Feb 14 2008
Scribbling on Divorce
Sometime during the Summer
of 2005, the Divorce Bill was discussed by some newspaper columnists in the
Philippine Star and Inquirer. I think
this was the time when Rep. Liza Maza resurrected the issue on divorce and
proposed a bill.
I wanted to put my reasoning
and analytical skills to test. I thought
it would be a good way to prepare myself for the school of law. So, I started scribbling and writing
questions and answers as my intellectual exercise. One of the topics I chose was divorce.
Ms. Janette Toral, the
founder of Digital Filipino of which I am a member, told me personally last
week that she tagged me in digitalfilipino blogspot to write an entry on some
interesting topics like divorce.
So I remembered the
scribbling…
So Ma’am Janette, here goes…
How do you differentiate
divorce from annulment?
Divorce is defined as the termination of the marriage bond while
annulment is making the marriage void from the very start. In both cases the spouses are free to marry
again.
Are you in favor on the
legalization of divorce?
Yes, I am in favor of the
legalization of divorce.
I do not see any reason why we should be against
it. I do not see any difference between
our existing laws such as annulment and divorce when both are for the
legalization on the invalidation of marriages and making the spouses free to
marry again.
I also do not agree that divorce is
violating the constitution in which it declares that “the state has the
obligation to protect the family as an inviolable social institution,” while
annulment is not.
I also find divorce to be more
convenient for both spouses since it would be easier for the estranged couples
to marry without carrying the brunt of being labeled psychologically
incapacitated which is the usual case in annulment. The process for annulment and legal
separation can be torturous and both time and money-consuming which seems to be
available only to the moneyed class.
What are the grounds for
divorce proposed by Rep. Liza Maza?
Divorce
can be filed on the grounds that:
*separation of the couple for
atleast 5 years upon the filing of petition and reconciliation is highly
improbable
*the petitioner has been legally
separated from his or her spouse for atleast 2 years at the time of the filing
of the petition and reconciliation is highly improbable
*when any of the grounds for legal
separation has caused the irreparable breakdown of marriage
*one of both spouses are psychologically
incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations
The
effects of divorce would be:
*marriage bonds are terminated
*the absolute conjugal property will
be liquidated and assets are divided equally between spouses
*the spouse who is not gainfully
employed shall be entitled of support from the other spouse
*the custody of any minor child
shall be decided by the court
*children of both spouses shall be
considered legitimate
What is your stand on the
divorce bill?
I do not have any problems with the divorce bill.
Isn’t this against your
Catholic teaching?
I find the Church inconsistent with what they teach with regard
to providing remedies to failed marriages, which are legal separation and
annulment.
Legal Separation is the separation
from bed and board where spouses’ marriage are retained and not free to marry
again while annulment is legally invalidating the marriage and allows the
couples to marry again – which is the same as divorce. They only differentiate divorce as the termination of the marriage bond from
annulment as making the marriage void from the very start. I don’t find these definitions making much
sense because whether divorce or annulment will take place it is common that
prior to this there has been an actual experience of the marriage to begin
with, they both share good and bad memories of that failed marriage and they
both share children as a product of this marriage.
I do not see the reason why the Church has to be against divorce
when they also have a marriage tribunal that performs annulment (which
legalizes the invalidation of the marriage and making them free to marry again
– like divorce).
Doesn’t the divorce bill
violate the constitution in which it declares that “the state has the obligation
to protect the family as an inviolable social institution?”
I don’t think the State violates this obligation because there
are marriages which can no longer be healthy for both spouses, especially to
the children emotionally. Situations
such as physical and emotional abuse (no mutual respect), infidelity, painful
quarrels that the children have to endure almost everyday and situations where
either of the spouse is not performing his or her task to the family – as a
homemaker or as a provider are in my opinion is a marriage that can no longer
be considered as an “inviolable social institution.” Thus there is no point of preserving it.
If ratified, wouldn’t this
be alarming that there might be a sudden mad rush to have courts to have
marriages terminated and people will file for divorce in the simplest pretext
(In US, i.e. snoring, not tightening the cap of the toothpaste, and a spouse
spending hours on the telephone).
Though couples at times have shallow
reasons why they want to have divorce, we also can not deny the fact that there
are marriages that can no longer work no matter how hard the couples try.
This is also the reason why there are certain grounds proposed
by Rep. Maza before divorce can even be considered. These grounds suggest that divorce shouldn’t
be taken lightly.
