Divorce In The Philippines

[orionblaze000]

Question.. if some people are soo itching to be divorce.. why get married in the first place??

The reason of failed marriages is the "failure" of expectations. That's right. Thats

the reality. I mean. How would you know that your loving boyfriend Snores alot when he sleeps

how could you know that the girl you have been yearning for to be with forever more

does'nt know how to cook. how could you have know that you are both sexually incompatible.

stuff like that. so my solution. before you guys get married. test drive muna for a couple of years

at least malalaman mo kung ok kayo or not.. and don't give me the "lugi yung babae" crap..

women now a days are more capable to take care of themselves. than 10 years ago. and we are

now more open, sa mg single parents. ok

[tranzfixer]

hindi namna kasi lahat ng ikinasal ngaun ay masaya pa magkasama kaya dapat may divorse..

 

kaya nga me annulment eh....redundant na pag me divorce mam...

[lowpost]

kaya nga me annulment eh....redundant na pag me divorce mam...

 

 

 

..+bket pa kasi sila nagpakasal kung hindi rin naman pala sila masaya sa pinakasalan nila?? 2loy nag ka2ron ng divorce..!!

[geneticfreak]

kaya nga me annulment eh....redundant na pag me divorce mam...

 

 

Hmm.. pardon my ignorance on this matter but we seem to hear the words divorce and annulment a lot in the media nowadays would anyone care to enlighten us and tell us what difference is between the two?

 

Sori if OT

[friendly0603]

you proven my point here that divorce is an easiest way to get out of marriage..by just a colussion between the spouse the divorce can be granted..while in annulment me collusion report pa from fiscal and the office of the sol gen will comment or file its opposition...

 

I expounded this as the difference between annulment and divorce.... Do you think that any girl will agree with you at no fault divorce when you are both fighting? hehehe then you must not know women?

 

why i said it has the same concept and effect or i qualify almost ?why we need divorce to cut the marriage ties and remarry which basically available in annulment...the effect of whether it is apply retroactively is out of the question...

 

If you leave your spouse, it has the same effect so is it the other option that is equivalent to the two above?

 

mali po sir because in case you just leave your spouse you cant remarry and exposed yourself for the crime of bigamy in case you remarried of if you just cohabit adultery and concubinage....

 

How can it be out of the question? You limited the conditions of how it applies. I'm sure that annulment is preferred over divorce because like i said no more financial obligations to the spouse. The same is in effect in just leaving your spouse. I'm sure that a lot of people still remarry. Hindi mo naman malalaman if you don't check. Bakit ka ba maghahabol in cases of bigamy? Does it fix your marriage? Can we check how many adulterers or those who engage in concubinage are in jail? We have a president and senators with multiple families. I believe these crimes aren't the ones people are afraid of.

 

Bakit meron mga tao na have two marriage contracts in NSO? Dapat impossible di ba if the previous marriage participants are still both living. Dapat isa lang.

 

If you are incapable of getting married (psychologically), how come later on you are allowed to? Let's say you married wife 1, annulled her, go on to marry wife 2 - are you psychologically capable now? If not, annul wife 2, - should you be allowed to marry wife 3? If you weren't gay before, and became gay later? Or if you were gay and was reborn now to be straight, should you be allowed to marry now?

 

i follow your logic sir so if you file a divorce because of irreconcilable difference how sure that in your 2nd marriage

magiging ok samahan niyo wala naman di ba..its the same thing ....divorce and annulment is basically within the same genre though it differs on some points..and i proven my point here that still annulment is much stiffer that why some of us here wants divorce...

 

Fukc, how can these argument be correct? This I meant for filing annulment. Ang hirap magpaliwanag. The conditions of annulment are like you said stiffer pero invalid and a farce. Anong logic ba ginagamit mo?

Divorce is better because it's the truth and it happens. There is no guarantee making the relationship work but that's why there's divorce. Kaya may divorce to try to make the next relationship work.

 

I meant if you were annulled, the conditions for the next marriage hasn't changed and therefore you shouldn't be allowed to marry - otherwise - you will ask for another annulment.

 

That's the basic premise for divorce - if you fail this marriage, you can try the next time. That's not the premise of annulment to try again. The premise of annulment is an invalid marriage.

