Till death us do part

Uxoricide is not a word one usually comes across. It means the killing of one's wife, or the person who does it. It can be taken to be the opposite of an uxorious husband.

The latter meaning an overfondness, or excessive fondness for one's wife. The uxorious husband is a rare find indeed, although that is probably healthy. I am never happy with excessive behaviour, whichever way it leans.

Most men and women tend to have a love/hate relationship within marriage. The hate comes through the constraints sometimes imposed by that institution, and idiosyncrasies that are delightful at the start of a relationship and extremely irritating as time goes by.

But mostly couples overcome the urge to throttle their 'better' halves and manage to live together, if not in harmony in some kind of 'live and let live' mode. Others decide to leave the marriage, even though the absence of divorce makes it more difficult.

I came upon the term "uxoricide" in yesterday's Times report on a case which has made legal history. A man was convicted of wilful homicide although the body of the wife was never found. Up till now one could not convict of murder unless the body was found.

The man was jailed for 30 years. There is no doubt that this judgment gives society a clear message that murdering your wife is not an option.

In my view unless there is a conceivable chance that a wife has flown the coop, foul play should be suspected. When the husband actually admits to the crime there are justifiable grounds to convict.

But let us look at the reasons given for the crime. The husband's defence was that he could not take the nagging and the beating of their toddler son.

The nagging, a regular male complaint, although a nuisance, is hardly a reason to top one's wife; and the beating of the child, although we do not have the victim's version of these occurrences, is a more serious issue, but still not grounds for further violence.

Let us deal with the last issue first. If there was a case of child abuse, did none of the other family members notice? What about the neighbours?

Besides, if the husband was concerned about his child being abused, was there no-one he could turn to? Parish priest, family doctor? I am not sure how social services work in Gozo, but this case should give the department food for thought.

As for the nagging, there is no doubt that constant henpecking is an insufferable torment. But again, getting permanently rid of the tormentor is not an option.

A man who finds his marriage intolerable should just leave the union. Otherwise "till death us do part" can take an ominous turn, as this history-making case has shown.

It certainly should make people who dissuade couples from leaving a bad marriage rethink.

Many argue that marriages should be kept together for the sake of the children's well-being. But the well-being of children is certainly not ensured in a violent family, or in a bad environment, for whatever reason. And in extreme cases, when murder is involved, the children are not only deprived of one parent on a temporary basis but forever.

Sex, drugs and rock and roll

Rock And Roll was the only thing missing in the results of a survey by Fr Charles Tabone carried in Il-Gens yesterday. The cause of youngsters' smoking, drinking and indulging in sex, it concludes, is that the family is in crisis.

Fr Tabone said he found the results alarming since his analysis showed that 20 per cent of adolescents found life had more downs than ups.

This was cause for concern, he elaborated, because the majority of youngsters showing dissatisfaction with life said the cause was home life and the family. Ten per cent said that they would like to be rid of conflict within the family and between individuals.

The results came from a sample of 300 boys and girls, representative of 28,300 adolescents attending state secondary schools. Surveys are funny things, because a) one never knows whether the responses are genuine; b) responses depend on how questions are asked and c) they can be interpreted in many ways.

For example, if a third or 20 per cent of youngsters surveyed are dissatisfied with home life and the family, then a majority are not.

However, it seems that only 47 per cent are satisfied with family and life in general, with 33 per cent saying either that they are "a little happy" or "unhappy". A confused lot, this 33 per cent. I would have thought they would be one or the other.

Sixty per cent said "things were not bad" and 6.2 per cent said they were very happy at home but not in life generally.

But, of course, sex and alcohol have always caught media attention.

Specifically, according to Il-Gens, more than a third of the young people surveyed drink alcohol; one in five smoke; 10 per cent had a sexual experience and 3.4 per cent were sometimes offered drugs. Youngsters obviously do not rock and roll anymore.

But seriously, I do not hang out with adolescents, however, I do not believe that (representatively) only a third drink alcohol, I am sure more do, or that only 10 per cent had a sexual experience.

Exploration into the adult world of sex and other 'naughty' things is the prerogative of the young since forever. It is a natural process. This does not mean to say that young people should not be taught morals and values, but I cannot understand the alarm even if I do not rate the figures as a true picture.

Besides, it seems to be assumed that the drinking, smoking and sex is down to dissatisfaction due to mainly the crisis in the family, specifically family conflict.

But we are not told what connects the things together. The reason why youngsters smoke, drink and experiment with sex and drugs is not just down to dissatisfaction. It could be one of the reasons for some, but it certainly cannot be concluded to be the cause.

Smoking, for example, can be laid at the door of the tobacco industry who spend a vast amount of money in advertising and sponsoring sport and entertainment in order to get youngsters hooked.

Earlier generations smoked even more, but I do not remember family crisis or dissatisfaction with life connected to it.

Certainly, wide access to pornography as on the Internet would have a detrimental effect on young people's moral values. But I would make a clear distinction between natural curiosity and sexual awakening in the young, and pornography.

As to the 10 per cent who wanted to be rid of 'fighting in the family', or glied individwali (I had a problem dealing with individual fighting! Do they mean shadow-boxing?), conflict and tensions are inherent to any group of individuals living together. It is how those conflicts are resolved that should be the objective of bettering young peoples' lives.

Code on disability

Timed to coincide with the charity extravaganzas we are inundated with over the Christmas season, the Broadcasting Authority has launched a code of conduct on the portrayal of disabled persons in the media.

People do get carried away to the extent of frenzy with the new telephone system of raising cash, interspersed with comedy. It is responsible that well-meaning, but misguided people, are made aware that using people with disabilities to get people to dig deeper in their pockets can be demeaning and portray disabled people as helpless victims.

The Commission for Persons with Disability have worked hard to ensure that the disabled gain acceptance as people who can contribute in the workplace and society as a whole and that they should be treated with the dignity they deserve. This code of practice is a step in the right direction.