演講題目：How understanding divorce can help your marriage
演講簡介：
在很多人心裡，離婚不隻是離婚，甚至附上了“不光彩”這樣的标簽。但正如标題所說，特定情況下，離婚對婚姻是有幫助的，在我看來恰恰能擺脫“不光彩”。
中英文字幕
"Till death do us part." When we get married, we make vows. To love, to honor, to forsake all others. Or as a friend of mine put it, "Not to leave dirty socks all over the house." We may fall short of some of our promises, some of the time, but one that will always hold true is that first one: "Till death do us part."
“直到死亡将我們分開。”當我們結婚時，會對彼此許下誓言。去愛，以之為榮，不對他人産生感情。或者像我一個朋友所說：“不要把髒襪子滿屋子亂丢。”有些時候，我們可能無法信守自己的某些諾言，有時候，有一句話應該被當作真理恪守，也就是演講開始的那句：“直到死亡将我們分開。”
Because spouses are bound together by their decisions in marriage and in divorce. So, a mentor of mine once told me, "You should always marry your second husband first." What did that mean? It didn't mean that Mr Right is somehow waiting behind door number two.
因為伴侶們始終被彼此的決定所牽絆，不論是結婚，還是離婚。我的一位導師曾告訴我：“你總是應當先和第二任丈夫結婚。”這是什麼意思？這并不說你的真命天子總會在第二次出現。
It meant that if you want to understand what makes a marriage work, you should think about how a marriage ends. Divorce makes extremely explicit what the tacit rules of marriage are. And everyone should understand those rules, because doing so can help us build better marriages from the beginning.
這句話的意思是：如果你想要了解如何能經營好一段婚姻，就應該思考一段婚姻是如何結束的。離婚非常明确地說明了婚姻的潛規則。每個人都應該了解那些規則，因為這樣做能讓我們從一開始就建立更好的婚姻基礎。
I know, it doesn't sound very romantic, but sometimes the things we do out of love can be the very things that make it hard for that love to last. I am a family-law professor. I have taught students, I've been an attorney, I'm a mediator, and I've also been divorced.
我知道這聽起來不太浪漫，但有時候我們出于愛意所做的事情可能會成為讓這段愛難以持續下去的原因。我是一名家庭法教授，我教過學生，也當過律師。我是一名調解員，我也經曆過離婚。
And I'm now happily married to my actual second husband. The reason that I think this is so important is that I think everyone should be having some of these very painful conversations that divorced people experience.
現在我和第二任丈夫有着很幸福的婚姻。我認為這件事之是以重要，是因為每個人都應該進行離婚夫婦所經曆的那些非常令人痛苦的對話。
These are painful conversations about what we contributed, what we owe, what we are willing to give, and what we give up. And also, what's important to us. Those conversations should be happening in a good marriage, not after it is broken.
這些痛苦的對話是關于我們貢獻了什麼，我們虧欠了彼此什麼，我們願意給予什麼，我們放棄了什麼，以及我們看重的是什麼。這些對話應該出現在一段良好的婚姻關系中，而非在一段婚姻破碎之後。
Because when you wait until it's broken, it's too late.But if you have them early on, they can actually help build a better marriage. Three ideas that I want to put on the table for you to consider.
因為當你等到婚姻破碎時，已經為時晚矣。但如果你提早就進行了這樣的溝通，它們其實可以幫助你建立一段更好的婚姻關系。在這裡，我想要分享三個觀點，供各位參考。
One, sacrifice should be thought of as a fair exchange. Two, there's no such thing as free childcare. And three, what's yours probably becomes ours. So let me talk about each of these ideas.
第一，應将犧牲看作是一種公平交換。第二，沒有免費育兒這回事。第三，“你”的東西可能會變成“我們”的東西。下面，讓我逐一進行解釋。
The first one, sacrifice should be a fair exchange.Take the example of Lisa and Andy. Lisa decides to go to medical school early in the marriage, and Andy works to support them. And Andy works night shifts in order to do that, and he also gives up a great job in another city. He does this out of love.
