Here is an interesting proposal. A new way to look at marriage. Instead of till death this writer asks why not make it a renewable contract. It makes sense in some ways. After all...might it make more people actually work at renewing and maintaining their marriages?

So, what do you think?

After all...statistics clearly show conventional heterosexual marriage is not working as intended.

Marry with a fixed-term contract, not for 'til death do us part

ACCORDING to the Australian Bureau of Statistics it appears that lifelong marriages are becoming a thing of the past. Few marry for life any more.

Thirty-two per cent of divorces involved separation within the first five years of marriage, and 22 per cent within five to nine years of marriage.

Have your say: What's the ideal term for a marriage contract?

We have fixed term-contracts for the buying of property, cars and insurance, but there is only one contract available for marriage and it is for life. Is it time to consider introducing fixed-term marriage contracts?

The fixed-term contract is not meant to be a "quick fix" or an "easy out".

It would allow for the celebration of the renewal of vows after a five-year or 10-year term and encourage partners to work towards maintaining a good relationship – in effect, it opens communication akin to a marriage performance review.

Or it would allow for the marriage to be dissolved by completing an acceptable contract term, without the shame and stigma associated with the failure of a marriage.

So why bother getting married at all? Because inherently we want to believe that we are making a commitment for life. Surely no one enters a marriage with a view to "give it a shot".

We stand in front of friends, family, even God and promise "until death do us part" and, at the time, we believe it. This only adds to the sense of failure when we can't deliver this promise.

It's a simple process: the standard certificate of marriage becomes a five-year contract. The marriage celebrant would continue to retain a copy for their records; forward the certificate to the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages for the registration of the marriage; and provide the marrying couple with a copy.

The marriage licence would clearly state the start and dissolution date for the five-year term.

The marriage contract dissolves if the parties do not "apply again". This eliminates the stress of dissolving the marriage by having to reopen wounds one year later, file papers together and be issued divorce papers.

The celebration is in the renewing – what better excuse for a party and family gathering?

The marrying couple are responsible for monitoring the date of renewal, signing the renewal form, having it witnessed by a Justice of the Peace and returning the form to the Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages.

Perhaps when a couple completes a 10-year marriage term (two five-year consecutive contracts), they could opt to undertake an "eternity" contract.

And what about the children? Divorces are happening irrespective of the family unit. The proportion of divorces involving children was 49.3 per cent in 2007 (ABS). Is a fixed-term marriage contract likely to increase this statistic? Are parents more likely to stay together for the children if they have a traditional marriage licence?

According to Families in Australia: 2008 (released by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet), marriage bears a less direct relationship to having children.

By 2026, couples without children are projected by the ABS to be the most common type of family in Australia (44 per cent of all families).

We are a society that has adapted to change: divorce, work contracts, the internet, SMS text, email, digital television, water restrictions and much more.

Eventually a generation may only know of one type of marriage contract: fixed-term.

Helen Goltz, a writer and marketing consultant, has written a discussion paper on fixed-term marriage contracts