The remarkable divorce consensus

Its season has come round again, the remarkable divorce consensus. The Divorce Now! proponents have resumed their siege against the anti-divorce formation, from some of whom presumably we shall soon hear. They disagree vehemently about the other's proposed solution to the problem. But about the nature of the problem they seem to be agreed.

When, like most other people referring to Malta's actual family landscape, they speak of "current social realities", everyone seems to know just what it is that they are referring to, and they appear to agree that they are referring to the same thing: The "fact" that we have a high rate of marriage breakdown comparable to western rates. Am I the only one here who is astounded by their confidence that they know what is the case?

The divorce rate (that is, the rate of marriage breakdown) for other countries is calculated in several ways. Expressed as a percentage, it is usually a predictive relationship - meaning something like: "What are the chances of a marriage contracted in 2005 surviving, given the divorce rate of 2005?"

Calculating a divorce rate is complex - to the extent that, say, the 50 per cent divorce rate often given for the United States is scoffed at by some experts, who claim the rate peaked at 40 per cent in the early 1980s and has come down since. There are further complications. Different generations of couples face marital pressures differently, and so statistical divisions into age cohorts and for the timing of the marital breakdown (less than five years of marriage, 10 years, 20 years) give a more informed idea of trends.

I have gone into this detail concerning the nature of a divorce rate to make two points. First, we have nothing like this level of detail processed for Maltese data - so anyone discussing the Maltese "social reality", beginning with me, is talking very impressionistically.

We are not even in a position to make simple comparisons with other western countries. We need to go back to the 1995 census to find the most recent data available to derive the number of annulled/divorced + separated individuals per thousand population and per thousand marriages - standard data elsewhere.

Second, invoking "intuition" has its uses, but is hardly adequate to gauging what the landscape is like as a whole. The year 1995 is a long time ago, but only two years before the then Prime Minister, Alfred Sant, triggered off a round of hot public debate on divorce. Do you remember the commentators who were convinced in 1997 - by "social realities", again - that the time for introducing divorce had come? Do you remember some lawyers specialising in separation cases testifying to the horrific load they dealt with?

Well, the 1995 census figures for Maltese citizens (excluding foreigners) in Malta (excluding Gozo, which has a markedly lower ratio) state that total number of annulled/divorced + separated people came to 4,721. Expressed as a percentage of the total marriageable population (16 years upwards), it comes up to 1.8 per cent. Without the never-marrieds, the figure is still less than three per cent

That, I emphasise, was not the marriage breakdown rate. I mention it because it is a figure that is markedly lower than intuitions suggested at the time.

I also mention it because of today's perception that marriage breakdown has grown "exponentially" since then. That may well be true. But exponential growth from that low 1995 number might still leave us with a breakdown rate that is significantly lower than almost all the European divorce rates.

For example, I have met people who invoke the large number of children of separated parents in the class they teach - but "three or four to every class" usually does not amount to more than 15 per cent.

If 15 per cent is something like the current marriage breakdown rate in Malta, it does not thereby follow that divorce ought not be introduced. It does mean, however, that those people who argue against the introduction of divorce on the grounds that Malta is unlike other countries, are not burying their heads in the sand (at least in this respect). They are making a point that requires a considered rebuttal and not howls of derisive laughter.

An argument for divorce can be based on principle alone, detached from practical circumstances. But since most arguments, pro and contra, do relate principles to "social realities", then to ask for statistical data to be provided is to ask for more intelligent debate. (Since my examples have illustrated why the current rate of marriage breakdown might be significantly lower than perceived, I should say I do not exclude that the rate might indeed be so high as to provide an open-and-shut case for the introduction of divorce legislation.)

Some of the data would take a long time to process; but some can and ought to be provided in readily digestible form (that is, worked-out rates and not just raw data) when the findings of the 2005 census are published around mid-year. Otherwise, we might as well, all of us, continue to debate this matter with a neon-sign above our heads flashing out the words: "We have only a faint idea of what we are talking about".

ranierfsadni@europe.com