and the anti-freedom people behind, are all about government power and control.

I still hear people talking about how a non-married couple living together is bad and that they should just get married if they want to live under the same roof as a couple. Guess what, this is how you get more of it. Make getting married even harder and more expensive.

How about the government and the these people just go away and keep their hands and noses out of other peoples lives.
OP rant off:


Heather Gann | hgann@al.com

Alabama lawmaker proposes mandatory conflict resolution training before couples can marry

Alabama state Sen. Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, has pre-filed a bill that would require couples to take at least one conflict resolution class before they can get married.

Currently, the only requirements to get married in Alabama are to complete a marriage document and pay a recording fee.

Under Smitherman’s bill, SB33, a probate judge would still collect the fee but there would be no requirement to obtain a license or undergo a ceremony to “solemnize the marriage.”

Once a couple had completed their class and turned in documentation listing their names and verification that both parties are 18 or above or 16 with a parent’s permission, the marriage would be recorded.

The bill would also require the Administrative Office of Courts to determine minimum requirements for an acceptable premarital conflict resolution class and to create a form to verify class attendance, it says.

Smitherman cited domestic violence figures within the bill’s text. Efforts to reach Smitherman for comment were not immediately successful.

“The Legislature finds and declares the following: (1) About one in four women and one in seven men have experienced physical violence by their intimate partner at some point in their lifetimes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,” it reads.

“(2) Annually, domestic violence is responsible for over 1,500 deaths in the United States; (3) According to the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, in almost 20 percent of all marriages and intimate partnerships, couples slap, shove, hit, or otherwise assault each other.

“Emotional abuse, such as verbal threats, degrading remarks, and controlling behavior, is even more common. And (4) Over 15 million children in the United States live in households where intimate partner violence has occurred at least once in the last year.”

SB33 would only apply to couples getting married after Oct. 1, 2025, and would not affect any other legal aspects of marriage including, but not limited to, divorce, spousal support, child custody, or child support, it says.

The bill is currently pending action in the Senate Committee on Judiciary.
 

jward

passin' thru
yup. It would immensely benefit folk to do some premarital counseling and needs/wants match checks and other compatibility exploration and conflict resolution training

But the state can keep their fat arses right on out of the issue of mandating any such thing.
 

gunwish

Senior Member
yup. It would immensely benefit folk to do some premarital counseling and needs/wants match checks and other compatibility exploration and conflict resolution training

But the state can keep their fat arses right on out of the issue of mandating any such thing.
You are dead on

I think the concept of it would benefit people. Especially those that are very young and people that have been single for way to long. Living with someone after being on your own for a long time can be a huge adjustment....ask me how I know. A lot of churches off some form of this type of counseling. I have heard of some churches that won't perform the marriage without it.

With all that being said, I don't want the government anywhere near this
 

Greybeard7

Veteran Member
How about mandatory DNA tests before any child support judgements. Many men are legally required to pay child support even if a DNA test proves they are not the father.
How about ending no fault divorce so women won't be financially incentivized to leave their husbands and seek their finances, property, and retirement accounts. I believe that the statistics are 80% of divorces are initiated by women. Check to see how long the marriage lasted. Marriages only lasting one to five years might be suspect.
How about divorce and family courts take a harder look at what women are demanding financially from their former spouse and their reasons for seeking divorce, child custody and alimony.

How about the government just stay the hell out of peoples personal lives.
 

Milkweed Host

Veteran Member
Well, that's one way to keep Muslims out of AL. Domestic violence almost describes their marriages.
So true.

when I was teaching LE classes to some of the officers from the Kirkuk police department,
I asked one of my students, through a LA, if it was okay to beat his wife upon returning home after
a hard day at work. He smile and said yes. He was proud of himself.

Heard of a husband who was jailed for killing his wife. He was jailed to teach him a lesson, that he
shouldn't be doing that.

Just think, they can have up to four wives at one time.

I will say that the Kurds in the Sulaymaniyah area are completely different, far more
civilized. Enjoyed many of the restaurants in Sulaymaniyah.
 

kyrsyan

Has No Life - Lives on TB
How about mandatory DNA tests before any child support judgements. Many men are legally required to pay child support even if a DNA test proves they are not the father.
How about ending no fault divorce so women won't be financially incentivized to leave their husbands and seek their finances, property, and retirement accounts. I believe that the statistics are 80% of divorces are initiated by women. Check to see how long the marriage lasted. Marriages only lasting one to five years might be suspect.
How about divorce and family courts take a harder look at what women are demanding financially from their former spouse and their reasons for seeking divorce, child custody and alimony.

