Life-threatening illnesses can disrupt even the most stable marriages, but new research suggests that men are far more likely to divorce a terminally ill spouse. Last year's tabloid revelation that presidential contender John Edwards had been caught in Full Story »
Posted by J Sinclaire - via Miller-McCune
taking a cheap shot at someone who is now a private citizen when there are others currently in pub;ic ;ife that have done the same or worse (newt, ensign, so on ) is at best poor taste. The study cited deserves much better than partisan bull.
how would the right feel, if everytime someone broke a law and covered it up the left and center called it the Nixon effect? Perhaps if everytime someone forgot they approved an unconstitutional act, they called it the Reagon effect? What if when someone got caught falsifying information to justify their actions they called it the Bush effect? All of those would be wrong, since each new screw up should be judged on its on merits.
I don't think bringing in the Edwards to prove a point benefits science. The Edwards also had a earlier tragedy in the death of their son. What was their marriage like before and after that? Was their blame? There is a great deal of stuff that goes on in a marriage. There are bargains made. What were their bargains? What were their secrets? We don't know. The writer should have stuck to the percentages i.e. the facts and left out the celebrity aspect.
This is a good article with important information for people diagnosed with a life-threatening illness. How unfortunate for John Edwards to have such a thing named for him, "The Edwards Effect". Support needs to be available from the initial diagnosis of an illness to keep families together.
Retrieving Comments
