Jason, Amanda Dufner Getting a Divorce

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

If you are only considering tour earnings, then you're missing some significant earnings from sponsorships.  Don't know what Duffner's sponsor earning potential is, but he's done well enough to make some good money there too.

Yes, but who knows the numbers?

At the same time, Alabama is equitable distribution, not 50-50. Jason had money before the marriage, had won before the marriage, and was the one who had developed his skills throughout his life. It was Jason who struggled alone for years before he'd even met Amanda, and had some limited success before their meeting, and his career took off after the marriage. Did his career take off because of her? We know it takes some golfers many years to deal with the mental struggle of winning.

Nonetheless, she was not there during the struggle, she did not have children with him, doubt if there was time for her to be a homemaker ... in other words, she received her funds as his companion in an almost 3 yr marriage (short by judicial standards), accustomed to a certain lifestyle, she could have argued that she gave up her time to develop her skills (although if I was Jason's attorney, I would argue she latched onto Jason's celebrity and made a name for herself with Photos, etc and developed skills) - so she was given money to support her lifestyle and develop her skills for a single life. She got off well, imho. Thanks.

All I was doing was pointing out the fallacy in your contention of a 50-50 split.  The reality is that she got far less than 50-50 any way you look at it.  Doesn't mean that she didn't do well for herself, but she didn't exactly rob him, either.

[inthehole]

[QUOTE name="Ferguson" url="/t/81079/jason-amanda-dufner-getting-a-divorce/360#post_1125399"] I'm onboard with you here in theory, and agree on your numbers. I look at it this way. Maybe we should be looking at marriage BEFORE making the leap. There should be a universal questionnaire or survey that is offered to measure the compatibility of couples who decide that marriage is the next step. At least seeing some real numbers or results in black and white might affirm that the two are either really good or really bad for one another. The results would draw a line in the sand, per se. One caveat, the questionnaire should be designed and created by those who have been married 10, 20 and 30 years. This would provide a real "taste" of marriage for people thinking of hitching. Re: Jason The way he slapped her on the can after that victory was downright insulting to the viewing public and to women in general. It was totally out of place for Sunday afternoon Golf TV. Clearly, Jason’s concept of an ideal wife or lifelong partner was critically distorted, probably by his father, society or a combination of both. If he entered that marriage as a kneejerk reaction from the reptilian portion of the brain, using his fame and fortune to attract Amanda - then shame on him. If she bought into his BS - shame on her.[/QUOTE] Universal questionnaire designed and created by those who have been married 10, 20, and 30 years?  May as well also make people take a test before they have kids, too. [QUOTE name="Ernest Jones" url="/t/81079/jason-amanda-dufner-getting-a-divorce/360#post_1125417"] I have a hard time believing that premarital cohabitation is detrimental to a marriage's longevity. That sounds like church sponsored claptrap to me.[/QUOTE] Exactly.  [QUOTE name="boogielicious" url="/t/81079/jason-amanda-dufner-getting-a-divorce/378#post_1125463"]   Possibly.  But my wife and I were married in a Catholic Church and the priest knew we lived together before marriage.  He had no issue with it.  He actually said, "Well then you're already married and this is just a big party!"  He was what Catholic priests should be, welcoming and willing to work with young couples in this more complicated age. [/QUOTE] This is awesome.  I'm Catholic and always like seeing and speaking with priests that are progressive instead of stuck in an old mindset.

X2

[Mr. Desmond]

All I was doing was pointing out the fallacy in your contention of a 50-50 split.  The reality is that she got far less than 50-50 any way you look at it.  Doesn't mean that she didn't do well for herself, but she didn't exactly rob him, either.

I did not contend it was a 50-50 split unless you conclude that " Sounds like a 50-50 split that way ... but who knows?" was a fallacy in a contention -- fallacy seeming to be the word of the day in the forums. 'How may times can we use "fallacy?" Let me count the ways.'

lol.

Not enough data to know what happened. At the same time, I've negotiated a few divorces, albeit not many and I do not do that work. But due to my background in accounting, tax, and law, I get a call once in a while after things have gone haywire -- someone has typically PO'd someone else -- that's when I am called - I discover both sides'  interests and see what we can negotiate.

Sometimes, it's as simple as I described above. At other times, there is more accounting. Every case, like every couple, is different. You've got to find their motivation for the $$ and other requests -- sometimes it makes no sense and you have to bring them back to a semblance of reality or go with part of what they want for psychological reasons, as long as your client agrees/it does not hurt them.

