Woman must stay in unhappy marriage, judges rule, as they urge Parliament to change divorce law

by Guest Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:40 pm

Supreme Court judges have "reluctantly" forced a woman to stay in an unhappy marriage as they urged Parliament to change the law on divorce.

The unanimous decision by five senior judges means Tini Owens, 68, must remain married to husband Hugh, 80, until at least 2020 because she has been unable to show sufficiently good grounds for the proposed split.

Judges said the case "generates uneasy feelings" and suggested that the current system, in which partners must demonstrate bad behaviour by their spouse, was out of date.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/25/woman-must-stay-unhappy-marriage-judges-rule-urge-parliament/

Beggars belief

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:10 pm

I think the law is fine as it is. She couldn't prove he behaved unreasonably, so he did nothing wrong. When people get married, they're supposed to stay married, not get divorced just because they're bored. She doesn't have to live with him, she just has to wait for a divorce.

by eddie Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:18 pm

Where did she say she was bored?

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:25 pm

eddie wrote:Where did she say she was bored?

If he's not behaving badly, it's obvious that she's bored with him.

by Original Quill Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:51 pm

Marriage is a status contract. Status is elective, and shouldn't be forced. The freedom to associate, or disassociate should be fundamental.

Where else can people not contract, or dissolve a contract as they see fit? It's feudal.

by Vintage Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:55 pm

Its a bit difficult to prove he's behaving badly, if he's nice as pie in front of others.

by eddie Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:37 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:Where did she say she was bored?

If he's not behaving badly, it's obvious that she's bored with him.

Is becoming bored with someone not a reason to divorce? When you get bored it’s due to many, many, reasons.
Besides, why would he want someone, who doesn’t want him? He sounds like a twat.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:56 pm

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

If he's not behaving badly, it's obvious that she's bored with him.

Is becoming bored with someone not a reason to divorce? When you get bored it’s due to many, many, reasons.
Besides, why would he want someone, who doesn’t want him? He sounds like a twat.

No, it's not a reason for divorce. People who get married should take it seriously, or not bother to get married in the first place. She tried to divorce him on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour. Why should he just accept that if he hasn't behaved in an unreasonable manner?

by Syl Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:06 pm

I dont think anyone should have to stay married if the relationship has irretrievably broken down.
Waiting 2 years for the other spouse to agree is wrong imo.
If one partner has had enough whats the point?

There doesnt always have to be blame...some marriages/relationships just run out of steam.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:14 pm

Syl wrote:I dont think anyone should have to stay married if the relationship has irretrievably broken down.
Waiting 2 years for the other spouse to agree is wrong imo.
If one partner has had enough whats the point?

There doesnt always have to be blame...some marriages/relationships just run out of steam.

People know the law when they get married. If they can't promise to stick it out, they shouldn't get married. She has to wait five years altogether because he won't consent to a divorce. I think that's fair enough.

by Syl Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:20 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:I dont think anyone should have to stay married if the relationship has irretrievably broken down.
Waiting 2 years for the other spouse to agree is wrong imo.
If one partner has had enough whats the point?

There doesnt always have to be blame...some marriages/relationships just run out of steam.

People know the law when they get married. If they can't promise to stick it out, they shouldn't get married. She has to wait five years altogether because he won't consent to a divorce. I think that's fair enough.

If he wont consent to a divorce it gives some idea why she wants out.

Why would anyone want to keep another person tied to them if they want to be free.

by eddie Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:21 pm

Rags I know what you’re trying to say, and to an extent I agree, many many people get married and give up too easily - but if you switch that around, perhaps they should’ve never married. Perhaps the real problem is that people don’t always really know the person they marry.

I do see where you’re coming from, but some relationships, love or otherwise, simply run their course. Or two people just don’t grow together as two people.

There are so many reasons, I could give you loads.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:25 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

People know the law when they get married. If they can't promise to stick it out, they shouldn't get married. She has to wait five years altogether because he won't consent to a divorce. I think that's fair enough.
If he wont consent to a divorce it gives some idea why she wants out.

