Jump to content


Photo

Divorce In The Philippines


  • Please log in to reply
696 replies to this topic

#41 new2dabeat

new2dabeat

    Wanton

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:The Outer Reaches

Posted 09 December 2005 - 09:32 AM

hmm, seems to me like there's ample opportunity to start a well-managed and well-funded organization and/or campaign (or several) to push through a divorce legalization.

the kye would, of course, be to have as many *female* backers (in positions of "power" or authority - such as key businesswomen, etc) as possible. otherwise it can be easily seen as yet-another "benefits only men" initiative.

and let's not even get started on getting The Church to just plain shut-up on the issue - if it were left to them, everyone would be encourage to f*ck like bunnies and to hell with STDs and unwanted "accidental" children...

levity aside, how does a bunch of old dried up men and women - who don't marry and are avowed a life of celibacy - qualified to dictate "family values" and pontificate on the ("ill") virtues of sex? to a BILLION people at that?

sheesh, talk about ludicrous...

#42 Guest_wackeen_*

Guest_wackeen_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 December 2005 - 12:17 PM

Just some quick takes.

I think the government only gets involved in marriage because of its economic implications: i.e. taxation, acquiring property, inheritance etc. There is also a mandate to protect the rights of children, and to ensure that they receive care and support. I don't think the government cares whether two people love each other per se, only that it is necessary to maintain order and ensure some degree of equity.

In any case what I really wanted to react to was the reference to the anti-violence law. It is simplistic to correlate abusive husbands to the absence of divorce as an escape route. Scumbags are scum by nature not circumstance, and even rich people who can afford to support a dozen families can beat their wives or children.

After all divorce does not relieve a man of his economic duties. In fact it forces one to fully recognize the obligation to support because the alimony is usually quantified and qualified in the settlement proceedings.

I think divorce boils down to one thing: it is not about how to end a marriage cleanly but getting into a position to be able to marry again and start another family/relationship!

#43 gig0l0

gig0l0

    Seducer

  • (08) Fanatical Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,202 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2005 - 01:17 PM

Marriage is not for everyone. If you cant keep it...then it's as simple as...dont get married!!

If you cant see marriage as a union of a man and a woman in love....if you see it more as a contract....then just pls dont get married...

:)

#44 Guest_wackeen_*

Guest_wackeen_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 December 2005 - 02:29 PM

Marriage is not for everyone. If you cant keep it...then it's as simple as...dont get married!!

If you cant see marriage as a union of a man and a woman in love....if you see it more as a contract....then just pls dont get married...

:)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



That's a fair statement. I guess my line of thinking is that our topic being Divorce, that we should be discussing strictly the legal aspects of marriage.

Discussing the philosophical/moral/religious/romantic aspects of marriage is a dead end in my opinion. I think everyone agrees why people should get married, stay married, and stay committed.

#45 Belly Dancer

Belly Dancer

    Wanton

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:the south
  • Interests:belly dancing, books, movies, crossword puzzles

Posted 09 December 2005 - 03:08 PM

Marriage is not for everyone. If you cant keep it...then it's as simple as...dont get married!!

If you cant see marriage as a union of a man and a woman in love....if you see it more as a contract....then just pls dont get married...

:)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


it is a fair statement. but then nobody really knows "who" they're really marrying. even if you have been together for so many years and think you know each other so well, this is no guarantee that your marriage will work. or in some cases, the person you thought you were marrying was a completely different person once the ink dried in the marriage contract. divorce is an option they can take. like so many has said in this thread, why stay in a marriage that has gone bad or sadly for some, to hell.


#46 Tanya08

Tanya08

    Charmer

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 432 posts

Posted 09 December 2005 - 03:12 PM

That's a fair statement. I guess my line of thinking is that our topic being Divorce, that we should be discussing strictly the legal aspects of marriage.

