On the cheap

I’m a great believer in market forces with regard to pricing so long as competition is allowed. I believe it’s not the province of government to set pricing, nor do I believe that the current fad over social engineering by politicians helps create the right environment for social control on health, believing that it simply drives either neglect as people pay more for their ‘habits’ or drives them into the arms of criminals of one stripe or another. Still it did amuse me with what the Co-op has come up with in the face of the governments desire to promote marriage…

Mail.

The Co-op is to start offering do-it-yourself divorces at the supermarket for just Ā£99.
Shoppers will be able to start quickie divorce proceedings while they pick up a pint of milk or bunch of Fairtrade bananas.
Those soon to get married will be offered the chance to sign up for a pre-nuptial agreement, for a slightly more pricey Ā£950.
The new Co-op family law service will be available through all its 2,800 local supermarkets and 350 bank branches.
It is aimed at hard-pressed families who cannot afford the astronomical fees of up to Ā£250 an hour charged by some specialist divorce lawyers.
But campaigners said such quick-fix splits risked making family break-ups too easy.

The problem for the campaigners is of course getting married is too easy along with no real benefit to those married to stay together in sickness and in health. The entire institution has come under attack by various government policies designed to allow equality for those who do not wish to be married. various allowances and benefits along with quickie divorces and the CSA to meddle in the mix have made staying together as a married couple no different to two people living together. Yet despite this various political parties have given lip service at least to marriage as being the ideal for bringing up children, though admittedly the Tories more than Labour as Labour were welded to the various fads of minority support far more than the Tories. Though it was always best to judge from their actions, rather than their words and their actions over the ensuing decades have always been to denigrate and marginalise the institution of marriage.

Still this is the first time I’ve heard of market forces taking a hand in the legal process of shedding a partner and considering what some lawyers charge it’s quite a bargain. I suppose it’s only Ā£99 if the entire process is mutual and uncontested and perhaps covers only the Nisi not the Absolute part of the process.

Still, this is I suppose the end result of social engineering and meddling by the state, dragging the end of an institution into the bargain basement.

9 comments for “On the cheap

  1. Single Acts of Tyranny
    September 21, 2012 at 6:08 am

    “staying together as a married couple no different to two people living together”

    Dead wrong. Look at a range of social indicators for the outcomes of kids* from married parents compared co-habting couples. the former is better than the latter, though the latter is better than single parenting.

    (* education, health, likelihood to commit crime, likelihood to have illegitimate children themselves etc).

    • Andrew Duffin
      September 21, 2012 at 11:11 am

      Cause, effect, confusion of….

      It’s not that married people do those things better, it’s that those likely to get married are more likely the kind of people who already do those things better.

      • Single Acts of Tyranny
        September 22, 2012 at 5:54 am

        AD ~ there is certainly something in what you say. If you can commit to marriage you maybe more likely to commit to your children. That seems like a reasonable point.

        I would add that having made a public contract and open commitment, combined with lots of inertia, married people are more likely to stay together and thus provide the stable environment that kids prosper in.

    • September 21, 2012 at 1:20 pm

      That’s only from the states and a statistical point of view, to those in a failing marriage the point is somewhat moot.

      • Single Acts of Tyranny
        September 22, 2012 at 5:56 am

        I understand your point entirely. There comes a point when the destructive effects of some marriages begin to outway even the damage that a spilt might cause.

  2. Jiks
    September 21, 2012 at 6:13 am

    “Never, ever involve lawyers.”

    • Jack Savage
      September 21, 2012 at 8:40 am

      As an ex-lawyer, I fully endorse “Jiks” remark. To all those seeking to divorce: SWALLOW YOUR PRIDE AND HURT AND COME TO AN AGREEMENT, write it down and THEN go to the lawyers. Preferably a couple of years later, when you have calmed down a bit.
      I have seen fights costing thousands over pets or, in one case, a clock. Fights which have the effect of ruining relationships with children etc.

      As a divorced man myself, I would still say : If you are going to have children, get married! Otherwise, forget it.

    • Tatty
      September 21, 2012 at 9:15 am

      Jiks – “Never, ever involve lawyers.”

      Ahuh…Rule #13…http://www.gibbsrules.com/

      I <3 NCIS šŸ˜Ž

  3. Dave
    September 21, 2012 at 6:43 pm

    I wish to marry a gal who can cook and clean the hoose.

Comments are closed.