Why would anyone want to keep another person tied to them if they want to be free.

No it doesn't, it shows that he won't accept that he's to blame in any way, and he's probably right.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:26 pm

eddie wrote:Rags I know what you’re trying to say, and to an extent I agree, many many people get married and give up too easily - but if you switch that around, perhaps they should’ve never married. Perhaps the real problem is that people don’t always really know the person they marry.

I do see where you’re coming from, but some relationships, love or otherwise, simply run their course. Or two people just don’t grow together as two people.

There are so many reasons, I could give you loads.

Well the divorce laws have been around for a while, and I don't think they should be changed to divorce on demand - like abortion on demand. If people don't think about the future when they get married, that's their own fault. She can wait for her divorce.

by Syl Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:50 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
If he wont consent to a divorce it gives some idea why she wants out.

Why would anyone want to keep another person tied to them if they want to be free.

No it doesn't, it shows that he won't accept that he's to blame in any way, and he's probably right.

Thats why I dont think there should always have to be blame when a marriage ends.

Maybe the law should change to recognise that. As it is, divorce can only be granted without blame after several years.
Its an outdated law.

by Syl Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:53 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:Rags I know what you’re trying to say, and to an extent I agree, many many people get married and give up too easily - but if you switch that around, perhaps they should’ve never married. Perhaps the real problem is that people don’t always really know the person they marry.

I do see where you’re coming from, but some relationships, love or otherwise, simply run their course. Or two people just don’t grow together as two people.

There are so many reasons, I could give you loads.

Well the divorce laws have been around for a while, and I don't think they should be changed to divorce on demand - like abortion on demand. If people don't think about the future when they get married, that's their own fault. She can wait for her divorce.

She is 68....time isnt on her side,
.
He is 80.....hanging on to someone who no longer wants to be with him isnt a good way to live out the winter of his life.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:54 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

No it doesn't, it shows that he won't accept that he's to blame in any way, and he's probably right.
Thats why I dont think there should always have to be blame when a marriage ends.

Maybe the law should change to recognise that. As it is, divorce can only be granted without blame after several years.
Its an outdated law.

There doesn't. People can divorce after two years if they agree without anyone being to blame. Outdated or not, I don't see why it should be changed just because people don't want to take marriage seriously any more.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 10:55 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Well the divorce laws have been around for a while, and I don't think they should be changed to divorce on demand - like abortion on demand. If people don't think about the future when they get married, that's their own fault. She can wait for her divorce.
She is 68....time isnt on her side,
.
He is 80.....hanging on to someone who no longer wants to be with him isnt a good way to live out the winter of his life.

Well then she should have separated from him a lot earlier. So what if she's 68? It's up to him if he doesn't want a divorce.

by Syl Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:16 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
Thats why I dont think there should always have to be blame when a marriage ends.

Maybe the law should change to recognise that. As it is, divorce can only be granted without blame after several years.
Its an outdated law.

There doesn't. People can divorce after two years if they agree without anyone being to blame. Outdated or not, I don't see why it should be changed just because people don't want to take marriage seriously any more.

I understand your view....I just dont agree with it.
Most people dont bother to get married anyway nowadays, but when they do, I doubt anyone enters into it with divorce on their mind.

I agree with what Eddie said though, people can change, grow apart, fall out of love, be bored rigid, dislike the person they once loved etc etc.....why legally tie them together for years if that happens?

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:21 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

There doesn't. People can divorce after two years if they agree without anyone being to blame. Outdated or not, I don't see why it should be changed just because people don't want to take marriage seriously any more.
I understand your view....I just dont agree with it.
Most people dont bother to get married anyway nowadays, but when they do, I doubt anyone enters into it with divorce on their mind.

I agree with what Eddie said though, people can change, grow apart, fall out of love, be bored rigid, dislike the person they once loved etc etc.....why legally tie them together for years if that happens?

Because marriage comes with promises and responsibility, that's why. Also, the person who doesn't want a divorce has rights as well, and shouldn't be made to get divorced against their will if they've done nothing wrong.

