To put it mildly, Kahn was something less of a hero to the members of his own family. For Nathaniel Kahn, the director of a terrific new documentary called My Architect, which opened this week in New York and will appear in cities across the country over the next few months, Kahn was primarily just a distant father�an occasional, unreliable presence. Nathaniel, who was 11 when his father died, was one of Kahn's three children, each by a different woman. The architect married Esther Israeli in 1930, and their daughter, Sue Ann, was born in 1940. Kahn later began an affair with Anne Tyng, an architect in his Philadelphia office; that relationship produced a second daughter, Alexandra. Finally there was Harriet Pattison, a pretty landscape designer who had Nathaniel, Lou's only son, in 1962. Kahn could never bring himself to leave Esther, though, and they remained married until his death. The public didn't know much about this at the time, though the three families, who lived within a few miles of one another, did. ("Besides his wife," his obituary in the New York Times reported simply, "Mr. Kahn leaves a daughter, Sue Ann.") According to Nathaniel, he and his half-sisters didn't cross paths until the day of their father's funeral.

In one New England state, a travel company is exploiting our country's epidemic divorce rate by offering travel packages to the Caribbean, where quickie divorces can be bought. In a recent press release, the Fresh Pond Travel Divorce Department trumpets the claim that "Haiti and the Dominican Republic grant immediate divorces to foreign nationals. Many clients, especially those already with a 'significant other,' prefer to actually make the trip to the Caribbean instead of divorcing in their local courts, so they can share a romantic vacation during an emotional time."

Yes, you read that correctly; Fresh Pond's stagnant idea is to take your adulterous partner with you for a sunny weekend of sand, sun and separation. Fresh Pond, which bills itself as "The world's largest arranger of foreign divorces," says divorce in the Caribbean is "fast, inexpensive and totally uncomplicated." Totally uncomplicated? How can the destruction of the vows of marriage ever be uncomplicated?

Psychotherapy -- even couples' counseling -- can be dangerous to your marriage. "Let the buyer beware," said William J. Doherty, director of the University of Minnesota's Marriage and Family Therapy Program. "A dirty little secret" is that couples therapy may be the hardest form of therapy, and most therapists are not very good at it. But most discussions of marital problems occur in individual psychotherapy, "where a lot of the damage to marriage goes on." UPI spoke to Doherty by phone from his St. Paul office, and he supplied copies of three of his articles, which form the basis of this story. Except where there is abuse or danger, Doherty tries to advocate for the marriage and support the possibility that a couple can salvage it.

"But I'm not going to fight with one hand tied behind my back. I don't believe in unilateral disarmament" ... Mr Kerry announced his move at a stop outside a diner here. He said "this has not been the easiest" week in the campaign. Then he added, "But I've been in a lot of tough fights before and I've fought back and I've won."

Lazin wisely showed how Shakur's fatherless childhood dictated how he evolved as a person. The death of fatherhood in many black families, Tupac says, has repercussions for the next generation: ``You need a man to teach you how to be a man.''

Supermodel Kate Moss has publicly declared she has no desire to marry her longtime lover and father of her child ... The 29-year-old model is also reported to have formed a close friendship with singer Bobby Gillespie, frontman for the band Primal Scream.

What if luring people into conditions of emotional stagnation and deadened desires were actually functional for society? Consider the norms of modern marriage. Here is a social institution devoted to maximising submission and minimising freedom, habituating a populace to endless compliance with an infinite number of petty rules and interdictions in exchange for love and companionship. Perhaps a citizenry schooled in renouncing desire - and whatever quantities of imagination and independence it comes partnered with - would in many respects be socially advantageous. Note that the conditions of marital stasis are remarkably convergent with those of a cowed workforce and a docile electorate ... In this respect, perhaps rising divorce rates are not such bad news. The British Office for National Statistics blames couples' high expectations for the rise in divorce. But are high expectations really such a bad thing? What if we all worked less and expected more - not only from our marriages or in private life, but in all senses, from our jobs, our politicians, our governments? What if wanting happiness and satisfaction, and changing the things that needed changing to attain it, wasn't regarded as "selfish" or "unrealistic", and do we expect so much from our mates these days because we get so little back everywhere else? What if the real political question was what should we be able to expect from society and its institutions? And if other social contracts and vows beside marriage were also up for re-examination, what other ossified social institutions might be next on the hit list?