Thanks.

[newtogolf]

If someone decides it isn't going to work, there's no reason to "try to make it work" just because of some notions that say so. It's a sunk cost. Cut your losses and get into a better situation. Time is a finite quantity. Maybe people should be more careful getting married, but once they are, it's a sunk cost and they should treat it as such when evaluating their decision.

I guess it depends on how you go into it and your personal beliefs on marriage.  I went into it as a life long commitment, not a short term lease.  If I was looking for a lease I'd shack up and not have kids, though I guess some (not saying you) think kids are sunk costs too.

[14ledo81]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dkolo

If someone decides it isn't going to work, there's no reason to "try to make it work" just because of some notions that say so. It's a sunk cost. Cut your losses and get into a better situation. Time is a finite quantity. Maybe people should be more careful getting married, but once they are, it's a sunk cost and they should treat it as such when evaluating their decision.

I guess it depends on how you go into it and your personal beliefs on marriage.  I went into it as a life long commitment, not a short term lease.  If I was looking for a lease I'd shack up and not have kids, though I guess some (not saying you) think kids are sunk costs too.

Thats the way I see it as well.

[RFKFREAK]

I guess it depends on how you go into it and your personal beliefs on marriage.  I went into it as a life long commitment, not a short term lease.  If I was looking for a lease I'd shack up and not have kids, though I guess some (not saying you) think kids are sunk costs too.

Maybe, but I am of the opinion that most of us have a breaking point.  In some cases, people would prefer to end it rather than stay in a harmful or loveless marriage even if they went into it with the intention of it being a life long commitment.  I don't see anything wrong with that.

[newtogolf]

Maybe, but I am of the opinion that most of us have a breaking point.  In some cases, people would prefer to end it rather than stay in a harmful or loveless marriage even if they went into it with the intention of it being a life long commitment.  I don't see anything wrong with that.

I'm not condemning anyone that is divorced, especially if they really made an effort to save the marriage.  I'm also agnostic so this isn't some sort of religious commentary.

What I see too often are people getting married for various reasons (pregnancy, financial, stupidity) and just assuming that if it doesn't work out they'll get a divorce.  I'd rather see people live together for a few years and get a real idea of what it's like to live with someone rather than rush into marriage, have kids and then find out that they're not happy anymore.

[Ferguson]

Ferguson seems very reluctant to identify the source of this published nonsense.

I am reluctant for good reason. I’m not permitted to do so. My source data comes from a network that I can’t just blurt out on an internet board. Sorry, or I would. There are several articles online that speak to these reasons for divorce supporting the ones that I posted.

[Ferguson]

I'm not condemning anyone that is divorced, especially if they really made an effort to save the marriage.  I'm also agnostic so this isn't some sort of religious commentary. What I see too often are people getting married for various reasons (pregnancy, financial, stupidity) and just assuming that if it doesn't work out they'll get a divorce.  I'd rather see people live together for a few years and get a real idea of what it's like to live with someone rather than rush into marriage, have kids and then find out that they're not happy anymore.

Amen. Then there are some people that truly believe that children will fix a bad marriage. How ignorant and selfish is that?

[RFKFREAK]

I'm not condemning anyone that is divorced, especially if they really made an effort to save the marriage.  I'm also agnostic so this isn't some sort of religious commentary.

What I see too often are people getting married for various reasons (pregnancy, financial, stupidity) and just assuming that if it doesn't work out they'll get a divorce.  I'd rather see people live together for a few years and get a real idea of what it's like to live with someone rather than rush into marriage, have kids and then find out that they're not happy anymore.

I think you can add because people love each other to that list of various reasons.

I am reluctant for good reason. I’m not permitted to do so. My source data comes from a network that I can’t just blurt out on an internet board.

Sorry, or I would. There are several articles online that speak to these reasons for divorce supporting the ones that I posted.

So, it's not something that's published and in the public domain?

[Ferguson]

I think you can add because people love each other to that list of various reasons. So, it's not something that's published and in the public domain?

These are from journals. Excerpts, quotes and portions can be found online, sure. Many times you’ll see the citing references that identify the source at the end of article, especially if the article is from a noteworthy website. I am not permitted to reference the actual journal and I will not cite an associate on an internet board. I would like to leave it at that.

