Recently I read an article on FoxNews.com that I found to be most unbelievable; so much so that I thought to myself is this guy for real? The author, a psychologist, Dr. Keith Ablow, suggested that instead of a couple deciding to divorce, they should consider an arrangement called “consorce” (which sounds like a completely made-up word if you ask me).
Basically a “consorce” goes something like this: Instead of splitting up the family, the finances, and the parenting responsibilities, why not continue to live together in the same house (perhaps even in the same bedroom he goes on to suggest, platonically of course) as one cohesive unit?
This is the part of the story where my brain exploded.
Because really, didn’t he simply describe the definition of marriage?
Let’s be real here. A “consorce” would never (NEVER!) work because most couples who are at the point of divorce need to be separated and living apart because frankly, staying in the same house with one another just makes it easier for them to kill each other.
And can you imagine dinnertime? Mom says, “Son, ask your dad to pass the salt.”
Dad replies, “Son, tell your mom to stop BEING A WHORE.”
Poor kid. He’s going to need lots of therapy if he survives this arrangement.
When couples get to the point of divorce there are usually so many emotions involved (hurt, anger, sadness, guilt, depression) that at times it makes it difficult to even breathe. It would be hard to live in the same house and be reminded daily of your failed relationship. The children would carry a lot of the burden of the decisions of the adults. I’m afraid they would suffer greatly.
Look, people get divorced. Does it suck? Yes. Does anyone get married with the intention of someday getting divorced? Most likely no. But if you’re faced with it, it’s best to make a clean break, please dear God, for the sake of the children. You think it’s awkward when you run into your ex at your kid’s soccer game? Imagine running into him in the hallway every morning on your way to the kitchen.