The seven-year study of 37,000 employees at 1,500 workplaces provides empirical evidence that working with people of the opposite sex is hazardous to your marriage. Working with co-workers who are all of the opposite sex increases the divorce rate by a startling 70 percent, compared with an office filled with co-workers of the same sex. Whether the co-workers were single or married had no impact, says author Yvonne Aberg, now a research fellow at Nuffield College, Oxford University, England ... Divorce is contagious, too. A married person is 43 percent more likely to get divorced if one-third of his or her co-workers are recently divorced people of the opposite sex, than if none of the co-workers were recently divorced. The effect shrank over time, suggesting it's the act of divorce, rather than simply being divorced, that sways others most, says Dr. Aberg, who did her research at Stockholm University. The study was confined to co-workers of compatible age (five to 15 years younger or older, depending on sex). By showing that office divorces can break out in what a separate study in Ohio called "a measles pattern," the research highlights the need for working couples to take steps to vaccinate their marriages.

A ruling last week against same-sex couples marrying in New Jersey may give impetus to legislative creation of a new status of domestic partnership. Not only did the judge put the matter squarely in the hand of the Legislature, she gave lawmakers a blueprint for the type of civil-status law that would be accorded full faith and credit nationwide.

Burgess has been interested in the recent debate - sparked by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Pru Goward - linking shared care of children during the marriage with men's prospects of achieving joint custody after a divorce. Burgess mentions that countries which have done the most to encourage new dads to care for their babies also tend to be the countries where divorced men see most of their children. "It is interesting that Norway, where non-resident fathers probably see more of their children than equivalent fathers anywhere else in the world, has designed its parental leave policies specifically to foster gender equity at home as well as at work, giving both men and women real opportunities and encouragement in both spheres," she says. But in Australia there's little sign of any major shift from the common pattern of men putting in long working hours to enable their partners time out to care for young children - with families fitting this pattern showing the highest life satisfaction, recent data from the "Household Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia Survey" shows. These fathers are taking a risk.

"I'll take care of it," said an uncomfortable-looking Letterman Tuesday night during her guest appearance. "It's just that my first marriage -- and God bless my first wife -- it ended in such a. . ." "Acrimonious way?" Madonna interrupted. "It was contentious, but it was all me, it was all my fault" he said. You haven't grown since then?" she asked. "Well, I've had a child, that's progress don't you think?" he asked. "It depends what you do with him," said Madonna. Later, when Letterman tried to cut to a commercial, Madonna interrupted and pressed him further for an answer about his marital situation. "It's coming," he said. "You'll read all about it ... it's unfair I think, to the child. You don't want the child to be raised a bastard!"

In the Lynch case, cute, blonde, young, and single is what counts. It meant no one had to tell unpleasant stories about a single mom leaving children behind to go to war. In the NBC movie Lynch's best friend, single mom Lori Piestewa, who is later killed, has taped pictures of her two young children to the dashboard of the truck she is driving. (Somehow that doesn't sound like a Hollywood gimmick. It rings true with every mom I know. ) This is who we are deliberately and unnecessarily sending into harm's way? Single moms with pictures of their young children taped inside their army trucks? NBC probably didn't realize the ugly questions they were raising with that depiction. Or what about single mom Casaundra Grant, who lost her legs in Iraq after they were pinned under a tank? Who has even heard of her? Where is the Shoshana Johnson story, also a POW, later rescued, and a single mom with little ones? Even Hollywood knows that the "single-warrior-mom-with-little-kids" angle just doesn't quite sit right with mainstream America ... After Lynch's rape revelation, I heard one feminist commentator claim that as awful as it is, it should not be used to keep women from serving in the frontlines of America's military. Why the heck not? As Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, points out, "women face a greater risk than do men of brutality, including rape, if they are captured by the enemy." This is not rocket science. Has anybody heard the term "raping and pillaging" used in warfare before? Yes, if the Fedayeen are coming up my driveway, my daughters and I will fight them to the end. But the notion that we would deliberately, and unnecessarily, be put in their crosshairs is not an idea a civilized nation should tolerate. But it is being tolerated � even promoted and celebrated. And that may be, more than anything else, what Jessica Lynch Week is all about.

