Tag: Divorce Advice

Occupation and Divorce

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

If you marry a flight attendant are you more likely to divorce than if you marry a software developer? A recent report on occupation and divorce asks that very question.

The Study analyzed data from the 2015 American Community Survey, and, based on the number of people in a particular occupation who had married at least once, calculated the percentage of people who divorced.

Librarians have about a 28% chance of divorce, while phlebotomist have approximately a 46% chance.

Another un-surprising part of the study, people with less income are less likely to be married in the first place, and more likely to be divorced.

About 25% of “poor” adults aged 18 to 55 are currently married, compared to 39% of working-class adults, and 56% of middle- and upper-class adults (above the 50th percentile).

What the report found is that there is a divorce rate of at least 48.8% in the occupations “most likely” to experience divorce; the divorce rate is under 22% in the 10 occupations “least likely” to be subject to divorce.

Divorce in Florida

I’ve written about the correlation between occupation and divorce before. The numbers don’t paint the whole picture. If a person divorced and remarried by the time of the Census, they would be counted as married.

There are various reasons cited in the study for the fault behind the divorce rate. It could be that spouses in some jobs are just quicker to jump into the next marriage than others.

The data on occupation and divorce doesn’t reveal whether it’s the nature of the jobs that lead to divorce, or if people prone to unstable relationships are drawn to certain professions.

Florida abolished fault as grounds for filing a divorce. The only ground you need to file for divorce in Florida is to prove your marriage is “irretrievably broken.”

But is no fault divorce the reason the for a higher divorce rate among bartenders than optometrists? Some people think so, and want to return to the old “fault” system to promote families.

Occupation as Predictor of Divorce

So, what are the occupations with the highest divorce rates:

  • Telemarketers
  • Bartenders
  • Flight Attendants

The occupations among the lowest divorce rates:

  • Actuaries
  • Physical Therapists
  • Chemical Engineers

Keep in mind that correlation is not causation. No one knows which bartenders are likely to stay married or divorced, nor give advice on choosing a profession based on the divorce rate.

Nor can the report tell you about those who choose to become bartenders may be less likely to have stable marriages for reasons other than their choice of profession.

Rolling machine operators seem to be in the same category today more because of their declining employment prospects than because of increased temptations to stray.

One question that does not command enough attention is why the correlation between relationship stability and employment prospects is so strong.

Commitment to an unstable partner — someone who runs up the credit card bills, incurs large health care expenses, or needs to be bailed out of jail — can diminish family savings, a source of peril.

The report is available here.

 

Rising Divorce Rates

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

The accepted wisdom is that divorce rates have dropped since the 1980s, and divorce rates have been declining since. A new report out of Great Britain is showing just the opposite, that divorce rates are increasing.

A recent article from the BBC in London reports that there were 106,959 divorces of opposite-sex couples in 2016 – an increase of 5.8% from 2015. It was the biggest year-on-year rise in divorce rates since 1985, when there was a jump of 10.9%.

Of 112 divorces of same-sex couples in 2016, 78% involved female couples.

Charity Relate said rising levels of household debt and stagnating wages could be putting a strain on marriages. For those in opposite-sex marriages, divorce rates were highest for women in their 30s and men aged between 45 and 49.

Overall, there were 8.9 divorces per 1,000 married men and women.

Florida and Divorce Rates

I’ve written about divorce rates in the United States before. Part of the problem with counting divorces in the U.S., is that collecting divorce statistics in the United States is not consistent.

Some counties in some states keep excellent records of finalized divorce cases, an important statistic in measuring divorce rates. Miami-Dade County, for instance has excellent records of filing online. However, other counties in Florida and outside of Florida may not.

Additionally, different American states, and the federal Census Bureau, have had a rocky history of collecting the data from across the country on divorce rates. In fact, the federal government has stopped providing financial support for detailed state collection.

Some states, especially California, have stopped reporting divorce rates entirely.

In the U.S., the increase in divorce rates is being blamed on the Baby Boomers, those born between 1945 and 1954. In the 1970s, Baby Boomers, who were then in their twenties, were equally likely to divorce.

But by 1990, couples in their twenties were more stable, but the Baby Boomers, who were entering their forties, continued to divorce “at unprecedented rates.” Since then, the biggest rise in divorce has the “massive increase” in divorce among women in their fifties.

Back in the UK

A spokeswoman in the Britain said: “Although the number of divorces of opposite-sex couples in England and Wales increased by 5.8% in 2016 compared with 2015, the number remains 30% lower than the most recent peak in 2003; divorce rates for men and women have seen similar changes.”