 

i reiterate my point here i have nothing against divorce but i just dont want that a marriage contract which im going to sign is just a mere scrap of paper..

 

i agree on this but this argument is does not deny the fact that divorce is the easiest way out...

 

Is there an easier? Or an easy way that makes divorce the easiest...

Then don't sign. Make your commitment to God/Allah/Brother Mike/whoever... Something that government will have no control over.

 

uulitin ko sir di lang psychological incapacity ang grounds ng annulment..its too many to mention pero bigyan kita isa following your example...a girl who gets pregnant and due to social norms sa pilipinas ang mga magulang ng babae pinilit pakasal ang anak nila sa lalake kahit sinabi pa ng anak nila it was just a mistake....in these example sir it can be a valid ground for annulment because there is lack of consent wc is the essential req of valid marriage...so theres a way out..divorce is not needed...

 

Is this easy or automatic? Is it easy to prove? Will the church agree? I don't think so. Ang dami yatang nagpapakasal na buntis na. Do you have a lot of statistics to prove that these pregnant girls on their wedding have filed for annulment? I use psychological incapacity because I think this is the majority factor for annulment.

 

if you read it sir then why youre argument is so lame...definitely other countries will not copied it whiy simple lang sagot diyan soveriegnity and countries have different constitution..i just wanna remind you that family code is legislated in consonance with our constitution..i dont wanna go deeper with that...maybe other countries constitution provides otherwise..i myself is polygamous in one time of my life but il just do it before marriage..divorce will not cure that problem much more worsen it...did MTC impart us not to respect our own laws and be polygamous?i dnt think so sir...

 

my argument is not good on the country thing. You got me there. The point here is progress. Phil. laws in general haven't been that great enough for people to believe in it. Do you believe that if you're innocent you won't go to jail? Do you believe that the arresting cop is righteous enough? Why are the Marcoses free? Why is erap free? Why is GMA not in jail? This is totally separate so I'll drop that argument; it will lead nowhere.

 

you cannot compare family code to death penalty because the latter is just imposing penalty, did not prescribe any offense and can be suspended anytime....while family code is continous in application and it never been suspended since it became law and it is applied to all filipino even though living abroad...family code is not changed the congress just propose ammendment...

 

peace :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley:

 

Is the following example not a change? My example before the change in family code; any dad who acknowledges their offspring are allowed to use the dad's family name. Now, it's always the mom's name right? Unless you can produce a phony recto marriage contract...

 

The dads here don't even have rights like visitation in other countries. Dito puwede itakas ng babae ang anak mo at hindi mo na makita ulit.

Edited May 28, 2008 by friendly0603

[friendly0603]

kaya nga me annulment eh....redundant na pag me divorce mam...

 

never redundant in my point of view.

[friendly0603]

Hmm.. pardon my ignorance on this matter but we seem to hear the words divorce and annulment a lot in the media nowadays would anyone care to enlighten us and tell us what difference is between the two?

 

Sori if OT

 

Some basics differences below:

Annulment = proving that the marriage is invalid from the start. No Alimony.

 

Divorce = change in the participants that created a need to separate and find a new spouse. Alimony from spouse with greater income.

 

Some common grounds:

- Dissolution of marriage

- Free to marry again

[tranzfixer]

I expounded this as the difference between annulment and divorce.... Do you think that any girl will agree with you at no fault divorce when you are both fighting? hehehe then you must not know women?

 

sir you must limit your argument on annulment and divorce kasi halo halo ka na...now women naman na ang topic..it proves lang na di mo alam ang topic mo at bato ka lang ng bato ng argument out of context..tsk tsk..

 

 

How can it be out of the question? You limited the conditions of how it applies. I'm sure that annulment is preferred over divorce because like i said no more financial obligations to the spouse. The same is in effect in just leaving your spouse. I'm sure that a lot of people still remarry. Hindi mo naman malalaman if you don't check. Bakit ka ba maghahabol in cases of bigamy? Does it fix your marriage? Can we check how many adulterers or those who engage in concubinage are in jail? We have a president and senators with multiple families. I believe these crimes aren't the ones people are afraid of.