第一條，應将犧牲看作是一種公平交換。拿麗莎和安迪的關系舉例。麗莎決定在婚後不久就去醫學院讀書，而安迪則上班來維持家用。安迪還需要上晚班，才能掙到足夠的錢，他也是以不得不放棄了在另一座城市一個絕佳的工作機會。他願意這麼做是出于對妻子的愛。
But of course, he also understands that Lisa's degree will benefit them both in the end. But after a few years, Andy becomes neglected and resentful. And he starts drinking heavily. And Lisa looks at her life, and she looks at Andy and she thinks, "This is not the bargain I wanted to make."
但當然，他也明白，麗莎的學曆從長遠來看會讓他們彼此受益。但幾年後，安迪感到備受忽視，心懷不滿。之後他開始酗酒。麗莎回顧了她的生活，又看了看安迪，她想：“這不是我原本想要的生活。”
A couple of years go by, she graduates from medical school, and she files for a divorce. So in my perfect world, some kind of marriage mediator would have been able to talk to them before Lisa went to medical school.
幾年後，麗莎從醫學院畢業，同時提出了離婚申請。在我的完美世界裡，一些婚姻調解員本能夠在麗莎去讀醫之前就和他們進行一場談話。
And at that point, that mediator might have asked, "How exactly does fair exchange work? What does it look like in your marriage? What are you willing to give and what are you willing to owe?"
那時候，調解員可能會問，“在你們的這個決定中，公平交換展現在哪裡？它在你們的婚姻中看起來如何？你們願意付出什麼，又願意虧欠什麼？”
So in a divorce, Lisa now probably is going to owe Andy financial support for years. And Andy... no amount of financial support is going to make him feel compensated for what he gave up and the lost traction in his career. If the two of them had thought about their split early on,what might have gone differently?
在這場離婚中，麗莎可能要欠安迪多年的經濟支援。而對于安迪，不論多少經濟上的幫助，都無法補償他為麗莎放棄的事業，以及他失去的職業生涯推動力。如果他們兩個人之前就考慮過可能會分開，事情可能會發生怎樣的改變？
Well, it's possible that Lisa would have decided that she would take loans or work a part-time job in order to support her own tuition,so that Andy wouldn't have had to bear the entire burden for that.
麗莎或許會決定申請貸款，或者做臨時工來支付自己的學費，這樣安迪就不用負擔學費的所有壓力。
And Andy might have decided to take that job in that other city, and maybe the two of them would have commuted for a couple of years, while Lisa finished her degree. So let's take another couple, Emily and Deb.They live in a big city, they have two children, they both work.
而安迪可能會決定接受另一座城市的工作機會，或許在麗莎拿到學位之前他倆要異地幾年。
Emily gets a job in a small town, and they decide to move there together. And Dequits her job to look after the children full-time. Deb leaves behind an extended family, her friends and a job that she really liked. And in that small town, Deb starts to feel isolated and lonely.
我們再看一下另一對伴侶，艾米莉和黛布的例子。她們住在一個大城市，有兩個孩子，兩個人都在工作。艾米莉獲得了在某個小鎮的工作機會，于是她們決定一起搬到那裡。黛布辭了職，全職照看小孩。她離開了她的大家庭，她的朋友，以及一份喜歡的工作。在那個小城鎮裡，黛布開始感到孤獨與寂寞。
And 10 years later, Deb has an affair,and things fall apart. Now, the marriage mediator who would have come in before they moved and before Deb quit her job might have asked them, "What do your choices about childcare do to the obligations you have to each other?
10年後，黛布有了婚外情，然後她們的婚姻破裂了。假設婚姻調解員在她們搬家以及黛布辭職前同樣介入，調解員可能會問她們：“你們對育兒方式的選擇會怎樣影響到你們之間的義務權衡？
How do they affect your relationship? Because you have to remember that there is no such thing as free childcare. If the two of them had thought about their split beforehand,what would have gone differently?
會如何影響到你們的關系？因為你們得記住一點，沒有免費育兒這種東西。”如果她們兩個人先前考慮過可能會分手，事情可能會發生怎樣的改變？
Well, maybe Deb would have realized a little better how much her family and her friends were important to her precisely in what she was taking on which is full-time parenthood.
黛布可能會更清楚地意識到她的家人和朋友對她來講是如此重要，尤其是在她選擇成為全職家長的這種情況下。
Perhaps Emily, in weighing the excitement of the new job offer, might have also thought about what that would mean for the cost to Deb, and what would be owed to Deb as a result of her taking on full-time parenthood. So, let's go back to Lisa and Andy.
