Thaler & Sunstein believe that marriage should be separate from government law. The current legal status of marriage entitles participants to several benefits, some economic and noneconomic.
These benefits relate to:
- Taxes
- Entitlements (such as FMLA)
- Inheritance & Death Benefits
- Ownership Benefits
- Surrogate Decision Making
- Evidentiary Privileges (spousal testimony)
Thaler & Sunstein suggest treating this partnership like any other business partnership and privatizing the marriage industry.
The history of marriage in the U.S. has been discriminatory against certain racial and sexual groups. Marriage was initially used as government licensing for both having sexual relationships and child rearing. People are frequently doing both of these activities outside of marriage in today's society, making the role of the government less important in regards to marriage.
Official marriages were most important for controlling a person's ability to leave a marriage. Women and children were often very vulnerable when a man, especially if the only earner, exited a marriage. Thaler and Sunstein suggest that good choice architecture is critical for supporting the victims of an abandoned marriage. Some potential solutions Thaler & Sunstein offer include:
- Prenuptial Agreements for All (default for those who don't make active choices)
- Establish a Standard Practice by the Law
- Primary caretaker will continue as such, and receive financial assistance.
- Joint Custody
- Automatic Enrollment in Child Support (no opt-out option).
These policies will help prevent disputes among divorcees. With an anchor or range of options, couples are likely to come to a fair outcome for both parties more efficiently.
A. The authors have an accurate and fair depiction of human behavior when analyzing economic decision-making. Many couples entering a marriage are unrealistically optimistic about their risk of divorce; therefore, they don't plan for this potential risk. With the right level of planning at the beginning of a marriage, the ending of a marriage will end more amicably with less time and money wasted. The choice architecture provided by the authors gives everyone an anchor, with the choice to develop their own or choose a frequently used alternative.
B. Libertarian paternalism does apply to this situation, as the authors suggest preserving the choice of the individuals. They also provide a default option for everyone and flexibility to find the choice that works best within each individual marriage for those individuals not interested in the default option. Decisions related to divorce are difficult and currently offer an enormous amount of alternatives. These decisions are difficult for humans to make, and with a little nudging, the divorce process can be made easier, speedier, and cheaper for all parties involved.