 

OUT OF CONTEXT.....pag me divorce ba fix na ang second marriage mo...sundan ko ulit ang napaka illogical explanation mo sir...kung sa tingin mo di pala kaw takot sa crime that i mention..then whats the use of divorce e di mag asawa ka ng marami and enjoy adulterous relationship..eh bakit pa tayo magdedebate sa sa kung dapat ba me divorce o wala na...

 

Bakit meron mga tao na have two marriage contracts in NSO? Dapat impossible di ba if the previous marriage participants are still both living. Dapat isa lang.

 

Does this reasoning have something to do with annulment and divorce?or just a question of implementation of law by the government or the agency.

 

 

Fukc, how can these argument be correct? This I meant for filing annulment. Ang hirap magpaliwanag. The conditions of annulment are like you said stiffer pero invalid and a farce. Anong logic ba ginagamit mo?

Divorce is better because it's the truth and it happens. There is no guarantee making the relationship work but that's why there's divorce. Kaya may divorce to try to make the next relationship work.

 

sir mahirap talaga magpaliwang pagdi mo alm ang subject matter mo..halo halo na nga argument you even questioning the lifestyle ng mga politician...anong connection sa subject matter...

 

 

I meant if you were annulled, the conditions for the next marriage hasn't changed and therefore you shouldn't be allowed to marry - otherwise - you will ask for another annulment.

 

That's the basic premise for divorce - if you fail this marriage, you can try the next time. That's not the premise of annulment to try again. The premise of annulment is an invalid marriage.

 

sweeping statement mo sir..meaning di mo alam talga subject matter..payo ko sayo magbasa ka muna to enhance youre reasoning capabilities..

 

 

Is there an easier? Or an easy way that makes divorce the easiest...

Then don't sign. Make your commitment to God/Allah/Brother Mike/whoever... Something that government will have no control over.

 

if you want this government controlled you the go to outer space where magisa ka lang at wala nakikialam sayo..what a lame argument sir...

 

Is this easy or automatic? Is it easy to prove? Will the church agree? I don't think so. Ang dami yatang nagpapakasal na buntis na. Do you have a lot of statistics to prove that these pregnant girls on their wedding have filed for annulment? I use psychological incapacity because I think this is the majority factor for annulment.

 

CHURCH anong connection ng church sa annulment and divorce and the law were talking about....

if its easy to prove ask your lawyer ......hahaha...

 

 

 

my argument is not good on the country thing. You got me there. The point here is progress. Phil. laws in general haven't been that great enough for people to believe in it. Do you believe that if you're innocent you won't go to jail? Do you believe that the arresting cop is righteous enough? Why are the Marcoses free? Why is erap free? Why is GMA not in jail? This is totally separate so I'll drop that argument; it will lead nowhere.

 

yes you must drop your argument because it has nothing to do with annulment an divorce kaya it will lead to nowhere talaga...

 

 

Is the following example not a change? My example before the change in family code; any dad who acknowledges their offspring are allowed to use the dad's family name. Now, it's always the mom's name right? Unless you can produce a phony recto marriage contract...

 

sir mali ka na naman revilla law an ammendment to family code allows an offspring to use his fathers name if the fathers acknowledge the child..before it is not....

you must read muna sir kasi out of the blue na yung mga post nalilito yung mga nagbabasa...buti sana kung tama ang post mo..law ang pinaguusapan natin we dont need personal opinion...

 

 

The dads here don't even have rights like visitation in other countries. Dito puwede itakas ng babae ang anak mo at hindi mo na makita ulit.

WRONG...the father here has the right to visitation and enjoy his offspring...ulitin ko sir magbasa ko muna before magpost nagugulo ang isp ng nagbabasa dito...

sa argument mo na pwede itakas ang bata maybe ang gusto mo palbasin dito ay sa custody ng bata...the custody of the child is enjoy by the mom until the child is 7 yrs old..unless the court sees that the mother is dont have capacity to support financially the needs of the child or the mother is living a immoral life...pagkatapos po sa ikapitong taon pwede ngayon tanungin sa bata kung kanino niya gusto sumama.....malinaw naman siguro ito and you can reserch on this matter..availble xa sa legal intermediaries sir....