Discussing the philosophical/moral/religious/romantic aspects of marriage is a dead end in my opinion. I think everyone agrees why people should get married, stay married, and stay committed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


But the thing here is they already got their selves into it… were talking about those people who were already got married for wrong reasons… people who viewed and realized that getting married was a mistake… people who are suffering, being abused and living in a miserable life during their marriage… how about those people who became a victim because of these mistakes? And their children… aren’t we going to give them another chance?

#47 Guest_Inquisitive_*

Guest_Inquisitive_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 December 2005 - 03:40 PM

I agree that there should be divorce in the Philippines especially to those cases that merit it. Imagine a wife who is always beaten black and blue by his husband every single night not to mention their children who are also battered too. Legal separation will not do since the spouses are only to be separated from bed and board but legally they are still husband and wife. Hence, the wife will have to live her life alone and not get the chance to be happy and start over.

#48 new2dabeat

new2dabeat

    Wanton

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:The Outer Reaches

Posted 09 December 2005 - 03:53 PM

That's a fair statement. I guess my line of thinking is that our topic being Divorce, that we should be discussing strictly the legal aspects of marriage.

Discussing the philosophical/moral/religious/romantic aspects of marriage is a dead end in my opinion. I think everyone agrees why people should get married, stay married, and stay committed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Exactly - but that, by no means, characterizes "If you cant see marriage as a union of a man and a woman in love....if you see it more as a contract....then just pls dont get married..." as a "fair statement."

On what merit?

Again, Love != Marriage - in ANY book - whether it be some holy tome or legal document. Hem and haw all you want, but it won't change the fact that modern "marriage" is a sad misguided mismatch of a LEGAL state adulterated by religious ratification (or vice versa - the statement works and is workable either way).

In simplest terms, why do you need the ratification of some entity (religious or otherwise) to "confirm" your love?

For that matter, why is a religious ceremony grounds for legal status?

I don't see any special legal status given to persons who got their First Baptism. Or their Confirmation. Or their Bar/Bat Mitzvah. Or their first Haj...

Yes, I agree we're going far afield from the legal focus. Unfortunately, it's EXACTLY the kind of childish/oversimplified/what-have-you (no, I am not trolling nor seeking to invoke a flame war - I am simply making a statement that fits with the discussion at hand) type of comment as "If you cant see marriage as a union of a man and a woman in love....if you see it more as a contract....then just pls dont get married..." that precludes any sensible discussion of divorce from taking place.

My two centavos worth.

#49 zencalix

zencalix

    for arts sake

  • (08) Fanatical Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,141 posts
  • Location:california

Posted 09 December 2005 - 04:19 PM

siguro dapat na nga may divorce dito... :(

problema lang, dadami talaga maghihiwalay na magasawa... :(

#50 cool_hedonist

cool_hedonist

    Player

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 925 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South of Luzon...
  • Interests:internet surfing, participating in online communities, downloading ebooks, movies and music....

Posted 09 December 2005 - 05:22 PM

Couples should be allowed to have a divorce if the marital relationship has totally broke down..........there is no need for them to suffer each other........

#51 gig0l0

gig0l0

    Seducer

  • (08) Fanatical Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,202 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 December 2005 - 07:30 PM

"Discussing the philosophical/moral/religious/romantic aspects of marriage is a dead end in my opinion. I think everyone agrees why people should get married, stay married, and stay committed."

The only reason i brought out this line of reasoning is because for me marriage is more than just a legal concern. If take the "philosophical/moral/religious/romantic aspects of marriage" in the discussion, then you're not talking about marriage at all cos you're only considering one side. Of course, legally, divorse can be justified. After all, legally, marriage is just a piece of paper...a contract....that can be treated as another legal document.

If you want a well rounded discusion of marriage, dont brush off important aspects of it. For me, i'm getting into marriage not for the contract's sake but for some other important reasons that you dont want to discuss.

I'm sorry...i probably barged in a forum that is purely legal. I'll keep my mouth shut from now on. Thanks.

:)

#52 new2dabeat

new2dabeat

    Wanton

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 792 posts
  • Location:The Outer Reaches

Posted 10 December 2005 - 02:41 AM

"Discussing the philosophical/moral/religious/romantic aspects of marriage is a dead end in my opinion. I think everyone agrees why people should get married, stay married, and stay committed."

