Strengthening marriage and the family

On July 13, The Sunday Times published an interview with Social Policy Minister John Dalli, which added fresh fuel to the divorce debate. However, in that interview Mr Dalli also said that "he is terrified at the way Maltese society is losing its robustness, its cultural and traditional strength", and that "he is getting all the advice he can to provide social support for the traditional family". This point was completely overlooked by almost all those who wrote in the newspapers to express their opinion on the subject.

Two days later, on July 15, The Times carried a report quoting the Prime Minister. It is true that Dr Gonzi told his interviewer, Ivan Camilleri, that "my government agrees that the time is ripe for such a discussion to start", but he also "insisted that his government believes first and foremost in having stronger families". His exact words were: "We believe that what Malta needs most is stronger families. Thus we will also be discussing better ways of how to offer more support to strengthen families". As simple as that. So simple that it has passed almost unobserved. But that is exactly what we need most, without, obviously, overlooking the delicate and sad problems of broken families.

This is all in line with what the President stated in his address at the opening of Parliament on May 10, namely that the government: believes that the wealth of our country is built on the family; considers as one of the richest patrimonies of our country the vocation of building a family; gives the greatest importance to the strength, development and protection of children, as much as possible in the hands of stable and strong families, built on marriage.

It was only in this context that it justly proposes to introduce legislation to protect from abuse those who are in unions other than marriage. I think that healthy marriages and stable families are not a controversial subject. I am sure even pro-divorce campaigners would agree about the social benefits of lasting family unions, built on happy marriages. But words are not enough. We should all work, in our own limited way, to help married couples achieve that ideal.

Pro-divorce campaigners would be much more credible in their mission if they were to push the cause of healthy marriages and stable families, at least with the same drive and enthusiasm with which they clamour for divorce. I have the impression that anti-divorce campaigners, in most cases, are also pro-marriage activists. If all of us were pro-marriage/family enthusiasts, there will happily be much less need for divorce, even if it were to be introduced.