THE blame game is over, folks. After years of trying to get a no-fault divorce bill through the Houses of Parliament and the Lords, it finally came into force this week. As someone who has gone through three divorces, you might imagine that this pleases me no end. Although, of course, it is tinged with […]
THE blame game is over, folks.
After years of trying to get a no-fault divorce bill through the Houses of Parliament and the Lords, it finally came into force this week.
As someone who has gone through three divorces, you might imagine that this pleases me no end.
Although, of course, it is tinged with some bitterness that it wasn’t pushed through years ago so the 100,000-plus people getting divorced every year in England and Wales hadn’t had to wait so long.
I also wish we hadn’t been forced to apportion blame in our divorce proceedings, or endure years of separation or be accused of adultery.
But it’s certainly better late than never.
Read more on divorce
The minority who think divorce is an easy or lazy way out ought to know that no one wakes up in the morning thinking they’ll just throw in the towel for no reason.
Most have agonised over their decision to end their marriage for a painful, protracted period of time.
When children are involved, the considerations are even graver.
It can often be the hardest decision of your life and it certainly is life-changing.
This new change in divorce law removes the need to establish that a spouse has “behaved unreasonably”.
There is no longer a need to state if anyone has been unfaithful and perhaps, most crucially, there is no need to wait the two or five years of separation before divorce can be applied for.
These have all been such deeply inflammatory conditions at a time when people actually just need advocacy and support and a system that helps them.
Previously, one person always had to be the petitioner (the person “suing” for divorce) and the other the respondent (the partner on the receiving end).
I’ve been a petitioner on two occasions. And it felt so utterly wrong that, despite us agreeing divorce was the only option, I had to be the one making the application.
The run-up to the decisions had been horrendous — emotionally mangling me, torturing my soul and sharply altering my view of myself and the world.
To then be forced to apportion blame in a legal document added to the stress. Having to come up with reasons why my husband had behaved “unreasonably” was unreasonable in itself.
It was a private matter. In the first case, we agreed together on a series of very dubious and ridiculous reasons — such as: His insistence on squeezing the toothpaste tube in the middle that was sending me over the edge.
Fast forward some 13 years later to my last divorce and the reasons were required to be a little weightier. And it felt awful.
It was emotional and damaging to have to retrace the steps of why things went wrong.
I’ve been a petitioner on two occasions. And it felt so utterly wrong that, despite us agreeing divorce was the only option, I had to be the one making the application. The run-up to the decisions had been horrendous — emotionally mangling me, torturing my soul and sharply altering my view of myself and the world.
I was amicable enough with my ex for me to let him see those reasons before I submitted the divorce online. But it caused no end of anxiety. In many ways, of course, I was also lucky in that sense.
With 47 per cent of women applying for divorce stating “unreasonable behaviour” as their reason, it becomes highly antagonistic to go through such a process. It engenders bitterness and culpability.
The facts remain that we cannot and should not force people to stay together if it has become unbearable.
This new change is not about making divorce easier, it’s about making it more even, more neutral and less confrontational.
In fact, the new process is not easier or quicker. It will take longer as there is a 20-week “reflection period” built in.
Nor has it been made any cheaper — something which makes it unattainable for some — and that will be the next inequality we need to broach.
It’s a fact of life that we are living longer. To that end we are going to have more partners and that will inevitably mean more relationship breakdowns.
Divorce has a bad name, is enveloped by stigma and is a dirty word for most people. It needs a makeover.
I’m not here to promote it but I would very much like to be part of a conversation which changes its reputation and allows people to experience the positivity it can bring.
WHAT a firecracker Ellie Simmonds is turning out to be.
She is a highly accomplished swimmer with five Paralympic golds to her name.
The youngest Paralympian at 13, youngest person to receive an OBE and winner of the BBC Young Sports Personality Of The Year.
But she is also turning out to be a brilliant journalist and presenter.
Her BBC documentary A World Without Dwarfism? was captivating, insightful, informative and highly emotional.
Taking herself on a journey to explore the implications of new drug vosoritide, which promises to make children with dwarfism grow closer to average height, was a deeply personal experience.
