For simplicity purposes, this is a bare bones version of my 10 step comprehensive solution to address the current status quo in regards to the above. Basically, by Nature, we are social creatures thus naturally seek companionship. However, given the current atmosphere, many have determined that this is a futile venture, based on a simple pro vs con analysis, therefore this is not debatable for them. A better system is needed hence this solution. My solutions are based on a turn-key operation, definitely not as a piece-meal one, it won’t work otherwise. Just like a car without a steering wheel will fail to take one from point A to B. I tried my best to be as neutral, objective and as fair as I could, so I focused on what is best for all concerned, and to be honest it was not easy, given that I’m a staunched anti-feminist and a MGTOW to boot.

So here it goes: 1) Remove Family Justice from the justice system. Why? Given that the principle of said family no longer exists, it follows that the status-quo is redundant.

2) Implement an enforceable Mandatory Prenup, (based solely on power of signatures involved, but subject to further mediation), ideally at a Constitutional level. Why? This is a master key, further details to follow. Because as far as assets; what is my is mine, what is yours is yours, and what is ours is ours. Because as far as children; it solves the individual’s choice for life/abortions, be it maternal & paternal. (Aka, couple solves both concepts of; ‘my body my choice’ & “my wallet, my choice).

3) Make Paternal Fraud a crime. Why? Because by society standards, all fraud should be a crime. To encourage transparency from on-set. Also to comply with UN Human Rights.

4) Enforce Parental Alienation as cruelty to children. Why? Self-explanatory and to comply with UN.

5) Abolish alimony. Why? Because it is robbery to pay for something that one neither has nor wants. (Item 2 provides solutions).

6) A default and enforceable 50/50 ‘ownership’ of kids to both parents. Why? Because that is what the majority of society wants. Couple decides details (Item 2). To comply with UN.

7) Abolish mandatory child-support. Why? To comply with 50/50 rule. (Item2 covers solutions).

8) Remove Domestic Violence, ‘Rape Culture” and other recent advocated initiatives out of the legal system into a Mediation Health Based System (MHBS). A system for couple problem solving, consisting of a relevant small group of professionals, with limited tribunal powers. Why? This is the other master key within the Contract. Because in general, most people are good, thus their personal problems belong in mediation, not confrontation. The MHBS would mediate, decide and recommend appropriately. Note that this clause could also cease to exist once the Contract is terminated.

9) Rights to abortions both physical and/or financial. (Item 2 offers solutions). Why? Because it is gender equality.

10) Mandatory cheap, non-intrusive DNA tests at birth. Why? To protect the child in regards to health issues, and to comply with UN.

The above turn-key acts as a business agreement, one that the signatory decided for themselves and if it lasts, great, but if not, the agreement would cease to exist on the spot without court involvement, stress or delays (It would also save billions to taxpayers). The neutral MHBS would play a major role in mediating, recommending, treatment thus problem solving, or to further address extra ordinary circumstances.
Existing relationships could be grand-father until one party applied thru MHBS team. Accountants would establish a financial starting point for the Pre-Nup, as decided by the signatory parties.

Item 2 Key points Names Involved (individually responsible for record keeping); Date ending *Date start-up; Location; Contract bank account number; a budget of all contributions, eligible expenses, portions of; daily and overall duties and responsibilities; parental choices and responsibilities; abortion and ‘wallet’ rights; intimacy frequency, preferences, exclusions; amendments. (All these could change at any given time as amendments just by signed mutual consent, without the need for further external involvement).

Like I said, this is bare bones of a comprehensive but neutral approach to address the above title. Feel free to test me with your hypothetical situation and I will try to respond accordingly. Who would this benefit? Society, the couples and their families, taxpayers, and to some degree banks, accountants and professionals. Losers = Justice System and self-interest groups, but I, no doubt “we society”, can live with that.