The most common reason for the increase in divorce rates was “unreasonable behaviour”, with 51% of women and 36% of men citing it in their divorce petitions. Unreasonable behaviour can include having a sexual relationship with someone else.

Overall, women initiated proceedings in 61% of opposite-sex divorces.

Commenting on divorce rates, Chris Sherwood, chief executive of the relationship support charity Relate, said: “It is unclear as to why there was a slight increase in divorces in 2016 and as to whether this rise will continue or not.

“We know that money worries are one of the top strains on relationships and it may be that rising levels of household debt and stagnating pay growth could be contributing factors.”

“Divorce is not something that people tend to take lightly but our research suggests that many people could have saved their marriage and avoided divorce with the right support.”

The BBC report is available here.

 

Suing Your Spouse’s Lover

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Historically, you could sue your cheating spouse’s lover. Although cheating comes up in divorce, suing your spouse’s lover is a different cause of action. In North Carolina, a man is now arguing that these laws violate his Constitutional right to engage in intimate sexual activity, speech, and expression with other consenting adults.

Alienation of Affection

American law used to recognize the tort of “alienation of affection” — causing a woman to lose affection for her husband and often to leave the husband because of the cheating lover.

The law also recognized the tort of “criminal conversation,” which basically consists of suing someone having adulterous sex with your spouse.

Many people think heart balm laws are dead. But a few states — Hawaii, Mississippi, New Mexico, Florida, South Dakota and Utah — still recognize them.

In North Carolina, Marc and Amber were a married couple. Amber is a nurse. The Defendant, Derek, is a medical doctor at the hospital where Amber works.

In early 2015, Derek and Amber began a sexual relationship. Marc discovered Amber was cheating on him with Derek, and sued Derek for alienation of affection and criminal conversation.

Derek tried to dismiss Marc’s lawsuit on the ground that common law causes of action for alienation of affection and criminal conversation are facially unconstitutional.

The trial court agreed with Derek, and granted his motion to dismiss. Marc appealed the decision.

Florida’s Heart Balm Statutes

I’ve written about heart balm statutes before, especially as they relate to engagement rings.

These common law torts are commonly referred to as “heart balm” statutes, because they permitted the former lovers’ heartaches to heal without recourse to the courts.

The purpose of the heart balm statutes was originally to prevent the perpetration of fraud by litigants who would use the threat of a breach of promise of marriage to force defendants to make lucrative settlements in order to avoid embarrassing publicity.

The Florida heart balm statute, originally passed in 1941, abolishes common law actions for alienation of affections, criminal conversation, seduction, and breach of contract to marry.

The Florida Legislature found that those who break engagements may be “free of any wrongdoing … [and may be] merely the victims of circumstances.”

The preamble declares it to be Florida public policy that the best interests of the people of the state are served by the abolition of the breach of promise action. Now, the rights of action existing to recover money for the alienation of affections, criminal conversation, seduction or breach of contract to marry are abolished.

Back to North Carolina

Surprisingly, the appellate court reversed the trial court, and found that the statute was not unconstitutional:

Our holding is neither an endorsement nor a critique of these “heart balm” torts. Whether this Court believes these torts are good or bad policy is irrelevant; we cannot hold a law facially unconstitutional because it is bad policy.

These common law torts are facially valid. They further the State’s desire to protect a married couple’s vow of fidelity and to prevent the personal injury and societal harms that result when that vow is broken.

Simply put, these torts are intended to remedy harms that result when marriage vows are broken, not to punish intimate extra-marital speech or expression because of its content.

The appellate court opinion is here.

 

Gray Divorce

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Yet another magazine is reporting on the rising phenomenon of “gray divorces,” or divorce among couples who are aged 50 or older. There are a few special concerns you should be aware of when divorcing after age 50.

Gray Divorces

First, some facts. Among the baby boom generation, the divorce rate has doubled since the 1990s. In 2015, up to 10 out of every 1,000 people over the age of 50 divorced, according to a report from the Pew Research Center.

Though these rates are still lower than those of younger generations, it is the increase in the number of divorces, not the actual divorce rate, that is generating interest among family law attorneys and experts.

Reasons vary. “Life is short, and once you sort of are aging and start to see a limited number of years left on your life, you start to put your own happiness first and do the things that you would want to do.”

