Charlene Giordimaina, Balzan
Contrasting reflections on the road to the divorce referendum (7)
Every letter I read against the introduction of divorce acts like a breeze of fresh air to me. However, it seems most forget those poor sailors on the boat in the middle of a thunderstorm. I am referring to the children, who always end up the victims of divorce.
I follow Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando and his Moviment Iva għad-Divorzju very closely and I can’t help but notice that unfortunately the topic of children is not given much importance. Is the movement proposing the creation of centres to help children who suffer the effects of divorce? In which way does it plan to help men and women who have to go through the psychological and financial stress of divorce? Is it aware of these problems in the first place? Does the movement have an answer to issues like the following?
If the movement says that divorce strengthens the family, how does it explain that today 40 per cent of the children in the US (where half of the marriages end in divorce) are growing up without their father? How does divorce protect the children when, following a divorce, children are 50 per cent more likely to develop health problems and 70 per cent of long-term prisoners grew up in broken homes?
Similarly, how does it explain that people from broken homes are almost twice as likely to attempt suicide than those who do not come from broken homes? And is it aware the death of a parent is less devastating to a child than divorce?
I ask these questions as I doubt whether the leading pro-divorce activists remember their childhood or if they ever felt the minimal effects of a break-up in their families.
I would also like to mention a few points with regard to the economic impact, especially on women. Divorced women with children are four times more likely to be below the poverty line than non-divorced mothers while a single mother is nine times more likely than a married woman to have an income below the poverty line.
Divorce also results in a higher cost to society as a whole. In fact, a single divorce can cost the government thousands of euros in court fees, increased bankruptcies and public housing benefits. How does the movement plan to help these women and fund divorce? Isn’t it aware that divorce will mean higher taxation?
Most people argue that divorce is something which you need not get involved in if you’re not interested. However, this is not true, as educational, social, environmental and economic impacts are felt throughout the whole of society, and if divorce ever becomes legalised, everybody will have to pay its price!
Popular Stories
In Discussion
39 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Klaus VELLA BARDON
Feb 6th 2011, 19:37
Charlene, PROSIT for the clarity with which you raise issues that are often overlooked in this debate.
Joe Zammit
Feb 3rd 2011, 09:38
There is absolutely no compassion in divorce. Promoting divorce is promoting evil for the detriment of all people. What is harmful to all people is not compassion. Christ knows more than all of us what is good for us: he commanded us never to resort to divorce.
1. Divorce is a great injustice against God.
2. Divorce is a great injustice against the family
3. Divorce is a great injustice against the children
4. Divorce is a great injustice against society
5. Divorce is a great injustice against the spouses themselves.
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it’s already guaranteed!
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:52
A point I'd like to say:
I'm afraid that the culture of utilitarianism (where you act only on what is useful to you- tuza u tarmi bil-Malti) is today's major problem.
If we believe that we are going to get married because we love the other person and experience showed us that we are also able to spend the rest of our lives together, we DEFINATELY won't be thinking about issues like divorce! Than what "love" would that be??!!!
Be careful, today people base their relationship on the assumption of "Dan x'nista' niehu minnu jekk nizzewwgu?" Please, don't let this culture get you.
Giga Borg
Feb 2nd 2011, 18:51
@Joe Grima Brussels,in Love there is no contracts,in Love you die for your loved ones,contracts are there for the business man.
Victor Laiviera
Feb 2nd 2011, 17:37
Ms Giordimaina does a good job of listing the negative effects of broken families. Where she goes wrong is in attributing them all to divorce and fails to mention that they all apply in equal measure to separations and annullments.
Nor does she say anything about the fact that divorce legislation will be invoked when the family has already ceased to exist in any effective way, and not before.
Blaming divorce for the ills that befall the children of broken families is like blaming the surgeon who amputates a cancerous limb.
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:16
Dear Mr Laiviera,
I appreciate your close critique of my letter.