Bryan Leach LAW '05 said when he wrote his dissertation at Oxford University Graduate School, he realized there was something wrong with today's society -- the lack of a father's presence in many families. A father's role, he said, is one of the most important ones in keeping future adults off the streets, drugs, welfare, and ultimately out of jail. This realization led Leach to found Present Fathers, a community organization that helps strengthen the role of fathers in their children's lives through regularly sponsored field trips and activities. The program creates bi-weekly activities for fathers and their children. All activities are funded through the New Haven Family Alliance, the Yale Law School and Dwight Hall, among other contributors.

MERCER, PA�Heather Lentz's 11-month imaginary romance with bad-boy heartthrob Colin Farrell has ended, the 25-year-old paralegal announced Monday.

� the question is, if girls like the idea of a traditional date so much then why aren�t more guys asking them out on these types of dates? � I asked a couple of guys why guys on college campuses generally don�t ask girls out on casual dates. One of the answers I got was that the guy doesn�t ask because he is afraid that a girl will interpret the request as a sign that the guy is interested in being in a �serious� (joined at the hip) relationship. These requests seem to be interpreted in one of two ways, either the guy assumes that the girl will immediately want this kind of relationship, and it scares the guys off or the girls tend to assume the guy wants too serious of a relationship and so she says no, because she doesn�t want to be �joined at the hip� either. I think it�s a tragedy that traditional dating is seen as a trigger for a scary, potentially suffocating relationship. Why can�t it just be a way for a guy and girl to get to know one another better and sort of feel their way out as they go along? If they have a good time, fine, then they should go out again. If not, no big deal, it�s one date and no one�s feelings should be hurt too badly. Another thing that I heard from a guy was that a guy�s fear of rejection keeps them from asking a girl out as a way to get to know them better. A guy would rather get to know her well before asking her out on a date, so that they would be less likely to be turned down if they do decide to ask her out on a traditional date. They like to feel a little more confident about their chances before asking. My thoughts on this are that either it is the girl�s fault that guys are afraid�maybe too many nice guys have been turned down or maybe the guys just need to be more willing to take a chance.

Now new research from Oxford University, based on interviews with married and cohabiting partners, questions whether there is anything unique about the institution of marriage which justifies its special status. The study shows considerable similarities between married and cohabiting partners in the way they see their relationships and behave within them. Both tended to think more in terms of "trust", "respect" and "consideration" than of "rights" for themselves. For both, the relationship changed and the commitment deepened with the arrival of children. Many of the married partners thought their union would be for life, but so did many of the cohabitees. Equally, some of the husbands and wives, like some of the unmarried partners, accepted that their relationship probably would not last "till death us do part." Researchers Mavis Maclean and John Eekelaar of the Oxford University centre for family law and policy, say the results "should lead to caution over claims that marriage is uniquely capable of producing certain 'goods'." They add: "The picture is more complex. Whether marriage delivers those goods more successfully than when people live together without marrying is also hard to substantiate".

Over 225 years ago, American colonialists overcome a subservient mentality, organized their resistance, and defeated the British tyranny. In 2003, fathers around the world face a new oppression. This tyranny cloaks its actions with the high-minded phrase "best interests of the child" -- which in practice really means "sole interests of the mother." So stay tuned. Because on October 20, Fathers 4 Justice issued an 40-day Ultimatum to the family courts: "enforce the right of children to have a meaningful, loving relationship with both parents," or "face a dramatic escalation in our campaign." Judges, take note -- that ultimatum expires on November 30.

After almost 40 years of focusing primarily on the education of preschoolers, Head Start in El Paso has created a program to help families develop a good home environment where children can learn without the struggle of abuse or neglect. "We believe in enhancing the lives of the children that we serve," said Margarita Baca-Gomez, assistant director of Head Start. "We want to bring the perspective that somewhere down the line it has been lost that marriage is forever and it is a commitment." ... The initiative, which continues for couples every other week for the next three months for Head Start parents in El Paso, has been developed in conjunction with the Washington-based Center for the Study on Social Policy.