I’ve written about gray divorces before. Like the emotional aspects, the legal nuances of gray divorce can be different than what younger couples might encounter when dealing with a split. Chief among those nuances are financial considerations, which can present unique challenges for spouses who are at or nearing retirement.

Florida Gray Divorces

When couples choose to divorce in their 30s or 40s, they still have time to recover financially, because adults at that age have several years, if not decades, left in their careers.

But when divorce occurs when a couple is in their 50s or later, the so-called “gray divorce”, careers may either be coming to a close or are completed, and spouses are often living on fixed incomes provided through Social Security or retirement benefits.

Here are some things to consider:

Valuing the Marital Estate – By the time a couple enters the golden years, they may have gold to divide, including businesses, retirement funds, and vacation homes. Valuing these assets can be difficult. The value of a business may not be apparent from balance sheets, and the sale or transfer of assets may have tax consequences. As a result, a financial advisor may be an important component in the divorce.

Medical Care – Health insurance is often tied to the employment of one spouse. With aging comes diminishing health, and declining cognitive ability. Courts may need to intervene if one party has dwindling capacity to handle their own affairs.

Long-Term Arrangements – Legal arrangements, such as wills and trusts, need to be reviewed to make sure they reflect post-divorce wishes. The same is true for long-term care, such as medical directives, living wills and trusts.

Retirement Plans – After 20 years of marriage, retirement plans can be substantial . . . and complex. Retirement plans vary in kind, and they all have different restrictions, tax consequences, distribution and vesting rules.

Lifestyle adjustment – Younger couples have time to re-accumulate wealth after divorce, but in Gray Divorces, the spouses have less time to re-establish themselves financially. One or both may be close to or in retirement, and face living on half of what they earmarked for retirement.

There are special concerns involved in a gray divorce, or when an older couple divorces. As always, information is power, so make a point to seek out experts for guidance.

Though a couple may have carefully planned for their futures when they were married, they return to the drawing board when it comes to estate planning after a divorce.

Most gray divorces involve marriages that have lasted for several decades, which makes it difficult to disentangle the spouses from each other. However, couples who divorce after many years together should receive a close-to-even split of assets, legally putting each spouse on an equal playing field for the future.

The Indiana Lawyer article is here.

 

Family Courtroom Behavior

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

It’s been said that criminal court judges see the worst people acting their best, and family court judges see the best people acting their worst. That old adage comes to mind reading about the antics in the divorce of Formula One billionaire heiress Petra Ecclestone from her husband James Stunt.

A Wild Divorce Hearing

Ecclestone and Stunt have each hired some of England’s most high-profile divorce lawyers to represent them in court hearings, which are expected to start next month.

Their £158 million mansion in Los Angeles and a Grade II-listed house in the fashionable London district of Chelsea – worth up to £100 million – are expected to just some of the assets fought over.

As the Daily Mail reports, extraordinary details of their bitter marriage were laid bare during a highly-charged court hearing yesterday. The businessman, who runs an international gold bullion firm, was yesterday accused of behaving in a ‘disgraceful’ and ‘unedifying’ way prior to the hearing.

The bad-tempered hearing boiled over when Mr. Stunt, 35, slammed his hand onto a table and appeared to make a ‘gun gesture’ with his hand.

He then pointed at Mr. Ecclestone before calling him a ‘c***’ under his breath. Stunt then tapped him on the shoulder and stormed out of the court room.

Mr. Ecclestone stood up as if to confront him and started to follow him before the judge intervened. Recorder Richard Anelay QC: ‘Please Mr. Ecclestone, don’t respond. I know it’s tempting. For the record I saw [Mr. Stunt] clearly tap Mr. Ecclestone on the shoulder.

‘I think my intervention prevented rather actually prevented Mr. Ecclestone from wanting to retaliate. ‘Don’t carry it on outside please, it will not help you in the long run.’

Courtroom Behavior

I’ve written about courtroom behavior before. As a couple of good rules of thumb to follow:

  • Don’t – come to a custody hearing wearing your Nazi uniform – complete with swastika patch on the arm and leather boots – and demand a family court judge let you see your son.
  • Do – Dress in a neat and professional manner.
  • Don’t – Speak on your cellular telephone because judges hate ringing cell phones. Judges hate ringing phone so much, that U.S. District Judge Hugh B. Clarke Jr. fined himself $50 when his own cell phone started ringing during a hearing.
  • Do – Keep your cell phone ringer off, and if you absolutely need to have your phone on, put it on vibrate.
  • Don’t – Take off your pants and show the judge your rear end. Try not to make faces or gestures, don’t show your anger or disdain for the other side or the court.
  • Do – Keep a “poker” face when others are talking, and be clear and confident and in a loud clear voice when you are talking.

