It isn

	It isn't over till.....
	Marriage Hospital: Divorce Intervention Aims to Save Marriages For Immediate Release: August 2, 2001 Contact: Judy Parejko, 715-233-0663, jparejko@juno.com An innovative divorce intervention is in operation in western Wisconsin. Judy Parejko, who worked as a family court mediator - but faced increasing frustration over the limitations that attorneys and the courts placed on her work - has turned to educating spouses about options open to them during divorce. In a letter sent to over 500 recipients of divorce papers, Parejko discusses the legal process they are facing and how they might slow it down - to give time for greater reflection. The letter invites recipients to visit her web site at www.divorceresourcecenter.com, which provides a mix of legal information, as well as articles about the high emotional and psychological costs of divorce - to adults, children, and to society in general. Hope, courage, and direction are the three main offerings. The web site front page says, "This service is plowing new ground." It goes on to say, "Divorce is a harsh and demoralizing way to address issues that have not been tackled in other ways." Learning improved communication skills may be an alternative to divorce. This new project is an attempt to try to restore some of the rights individuals once had when facing divorce. With the present system, where 'no-fault' divorce is the only option, most who get served divorce papers believe there is nothing they can do to stop the divorce. Parejko encourages those who feel the divorce is harmful, to "Just say no," - to leave it to the judge to determine whether the marriage is truly 'broken' or not. Judges would rather not do this. But standing up to the process instead of caving in is the first step to regaining lost rights. As the court process typically plays out, attorneys move right into 'settlement' discussions and don't even question the merits of staying married - or who might have been responsible for the wrongdoing that caused the breakup. 'No-fault' laws eliminated that. And when it comes time for important decisions about the children, the 'best interests of the child' is the guiding principle. But no one is candid enough to admit that - according to a growing number of studies - an 'intact family' versus a broken one is in the best interests of children, as long as no criminal or abusive behavior is occuring in the home. The web site is full of articles that would give pause to most parents as they move through the process. Cautions about the hazards of marital therapy are also posted. And, an organization called Protecting Marriage, Inc., is referenced - whose mission is to "reduce the divorce plague." Personal phone consulting is offered, with on-line payment available. Parejko believes - and has been told by those who receive her letter - that no service like this is being offered. Some of those who've responded have expressed their gratitude for being given an alternative perspective - one that goes against the mainstream in our 'culture of divorce' that too often supports the easy disposal of marriage when trouble arises. This project was born out of six years of experience in divorce mediation - and hearing stories of the caustic practices by attorneys and courts that served to traumatize families further rather than lift them out of despair or give hope. And the widespread belief that 'no-fault' divorce meant that only one partner's veto of the marriage dooms it - that is where the biggest surprise was for her. By carefully studying the law over the past two years, she realized there was something terribly flawed about how 'no-fault' divorce was being practiced. She also believes the law was not intended to be enforced like this - that 'forced' divorce was not what was originally intended by lawmakers. In the courtroom when one spouse hesitates to let go of the marriage, the judge will declare it dissolved - even if there is no just cause, where there might be a chance to save the marriage. Even the authoritative Black's Law Dictionary equates 'no-fault' divorce with 'divorce by consent.' But by now, most 'marrieds' don't know the real history or intent of the law-change - and don't know that at one time, there was such a thing as a 'guilty' party in a divorce. The accepted belief now is that the one who is 'served' divorce papers can't stop the divorce. And for the one wearing those shoes, it is a feeling of utter hopelessness. Those who have responded so far to the letter have said it felt like a breath of fresh air - to receive a different story - and also to get encouragement to try to save their marriage. Parejko began this project as an experiment, not knowing what reactions would be. When mediating she had not been forthright about the laws. She would have faced serious trouble from the courts. In fact, her mediation training emphasized that a mediator must be 'neutral' about divorce during their work. But to approach a failing marriage with such neutrality feels immoral to her now - when all the studies show the damage done by divorce. Since this project is being done independent of court-constraints, she has been emboldened by the gratitude she's received from those responding. The region she is targeting has more than 1,000 divorce cases in process at one time. That means there are many more letters to be sent out.