Women have ‘nothing to lose’ with the introduction of divorce
The pro-divorce movement yesterday slammed its rival movement for its “coordinated scaremongering campaign” on the impact of divorce on women, saying women would not lose any of the rights they had today. Chairman Deborah Schembri insisted that with...
The pro-divorce movement yesterday slammed its rival movement for its “coordinated scaremongering campaign” on the impact of divorce on women, saying women would not lose any of the rights they had today.
Chairman Deborah Schembri insisted that with the introduction of divorce, women would not lose anything.
She hit out at the anti-divorce camp which she said was “insensitive to the pain and hardship women found themselves in when their marriage broke down”.
“Women have nothing to fear from divorce. Nothing will change in their lives that cannot already happen with separation or annulment,” she said.
Speaking at a press conference, she said the proposed divorce law ensured all social benefits currently received by separated women would continue to be received when there was divorce. These included social benefits and children’s allowance. Financial support from the husband agreed in the separation contract would also continue to be paid.
She quoted family law expert Ruth Farrugia, who recently said the introduction of no-fault divorce reduced domestic violence and female suicides.
Referring to the issue of pension eligibility for former wives, Dr Schembri explained that they were entitled to this only by marriage and that once the marriage ended, the right to this pension also ended.
However, she said the divorce Bill featured a clause that allowed the judge presiding over the divorce case to take into account the investment that the former wife would had put into the marriage, and adjust the maintenance accordingly.
She said with an annulment, the right to any pension automatically fell through when the marriage was annulled. Referring to the proposed cohabitation law, Dr Schembri said it was obvious it would not cover separated people who found new partners, since this would clash with the marriage law.