The only reason i brought out this line of reasoning is because for me marriage is more than just a legal concern. If take the "philosophical/moral/religious/romantic aspects of marriage" in the discussion, then you're not talking about marriage at all cos you're only considering one side. Of course, legally, divorse can be justified. After all, legally, marriage is just a piece of paper...a contract....that can be treated as another legal document.

If you want a well rounded discusion of marriage, dont brush off important aspects of it. For me, i'm getting into marriage not for the contract's sake but for some other important reasons that you dont want to discuss.

I'm sorry...i probably barged in a forum that is purely legal. I'll keep my mouth shut from now on. Thanks.

:)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I assume your response was based on my last response :)

Not at all, nothing to apologize about, and certainly nothing to keep your mouth shut over - this is a discussion board, right? In any case, as you put it, it *is* an issue that has to take several aspects into account. The only point I wanted to make was that the _institution_ of marriage and its underlying "non-material" baggage makes it extremely difficult to have a real discussion (and not just on this board, but in terms of the Phils gov't and society) on the merits of legalizing divorce.

#53 lomex32

lomex32

    The Eye from the Sky

  • Ambassador
  • 10,551 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manila
  • Interests:Automobiles, travel, cooking, computer gaming,

Posted 10 December 2005 - 04:20 PM

In the absence of the desired Divorce Laws
We have legal separation and Annulment....

Anyone wants to enlighten how things progress?

1. Indeed the grounds are established. what are these? (infidelity.... moraly, financial, emotional incapacities...? what else

2. What are the usual elements divided apart? Children, expenses, assets and properties ....what else?

3. Are there a formulae to this regard?

4. Care to share an actual scenario?

#54 antwanshakeel

antwanshakeel

    Wanton

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 722 posts

Posted 10 December 2005 - 04:41 PM

problem with annulment is that the court would always deny the petition whenever one of the spouse contests it. meaning, you must have prior consent or agreement before filing a case for it to be successful

#55 Hudson

Hudson

    Hotter when wet!!!

  • (06) Chronic Poster
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:2nd Star to the Right and Straight on till Morning
  • Interests:Golf,Photography,Cars and FUN!!!

Posted 10 December 2005 - 05:14 PM

In the absence of the desired Divorce Laws
We have legal separation and Annulment....

Anyone wants to enlighten how things progress?

1. Indeed the grounds are established. what are these? (infidelity.... moraly, financial, emotional incapacities...? what else 

2. What are the usual elements divided apart? Children, expenses, assets and properties ....what else?

3. Are there a formulae to this regard?

4. Care to share an actual scenario?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



It is a very slow and tedious process unless you know someone who can make it happen in 3 months for 200,000 pesos and no appearances in court.

The usual complaint is psychological incapacity. drug abuse,homosexuality, non-consumation of the marriage vows(no sex) are the rest i think. But these reasons have to be present and was not disclosed before the marriage.

Infidelity is not a ground for annullment but for legal separation only.

The division of the assets is usually the bone of contention. The kids are used as a bargaining chip unless you can prove that she is an unfit mother. Children below 7 years old are automatically given to the mother.

My take on the 3rd question is the actual process? If it is then you have to get a very good lawyer and be honest with him. He will be your friend,priest for the duration of the case.


I filed my case in 2002 and it is still pending because she is contesting. As i have said in my previous post, she would keep quiet for 2 million.

My children are with me except for my daughter who is in college in manila and she lives with my mother.

My ex-wife's lawyer has admitted to my lawyer that i really do have a case but it can't be used in court.

I am not a lawyer but i read the family code before i filed just to know what are my rights and they are very few.

Para hindi OT.
For all of the difficulties a person would go through just to be free, we should have divorce in the country.


#56 antwanshakeel

antwanshakeel

    Wanton

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 722 posts

Posted 10 December 2005 - 05:29 PM



It is a very slow and tedious process unless you know someone who can make it happen in 3 months for 200,000 pesos and no appearances in court.

