e children, drunkenness, insistence on unnatural or excessive sexual intercourse, or homosexuality.
The law of most states also provided for defenses to divorce actions based upon fault. These defenses were based upon the notion that an action for divorce could only be brought by an innocent spouse. Consequently, these defenses were based upon the idea of showing "unclean hands" on the part of the spouse petitioning for divorce. Evidence of such wrongdoing in divorces involving wealthy persons was often accumulated by private investigators. In any event, such requirements for divorce resulted in acrimonious proceedings, with each spouse accusing the other of heinous actions and both sides given to using perjured testimony.
One of the main reasons for introducing the no-fault concept into divorce laws throughout the United States was the elimination of much of the acrimony in divorce proceedings. As society began accepting divorce more in the Twentieth Century, it was felt that such rancorous proceedings were unnecessary and counterproductive. Ex-spouses were more likely to remain friendly if the accusations of fault were disposed of; moreover, happier ex-spouses would likely result in happier children.
Many had believed that adoption of no-fault divorce would essentially codify the economic theory of marriage, which held marriage to be an economic partnership. As with other types of economic partnerships, it was thought that marriages should be easily dissolved when the interests of the parties benefitted from the dissolution. It was especially felt that women would benefit from no-fault divorce, since it would empower them and make them more independent. The emphasis would shift from moral fault and responsibility to distribution of the marriage's economic assets.
Studies now indicate that no-fault divorce has not proved to be the panacea its advocates had hoped. One study of the effects of California's no...