I won't change my mind so I think there's nothing else I can add.

by Syl Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:25 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
I understand your view....I just dont agree with it.
Most people dont bother to get married anyway nowadays, but when they do, I doubt anyone enters into it with divorce on their mind.

I agree with what Eddie said though, people can change, grow apart, fall out of love, be bored rigid, dislike the person they once loved etc etc.....why legally tie them together for years if that happens?

Because marriage comes with promises and responsibility, that's why. Also, the person who doesn't want a divorce has rights as well, and shouldn't be made to get divorced against their will if they've done nothing wrong.

I won't change my mind so I think there's nothing else I can add.

OK....but hanging on to a marriage when the other person wants out doesnt seem to be a happy way to live.
I respect that for many people who hold religious views they would not see it in the same way.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:28 pm

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Because marriage comes with promises and responsibility, that's why. Also, the person who doesn't want a divorce has rights as well, and shouldn't be made to get divorced against their will if they've done nothing wrong.

I won't change my mind so I think there's nothing else I can add.
OK....but hanging on to a marriage when the other person wants out doesnt seem to be a happy way to live.
I respect that for many people who hold religious views they would not see it in the same way.

I'll just say that's up to him if he wants to live that way. Maybe he doesn't agree with divorce generally, maybe he's Catholic, maybe he's not. It's not always to do with religion. He might just take his vows seriously - till death do us part, etc.

by eddie Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:33 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Well the divorce laws have been around for a while, and I don't think they should be changed to divorce on demand - like abortion on demand. If people don't think about the future when they get married, that's their own fault. She can wait for her divorce.
She is 68....time isnt on her side,
.
He is 80.....hanging on to someone who no longer wants to be with him isnt a good way to live out the winter of his life.

Well then she should have separated from him a lot earlier. So what if she's 68? It's up to him if he doesn't want a divorce.

And there it is. A marriage is between two people. It shouldn’t be up to one person to stay in the marriage.

He’s a twat. I don’t care how old he is.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:35 pm

Marriage isn't something that you grit your teeth and endure. It's supposed to bring happiness. Of course it comes with sadness as well, because you have to endure sad things together -- but if she doesn't feel he's the partner that he was when they first married, she has every right to divorce him.

Only stupid people support rules or laws simply because they exist.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:37 pm

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:Marriage isn't something that you grit your teeth and endure. It's supposed to bring happiness. Of course it comes with sadness as well, because you have to endure sad things together -- but if she doesn't feel he's the partner that he was when they first married, she has every right to divorce him.

Only stupid people support rules or laws simply because they exist.

They're not stupid if they agree with those rules and laws. They just think differently to you.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:38 pm

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Well then she should have separated from him a lot earlier. So what if she's 68? It's up to him if he doesn't want a divorce.

And there it is. A marriage is between two people. It shouldn’t be up to one person to stay in the marriage.

He’s a twat. I don’t care how old he is.

It shouldn't be up to one person to break up the marriage either - unless they have good grounds, which she clearly doesn't.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:40 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:Marriage isn't something that you grit your teeth and endure. It's supposed to bring happiness. Of course it comes with sadness as well, because you have to endure sad things together -- but if she doesn't feel he's the partner that he was when they first married, she has every right to divorce him.

Only stupid people support rules or laws simply because they exist.

They're not stupid if they agree with those rules and laws. They just think differently to you.

Well if you support them because you agree with them, then you aren't just supporting them because they exist, obviously.

by eddie Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:41 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Well then she should have separated from him a lot earlier. So what if she's 68? It's up to him if he doesn't want a divorce.

And there it is. A marriage is between two people. It shouldn’t be up to one person to stay in the marriage.

He’s a twat. I don’t care how old he is.

It shouldn't be up to one person to break up the marriage either - unless they have good grounds, which she clearly doesn't.

Let me ask you a question. Wouldn’t you stay married to someone who didn’t want you?

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:42 pm

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

They're not stupid if they agree with those rules and laws. They just think differently to you.