How about the government just stay the hell out of peoples personal lives.
So from some experience, in multiple incidences, this depends on whether the father had reason to believe in infidelity at any time between the child's birth and the divorce. And choses to not do anything and to accept responsibility. So father X suspected/knew but chose to accept full responsibility/chose not to check. That father will end up paying child support.

I know of several fathers who knew, and some who were actively "swinging", who took responsibility from birth, then tried to ditch responsibility in divorce. The courts were not nice to those fathers. The older the child was, the more difficult it was for those fathers in court.

Now, if father X did not know or suspect infidelity and only discovers this leading up to the divorce, or in the process of the divorce, the court gets more strict. And there can be an unpleasant surprise for another male who suddenly finds out that they are a dad. And a lot of unpleasant stuff for the kids. So much unpleasant stuff for the kids because the person that they regarded as Dad is suddenly not Dad. And frequently just exits their life.

I currently have a friend whose Ex treats their son like absolute crap because "he doesn't believe it is his son" but refuses to go get the DNA test. Both son and mother are more than willing for the DNA test, but he refuses. But he still treats his son like crap. He treats his daughter like she is a princess, in contrast.

I honestly could get on board for DNA verification at birth. So that everyone knows from day one and moves forward from there.
 

von Koehler

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I advised a young man to spend a day attending the local family/divorce court and hear for himself what happens to men in a divorce.

He didn't know that approximately 50 percent of all marriages currently end up in divorce. Actually, if the woman is a college graduate the divorce rate goes up to 90 percent. Second marriages have a 80 percent divorce rate.

And men typically lose 50 percent of their assets in a divorce. If there are children involved, there's custody and child support financial matters to be settled. Rarely in the man's favor. Being with a single mother is the worst thing a man can do.

I urged him to picture himself in front of the judge.

Sadly, there is no advantage to a man to get married today.

"The juice ain't worth the squeeze."
 
Last edited:

end game

Veteran Member
I advised a young man to spend a day attending the local family/divorce court and hear for himself what happens to men in a divorce.

He didn't know that approximately 50 percent of all marriages currently end up in divorce. Actually, if the woman is a college graduate the divorce rate goes up to 90 percent. Second marriages have a 80 percent divorce rate.

And men typically lose 50 percent of their assets in a divorce. If there are children involved, there's custody and child support financial matters to be settled. Rarely in the man's favor. Being with a single mother is the worst thing a man can do.

I urged him to picture himself in front of the judge.

Sadly, there is no advantage to a man to get married today.

"The juice ain't worth the squeeze."
If it flies, floats, or f**** rent it.......
 

von Koehler

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Reminds me of a very old joke.

"What's the difference between a prostitute and a wife?"

You settle with a hooker on a price first, but never stop paying for a wife.

Apologies to any good women.
 
Last edited:

von Koehler

Has No Life - Lives on TB
While I wouldn't make attending a divorce court mandatory I certainly would recommend it to any man considering marriage.

I do think DNA testing of the parents and child should be required so that there is no question about who is the real biological father.

Studies have found that about 30 percent of children are NOT from the alleged father. I don't think it's fair that he should pay 18 plus years of support for some other man's child.
 

Blacknarwhal

Three-Time Trump Voter
I advised a young man to spend a day attending the local family/divorce court and hear for himself what happens to men in a divorce.

He didn't know that approximately 50 percent of all marriages currently end up in divorce. Actually, if the woman is a college graduate the divorce rate goes up to 90 percent. Second marriages have a 80 percent divorce rate.

And men typically lose 50 percent of their assets in a divorce. If there are children involved, there's custody and child support financial matters to be settled. Rarely in the man's favor. Being with a single mother is the worst thing a man can do.

I urged him to picture himself in front of the judge.

Sadly, there is no advantage to a man to get married today.

"The juice ain't worth the squeeze."

Still technically possible to achieve the best result, but outside of divine intervention, it's way too many coin flips to expect probability to come up in your favor.