或許艾米莉，沉浸在獲得新工作的興奮之餘，可能也會考慮到她的決定對黛布來說意味着多大的犧牲，而且由于黛布成為全職家長，艾米莉會虧欠黛布多少。讓我們再回到麗莎和安迪的例子。
Lisa had an inheritance from her grandmother before the marriage. And when they got married, they bought a home, and Lisa put that inheritance toward a down payment on that home. And then Andy of course worked to make the mortgage payments. And all of their premarital and marital property became joined.
麗莎在婚前從她祖母那裡獲得了一筆遺産。當他們結婚買房子的時候，麗莎用那筆遺産付了首付。之後自然就由安迪工作來付後面的房貸。他們所有的婚前與婚後财産都合并了。
That inheritance is now marital property.So, in a split, what's going to happen? They're going to have to sell the house and split the proceeds, or one of them can buy the other out. So this marriage mediator, if they had talked to them before all of this happened, that person would have asked,"What do you want to keep separate and what do you want to keep together?
那筆遺産現在變成了共同财産。那麼如果他們離婚，會發生什麼？他們将不得不賣了房子，平分賣房所得，或者他們其中一人可以買下整座房子。如果在這一切發生之前，他們和婚姻調解員談話，調解員會問：“你想保留什麼作為個人财産，你想保留什麼作為夫妻共同财産？
And how does that choice actually support the security of the marriage? Because you have to remember that what's yours, probably, will become ours,unless you actually are mindful and take steps to do otherwise."
你們的選擇會如何確定婚姻安全？因為你們得記住，如今是你的，可能之後會變成你們的，除非你真的非常注意，并采取應對和防範措施。”
So if they had thought about their split,maybe they would have decided differently, maybe Lisa would have thought, "Maybe the inheritance can stay separate," and saved for a day when they might actually need it.
如果他們考慮過可能會分開，他們或許會做出不同的決定。或許麗莎會想：“也許這筆遺産可以作為我的個人所有财産，先存着，等到以後可能會用到的那一天。”
And maybe the mortgage that they took on wouldn't have been as onerous, and maybe Andy wouldn't have had to work so hard to make those payments. And maybe he would have become less resentful. Maybe they would have lived in a smaller house and been content to do that.
或許他們不會申請如此繁重的房貸，這樣安迪就不用如此辛苦地工作來還房貸，或許他就不會變得那麼憤懑。他們可能會住在小一點的房子裡，并為此感到快樂滿足。
The point is, if they had had a divorce-conscious discussion about what to keep separate, their marriage might have been more connected and more together. Too often in marriage, we make sacrifices,and we demand them without reckoning their cost.
重點是，如果他們曾進行過帶有離婚意識的讨論，關于什麼作為個人私有，他們婚姻的聯系會變得更緊密，歸屬感會變得更強烈。我們在婚姻中總是犧牲自我，我們也要求伴侶做出犧牲，卻未曾思考各自所付出的代價。
But there is wisdom in looking at the price tags attached to our marital decisions in just the way that divorce law teaches us to do. What I want is for people to think about their marital bargains through the lens of divorce.
但以離婚法教導我們的方式來看待我們的婚姻決定所附帶的代價，是很明智的。我希望人們能夠通過離婚的角度來思考婚姻的得失，
And to ask, "How is marriage a sacrifice but an exchange of sacrifice? How do we think about our exchange?" Second: "How do we think about childcare and deal with the fact that there is no such thing as free childcare?" "How do we deal with the fact that some things can be separate, and some things can be together, and if we don't think about it,then it will all be part of the joint enterprise."
并且自問：“如何将婚姻的犧牲變為一種互相犧牲的交換？我們該如何思考彼此的交換？”第二：“我們該如何思考育兒，并且面對沒有免費育兒的這個事實？”“我們該如何處理以下的事實，有些東西能分開，而有些東西能合并到一起，倘若我們不思考這件事，那麼以後所有的東西都将共有。”
So basically, what I want to leave you with is that in marriage or divorce, people should think about the way that "till death do us part" marriage is forever.
是以總的來說，我想要傳達給各位的是，不論在一段婚姻還是一場離婚中，人們都應該謹記，“直到死亡将我們分開”的婚姻方式代表着永恒。
Thank you.
謝謝。
視訊、演講稿均來源于TED官網