Well if you support them because you agree with them, then you aren't just supporting them because they exist, obviously.

Who supports them just because they exist then?

She does have the right to divorce him - five years after they separated.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:43 pm

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

It shouldn't be up to one person to break up the marriage either - unless they have good grounds, which she clearly doesn't.

Let me ask you a question. Wouldn’t you stay married to someone who didn’t want you?

If I didn't agree with divorce for no good reason, I don't see why not.

by eddie Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:45 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

It shouldn't be up to one person to break up the marriage either - unless they have good grounds, which she clearly doesn't.

Let me ask you a question. Wouldn’t you stay married to someone who didn’t want you?

If I didn't agree with divorce for no good reason, I don't see why not.

But if your husband told you he didn’t love you or want you anymore, why would you stay? Please let me understand.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:49 pm

eddie wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

If I didn't agree with divorce for no good reason, I don't see why not.

But if your husband told you he didn’t love you or want you anymore, why would you stay? Please let me understand.

It's not about me is it? This man has not behaved unreasonably. He could have divorced her on the grounds of adultery but he forgave her. She's now trying to blame him for the fact she doesn't want to be with him, and he's not having that. He could be hoping that she'll change her mind, I don't know. I just think it's unreasonable to blame him for not wanting a divorce. I hope others take their vows more seriously.

by eddie Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:51 pm

Okay, I’ll rephrase my question. If her husband doesn’t want her or love her anymore, why would she stay?
Why would he? For a vow that they felt once, but not anymore?

by Syl Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:52 pm

Maybe he doesnt want to split the matrimonial asetts. Sad but true that many people stay together because they dont want to lose what has been accrued together.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:54 pm

Syl wrote:Maybe he doesnt want to split the matrimonial asetts. Sad but true that many people stay together because they dont want to lose what has been accrued together.

I thought of that too. I haven't read that he has substantial assets, but if they divorce, he could find himself having to hand over a lot of them. Considering that she's the one at fault, perhaps he would resent that.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:55 pm

eddie wrote:Okay, I’ll rephrase my question. If her husband doesn’t want her or love her anymore, why would she stay?
Why would he? For a vow that they felt once, but not anymore?

Perhaps he still does feel his vows.

by Raggamuffin Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:56 pm

I don't understand why people are so against this man. Why are you all so cavalier about marriage vows?

I'll also say that it's good to see judges actually upholding the law rather than agreeing to divorce on demand against the wishes of one party.

by Ben Reilly Wed Jul 25, 2018 11:58 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
eddie wrote:Okay, I’ll rephrase my question. If her husband doesn’t want her or love her anymore, why would she stay?
Why would he? For a vow that they felt once, but not anymore?

Perhaps he still does feel his vows.

But on the basis of relationships being consensual, if she doesn't consent to being his wife anymore, do you think it's moral for the courts to force her to do so?

It takes two to tango.

by Syl Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:05 am

Raggamuffin wrote:I don't understand why people are so against this man. Why are you all so cavalier about marriage vows?

I'll also say that it's good to see judges actually upholding the law rather than agreeing to divorce on demand against the wishes of one party.

Im not against him, but I think its sad that he is determined to hang on to a woman who clearly doesnt want him or love him anymore...she doesnt seem to even like him.

You cant force someone to want you or stay with you,, and it seems that's what he is trying to do.

by Syl Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:10 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:Maybe he doesnt want to split the matrimonial asetts. Sad but true that many people stay together because they dont want to lose what has been accrued together.

I thought of that too. I haven't read that he has substantial assets, but if they divorce, he could find himself having to hand over a lot of them. Considering that she's the one at fault, perhaps he would resent that.

They seem pretty well off.
In the early years, Mr and Mrs Owens lived an enviable lifestyle.
They built up a hugely successful £5million-a-year mushroom growing business and amassed four 'nice houses', including a stunning £630,000 Cotswolds farmhouse, where the family lived, and holiday homes in Wales and France.
But Mr Owens was accused of prioritising his work over home life, often missing holidays and family events.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:17 am

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Perhaps he still does feel his vows.