I have no doubt that separations and annulments leave the same effect, and in fact, that is why I wrote “I ask these questions as I doubt whether the leading pro-divorce activists… or if they ever felt the minimal effects of a break-up in their families.” Unfortunately a good number of children in Maltese society have to face breakup in their families, and yes they all do have the same effects.
We cannot however legitimize divorce just because there are already similar factors. With divorce, the cases of separation and annulments will diminish while the cases of broken families will increase. This means that if up till today, if a husband separates from wife, it is only the children of his first and only marriage which will suffer. With the legalization of divorce on the other hand, this man has the opportunity to remarry and have other children, and if he decides to divorce again you have to add another 2 or 3 children which experience a breakdown between their parents.
Regards
Joe Zammit
Feb 3rd 2011, 09:44
You cannot compare divorce (a thing) with a surgeon (a person). Such comparisons are illogical.
A cancreous limb cannot be healed; failed marriages can be healed. It all depends on the will-power, helped by God's grace, to heal the marriage. We have had separated couple who have found a way how to reunite again. Separation leaves the door of reunion open; divorce unjustly closes that door for ever.
Marriage + Divorce = Cohabitation
Joe Zammit
Feb 2nd 2011, 17:07
Divorce is an illusion.
Divorce and remarriage is a greater illusion.
Divorce and remarriage ad infinitum is the greatest illusion.
There is absolutely no reason for the introduction of divorce. Divorce is evil and to the detriment of all people. Any reasoning given in favour of divorce is flawed, groundless and unconvincing.
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it's already guaranteed!
Sebastian Hawkes
Feb 2nd 2011, 13:37
@ Charlene Giordimaina
The broken homes you mention is not a symptom of divorce, but of the value shift we are part of anyway.
Values in the world, particularly the west, are in a state of change, so as part of the world, Malta will change too, it's inevitable, with or without divorce.
Not introducing divorce will only serve to keep our head buried in the sand, thinking such issues are not our problem.
Wilfred Camilleri
Feb 2nd 2011, 19:16
Divorce does result in broken homes. It's a fact proven by statistics. The world is indeed in a state of change, but not for the better. We keep our head buried in the sand when we blindly follow all trends and societal value changes that are happening in the rest of the world. We don't have to follow every trend and societal change that is happening elsewhere to stay with the times. Perhaps we can be leaders by not adopting changes that negatively impact on society!
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:26
You clearly said that “Not introducing divorce will only serve to keep our heads buried in the sand”. You think so? I find such statement quite offensive as personally I consider myself to have my head quite above the sand and also the rest of Europe.
(2)
And you and everybody else should do the same. I ask you this; why should WE keep our heads buried in the sand and thinking that divorce will solve problems, when we can look at the rest of the world and realize that in fact IT DOES NOT?!!!
Are you so fragile to think that just because the rest of the world has something than we should do too? Please try to compare the countries…
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:29
(1)
Dear Mr Hawkes,
I can’t help but comment on your repetitive emphases on “values” of the rest of the world.
Let me clarify some points:
1. What Western Europe is experiencing is not a shift in values, but a loss of values- as a result of today’s hectic world, citizens don’t have the time to sit down and enjoy their family. The family has lost its importance in Europe, and that is why, amongst others, we are experiencing a decline in marriage and birth rate.
2. Personally I find it irritating when you generalize all countries and say things like “Values in the world”. This is not true. The only place where this devaluing of society is happening is in Europe and America. Just in case this is good news for you, please do check which problems Europe is facing today due to this! It’s quite alarming I must say.
You clearly said that “Not introducing divorce will only serve to keep our heads buried in the sand”. You think so? I find such statement quite offensive as personally I consider myself to have my head quite above the sand and also the rest of Europe.
wally vella-zarb
Feb 2nd 2011, 13:13
Children are also involved in cases of annulments and separations. Should these be banned?
If the "economic impact" is worrying you, chances are that a divorcee - and any children dependent thereon - who opts to remarry would, if anything, be less of a burden on society and less likely to fall below the poverty line.