Yes, sadly these are cases of what people have actually done in court, and all of these instances are documented. Consider the solemnity of the courtroom, the stress family cases have on everyone, and show some respect to the judges and others in the courtroom who deal with these cases on a daily basis.

Back to the London Hearing

With those rules of thumb, consider some of the antics at the Ecclestone v. Stunt hearing. During the hour-long hearing, Mr. Stunt repeatedly laughed, scoffed, panted, sighed and raised his hands in the air as lawyers gave their submissions.

At one point the judge asked him to stop gesticulating because it was ‘very distracting’.

The husband, who was sporting a wedding band, smirked as he raised his middle finger towards photographers outside the court building.

The Daily Mail article is here.

 

Child Name Changes

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

For various reasons, some parents want to change their child’s name after a divorce or paternity case. The “best interests of the child” standard is what Florida courts rely on for determining child related issues. How can a child’s name run afoul of the best interests of the child test?

From Elias Alley to Faisel Ali Maqableh

In Kentucky, Ali Al-Maqablh wanted to change the name of his biological child. The Family Court changed the name of his biological child from “Elias Miles Alley” to “Elias Miles Ali Alley”, but Al-Maqablh wanted to change the name to “Faisel Ali Maqableh”.

After the child was born, Alley named him “Elias Miles Alley.” Al-Maqalblh sought to change the child’s name to “Faisel Ali Maqableh” because of the cultural importance of the child’s middle and last names.

Alley argued that the name Maqableh could result in the child’s being socially ostracized due to the prejudice inherent in her small community; she also noted that many people would probably mispronounce it. Alley argued Al-Maqablh currently refers to the child as Faisel while around friends and relatives, and he could continue to do so.

The family court found that changing the child’s name could increase the bond between the child and Al-Maqablh, would not alter Alley’s relationship with the child, would not result in insecurity or lack of identity for the child and could increase a sense of identity for the child, but the proposed name would likely result in regular misspellings and mispronunciations.

It noted potential bullying or harassment in child’s rural community was a factor to consider with regard to the best interest of the child and changing the surname from that of Alley, the current custodial parent, could result in some embarrassment or inconvenience to Alley.

On appeal, Al-Maqablh argued that the family court’s order was culturally insensitive because it rejected giving the child his surname because the people in Trimble County might have difficulty pronouncing it or be racist.

The appeals court found that the trial judge properly applied the best interest test because it considered the child’s stability, fostering familial bonds and minimizing contention between the parents in determining the child’s name.

It made a specific factual finding against Al-Maqablh’s claim that Alley consented to raise the child in accordance with his cultural traditions and, thus, name him in accordance with those traditions.

Florida Name Changes

I’ve written about various tips on Florida divorce law and paternity law. Florida is actually pretty strict about changing a child’s name. Simply because the parents are divorcing, or paternity is at issue, is generally not a sufficient reason on which to grant a change in a child’s surname.

Instead, a child’s surname may be modified only where the change is required for the welfare of the minor. Additionally, the parent petitioning to change a child’s name has the burden to prove that changing the child’s surname is in the child’s best interest.

The Worst Name Changes

It is bad enough that some people are given a last name that sounds weird. But some people willingly create names that make everyone scratch their heads. The following are the best examples of these names:

  • Tyler Gold legally changed his name to “Tyrannosaurus Rex”
  • Steve Bolton changed his name to “Buzz Lightyear”
  • Andrew Wilson changed his name to “They”

The Kentucky appellate case is here.

 

Suing Your Spouse

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Steve Harvey’s ex-wife Mary Vaughn is suing him for $60 million, claiming that she suffered “prolonged torture with the infliction of severe mental pain and suffering.” Can you sue your spouse in a divorce for battery, transmission of STDs, or emotional distress?

The Harvey Divorce

The Harvey marriage lasted from 1996 until their public divorce in 2005, which was two years prior to Harvey’s third marriage to current wife, Marjorie Bridges. The 60-year-old “Family Feud” host was previously married to Marcia Harvey for 14 years before he wed Vaughn.

As reported by Fox News, court documents claimed that Vaughn “attempted suicide by self-medicating [in] an effort to stop the pain” and alleged that Harvey and his attorney reportedly caused “severe emotional distress” over the years.