Sad but true.
 

poppy

Veteran Member
I read somewhere that the conflict resolution training is really simple. The women's manual simply says 'You are always right' and the men's manual says 'Your wife is always right'. The problem is finding enough people capable of reading the manual in Alabama.
 

Landcruiser

Senior Member

Rate of misattributed paternity is fron 0.8%-30% depending on the study with the average of all studies at 3.7%....

Even 3.7% exposure could completely upend our society if automatic exposure at birth occurred. I wonder if it would make us a better or worse society if automatic DNA test at birth was a thing.
 

jward

passin' thru
You are dead on

I think the concept of it would benefit people. Especially those that are very young and people that have been single for way to long. Living with someone after being on your own for a long time can be a huge adjustment....ask me how I know. A lot of churches off some form of this type of counseling. I have heard of some churches that won't perform the marriage without it.

With all that being said, I don't want the government anywhere near this
Yes, i believe it would benefit all people; I am constantly surprised at the number of couples who neglect that piece of the pre-commitment work and end up with men/women they cannot respect, trust, or even like :eek: let alone who share enough goals and values to build a successful life together.

Yes, catholic church does, tho honestly I cannot claim it was anything useful. I remember the priest asking my first DH and I if we were prepared to negotiate who slept in the wet spot :: thud and flaming red cheeks :: to this day I don't know what the value of that "guidance" was supposed to be, but fortunately I was able to regain my composure in time to assure him that though my spouse and I had complete comfort and ability discussing and negotiating issues around intimacy, there was nothing - imho - to be gained by exploring that line of counseling with a third party- even our religious leader :: shakes head ::

Having said that, the process of knowing who YOU are and sharing your needs/wants and expectations of what you can bring and what you need to find at the table is essential. We all need that level of self awareness in general, I think, not just specifically couples. I don't know that we need "counseling" though- just conversations between the two people, assuming they are both of good will, and maturation, should suffice. I almost did not marry my last DH, due to issues that arose in such one on one conversations- as I held that my children must have a church family in their formative years, and I had to have the assurance that one would be provided them if something happened to me. There are a million and one examples like that, and most successful relationships seem to understand it is all stuff you figure out BEFORE you lay down beside someone.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
While I disagree with the government mandate, I only partially disagree. Today’s “social media” generation has zero face-to-face social skills. When the going gets rough, they only know to walk away. You all know this is true. Back in the day, marriage licenses required blood tests, and in some cases, pre-marriage counseling. So technically this isn’t new.
 

Phelan

Contributing Member
How about mandatory DNA tests before any child support judgements. Many men are legally required to pay child support even if a DNA test proves they are not the father.

This is a bridge to far, It's not that I don't understand where your coming from. Please, not this thread; start your own.
 
Last edited:

Luddite

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Marriage is a risk. Young folks need to learn how to minimize their risk.

We could start a big long list of platitudes. Keep your promises would be at the top of the list.

Government at any level needs to realize they're a necessary evil not a bastion of all things benevolent.

An ancient "old school" LEO loves to recount his solution to being called to a home for a "domestic". He always looked for any scintilla of reason to take them BOTH to jail. He bragged he never got called back to the same house. There's wisdom in action...


I've yet to see any government action or intervention make positive influence.
 

von Koehler

Has No Life - Lives on TB
The only way to definitely avoid the risk of marriage is not to get married.

The risks to a man are simply not worth it.
 
Last edited:

Knoxville's Joker

Has No Life - Lives on TB
While I wouldn't make attending a divorce court mandatory I certainly would recommend it to any man considering marriage.

I do think DNA testing of the parents and child should be required so that there is no question about who is the real biological father.

Studies have found that about 30 percent of children are NOT from the alleged father. I don't think it's fair that he should pay 18 plus years of support for some other man's child.
Some states actually require paternity testing by default. Too many parents getting screwed with lies. Plus it helps medically if the actual father is identified if the baby is medically fragile.
 

Melodi

Disaster Cat
This is one of those ideas that may sound great on paper but, in reality, would be a disaster if enacted. Not only would it be a waste of taxpayer money, but it would simply result in couples going to nearby states to get married.

When I married Nightwolf, we needed to marry quickly for Visa reasons. I looked up local marriage laws when it looked like he would be the best man at a friend's wedding and fly to the US for a week. California required all sorts of things, including blood tests and fees; Nevada required identification and nothing else. Getting a license also took several weeks, but nearby states did not.