[RFKFREAK]

These are from journals. Excerpts, quotes and portions can be found online, sure. Many times you’ll see the citing references that identify the source at the end of article, especially if the article is from a noteworthy website. I am not permitted to reference the actual journal and I will not cite an associate on an internet board. I would like to leave it at that.

Seems sort of pointless to make a statement, imply that it's backed up by some data but being unwilling to cite that data to let others review it.

[saevel25]

Seems sort of pointless to make a statement, imply that it's backed up by some data but being unwilling to cite that data to let others review it.

I agree. It is strange he said that his sources are from published sources yet he's not willing or able to reference them. If not then how are they published?

[Mr. Desmond]

I agree. It is strange he said that his sources are from published sources yet he's not willing or able to reference them. If not then how are they published?

Try this ... it has many of the cited reasons:

http://www.divorce.usu.edu/files/uploads/lesson3.pdf

There are some well known factors that put people at higher risk for divorce: marrying at a very early age, less education and income, living together before marriage, a premarital pregnancy, no religious affiliation, coming from a divorced family, and feelings of insecurity. The most common reasons people give for their divorce are lack of commitment, too much arguing, infidelity, marrying too young, unrealistic expectations, lack of equality in the relationship, lack of preparation for marriage, and abuse. Some of these problems can be fixed and divorce prevented. Commitment is having a long-term view of the marriage that helps us not get overwhelmed by the problems and challenges day to day.

When there is high commitment in a relationship, we feel safer and are willing to give more for the relationship to succeed. Commitment is clearly a factor in why some couples stay together and others divorce. Divorce is necessary at times, and it may even help to preserve the moral boundaries of marriage. But parents have a responsibility to do all that they reasonably can to preserve and repair a marriage, especially when the reasons for divorce are not the most serious ones. Barriers to leaving a marriage, such as financial worries, can keep marriages together in the short run. However, unless there is improvement in the relationship, eventually the barriers are usually not enough to keep a marriage together in the long run.

[Shorty]

These are from journals. Excerpts, quotes and portions can be found online, sure. Many times you’ll see the citing references that identify the source at the end of article, especially if the article is from a noteworthy website. I am not permitted to reference the actual journal and I will not cite an associate on an internet board. I would like to leave it at that.

Oh what complete and utter bollocks.

Yes some of these reasons are found if you Google "Causes for divorce".

Again - I am thinking that the avatar is actually you. Stethoscope around the neck, white coat, Day of Our Lives style.

It's clearly some "research" reported  in some embarrassing religious journal.

Reason for divorce: : "Premarital cohabitation". What nonsense.

[Golfingdad]

As much fun as it is to pile on and criticize @Ferguson for his random list of divorce reasons ... does it really matter?

Common sense will tell anybody that there are lots of reasons people get divorced and whether or not he knows of a study that lists more common ones doesn't add any information to the facts of this thread.

We have no flipping idea why these two decided to divorce, and we likely never will.  And most of us don't even care.

[dkolo]

As much fun as it is to pile on and criticize @Ferguson for his random list of divorce reasons ... does it really matter? Common sense will tell anybody that there are lots of reasons people get divorced and whether or not he knows of a study that lists more common ones doesn't add any information to the facts of this thread. We have no flipping idea why these two decided to divorce, and we likely never will.  And most of us don't even care.

Like the third Lord of the Rings movie, this thread has had a number of logical and satisfying ending points, like this one, and yet has kept going for no particular reason. Roll credits.

[Shorty]

We have no flipping idea why these two decided to divorce, and we likely never will.  And most of us don't even care.

Quite right, but the focus has now moved to the weird research by one of Ferguson's esteemed colleagues, the identity of whom is such a closely guarded secret.

I just want someone to explain to me how  "No religious affiliation" could be  a reason for divorce, but more pressingly, an context where "Premarital cohabitation" has been cited as a reason for divorce.

I understand how someone like a celebrity can turn to Scientology and then reject their partner for not becoming a Scientologist too, but the list is just ridiculous.

Question: Why did you get divorced?

Answer 1. "Difference of opinion regarding religion"

Answer 2. "No religious affiliation".

Question: Why did you get divorced?

Answer 1. "Premarital cohabitation."

Answer 2. "We were very young when we started living together and have changed and are no longer compatible."

Which answer sounds reasonable and which one sounds nuts?