 

NOTE

i respect your opinion on this matter and pwede mo paniwalaan ang gusto mo paniwalaan...ang sa akin lang you posted here false information on the subject matter...which para sa akin alam ko din naman kasi pinagaralan ko ito...magpopost ako para naman sa information ng iba...

 

peace.... :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley:

Edited May 28, 2008 by tranzfixer

[tranzfixer]

Some basics differences below:

Annulment = proving that the marriage is invalid from the start. No Alimony.

 

Divorce = change in the participants that created a need to separate and find a new spouse. Alimony from spouse with greater income.

 

Some common grounds:

- Dissolution of marriage

- Free to marry again

Alimony, maintenance or spousal support is an obligation established by law in many countries that is based on the premise that both spouses have an absolute obligation to support each other during the marriage (or civil union) unless they are legally separated. In some instances, the obligation to support may continue after separation...

 

ANG IBIG SABIHIN NITO SIR ANG ALIMONY AY INCIDENTAL lang sa annulment and divorce cases..it can be alleged on the cases at bar...but the court may or may not rule in both cases unless you give legal grounds for alimony...

it is not true that when the spouse has a greater income you were obliged to support it will depends on certain factors which the courts will determined....... :thumbsupsmiley: :thumbsupsmiley:

 

you must read you law before posting...

:sleepysmiley03: :sleepysmiley03: :sleepysmiley03:

Edited May 28, 2008 by tranzfixer

[friendly0603]

are you a lawyer? Do I need to get a divorce lawyer to help you out?

Are you from the phils or from a foreign country?

ang hirap basahin ng posts mo. Sobrang galing mo yata ....

 

What i posted are basics? What you are saying are specifics? case to case like you said the court will decide....'

 

Spousal Support (Alimony) Basics

When a married couple gets a divorce, the court may award "alimony" or spousal support to one of the former spouses, based either on an agreement between the couple or a decision by the court itself. Following is a discussion of the basics of alimony and spousal support

 

Did you see what happened with Sir Paul McCartney and his wife? Generalization.... What is more common.... You have to prove specific cases.

 

How about yung divorce ni Britney Spears? If your friend or acquaintance got divorced/annulled, would I know about it?

 

I have a few friends who went thru annulment: no spousal support.... Divorce, i know someone who went thru it... but since his ex-wife was the one who wanted out of the marriage and I think hooked up with a well-off guy din yata - i don't know what happened.

 

Watch "Bye, Bye Love" - Alimony being paid by 3 divorced dads.

 

Do I have to be specific in each case of divorce and annullment? I'm making the generalizations that are observed around us.

 

How old are you transfixer?

 

OUT OF CONTEXT.....pag me divorce ba fix na ang second marriage mo...sundan ko ulit ang napaka illogical explanation mo sir...kung sa tingin mo di pala kaw takot sa crime that i mention..then whats the use of divorce e di mag asawa ka ng marami and enjoy adulterous relationship..eh bakit pa tayo magdedebate sa sa kung dapat ba me divorce o wala na...

 

Logic? I didn't say it fixed the marriage pag may divorce. Ang sabi ko those who wants to end their marriage have that route and try again. Ikaw ang illogical.

 

Para sa mga taong gustong maayos ang pagsasama nila, they want to divorce... Now sa mga non-law abiding citizens - wala na silang paki kung may divorce nga.

 

Generalizations ito for those marriages that don't work. I'm not interested in exceptions or case to case basis.

 

Mahirap magpaliwanag sa isang katulad mo dahil walang kang sasabihin kundi not related. Are you looking at the overall picture of what I'm trying to explain? Laws are affected by politicians by the society by the church... Everything is related.

 

============

sir mali ka na naman revilla law an ammendment to family code allows an offspring to use his fathers name if the fathers acknowledge the child..before it is not....