ET added that Vaughn is also suing for alleged child endangerment, torture, kidnapping, breach of contract, conspiracy against rights, intentional infliction of emotional distress and even “soul murdering” (which we’ll get to later).

Interspousal Immunity

I’ve written about various issues relating to divorce before. Things like saving taxes, how not to treat your spouse, and what to wear to court. The subject of suing your spouse for emotional distress often comes up in divorces.

Florida used to have a long-standing policy about suing your spouse called the interspousal immunity doctrine. Under the interspousal immunity doctrine, one spouse could not sue the other spouse for tortious conduct committed during the marriage.

Interspousal tort immunity was thought to protect families from the adverse effects to a family relationship as a result of bitter lawsuits, and the drain on family resources.

However, the doctrine of interspousal immunity was abrogated in Florida. So, the ability of a person to sue another person for the intentional tort of battery, for instance, is not affected by marriage between the persons.

The justifications for having an interspousal tort immunity were found to be non-existent in this day and age. So, for example, in some divorce cases it is common for a person to be held liable for infecting another with a sexually transmissible disease.

What About Soul Murder?

Steve Harvey is being sued for, among other things, “soul murder.” This is defined as a “combination of torture, deprivation, and brainwashing.” While the interspousal immunity doctrine is not applicable in Florida, there is a reasonable chance the “soul murder” claim would be thrown out here too.

“Mr. Harvey vehemently denies any allegations set forth in the lawsuit,” read the statement sent to ET.

“The complaint is merit-less, frivolous and the allegations are completely false. We will vigorously defend/counterclaim against the complaint.”

The Fox News article is here.

 

What if a Spouse Dies During the Divorce?

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Well this is a gloomy post: it’s about death and divorce. In November 1789, Benjamin Franklin wrote: “In this world, nothing can be said to be certain except death and taxes.” If roughly half of marriages end in divorce, there are some odds that a spouse will die during the divorce case. What happens legally and emotionally when a spouse dies during the divorce?

Emotional Roller Coaster

As the Washington Post reports, a couple of years after a wife and husband separated — but before he reached a divorce settlement — he died of a heart attack at age 57.

Overnight, the wife went from almost-ex-wife to widow. But, nearly six years later, I still feel as if I was widowed on a technicality. A real widow doesn’t have a divorce lawyer and a Match profile. A real widow is pining for her spouse, inconsolable.

Sometimes she calls herself a “partial widow.” To make her point, she mentioned a friend whose fiancé died three weeks before their wedding. “She doesn’t get to call herself a widow and I do?” “That’s ridiculous.”

Misplaced Emotions

“It’s called disenfranchised grief,” and it is also referred to as the grief that has no voice, because it’s a grief that our society typically does not recognize.”

It occurs in situations that fall outside the norm and might also include, for example, mourning the death of a former spouse or an extramarital lover. A widow who was about to be divorced has no defined place in society, so we often don’t know what we’re supposed to do.

Even responding to condolences can be awkward because there’s an element of not wanting to accept sympathy for something that is a misconception on their part. Others feel for the surviving spouse in a way that doesn’t feel accurate to the experience. It’s a different kind of pain than they’re assuming.

Legal Implications

I’ve written about divorce problems before. When a spouse dies during a divorce, the death of the spouse can have major legal implications that extend far beyond the mixed feelings you may have about losing your soon-to-be ex spouse.

Divorces are unlike other civil cases. It is true that in ordinary civil cases, the death of a party does not deprive a court of the power to enter a judgment after the death of a party. This means a court can still rule. This happens frequently in breach of contract actions, and especially in personal injury cases.

However, the general principle does not apply to divorce actions since the death itself has already terminated the marriage.

In Florida, the general rule for divorce is that there can be no judgment of divorce rendered after the death of either of the parties, since that event of itself terminates the status of marriage.

This immediate stopping of the divorce when a spouse dies during the divorce process can cause a lot of problems. This is especially true in divorce cases in which the parties are elderly, or sick, and death is a very real possibility. In those cases, the parties should seriously consider ways to avoid the court losing jurisdiction because of death.

The Washington Post article is here.

 

Is Your Marriage Valid?

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Thinking about divorce? Concerned about alimony? Want to divide property? Many people who file for divorce may sadly discover they were not married legally, and can’t divorce! For one couple, the lack of a valid marriage led to a federal fraud case.

Florida Marriages

First off, common-law marriages have been abolished in Florida since 1968. In order to be validly married, you need a license. It may seem like a mere formality, but couples who want to be married must apply for a license.

