What I think of the “divorce debate”

There is at least one thing which those who are against the introduction of divorce in Malta and those that are in favour agree about. For the good of society and for the good of individuals we should all strive for the promotion of strong marriages and healthy families.

But are we doing that?

Are we really supporting marriage and the family?

Let me pose some questions.

1. The Church through the courses organised by the Cana Movement prepares people for marriage. In a country where civil marriage is on the increase and has today reached a substantial proportion of all marriages, is the State preparing in any way those who choose to marry civilly?

1. Is our system of social services open to abuse which favours, even if indirectly and unintentionally, those who decide to live together without marrying? I have heard of cases where people say that they cohabit without marrying so as not to lose social services.

1. Are work practices as family-friendly as they should be in a day and age where both married couples are being encouraged (sometimes forced by circumstances) to work? Family-friendly work practices come at a price, but so does family breakdown. In fact the price in emotional and monetary terms is much bigger.

1. Are the messages projected by the media – even the local media – promoting pro-marriage and family values such as fidelity, solidarity and dedicated love or are they promoting promiscuity, free love and instant gratification? Is marriage shown as just one of the possible ways for a man and a woman to live together?

1. Does the government have a holistic strategy in favour of marriage and the family? Are Family Impact Assessments done prior to the introduction of social legislation and any other measures – legal or administrative – which affects the family?

1. Is the government investing enough to help problem families and to save marriages in difficulty? Is it helping enough NGOs who are doing this sterling work?

The list can go on and on.

A foregone conclusion?

I have the impression that the divorce debate which is now being touted by so many can easily turn into a non-debate. A debate is an exercise where different options are examined and one is finally considered – at least by the winners of the debate - as the desired option. I have the feeling that the impression is being created by some that there can be only on conclusion to the divorce debate and that is the introduction of divorce legislation in Malta.

This is not a healthy or desirable situation.

Are we well informed?

Any debate, especially a debate about such an important institution in our society, should be an informed debate. But are we adequately informed to do this debate?

Let me give a few examples.

• The Family Court. In April 1999 Minister Austin Gatt writing in the Report on the Family Court said that the statistics that were given out in reply to Parliamentary questions were exaggerated. The statistics given by the Minister in page 25 of the Report are roughly one third of those given in Parliament.

• Borg vs Lifestyle. In November 2003 Minister Tonio Borg said that “in the last two years” there were 1,140 separations i.e. 2,280 persons were involved. On the other hand according to Table 2 of Lifestyle 2003, a NSO publication, the number of persons divorced, or separated or whose marriage was annulled was 6960. If both statistics were correct it means that one third of all separations etc happened in the two years mentioned by the Minister. Is this believable?

• HBSC vs Census. The Times (June 18) reported that according to the 2005/6 edition of the Health Behaviour of School-Aged Children Study 37% of schoolchildren aged 11, 13 and 15 live with one biological parent. The 2002 edition of the same report shows that only 8 per cent of children lived with just one biological parent. These figures, if correct, would imply that in four years the number of children living with a single parent increased almost five times. The 2005/6 figures imply a high rate of divorced or separated couples. But the 2005 census shows that separated persons are 6.8% of those married. How can it be that in 2005/6 the separated amounted to 6.8% of married couples but 37% of children were living with just one biological parent?

• Unknown fathers. This list started with Minister Gatt saying that answers given to PQs gave exaggerated figures of separated persons. Let us conclude with another exaggerated figure given in Parliament by the same Minister. He had said that during 2007 the percentage of children born to an unknown father was 19.68%. This was more than double the figure for 2006 – 9.2%. Many columnists commented on these figures using them as proof that the situation of our families was going from bad to worse. Then Minister Gatt apologised to Parliament because he had been supplied – once more – by exaggerated figures. The correct figure was 9.095 not 19.68%! What a difference!

Do we have a realistic picture of the family and marriage in Malta? Can we have an informed debate about the introduction or otherwise of divorce in this situation?

Changing the paradigm

Introducing divorce implies changing our marriage paradigm. Up till now marriage was for good and for bad, for health and for sickness; in one word forever. Should we now adopt a different paradigm of marriage and during the marriage ceremony the spouses take each other “for health not for sickness, for the good but not the bad, and till we agree otherwise”?

An open, informed and mature debate conducted after the introduction of more steps to strengthen marriage and the family can make us conclude that the answer should be in the negative or in the positive. It could be that the state of marriage and the family is such that divorce should be legalized as it can be considered to be the lesser evil. I, for one, am open to conviction either way. But I think that the onus of proof lies with those who are advocating its introduction.