Marriage — the timeless institution, the sacred promise, the fairy-tale finale that’s supposed to last “forever.” But what if “forever” is a lie we’ve been telling ourselves for centuries? One of America’s most famous supermodels just said exactly that — and her replacement for the centuries-old vow has the potential to blow up the way we think about love.

Yes, Christie Brinkley, the 71-year-old beauty whose face once graced every magazine cover, now wants us to imagine marriage as something far less… eternal.

Her jaw-dropping suggestion? Forget “until death do us part.” Replace it with:

“Until the next five years do us part — and then we’ll decide again.”

The Shocking Proposal

Speaking to actress Kristin Davis on the Are You a Charlotte? podcast, Brinkley opened up about her very public and often painful history with marriage. Having walked down the aisle four times, she knows a thing or two about romance gone wrong — and about how brutal the legal and emotional fallout can be.

Instead of forcing couples into a lifetime contract, Brinkley proposes a renewable marriage agreement. Think of it like a driver’s license or a lease: every five years, both parties decide if they want to renew the terms or let it expire — no divorce court, no mud-slinging, no ugly asset battles.

“It would just be two people saying, ‘I still choose you’ — or not,” she explained.

The Pain Behind the Proposal

To understand why Brinkley’s idea is so explosive — and perhaps why it resonates with so many people — you have to look at her past.

Jean-François Allaux (1975–1981) — A young love that ended quietly.
Billy Joel (1985–1994) — The high-profile marriage to the legendary singer, complete with paparazzi, glamour, and eventually heartbreak.
Richard Taubman (1994–1995) — A whirlwind romance that fizzled almost immediately.
Peter Cook (1996–2006) — Ended in one of the most bitter celebrity divorces of the decade, involving allegations of infidelity and betrayal.

Despite the glamorous veneer, each marriage ended in separation — and Brinkley has admitted that in many cases, she felt “unloved” and “too trusting.” She has also confessed that some marriages she wishes she had fought harder to save, and others she wishes she’d never entered at all.

Her takeaway? That the “forever” promise may be setting us up for disappointment — and that relationships need a built-in mechanism for reflection and escape.

Why Five Years?

Five years, Brinkley says, is long enough to know if you’re truly compatible — and short enough to avoid decades of misery if you’re not. It’s a safety net, a pressure valve, and a reality check.

Couples could use those five years to put in genuine effort, knowing that the renewal date is coming. And if love is gone, they could walk away without the emotional bloodbath of divorce court.

In other words: marriage, but make it Netflix-subscription-simple to cancel.

The Backlash

Of course, not everyone is buying what Brinkley is selling. Critics argue that her idea completely undermines the stability of marriage. They say love requires more than just five-year increments — that the very beauty of “until death do us part” lies in its endurance through hard times.

They worry that making marriage easier to exit will lead to more shallow commitments, encourage people to bail at the first sign of trouble, and destroy the cultural framework that supports family life.

Some have even accused Brinkley of projecting her own failed relationships onto the rest of society — that just because marriage didn’t work for her doesn’t mean it’s broken for everyone.

The Praise

On the other hand, supporters are calling her idea revolutionary. They point to the skyrocketing divorce rates, the increasing acceptance of cohabitation over marriage, and the staggering financial and emotional toll of failed unions.

For them, a renewable marriage is a practical evolution — a way to align the institution with the reality of modern relationships. If a job can have a probationary period and a contract renewal, why can’t a marriage?

As one fan put it online: “It’s not unromantic to renew your vows every five years — it’s more romantic, because you’re actively choosing each other again.”

Questions for You, the Reader

Now here’s where it gets juicy — because this isn’t just about Christie Brinkley’s love life. It’s about your views on love, commitment, and whether “forever” is still relevant in 2025.

So let’s put it to you:

Would you be willing to sign a marriage contract that expires in five years unless renewed?
Do you believe that a fixed-term marriage could make relationships healthier — or would it just make people lazier about working through problems?
Does the romance of marriage come from its permanence, or from the daily choice to stay together?
And here’s the big one: is “until death do us part” a beautiful ideal… or a dangerous myth?

The Legal Angle

Some lawyers have pointed out that short-term renewable marriage contracts would require massive legal reform. Current divorce laws assume that marriage is indefinite unless dissolved through a court process.

If Brinkley’s model were adopted, we’d need new legal frameworks to deal with property, children, and inheritance when a marriage expires without renewal. It’s doable — prenuptial agreements and civil unions already navigate some of these waters — but it would be a cultural earthquake.

The Psychological Impact

Relationship experts are also weighing in. Some say that renewal dates could actually strengthen marriages, as couples would have a clear moment to reflect and communicate about the state of their union. Others fear that the looming “expiration” could create anxiety and undermine trust.

Would you start counting down the months until your partner could walk away? Or would you see it as motivation to keep the relationship fresh?

The Celebrity Factor

Let’s not forget — this is Christie Brinkley we’re talking about. Her name still carries the kind of fame that can ignite viral debates. And it’s not the first time she’s been outspoken about love, beauty, and aging in the public eye.

By dropping such a bombshell on a podcast, she’s turned what might have been a private opinion into a national conversation.

The Bigger Question: Is Marriage Already Broken?

Brinkley’s proposal might sound extreme — but is it really that far from where society is headed? Divorce rates remain high, people are marrying later (or not at all), and younger generations are more skeptical of lifelong commitments than ever before.

Maybe a renewable marriage contract isn’t a radical break from tradition — maybe it’s just a formal acknowledgment of what’s already happening.

Where Do You Stand?

Christie Brinkley’s suggestion is either a stroke of genius or a dangerous blow to the heart of marriage as we know it. But the truth is, the answer might depend on your own experience.

If you’ve been burned by love, the idea of a clean, drama-free exit every five years might sound like bliss. If you’ve built a life with someone over decades, you might see it as an insult to the very concept of devotion.

So we’re asking you:

Would you sign a five-year marriage contract?
Is Brinkley right — is “forever” overrated?
Or is she dead wrong — is the very point of marriage to not have an escape clause?

Your move, readers. Forever… or five years?