============

 

This is a new change. Originally allowed - i know someone na have kids na iba-iba apelyido, then hindi allowed tapos ngayon puwede na ulit.... tama pa rin ako. Read below

 

June 18, 1949 (merong term as natural child na illegitimate) Civil Code of the Philippines

 

Art. 282. A recognized natural child has the right:

 

(1) To bear the surname of the parent recognizing him:

(2) To receive support from such parent, in conformity with article 291;

 

(3) To receive, in a proper case, the hereditary portion which is determined in this Code. (134)

 

 

July 6, 1987 Family Code

 

Art. 176. Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be under the parental authority of their mother, and shall be entitled to support in conformity with this Code. The legitime of each illegitimate child shall consist of one-half of the legitime of a legitimate child. Except for this modification, all other provisions in the Civil Code governing successional rights shall remain in force. (287a)

 

As ammended by (As amended by EO No. 227 and RA 9225) family code i believe this happened recently 2007

 

Art. 176. Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be under the parental authority of their mother, and shall be entitled to support in conformity with this Code. However, illegitimate children may use the surname of their father if their filiation has been expressly recognized by the father through the record of birth appearing in the civil register, or when an admission in a public document or private handwritten instrument is made by the father. Provided, the father has the right to institute an action before the regular courts to prove non-filiation during his lifetime. The legitime of each illegitimate child shall consist of one-half of the legitime of a legitimate child. (289a)

 

Yung itakas I meant if hindi kayo nagpakasal. Of course if kasal kayo you have rights. Sorry kulang ang sinabi ko.

 

if you studied all these, lawyer wannabe ka ba?

 

Am also posting for information's sake. Sorry sa iba sa mga OT na topics na overall related to relationships and some relation to annullment and divorce.

 

Ang alam mo lang pala is yung from Revilla and yung 1987 version. The civil code is older than that. Kailan pa ba tayo nagkaroon ng sariling government?

 

Para sa mga interested dyan, just google some of these and compare. Maybe you are an exception to the generalization that my opinions are based upon. Please contact transfixer na lang

 

Ayos ba? :thumbsupsmiley:

Edited May 29, 2008 by friendly0603

[tranzfixer]

are you a lawyer? Do I need to get a divorce lawyer to help you out?

 

baka ikaw po sir ang kailangan ng divorce lawyer....kasi mga sisabi mo based on hearsay...do i need to answer you if im a lawyer....

 

Are you from the phils or from a foreign country?

 

pinoy na pinoy ako at nasa pilipinas ako

 

ang hirap basahin ng posts mo. Sobrang galing mo yata ....

 

kung di ka marunong magbasa at umintindi at di mo alam ang context ng topic na pinagtatalunan natin...mahihirapan ka talaga....

 

What i posted are basics? What you are saying are specifics? case to case like you said the court will decide....'

 

FYI sir ang pinaguusapan natin ay ANNULMent AT DIvorce which basically there must be a law that governed....you need to be specific theres no room for generalization and basic argument which available only in laymans term...

 

 

Spousal Support (Alimony) Basics

When a married couple gets a divorce, the court may award "alimony" or spousal support to one of the former spouses, based either on an agreement between the couple or a decision by the court itself. Following is a discussion of the basics of alimony and spousal support

 

 

Did you see what happened with Sir Paul McCartney and his wife? Generalization.... What is more common.... You have to prove specific cases.

 

have you read the whole case of mc cartney and britney ?if not better read it...ayoko naman na icopy paste pa kasi mahaba maxado....

 

How about yung divorce ni Britney Spears? If your friend or acquaintance got divorced/annulled, would I know about it?

 

I have a few friends who went thru annulment: no spousal support.... Divorce, i know someone who went thru it... but since his ex-wife was the one who wanted out of the marriage and I think hooked up with a well-off guy din yata - i don't know what happened.

 

 

i dont need a friends experience to know whats the difference between this two..it can be learned...mahirap kasi i argue everything that is hearsay and outside the legal intermediaries....

 

 

Watch "Bye, Bye Love" - Alimony being paid by 3 divorced dads.

 

MOVIE ba yan sir...kung movie yan kathang isip yan...there are not based on actual facts and governing laws...

 

Do I have to be specific in each case of divorce and annullment? I'm making the generalizations that are observed around us.

 

yes you have to be specific kasi were talking here of law and its applicability...di ka pwede manghula on how it is apply....what is your basis for your argument?hearsay..kasi sabi ng kaibigan mo ganito kasi napanood mo sa sine ganito....

be resourceful sir.....

 

How old are you transfixer? OT na tong question mo...tsaka tranzfixer po....

