Divorce as a Way of Life

Divorce is like Friendster. It has become a culture or way of life after transcending its status as a fad. It has a social network of its own composed of couples who could no longer tolerate the social prescription that marriage must be preserved through thick and thin. It is a practical response to the irremediable conflicts and irreconcilable differences of couples. But what is the measuring stick of irremediable and irreconcilable?

The entire world is part of this circle except Malta and the Philippines. Even Spain, which introduced Catholicism in the country, has also legalized divorce. For sure the Philippines is host to this phenomenon only that it lacks the legal formality and official statistics on divorcees.

I am suddenly interested in divorce as a concept not as a practice after witnessing failed marriages. Since the Philippines outlaws the legalization of divorce, the following scenarios are tantamount to it:

It is not the talk of the town but it is an open secret. The father seldom comes home because the mother who still denies the relational abnormality keeps on reasoning out that he is just distant from home for his work in a place down south. For two decades most of his children spent time with him for approximately 2 years only. If I am not mistaken, he was only most visible when his two children got married and when his biological and in-law parents died. He returned for the social obligations.

The idea that he is dedicated to his work and its benefits is an inutile excuse. I hope I am not constricting and stereotyping but a loving and responsible father will try to provide “quality time” with his family above all else. To be able to stomach his distance with his family should not already cause any hash but certainty that he chose to care less about his “legal” family. This is not very hard if new or another family fills up the grueling emptiness of singlehood or reclusion.

Divorce is a dual effort. The father left for apparent reasons. The mother is a nagger who frequently insulted his person and profession due to his incapability to act as the breadwinner. The mother used to be affluent until her marriage. The insult can be rooted from her disappointment or sheer immaturity and insensitivity. The father is equally immature since he valued his ego more than his role as the haligi ng tahanan.

Marital maturity is seminal in preserving a relationship. Without maturity that guarantees sufficient and relevant insight and empathy on the responsibilities of married life, couples will have difficulty sustaining their relationship. While love as an emotion acts first as a thread that binds and compels couples to live under one roof, a concentric of economic, social, and political factors will strengthen or weaken the thread. The growl of an empty stomach can deafen couples and overwhelm their heartbeats.

Divorce, thus, happens when couples do not sacrifice. Or maybe they have sacrificed but both have reached saturation points especially if the insults hurled against each other are already unprintable. It seems to be one humane solution when one espouse turns black and blue every contact with the other.

I am not against divorce but I do not promote it either because while it has benefits, its detriments are devastating in principle and in deed. It won’t be the last option if humankind will gain enough from it.

In principle, divorce mocks the institution of marriage as a union with God. It destroys the institution that humans have created. It debases love as it implies material/economic satisfaction as its lifeblood. It debases love as a mere social practice not metaphysical with meaningful experiences. It destroys unity in diversity since it supports the idea that two unique couples can’t simply be united.

On the other hand, divorce is empowering. It does not box couples with the social construct that marriage should be forever even amidst all odds. It gives couples the wings after a painful experience. If human experience is dynamic divorce is just responsive.

In deed, divorce creates a chain reaction by disorienting the children. The children of the same divorced couple have dysfunctional marriages. They have become too difficult to deal with. They were so tight with their wives. For fear of loss and suffering what their parents had, they set unreasonable rules for their espouses. They assume a dominant position in their marriage even though it should have been symmetrical in the first place.

On the other hand, it can inspire some children to forge the best relationship possible to avoid replicating the horrendous experience of their parents.

Divorce is a very complicated way of life. Yes, it is and should be the last option. Never mind Britney Spears who glamorized divorced for doing so immediately after her wedding in Las Vegas. It must not be impulsive and selfish. It must not intend to hurt the other party. It must include in the equation its repercussions to children. Divorcees must attempt to become genuine friends as a sign that respect for each other still resides in their hearts.

Ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. Divorce is a cure for an "incurable" relationship. It is better that we choose best whom to walk down the aisle with. I am not saying that divorce can be prevented through this. But at least with careful choice of a partner in life we can hopefully reconcile differences and remedy conflicts.