We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights - older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.

The entire fabric of the Constitution and the purposes that clearly underlie its specific guarantees demonstrate that the rights to marital privacy and to marry and raise a family are of similar order and magnitude as the fundamental rights specifically protected.

The fact that no particular provision of the Constitution explicitly forbids the State from disrupting the traditional relation of the family -- a relation as old and as fundamental as our entire civilization -- surely does not show that the Government was meant to have the power to do so.

For me, marriage forms the basic unit of the family. Families are formed at weddings. They are sustained through marriages. Children are additions to the family. I've talked with some liberals lately. From their perspective a "wonderful mother" or a "hard working single mother" is all a child needs. Marriage is an optional upgrade from the basic family unit. Just like leather seats or four wheel drive are optional upgrades on a car. The car will run just fine without them. The upgrades make the car more comfortable or more safe, but they aren't really necessary. For liberals marriage is an optional upgrade from a single parent household. The family is more safe and comfortable when parents are married, but if marriage doesn't happen the family runs just fine.

"Marriageability" fits under this paradigm because as an optional upgrade one can easily do a cost/benefit analysis on the upgrade to marriage. Is it really worth the investment? Can I live without it? Do I need it? Can I make a better investment elsewhere? I know you know this already, but this is why marriage seems like such a superfluous option to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. And it isn't just liberals. Lots of pro-life conservatives are also convinced that mother and child alone can function full well.

The difference for me is that I see marriage as essential, just like brakes or tires on a car. When marriages fail to form or sustain themselves, things fall apart and don't run very smoothly. Yes mothers can adjust, but not easily because they are missing something essential for full functioning and safety. Which is why I am so bothered by the delays in funding for marriage initiatives. I see this as a public safety and health issue that deserves to be addressed by all sectors, including government.

Absent research showing that government-funded marriage promotion programs are more effective than the uses to which these funds are now being put, such a large amount of federal funds should not be dedicated to such a narrow range of marriage promotion programs.

Last week, she stopped by to ask me a question: "Have you ever heard of a divorce shower?" At first, I winced. I couldn't imagine throwing a big party after a divorce. She smiled a little shyly. "A friend suggested that a divorce shower might be exactly what I need right now," she said. Then she explained.

The parents in a newly formed stepfamily frequently want to begin their new life together in a new house, untainted by the ghosts of their first marriages. Just as frequently, their children have no enthusiasm for the project. They desperately want to be living back in their old home with both biological parents. Against this emotional backdrop, trying to get the family to work together on anything can be challenging. That's especially the case with a new house that the children may regard as a constant reminder of everything they have lost -- their old family, their old neighborhood and their old friends.

Rachel Katz is not the exception, she's part of a growing trend of 50, 60, and 70-something year olds who are divorcing after decades of marriage ... According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2001, a record number of senior citizens, 2.2 million, were either divorced or separated.

Over the next few months, Florida will begin promoting healthy marriage as a salve for the state's most complex and expensive ills -- child abuse, crime, poverty. In doing so, it joins a national experiment that has some praising government's progressiveness and others squirming uncomfortably at the thought of public policy entwined so intimately with personal choice. From the federal government on down, politicians are pointing to research that shows children who grow up with married parents in a loving relationship are at lower risk for behavioral and psychological problems, dropping out of school and becoming teen parents. They also are less likely to be poor, a major risk factor for such problems as drug abuse, child abuse and homelessness ... The $1.7 million in federal grants on its way to Florida mostly will be aimed at families involved in the child-welfare system. The money will go to three organizations -- University of Central Florida, Big Bend Community Based Care in Tallahassee and PAIRS. The organizations will do research as well as train social service staff in public, private nonprofit and faith-based groups on how to counsel married and cohabitating couples ... Last month , a legislatively established Commission on Marriage and Family Support Initiatives met for the first time. The group is charged with increasing public awareness of divorce, violence, poverty and substance abuse -- and developing public policy to address those problems.