 

 

 

Logic? I didn't say it fixed the marriage pag may divorce. Ang sabi ko those who wants to end their marriage have that route and try again. Ikaw ang illogical.

 

well i follow your argument in annulment pwede mo pawalang bisa ang kasal niyo and try again....

 

Para sa mga taong gustong maayos ang pagsasama nila, they want to divorce... Now sa mga non-law abiding citizens - wala na silang paki kung may divorce nga.

 

 

basahin mo ang pervious post mo di ba kaw ang nag argue niyan.....tsk tsk nakalimutan mo na...o baka naman you just throw argument which you did not think of...

 

 

Generalizations ito for those marriages that don't work. I'm not interested in exceptions or case to case basis.

 

Mahirap magpaliwanag sa isang katulad mo dahil walang kang sasabihin kundi not related. Are you looking at the overall picture of what I'm trying to explain? Laws are affected by politicians by the society by the church... Everything is related.

 

kaya mahirap ipaliwang sir di mo muna pinagaralan before you qoute my post not knowing i knew quite well the topic....

im not saying this my opinion but it is based on law which is written not just mere hearsay....

 

 

============

sir mali ka na naman revilla law an ammendment to family code allows an offspring to use his fathers name if the fathers acknowledge the child..before it is not....

============

 

This is a new change. Originally allowed - i know someone na have kids na iba-iba apelyido, then hindi allowed tapos ngayon puwede na ulit.... tama pa rin ako. Read below

 

June 18, 1949 (merong term as natural child na illegitimate) Civil Code of the Philippines

 

Art. 282. A recognized natural child has the right:

 

(1) To bear the surname of the parent recognizing him:

(2) To receive support from such parent, in conformity with article 291;

 

(3) To receive, in a proper case, the hereditary portion which is determined in this Code. (134)

 

 

July 6, 1987 Family Code

 

Art. 176. Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be under the parental authority of their mother, and shall be entitled to support in conformity with this Code. The legitime of each illegitimate child shall consist of one-half of the legitime of a legitimate child. Except for this modification, all other provisions in the Civil Code governing successional rights shall remain in force. (287a)

 

As ammended by (As amended by EO No. 227 and RA 9225) family code i believe this happened recently 2007

 

Art. 176. Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be under the parental authority of their mother, and shall be entitled to support in conformity with this Code. However, illegitimate children may use the surname of their father if their filiation has been expressly recognized by the father through the record of birth appearing in the civil register, or when an admission in a public document or private handwritten instrument is made by the father. Provided, the father has the right to institute an action before the regular courts to prove non-filiation during his lifetime. The legitime of each illegitimate child shall consist of one-half of the legitime of a legitimate child. (289a)

 

Yung itakas I meant if hindi kayo nagpakasal. Of course if kasal kayo you have rights. Sorry kulang ang sinabi ko.

 

apology accepted....hehehehe

 

if you studied all these, lawyer wannabe ka ba?

 

and if i say yes....whats next....

 

Am also posting for information's sake. Sorry sa iba sa mga OT na topics na overall related to relationships and some relation to annullment and divorce.

 

Ang alam mo lang pala is yung from Revilla and yung 1987 version. The civil code is older than that. Kailan pa ba tayo nagkaroon ng sariling government?

 

SIR IM SURE YOURE NOT EVEN HAND A HAND IN THE STUDY OF LAW...I DONT BLAME YOU IF DI MO ALAM ANG TUNGKOL SA PASIKOT SIKOT SA BATAS...SUBALIT NAGPOST KA PA NG PROVISION MIND YOU SIR PROVISION IN THE CIVIL CODE REGARDING FAMILY CODE IS ALREADY OBSOLETE AND AMMENDED BY 1987 FAMILY CODE....IT IS THE AMMENDATORY LAW TO THE CIVIL CODE KAYA DI MO NA SIYA PWEDE GAMITIN...eto po sinasabi ko sayo nag aargue ka without even knowing it...matagal napo di gingamit ang provision sa civil code with respect to family code kasi siya po ay na amyendahan na..

 

the civil code is older than that revilla law and 1987 family code kaya nga siya di na applicable eh...it is already AMMENDED.......for your information sir....

