The legal process of divorce should be changed

Errata

Divorce is a legal matter, fighting over the furniture and the Premium Bonds is a matter of choice.

tayforth

hawk30 wrote: »

Actually, irretrievable breakdown is the only ground for divorce. But to prove it you have to show one of the five facts, being adultery, unreasonable behaviour, etc.

Yes, thanks for the clarification and sorry if my post was unclear! What I meant was what you said.

Mrs_pbradley936 wrote: »

I think that we have the balance about right especially when there is no social stigma to living with another partner while legally you are still married to someone else.

When I got married in 1968 a divorce was far harder to get and one of you had to be the guilty party. Fortunately I am still happily married to the same man.

Plus if one of you wanted to be spiteful and refuse to divorce it was very difficult to move in with another while you were still married. If any of you are watching Downton Abbey it was akin to the newspaper chap with the mentally ill wife. She would be the innocent party i.e had become ill not done anything wrong and so he cannot swan off with Edith without giving her a bad name.

I watch it, and it's a fascinating storyline! What would happen nowadays? Presumably, the wife wouldn't be capable of consenting to a divorce, so he'd have to wait 5 years?

RAS

tayforth wrote: »

I watch it, and it's a fascinating storyline! What would happen nowadays? Presumably, the wife wouldn't be capable of consenting to a divorce, so he'd have to wait 5 years?

It would have bene a lot longer than 5 years.

At one stage adultery by one party was one of the few ways to get a divorce, provided one spouse agreed to be the "guilty" party and the other went to court. And if the guilty party was the woman she was unlikely to be allowed much if any contact with the children.

I had a relative whose wife was apparently committed to a mental institution (as they were then known) after WW1. As far as I know he was not able to divorce her. There was a bit of scandal when he left everything to the daughter of his land lady.

Excited13

I agree that divorce is much easier than it was. My grandmother went through a divorce in the 1960s and she was scared for me due to what she had gone through (going to Court swearing on the bible etc).

My divorce took 18 months to go through and it was the most ridiculous process going. My ex issued against me as soon as he could so he went on the grounds of my unreasonable behaviour. It was quite funny considering the background. My solicitor laughed at his statement and actually warned me the judge may not grant a divorce! I wanted it over with so decided to accept although I spent a long time worrying that it wouldn't get through.

I'm so glad it is now over but it is the most stressful event of my life. I think part of the problems are solicitors I think mine and his solicitors were spending most of the time blaming each other and racking up costs.

I think there should be a non fault option in this day and age where if both parties agree the marriage is over there is no need to go for unreasonable behaviour or adultery within the first couple of years.

Slight rant over!