But on the basis of relationships being consensual, if she doesn't consent to being his wife anymore, do you think it's moral for the courts to force her to do so?

It takes two to tango.

Yes, I do think it's moral for the courts to do that. It would be immoral to grant her a divorce against his wishes.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:18 am

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

I thought of that too. I haven't read that he has substantial assets, but if they divorce, he could find himself having to hand over a lot of them. Considering that she's the one at fault, perhaps he would resent that.
They seem pretty well off.
In the early years, Mr and Mrs Owens lived an enviable lifestyle.
They built up a hugely successful £5million-a-year mushroom growing business and amassed four 'nice houses', including a stunning £630,000 Cotswolds farmhouse, where the family lived, and holiday homes in Wales and France.
But Mr Owens was accused of prioritising his work over home life, often missing holidays and family events.

Hmmm, I bet she wouldn't say no to getting the proceeds of all his hard work.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:18 am

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I don't understand why people are so against this man. Why are you all so cavalier about marriage vows?

I'll also say that it's good to see judges actually upholding the law rather than agreeing to divorce on demand against the wishes of one party.
Im not against him, but I think its sad that he is determined to hang on to a woman who clearly doesnt want him or love him anymore...she doesnt seem to even like him.

You cant force someone to want you or stay with you,, and it seems that's what he is trying to do.

He's saying he won't agree to a divorce, he's not trying to force her to live with him.

by Syl Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:21 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
They seem pretty well off.
In the early years, Mr and Mrs Owens lived an enviable lifestyle.
They built up a hugely successful £5million-a-year mushroom growing business and amassed four 'nice houses', including a stunning £630,000 Cotswolds farmhouse, where the family lived, and holiday homes in Wales and France.
But Mr Owens was accused of prioritising his work over home life, often missing holidays and family events.

Hmmm, I bet she wouldn't say no to getting the proceeds of all his hard work.

They have been married 40 years, I believe they both put in the hard work, not just him.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:23 am

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Hmmm, I bet she wouldn't say no to getting the proceeds of all his hard work.
They have been married 40 years, I believe they both put in the hard work, not just him.

He clearly worked harder at the business, otherwise she wouldn't be moaning about him prioritising it over holidays and family events. Anyway, after 40 years, surely she can wait another two years.

by Syl Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:23 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
Im not against him, but I think its sad that he is determined to hang on to a woman who clearly doesnt want him or love him anymore...she doesnt seem to even like him.

You cant force someone to want you or stay with you,, and it seems that's what he is trying to do.

He's saying he won't agree to a divorce, he's not trying to force her to live with him.

He refuses to give her her freedom, so he is tying her to him whether they live together or not.

by Ben Reilly Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:24 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I don't understand why people are so against this man. Why are you all so cavalier about marriage vows?

I'll also say that it's good to see judges actually upholding the law rather than agreeing to divorce on demand against the wishes of one party.
Im not against him, but I think its sad that he is determined to hang on to a woman who clearly doesnt want him or love him anymore...she doesnt seem to even like him.

You cant force someone to want you or stay with you,, and it seems that's what he is trying to do.

He's saying he won't agree to a divorce, he's not trying to force her to live with him.

But they are forcing her to be his wife. How can you support that?

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:24 am

Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

He's saying he won't agree to a divorce, he's not trying to force her to live with him.
He refuses to give her her freedom, so he is tying her to him whether they live together or not.

She is free, she's just not free to marry anyone else yet.

by Raggamuffin Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:24 am

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

He's saying he won't agree to a divorce, he's not trying to force her to live with him.

But he is forcing him to be his wife. How can you support that?

She's trying to force him to be divorced against his wishes. How can you support that?

by Ben Reilly Thu Jul 26, 2018 12:25 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
Syl wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

He's saying he won't agree to a divorce, he's not trying to force her to live with him.
He refuses to give her her freedom, so he is tying her to him whether they live together or not.

She is free, she's just not free to marry anyone else yet.

Freedom doesn't come with restrictions, or it's not freedom.

by Sponsored content