 

 

Para sa mga interested dyan, just google some of these and compare. Maybe you are an exception to the generalization that my opinions are based upon. Please contact transfixer na lang

 

siguro sir ikaw ang kailangan magresearch muna....

kasi ikaw lang naman ang nagqoute sa post ko eh....

you assume you know everything but it seems in your argument you know nothing ....

 

Ayos ba? :thumbsupsmiley:

 

:thumbsupsmiley: ayos na ayos

[complicated8]

Some divorce statistics for you.

 

Percentage of New Marriages which End in Divorce

 

Sweden 54.9%

Japan 1.9%

Guatemala 0.13%

 

Hindi lahat ng countries with divorce have high divorce rates. The good thing about it is the option is there.

 

Here is quote that I found online...

 

As a lawyer handling family court cases for years, I have come to accept that courts have an unrealistic (if not hypocritical) view of when annulment is justified. Contrary to popular perception, a lot of annulment petitions get denied. It seems that courts are swayed only by certain grounds which are really extreme. I wonder when courts will accept the fact marriage can and do fall apart on simpler, albeit actual grounds which prove traumatic to spouses.

 

From the phil news...

 

Statistics from the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) showed that 7,753 annulment cases were filed last year compared to 7,138 in 2006.

 

Before 2006, the number of annulment cases never breached the 7,000-mark.

 

Pressed to explain the surge, Devanadera said it could be because society now accepted separated couples.

 

“The society tolerates it. It is now acceptable for a couple to be separated,” she said.

 

Devanadera said the Church should be aware of the trend and help troubled couples.

 

“We call on the Church to do something about this,” she said, noting that break-ups had the greatest effect on the children. “In the end, the losers are the children,” she said.

 

=========

 

This is the main reason why there is a need for divorce. Another quote...

 

"We have come across so many cases where the parties were really not serious in getting into the marriage…but got stuck because the act of getting married has serious legal repercussions that can’t be made to go away with a snap of a finger. Getting in is cheaper…getting out is definitely not. There are several posts to the effect that even if a marriage is null and void from the very beginning, a petition MUST be filed in court to declare its nullity. "

[friendly0603]

kung di ka marunong magbasa at umintindi at di mo alam ang context ng topic na pinagtatalunan natin...mahihirapan ka talaga....

 

nahihirapan ako dahil hindi ka marunong mag-quote to separate your words from mine. raise your hands to those who think i can't read and understand..... or post na lang kayo dito.

 

FYI sir ang pinaguusapan natin ay ANNULMent AT DIvorce which basically there must be a law that governed....you need to be specific theres no room for generalization and basic argument which available only in laymans term...

 

The law is generally applied... specifics are ironed out in court.

 

i dont need a friends experience to know whats the difference between this two..it can be learned...mahirap kasi i argue everything that is hearsay and outside the legal intermediaries....

 

real cases i post have some semblance of truth. you don't even quote your legal reasons.

 

basahin mo ang pervious post mo di ba kaw ang nag argue niyan.....tsk tsk nakalimutan mo na...o baka naman you just throw argument which you did not think of...

you argued an incorrect point. - end of that.

 

kaya mahirap ipaliwang sir di mo muna pinagaralan before you qoute my post not knowing i knew quite well the topic....

im not saying this my opinion but it is based on law which is written not just mere hearsay....

 

wala naman specific case that we are discussing here to point out your explanations.

 

if you studied all these, lawyer wannabe ka ba?

 

and if i say yes....whats next....

 

Ever wondered why lawyers are regarded as sharks? and given not so good adjectives? or kaya ka still lawyer wannabe is because of how you reason? Have you won in court? Probably not....

 

SIR IM SURE YOURE NOT EVEN HAND A HAND IN THE STUDY OF LAW...I DONT BLAME YOU IF DI MO ALAM ANG TUNGKOL SA PASIKOT SIKOT SA BATAS...SUBALIT NAGPOST KA PA NG PROVISION MIND YOU SIR PROVISION IN THE CIVIL CODE REGARDING FAMILY CODE IS ALREADY OBSOLETE AND AMMENDED BY 1987 FAMILY CODE....IT IS THE AMMENDATORY LAW TO THE CIVIL CODE KAYA DI MO NA SIYA PWEDE GAMITIN...eto po sinasabi ko sayo nag aargue ka without even knowing it...matagal napo di gingamit ang provision sa civil code with respect to family code kasi siya po ay na amyendahan na..