The usual complaint is psychological incapacity. drug abuse,homosexuality, non-consumation of the marriage vows(no sex) are the rest i think. But these reasons have to be present and was not disclosed before the marriage.

Infidelity is not a ground for annullment but for legal separation only.

The division of the assets is usually the bone of contention. The kids are used as a bargaining chip unless you can prove that she is an unfit mother. Children below 7 years old are automatically given to the mother.

My take on the 3rd question is the actual process? If it is then you have to get a very good lawyer and be honest with him. He will be your friend,priest for the duration of the case.
I filed my case in 2002 and it is still pending because she is contesting. As i have said in my previous post,  she would keep quiet for 2 million.

My children are with me except for my daughter who is in college in manila and she lives with my mother.

My ex-wife's lawyer has admitted to my lawyer that i really do have a case but it can't be used in court.

I am not a lawyer but i read the family code before i filed just to know what are my rights and they are very few.

Para hindi OT.
For all of the difficulties a person would go through just to be free, we should have divorce in the country.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



200k is really expensive but you cant put a price to freedom

#57 torix

torix

    Tease

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 692 posts

Posted 10 December 2005 - 05:52 PM

kaya marahil nowadays marami ang naglive in para wala nang kuskos balungos pag nagkasawaan o nagkasamaan - divorce may papeles pa yan - yung live in, aregluhan na lang

#58 Guest_wackeen_*

Guest_wackeen_*
  • Guests

Posted 12 December 2005 - 12:14 PM

But the thing here is they already got their selves into it… were talking about those people who were already got married for wrong reasons… people who viewed and realized that getting married was a mistake… people who are suffering, being abused and living in a miserable life during their marriage… how about those people who became a victim because of these mistakes? And their children… aren’t we going to give them another chance?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



using this post as a jump-off point, but Tanya am not directly responding to you..

the beauty of these forums is we can make focused but well-rounded discussions. pag masyadong malawak ang topic, sabog na masyado di ba? and so fortunately or unfortunately, divorce is primarily a legal matter.

divorce is a legal remedy or escape route from a marriage (as a legal union). now the reasons to enter and exit marriage are multi-faceted. in the case of abused women and children there problems are much deeper than a marriage contract. there are bad husbands and bad fathers (say what you will, but you can be one but not the other). divorce will help in managing one, but not the other.

#59 Tanya08

Tanya08

    Charmer

  • (05) Regular
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 432 posts

Posted 12 December 2005 - 04:12 PM

using this post as a jump-off point, but Tanya am not directly responding to you..

the beauty of these forums is we can make focused but well-rounded discussions. pag masyadong malawak ang topic, sabog na masyado di ba? and so fortunately or unfortunately, divorce is primarily a legal matter.

divorce is a legal remedy or escape route from a marriage (as a legal union). now the reasons to enter and exit marriage are multi-faceted. in the case of abused women and children there problems are much deeper than a marriage contract. there are bad husbands and bad fathers (say what you will, but you can be one but not the other). divorce will help in managing one, but not the other.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


i guess you’re right divorce is something more about legal matter and we should know them first if were planning to go through it. kaya lng kse wala pa ring divorce d2 saten kaya im asking everyone if their agree or not, but its really nice to know about the legal matter pra ma-educate din kme so thank you guys for sharing your thoughts and knowledge about this thread. :) keep it up! :cool:

to hmlokh thanks a lot sa mga info.. ive learned a lot sa mga posts mo.. :)

basta ako, i still agree that we should have divorce in the ph. I guess mas marami ang nag post na agree din cla.

#60 veco

veco

    Looker

  • (03) Newbie
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 17 December 2005 - 07:25 PM

i won't go for divorce in the phils.. kase baka ma-take for granted lang yung marriage kung sakalai eh..

though i know mahirap, matagal and magastos yung annulment process, mas mabuti pa din yun para hindi magpadalus-dalos yung mga nagpapakasal.

sabe nga ng Diyos diba, what God has joined together, no man shall separate them (tama ba?) =)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users