“Predatory Industry Practices”
“Insufficient checks and balances”
These phrases comprise the apex of constitutional injury chronicled in the documentary Divorce Corp. The film deviates from the underlying peril of a Constitutional CRISIS in action and focuses on communicating the extent of the abuses of the public in addition to generalized public ignorance.
However the film is FAR from insulting toward the general public with first & second hand knowledge of the Family Court system and neither is it a blanket ideological assault against legal and judicial practitioners. Perhaps no other legal arena exposes the challenges and perils with logic agreement as does this documentary. The film doesn’t chronicle the burdens shifted to State agencies or the political climate these agencies must operate in when faced with picking up the pieces of individual lives of predators and prey. Add in the social “slacktivism” associated with grassroots communication and the ideological frankness is what allows the film a balanced reach with facts, evidence and appeal. A deeper analysis for students and the general public certainly has been given “wiggle room” due to the film and the film continues to reach new audiences daily. The film doesn’t lack for “evidence based” support for it’s claims of both individual and constitutional injury across The United States and it’s Territories.
The film made me stop and reread a section from Christopher Krebs A Most Dangerous Book: Tactius Germania from The Roman Empire to The Third Reich. Krebs passes on his own insight into public oratory and the legal systems DEPENDENCE upon it. Krebs shares a collective review on Tactius mastery of insuination, narrative structure and outright gossip. It was the films repeated return to Equity that brought Krebs and Tactius to mind. Divorce Corp strikes a pose in its portrayal of what Equity OUGHT TO BE as it chronicles battle after battle between provider and dependent(s.) The posturing that implicates the system and its representatives as a problem allows the narrative to showcase the effect of Family Court practices on the Constitution and the public without OVERUSE of the premise of a Constitutional Crisis. The crisis viewed as a disease is frightening. From this position repetition of social abuses arguably mirror the mind numbing trauma of propaganda for those inside the circus and insinuates the gaslighting cultural elements involved in abusing both the public and legal systems. The film is highly critical of Family Court as an industry and as a centerpiece of reform it walked the line so to speak. But the numbers speak so loudly you can’t entertain anything else. While it does define key concepts such as “Family court is a Court of Equity” it does not outline a plan of reform or even action on screen. Communicating the problem is so pressing and the need for ethical response so great, that communicating the basic structural concepts alongside their magnitude takes precedence.
That’s all it can do.
And that IS the point.