So many people married in nearby States, which Nevada had made into an industry. That is what we were going to do (I had two friends for witnesses to sneak us over the border) when the wedding was postponed, and I did something very similar in Cambridge, England (which was easier then than it is now).

Besides, as others have pointed out, who will pay for these classes, who will teach them, and what will they teach exactly?

That said, I am all in favor of couples getting marriage counseling and things like engaged couples retreat run by churches and charities. But you can't force that on people by law simply by examples and good outcomes.
 

mikeabn

Finally not a lurker!
It's not a BAD idea, per se, but it really isn't something the government needs to mandate.
You're right-it isn't a bad idea at all but maybe it's one of those things that should be taught in a sort of a Life Course in HS. Then again the schools can't teach anything very well...
 

Matt

Veteran Member
Just another state mandate to push business to the shitbags that comprise a huge percentage of what we call counselors... just like all the court mandated drug classes, parenting classes, anger management classes, etc.

I have a social worker that lives across the street... gets paid by Presbyterian Medical Services... she is divorced and sits on the deck with her unemployed boyfriend while he smokes meth...
 

saeurs

Senior Member
Am I reading the article correctly? It states that, according to the proposed law, once the couple completes the class, they are declared married thus foregoing the marriage ceremony and license? Sounds to me more like supplanting the role of the church or marriage official with state certification. Here, you've both completed marriage certification class, have a nice life, see you in divorce court.

Personally, I don't think the state should be in the business of regulating (or registering) marriage anyway. The marriage is between a man and a woman, plain and simple. It's all the added baggage the families and the state bring into the marriage that ruins most of them.
 

Blacknarwhal

Three-Time Trump Voter
Am I reading the article correctly? It states that, according to the proposed law, once the couple completes the class, they are declared married thus foregoing the marriage ceremony and license? Sounds to me more like supplanting the role of the church or marriage official with state certification. Here, you've both completed marriage certification class, have a nice life, see you in divorce court.

Personally, I don't think the state should be in the business of regulating (or registering) marriage anyway. The marriage is between a man and a woman, plain and simple. It's all the added baggage the families and the state bring into the marriage that ruins most of them.

Gives the gays their precious little marriages without having to force the church's hand.
 

Kathy in FL

Administrator
_______________
Am I reading the article correctly? It states that, according to the proposed law, once the couple completes the class, they are declared married thus foregoing the marriage ceremony and license? Sounds to me more like supplanting the role of the church or marriage official with state certification. Here, you've both completed marriage certification class, have a nice life, see you in divorce court.

Personally, I don't think the state should be in the business of regulating (or registering) marriage anyway. The marriage is between a man and a woman, plain and simple. It's all the added baggage the families and the state bring into the marriage that ruins most of them.

When it comes to getting financial benefits based on your marital status then yeah, they kinda do need to be involved, at least in terms of registering your marriage. Social security alone would be an issue.
 

jward

passin' thru
You're right-it isn't a bad idea at all but maybe it's one of those things that should be taught in a sort of a Life Course in HS. Then again the schools can't teach anything very well...
schools have been co-opted by the leftist, and are the last place and group of people qualified to help anyone learn healthy behaviors, skills and mores.

Normally we turn to older sisters, aunts, older friends and cousins and the like to help us acquire the understanding of what actually matters in selecting a mate and creating a healthy future with them. Unfortunately though we've so many troubled people right now that we can't really count on those usual "safety net" providers to help well socialize kids.

Weighting the needs, and the currant resources, I'd probably turn to books or slumber party age/jr. high school games to broach topics and become fodder for discussion for the youngins.
..and that being successful would depend on someone sane and balanced presenting the material, and then being able to get it through to market. :: shrug ::
 

WildDaisy

God has a plan, Trust it!
Here's a better idea. Instead of giving a few hours of conflict resolution lessons to people who want to marry, bring back teaching these skills to CHILDREN. We took away their recess, we took away playing kickball for fear that Lil Johnny would get picked last and feel bad. We stopped kids from learning how to lose gracefully, win gracefully and resolve their own conflicts with peers as they grow.

That's why we need to teach them as adults - they didnt get those lessons where the rest of us did - on the playground and in the neighborhood playing outside with our peers.
 
Top