There is a fee for getting a marriage license, and that fee is reduced for attending pre-marital counseling. The license is valid for 60 days. The officiant at the ceremony must certify that the marriage was solemnized.

The certified marriage license must be returned to the clerk or an issuing judge within 10 days, and the clerk or judge is required to keep a correct record of certified marriage licenses.

I have written about Florida marriages and divorces before. Florida courts have repeatedly warned people that they cannot depart from the requirement of the Florida Statutes to have a license, otherwise the courts would be re-creating common-law marriages.

Don’t Forget your License

In the fall of 2004, Jonathan Arnold and Leticia Villarreal exchanged marriage vows in California in a ceremony solemnized by both a priest and a rabbi. But they forgot to file their marriage license as required by law.

Shortly before their license expired, the county sent them a reminder letter that the license had not yet been filed, and that they needed to file it to complete the legal process. The couple forgot, and the license expired unfiled.

Their relationship deteriorated, they separately filed for divorce — she in California, he in Illinois. However, both divorce cases had to be terminated when they found out that they were never married.

By not filing their marriage license, they could not divorce, could not make claims for equitable distribution or community property, and could not ask a court for alimony. That can be a devastating result for many couples.

Making a Federal Case out of it

Arnold sued Villarreal in federal court in Illinois alleging various fraud claims and seeking compensatory damages totaling about $1 million. He also sought an additional $1 million in punitive damages. He claimed that she tricked him into believing the two were legally married to induce him to give her gifts, including the California condo.

The trial judge threw out the case as “frivolous” and he appealed to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate court found that Arnold has utterly failed to confront what two district judges recognized: that his fraud claims are not merely meritless but are frivolous.

The panel of judges concluded that he only filed his appeal simply to harass Villarreal.

As Judge Grady drily noted, the courts “are not a proper venue for petty score-settling.”

The opinion is available here.

 

Outlaw Divorce?

Posted by Ron Kauffman on

Swaziland’s King Mswati III has told leaders that it is against culture to divorce, and instructed them to tell citizens that there will be no pulling out from marriage, once it takes place. So much for no fault divorce in Swaziland.

Swaziland Divorce

King Mswati III of Swaziland is Africa’s last absolute monarch. The 49-year old king who calls himself “the lion,” owns most of the country’s land and rules by decree, appointing all of the government’s top positions. Now he may make Swaziland the first country in Africa to outlaw divorce.

“In our culture, once you marry someone, there is no turning back,” he said  speaking at an Easter ceremony earlier this month, according to a local paper, Times of Swaziland. There is no word for “divorce” in Siswati, the official language of Swaziland, the king added.

Swaziland officials have been quick to clarify that divorce has not been officially banned. The king’s comments, which are not a decree until he officially tables them, run counter to a recently submitted marriage bill by Swaziland’s attorney general that allows for divorce on certain grounds.

Divorce is not permitted under current legislation, but a process called Kumbuyisela ekhaya, which refers to reuniting a married woman with her family, is allowed.

King Mswati III has at least 15 wives, and is entitled to a new one every year, chosen at an eight day festival known as the reed dance. Polygamy is common in Swaziland where women are considered the property of their husbands. Domestic abuse and sexual violence are prevalent. Leaders often criticize ideas of equal rights for women as foreign values that should be subordinated to Swazi culture, according to Human Rights Watch.

Divorce Around the World

The Philippines is the only country in the world where divorce is illegal for most of the country’s population. (Muslims are allowed to divorce and the country’s mostly Catholic population can annul marriages.) In Vatican City, there are also no procedures for divorce.

Florida, of course is a “no fault” divorce state. I mentioned in an a earlier post that Florida abolished fault as grounds for filing a divorce. The only reason you need to file for divorce in Florida is to prove your marriage is “irretrievably broken.” But many people want to return to the old “fault” system to stem the numbers of divorces.

The King’s directive comes as the kingdom’s attorney-general is drafting a marriage Bill which will make it easier to divorce, particularly for women. The king’s wish is likely to become law, if he formally tables it. This would mostly affect women, whom it says are already oppressed.

“It is not necessarily a decree. However, given the vast powers that the king has it may sound as it is. Remember that he’s also a chairperson of the judiciary commission. I’m just imagining women going there to demand a divorce given that the judge himself will be worried about his job after they had to contradict their boss; in this case the king,” said Lucky Lukhele from the Swaziland Solidarity Network.

The article is available here.