        |
Do not use children in the divorce debate Poor Mgr Charles Vella. He was very realistic when he said that the Church should not be afraid of divorce. Mgr Vella does not live in a glasshouse and knows that divorce is on our doorstep and that it is useless to continue to believe that Malta will not live to see the day when divorce becomes part of its legal system. The Prime Minister was reported as saying that we must have first a divorce debate; that the debate should focus more on the repercussions on children born in a failed marriage. But the Prime Minister ought to know that the focus must start now because children of separated and divorced parents face the same repercussions and it is unwise to treat the children of one more than the other. It is totally false to say, like the Prime Minister did, that we still have to identify what is causing these pressures in some families and what issues are endangering the family structure. I say it is false because they are the same issues facing the children of separated couples, and if the Prime Minister and his government has not realised this yet, then we have a big problem on our hands. No wonder that Gonzi still believes that children of divorcees suffer more than those of separated couple: he is merely echoing what the Church is saying. If we truly love our children, we should not use them in the divorce debate. On the contrary we should provide them as from now with the help that they and their parents need when they are facing separation. Let us face it, only the parents want the best for their children and it is stupid for those parents to expect the State to interfere where they themselves have failed. But unfortunately we have cases where the State does have to intervene: to prevent marriages from collapsing, to save marriages and to help children and the spouses deal with separation. Of course we have education, of course we have nice school buildings, of course we have MCAST and university; but we seem to cater for children who have a ‘normal’ upbringing. Little are we catering for those children whose parents know nothing about parenthood. The divorce issue has nothing to do with the welfare of our children, because children of separated parents and divorcees go through the same trauma. It is most unjust for those of us who wish to remarry but the system deprives them of this wish simply because we do not have the courage to tell the Church not to interfere in civil matters. And ironically, where the Church ought to interfere, it keeps its mouth shut. The Prime Minister has to study what pressures Maltese families are facing. He is unaware that parents have to stay away from home for long hours because of the high gas and water and electricity tariffs; that children have no time with their parents anymore; that the family does not eat together anymore; that the financial pressures are ruining our families and draining them to the extent that they have little energy to work on their relationship as couple and as parents. The Church is oblivious to this as well, because otherwise it would not keep silent on these issues. God forbid that it is aware of what is going on and has taken the road of complacency. That would be a bigger sin than divorce, because the focus should not be on the repercussions of divorce, but on keeping the family together. If we are living in a system which on the one hand claims that the family is the most important structure in Malta, and on the other introduces laws and regulations which are ruining the family structure by imposing exorbitant rates, higher cost of medicines, schooling expenses which are making the family work more and play less, then it is clear that we are living a lie. But the Church says nothing about this. It keeps its mouth shut on the financial laws passed by the administration of the same Prime Minister who claims to hold the family to heart, and which are themselves the cause of many marital problems. These financial laws provide people with a licence to hide from their spouses any income they derive during marriage. They are a blatant blunder to the concept of the community of acquests, so that if and when the other spouse manages to get to know about this (and sometimes this takes a lot of bribery in view of data protection), the pillars of the family are shaken because there is no longer any trust. It is not fair to say we love our children less if we have divorce; because although we do not have divorce we still love our children less – we have no policy on children, no juvenile justice system, with the result that children are treated as adult criminals; we have no place for children with behavioural problems; we give no support to families who are going through a bad patch’ we give no support to children of separated couples; we burden our families with more taxes giving them less time to spend as a family and as a couple; we only have support for those who have the money. Those who cannot afford are isolated. It is also not fair to ignore that there is divorce in Malta, but only for those who can afford it. There is nobody who lifts an eyebrow, and checks how divorce is obtained by claiming residency abroad, and how many are registering for divorce although the other spouse receives no papers and signs no papers for divorce. We do not even have the decency to inform the other spouse that he or she is divorced, and they only get to know if and when they need a marriage certificate, thus depriving them of the right to remarry until such time. We sanctify co-habitation, but not divorce. We prefer to legalise co-habitation, but not divorce thus demeaning the institution of marriage. The reason is simple: to avoid a clash with the Catholic Church, although I cannot see why the Church can agree to co-habitation, because the Catholic religion does not allow one or the other. Men prefer cohabitation because they have no strings attached and they get the best of both worlds - the day they get sick of their partner they throw her in the streets and that is perfectly legal. They obviously prefer to retain the status quo, and living in a society dominated by men, it is no wonder that they do not want to see divorce in this country – not because their heart pours out for their religion, but only because convenience dictates so. In the 1960s Mgr Vella started the Canal movement, and more than 40 years later we are still with Canal. The services provided by the State are few and they do not come for free. The situation calls for a revamp of the whole system so that it reaches every town and village. It is like the retailers are doing: they are no longer waiting for consumers to come to them, but instead they are reaching out to consumers themselves. It is a shame that the parish priest has no resources to know the families in this parish and the problems they are facing. It is a shame that the parish priest has o resources to help the families either. We cannot continue to neglect these realities just as we cannot continue to neglect the fact that single parents are on the increase. Divorce or no divorce, the problems are there and it is a myth to say that divorce will weaken the families. The children are affected not by divorce, but by their parents’ attitude when the marriage fails. It is the duty of the Church to preach against divorce, but it is also its duty to help to keep the families together and not be indifferent to the threats of today’s families. It is also very sad for the Church to continue to treat co-habitees as sinners and unloved by God. If that were so, three-quarters of the world’s population is going to Hell because they are divorced and remarried.
Any comments? |
 |
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
European Elections special editions 01 June 2009 |
I expected the usual tantrum from our Curia, but honestly I did not expect the Prime Minister, as the head of our civil society, to use children as a pretext and another delaying tactic for the introduction of divorce.
Managing editor Saviour Balzan | Tel. ++356 21382741 | Fax: ++356 21385075 | Email