Wilfred Camilleri
Feb 2nd 2011, 17:00
Only in cases where the guardian parents get remarried. Statistics overseas shows that most of the divorced guardians, usually women, do not get married and live in single family homes. This impacts both the guardians, usually women, and the children, economically, socially and psychologically!
wally vella-zarb
Feb 2nd 2011, 19:06
You are going round in a circle. What is happening now in the case of separatees who "do not get married and live in single family homes". They have no option to remarry. Are they - and their children not being equally impacted "economically, socially and psychologically"?
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:32
Dear Mr Zarb,
Regarding the case of annulment and separations, please refer to the comment I left on Mr Laiviera’s comment.
Could you please also elaborate on your second point? As it is very confusing!
Godfrey Camilleri
Feb 2nd 2011, 13:06
Mr Ramon Casha has given you, Ms Charlene Giordimaina, the reason why children do not feature much in the discussion on divorce. Because children do not make a difference between divorce, separation and annulment, the latter two being legal in Malta. The only difference is that divorce is giving hope to the separated couples to again find happiness in a stable marriage and so possibly give a better life to the effected children.
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:47
Mr Camilleri,
Mr Casha’s comment was very hypothetical and not grounded on a strong base. These things were never proven.
Saying that children don’t make the difference between the three is very vague when today there are programmes for 6 year olds depicting the cruel life of divorce in families.
People say that children don’t understand death either- yet, even a few months year old baby cries if his mother does not return.
And if Mr Casha’s argument was true, does this mean that when children are conscious of the difference between the three, couples won’t have the right to divorce?
Regards
Ramon Casha
Feb 2nd 2011, 11:35
I very much doubt that there has ever been a child, anywhere in the world, who has suffered as a result of divorce. Not one.
Try asking the children of divorcees how they feel about their parents' divorce, then compare that to the response given by parents who got a separation, and those whose parents annulled their marriage.
You will find that the ONLY thing that matters is that "mum and dad are no longer together", and they couldn't care less what you call that - annulment, separation or divorce.
Joe Grima Brussels
Feb 2nd 2011, 12:48
We presume that you made a thorough study, a vox pop, and in-dept research to come to such conclusions!! Can you please find a publisher, and publish these wise theses of yours? We would love to have a look! 'Not one.' you say! This study of yours probbly took ages to conclude!
'The ONLY thing that matters... is that mum and dad are not together!' Wow, I believe children look forward to that, and children of couples who REMAIN together for life feel cheated by their parents! Wise words, as usual!?
Wilfred Camilleri
Feb 2nd 2011, 12:54
What? How did you arrive at this bizarre conclusion? You obviously have never looked at studies made in other countries about children from divorced parents. If your statement wasn't so sad it would be funny!
Kenneth Cassar
Feb 2nd 2011, 15:06
@ Joe Grima Brussels and Wilfred Camilleri:
Can you please explain the difference - with regards to how it effects the children - between their parents divorcing and re-marrying, and their parents separating and forming a new relationship with a different partner?
Joe Grima Brussels
Feb 2nd 2011, 16:33
Yes Kenneth, IN BOTH cases the children suffer the same, but from the title to this article, I was lead to believe that the subject is actually divorce! Did you read anything different?
Wilfred Camilleri
Feb 2nd 2011, 17:11
@ Kenneth Cassar The only difference is one is legal under the law and the other is not recognized as a union by the law. The children are affected negatively either way!
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:41
(2)
(ii) Secondly, the introduction of divorce leads to more cases like these as psychologically, the law is telling its men and women that they have the right to divorce. Therefore man and women wouldn’t feel guilty if they divorce, even if that means leaving behind some poor children, and sometimes, not even wanting to hear about them for the rest of your life!
Studies have shown that most divorces couples admit that they could have done more to safe their marriage. In fact, most divorce cases are also low conflict marriages- so in other words, most people admit that they divorced for nothing!