As a child born with the condition achondroplasia, Ellie herself has not let that hold her back, inhibit her zest for life or hamper her ambition for sporting achievement.
Nor has she let it define her.
This woman’s mental strength is above and beyond that of most people.
Dwarfism is a random mutation which occurs in the egg or sperm before the start of conception, and with around one in 25,000 babies born with the condition in the UK, and with no family history of it in 75 per cent of cases, it’s clear it could happen to anyone.
Ellie is quite clear that she doesn’t “suffer” from dwarfism. It’s not something she regards as in need of a cure.
In fact, one of the contributors succinctly put it when he said that this new drug is “a solution looking for a problem”.
TEACHING assistant Sabrina Willmott knelt down to hug and calm her nursery-aged pupil, who had special needs, because she anticipated he was going to have a physical outburst.
It was an act of empathy. An act of reassurance. An act of humility.
But she was sacked because she was said to have “abused her position of trust”.
Thankfully, an employment tribunal this week found she had been unfairly dismissed and she received £7,000 in compensation.
I wonder what this tells us about the state we’re in. Her pupil will probably have felt comforted by her actions, secure even.
And yet a simple act of compassion was seen, in a worrying trend of knee-jerk reactions, as some kind of assault — of overstepping new boundaries.
Of course it’s brilliant that we now observe people in positions of trust in a different light.
It’s crucial that we analyse adult behaviour around children — indeed, adult behaviour around other adults, too.
Of course, I’m grateful to the #MeToo movement for exposing inappropriate behaviour women have had to suffer by misogynists.
And with children, of course, we need to be on high alert that impropriety is not happening in quiet corners of playgrounds, in professional settings and in the home.
I’m just wondering if we haven’t now taken things too far.
I wonder what this tells us about the state we’re in. Her pupil will probably have felt comforted by her actions, secure even. And yet a simple act of compassion was seen, in a worrying trend of knee-jerk reactions, as some kind of assault — of overstepping new boundaries.
During my early school years, my father was a single parent and my form teacher stepped up and would often invite me over for an evening meal. She would hold my hand if we walked along the road.
I felt a comfort and affection I had not felt at home. It was never an abuse of trust. If anything, it was a sign of trust.
So, isn’t it time we stepped back a bit and re-learn that touch, connection and interaction is perfectly natural? It’s a sign of caring and nurturing.
Children need physical touch, whether to calm or comfort or for them to understand they are safe and being cared for.
I think we need to remember that physical communication is just as important — if not more important — than algebra or understanding photosynthesis.
It is an integral part of what makes us human. Let’s not forget how much we all suffered during the pandemic when we felt the loss of human touch.
An embrace could do more than just reassure. It could show a child how to be kind and how they deserve to be treated.
OH, the irony. Being locked up at home for nearly two years.
Not allowed to leave the country.
Feeling trapped and fearful of ever having the ability to visit family or even go on holiday abroad.
Then the world opens up. Restrictions fall by the wayside. We learn to breathe again and we’re told we can once again board flights and try to reclaim some of that time we lost.
But then, we turn up at the airport to find them full to the brim. There are staff shortages which see flights delayed or cancelled and people’s hopes and dreams ruined.
It seems unforgivable that just as we are given permission to finally spread our wings and fly again, thousands end up stranded at airports — queuing for hours and missing flights.
The airline business, having suffered so badly during the pandemic — laying off staff and then not being able to recruit enough — now find themselves in a position of not being able to provide the service they have been waiting so long to supply.
It’s little wonder tempers frayed at Gatwick, Heathrow and Manchester. I have no plans to be away over Easter but if I had, I would have been spitting fire and damnation to have found myself (doubtless with children in tow) unable to board a much longed-for flight.
Read More on The Sun
While high levels of sickness have forced staff to isolate, it does seem unforgivable that airlines have been all too keen to accept bookings without having enough workers to ensure people were able to enjoy their getaway.
Instead, passengers found themselves stranded, losing not only luggage and sanity — but presumably a huge amount of trust in the business.
