Some of the most intriguing articles I find are those posted by the CCF (Council on Contemporary Families) from major news outlets around the country. They highlight the research and thinking of the best couple/family/marriage scholars in the world, citing CCF-members’ work, scholarship and smart (almost always) thoughts about all-things family and relationships.
Today I was reading an article published in the New York Times last week. Yep – I’m way behind in life (hence why I haven’t been posting much lately; sorry loyal readers!) As I read the piece, I scratched my head and furrowed my brow (or do you furrow both brows?) Anyway, my brows were doing something as I tried to discern the key question of the piece: would making marriage a 20-year (or even shorter-year) contract result in happier partnerships?
Before I read the article I wanted to say (scream. Okay, I wanted to yell a bit): WHAT? That’s SO dumb!
But as I read, I realized that while the concept might be odd and altogether outright ridiculous, the point of both researchers and everyday folks alike trying to figure out happiness in coupledom is that … duh … we really do want to figure it out (how to be happy and how to be a great couple). We do! And maybe some day we will.
Until then, give this article “Till Death, or 20 Years, Do Us Part” by Matt Richtel a read
Till Death, Or 20 Years, Do Us Part by Matt Richtel and while you do … whether you think it’s a ridiculous, dumb idea or a really innovative approach to an old institution … simply vow to stay in the conversation! The point of the contracts and “ridiculous” suggestions and new/old models and even good-old-fashioned controversies about couple-hood is that we do, essentially, want to collectively figure this stuff out. We do, I believe, want to figure the happy couple stuff out so we can all get it right.
I know, right? That, dear friends and strangers, is a really good idea. Period.