Charlene Giordimaina
Feb 2nd 2011, 21:42
(1)
With all due respect Mr Casha,
But it is rare that I hear such nonsense comments!! At first I thought that you were being ironic when saying “I very much doubt that there has ever been a child, anywhere in the world, who has suffered as a result of divorce. Not one.”!!
There are 2 points I’d like to clarify:
(i) The difference of the impacts of separation and divorce are huge on children. I think it does make a difference when a child ends up without a father and when a child ends up without a father and suddenly there’s another man “acting” like his father, with the same duties etc. This man which he doesn’t know has the right to order him what and what to do, if he wants he can spank him, he can be aggressive, etc., because the law tells him that he has the “right” to do so!
Kenneth Cassar
Feb 3rd 2011, 06:37
@ Joe Grima Brussels:
I wasn't replying to Charlene Giordimaina. I was replying to you. But since you admit that in BOTH cases children suffer the same, why do you give the impression that the introduction of divorce will make matters WORSE for the children? After all, without divorce, people still separate, and the suffering, by your admission, is THE SAME.
@ Wilfred Camilleri:
Same reply given to Joe Grima Brussels applies to you.
Ramon Casha
Feb 3rd 2011, 06:56
@Wilfred: You stopped reading too soon. In most if not all countries, divorce is only granted after separation. That is when the children are affected. Hence my statement that children are not affected by divorce. Divorce is merely a formality - filing papers, getting signatures etc.
Joe Zammit
Feb 2nd 2011, 10:46
Par.2385 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:
“Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a PLAGUE on society.”
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it's already guaranteed!
Giga Borg
Feb 2nd 2011, 11:53
Marriage, the leading cause of divorce,so don't get married but cohabit.
Joe Grima Brussels
Feb 2nd 2011, 12:41
Giga, if you cannot keep your word, or cannot be trusted, I'm afraid that THAT is your only option!
Wilfred Camilleri
Feb 2nd 2011, 12:59
@Giga Borg The leading cause of divorce is selfishness. There are other causes but the leading one is definitely selfishness.
Giga Borg
Feb 2nd 2011, 14:58
@Joe Grima Brussels,the most important thing is Love and respect the rest is just a piece of paper,what good is it to have a married couple with out love and respect,it is better to have loving parents than wedded once,love is the most important thing.
Kenneth Cassar
Feb 2nd 2011, 15:07
@ Wilfred Camilleri:
You seem to forget one simple fact:
It takes two to make a marriage work, but it only takes one for it to fail.
Wilfred Camilleri
Feb 2nd 2011, 17:02
@Kenneth Cassar Yes and the one who made it fail is free to go get married again to make another marriage fail!
Joe Zammit
Feb 2nd 2011, 17:06
It takes three to make a marriage: the bride, the bridegroom and God.
The family that prays together stays together.
Joe Grima Brussels
Feb 2nd 2011, 18:10
Giga. So, I seeYou treat an agreement/contract/pact....as a piece of paper. Says a lot about how much you are to be trusted!
It is true that love is the most important thing. In FACT, that is why people wHO REALLY love one another swear to live and love each other till death. Unless they consider all their promises as a piece of paper!!!!!!
I hope you are sincere enough whenever you go to sign a contract, and TELL the public notary that you are going to consider THAT contract as a piece of paper.
Kenneth Cassar
Feb 3rd 2011, 06:41
@ Wilfred Camilleri:
"Yes and the one who made it fail is free to go get married again to make another marriage fail!".
That's not necessarily the case. In any case, the person "without fault" in the first marriage would have the option to remarry too. If your reason above is valid, one would have to conclude that divorce should be introduced, but the person at fault may not remarry. I bet you won't even concede this. If so, you might wish to try another argument, since this one does not work.
Kenneth Cassar
Feb 3rd 2011, 06:42
@ Joe Zammit:
"It takes three to make a marriage: the bride, the bridegroom and God".
Ah, a threesome.