Sources:
Philippine
Daily Inquirer and Philippine Star – Summer of 2005
Editorial
Section with columns on Divorce Bill
Sabi mo comment diba? *(^^,)* Well, I think it would be helpful if you also look into the grounds of annulment and legal separation. You see, there’s a Canon Law which the Church people turn to as guide. Just to balance the arguments.
And also, I just want to say that hopefully in our lifetime someone would do a cohort on the effects of divorce. For me kasi it is pro-couple. Not pro-family. And family constitues the children which are the bearers of burden when
their parents gets divorced. Ang alam ko sa annulment hindi ka na pwede mag-asawa uli. Pero I’ll ask my s.adviser on that just to be sure.
Bakit cohort? One divorce leads to another and another and another. What does that imply? What are its long term effects? Specially on children…the future parents? Is it healthy for our culture?
Marriages that “dont work” anymore can be handled by annulment (though I need to read more on that, I guess). Why allow a system that can work like a condom? Or is it because of the condom that divorce was created? *wink*wink* for ME, divorce is like rust…
*(^^,)*
hi tin. thanks for commenting. i respect all opinions.
about annulment… you can remarry.
Hmm…siguro rin before deciding to adapt a new system such as divorce, we must study it well. Where did it come from? Who passed that bill? (integrity and purpose of the legislator) For what reason? What was the first case that warranted divorce? What good did it bring?
A little history would be helpful because I believe the agenda behind divorce, in its true nature is very important.
hehehe, mentally stimulating to ha. =P
ang alam ko hindi pwede, Naoms. check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_marriage
Yung sinasabi ni Pope Benedict XVI, yung mga nagdivorce and remarried, how do they fare in the Church. Magkaiba talaga ang annulment and divorce.
Sorry, hehe, cant help but defend my stand. Sorry.
oo nga, pwede pero kung walang consummation. Pero kung meron…separation separation lang pwede hindi annulment.
tin it is in our law that you can remarry in annulment. I checked the link you referred me to, it doesn’t say.
anyway here is a link
http://www.filipinawives.com/Annulment.htm
where you can get a glimpse of the provisions on annulment.
annulment tin is making the marriage void from the very start, so as if you didn’t marry or the marriage never existed. as a result, after annulment, couples are free to remarry.
sabi ko na nga ba iakw ang unang mag rereact. hehehehe.
I thought this was a very interesting read though, my knowledge about law is very limited. I was just wondering if this bill has been passed by the Senate, or not?
Also, with regards to the question about the financial effects of annulment and legal seperation being different to that of divorce, isn’t divorce as costly? I mean, here in the West, it’s so expensive for couples to get a divorce and some ex-wives who are gold diggers make a livin out of it (i.e. Heather Mills, Paul McCartney’s ex).
And if this is the case, it means that the bill will only be available to the upper-class couples in the Philippines, which is like 10 to 20% of the population? So is it really worth having at all? Doesn’t it perpetuate further inequality? (Correct me if Im wrong pls)
Anywhoo, the topic of divorce in the Philippines can be a positive sign because it shows that the government and politics are “divorcing” because politics and religion don’t mix, especially when your citizens don’t all share the same religion.
Sorry I meant to say, “the government and the Catholic Church are ‘divorcing’, not goverment and politics.
hi jaz, thanks for dropping by.
it is not yet approved in congress but it is a proposed bill by Rep. Liza Maza.
yes divorce is costly in america i heard. however if you check the grounds for divorce proposed, by 2 years of legal separation, couples can be divorced right away. annulment takes a very long process, numerous court hearings, even kids are involved sometimes.
regarding the separation of properties/assets incase of divorce — there is no final rules yet, the bill has to be approved and better yet, amended - incase changes are needed. however in annulment - spouses still have shared obligation to their children - especially financial support, and the judge also decides on that aspect.
… about my digression to annulment… i meant this can be also applied in divorce incase the drafters of the law decide what to put there.
testing…
Im having a hard time posting my reply…but hopefully this get thru. So I see that the bill hasn’t been ratified.
It would be interesting to see the outcome of this bill.
I agree with the divorce. I’m happy with my marriage by the way, but I have friends who are tied with marriage that is already failing yet they don’t want to seek annulment because it just seems unfair not to acknowledge a marriage that produces their wonderful children.