 

the civil code is older than that revilla law and 1987 family code kaya nga siya di na applicable eh...it is already AMMENDED.......for your information sir....

 

Did I say that it was applicable? I said that originally allowed then changed by the family code and now changed again by revilla.

 

Sinabi mo pa do not compare death penalty with family code, etc. bakit hindi na puwede gamiting point ang civil code? tapos sabi mo obsolete na. di ba binago nga? and that was the point. Nababago. Tapos sasabihin mong obsolete na. Napaka recent change nga nung revilla law eh. You cannot even understand that I have already proven previous to the 1987 family code na allowed gamitin ng anak ang apelyido ng tatay.

 

Ammendment:

Addition, deletion, or change to a legal document. All parties to the agreement must formally consent to an amendment by signing it. Only then does the amendment become an integral part of the document, binding on all parties to the original agreement.

 

siguro sir ikaw ang kailangan magresearch muna....

kasi ikaw lang naman ang nagqoute sa post ko eh....

you assume you know everything but it seems in your argument you know nothing ....

 

i think i have argued my point to an intelligent degree. I didn't assume to know everything--- you did that.

I have made generalizations of what is being observed.

 

some more point of research para dun sa ibang interesado kahit na hindi ako lawyer/wannabe.

 

What are the grounds for annulment?

 

1. Lack of parental consent in certain cases. If a party is 18 years or over, but below 21, and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of the parents/guardian. However, the marriage is validated if, upon reaching 21, the spouses freely cohabited with the other and both lived together as husband and wife.

 

2. Insanity. A marriage may be annulled if, at the time of marriage, either party was of unsound mind, unless such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife.

 

3. Fraud. The consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife. Fraud includes: (i) non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime involving moral turpitude; (ii) concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than her husband; (iii) concealment of sexually transmissible disease or STD, regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the marriage; or (iv) concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism or homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time of the marriage. However, no other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute such fraud as will give grounds for action for the annulment of marriage.

 

4. Force, intimidation or undue influence. If the consent of either party was obtained by any of these means, except in cases wherein the force, intimidation or undue influence having disappeared or ceased, the complaining party thereafter freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife.

 

5. Impotence. At the time of marriage, either party was physically incapable of consummating the marriage with the other, and such incapacity continues and appears to be incurable. Impotence is different from being infertile.

 

6. STD. If, at the time of marriage, either party was afflicted with a sexually-transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to be incurable. If the STD is not serious or is curable, it may still constitute fraud (see No. 3 above).

 

 

These reasons are not generally applicable to all kaya nga gusto nila ng divorce and generally (transfixer). Oo nga pala yung mga wife-beaters, addicts, lasenggero are very happy kasi your marriage cannot be voided.

 

Sana gawin nilang mahirap to get into marriage para mahirap din to get out of it... Kaso it's so easy to get married.

 

For people who get married to seek some guarantee. There is none in life. I wouldn't want my future wife to stay with me unhappy and just because we are married.

 

I'm sure that people who got married wanted to make it work. For those that think that everything is fixable, news flash --- it ain't. I do not claim to know their problems and every individual is different.

 

Some movies are reflective of current world society hindi kathang isip lamang although some are. Now pure fiction like Harry potter is different. "Story of Us" - couple who was at the brink of divorce but decided to work it out.

 

The end.....

[lavender]

sana ma-exist na yan dito..

[topsykretts]

To some extent, I subscribe to the option for divorce as a lot of couples marry for the wrong reasons. When your gf gets pregnant, marriage is not the solution. Giving birth and being responsible for your actions are more than enough. Some marry for wealth (yes, wealth!). When marriage turns sour beyond salvation, couples hurt each other emotionally, psychologically or most often physically. Wonder why there's a lot of wife battering cases? Even if the wife turns black and blue more frequently than a regular boxer, she will stay on because its sacred and their bound to it. Blame church and society for instilling such a myopic understanding? There should be a way out.