Conscious uncoupling trumps angry divorce

Divorce can often be a messy procedure. And couples playing the “blame game” in order to get out of their marriages can turn what is already an acrimonious process into a long, drawn-out conflict.

Last year, 118,000 people petitioned for divorce in England and Wales.

Currently, unless someone can prove there was adultery, unreasonable behaviour or desertion, the only way to obtain a divorce without their spouse’s agreement is to live apart for five years.

But for some couples, marriages break down simply because they have fallen out of love. Not everybody is like Dirty Den serving up the papers for Christmas – many couples are more like Chris Martin and Gwyneth Paltrow, who said they went through a “conscious uncoupling” when they split in 2014

Now the country’s 50-year-old divorce laws are to be overhauled.

On Tuesday Justice Secretary David Gauke confirmed new legislation would be introduced after a consultation revealed support for reforms of the existing fault-based system.

The proposed new arrangements will mean the “irretrievable breakdown” of a marriage is the only grounds for divorce.

But, rather than having to provide evidence relating to behaviour or separation, divorcing spouses will simply be required to make a statement saying that their marriage has fallen apart.

A husband or wife’s ability to contest a divorce, which is applied in just under two per cent of cases, will be scrapped.

It means that criticisms of one another’s behaviour will no longer necessarily be required in law.

“With the best will in the world divorce can still cause unpleasantness and mistrust,” says Colin Spanner, head of family at Lanyon Bowdler Solicitors. “Sometimes people have to sort out children and finances and getting off on on a bad foot doesn’t help.”

Mr Gauke said that while the Government “will always uphold the institution of marriage” it should not create or increase conflict between couples.

The existing two-stage process, in which a decree nisi is followed by a decree absolute, will be retained. It means a six-month minimum period must elapse between the lodging of a petition and the divorce being made final.

Parallel changes will be made to the law governing the dissolution of a civil partnership.

Calls for Government reform intensified after a woman lost a legal battle to divorce her husband of 40 years.

Tini Owens argued she was unhappy in her marriage, which she claimed had broken down irretrievably. But Mrs Owens’s husband Hugh Owens did not agree to divorce, and the Supreme Court ruled against her, meaning she must remain married until 2020.

Christina Blacklaws, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, said the current system “exacerbates tensions” between couples.

And Leanne Hayward, a lawyer-turned-mediator with Shropshire Mediation Service, agrees that a change in the divorce law is long overdue.

“From my time as a lawyer it was very difficult when you had an amicable divorce,” she says. “To finalise any divorce a couple have to apply to the court and the old law says they have to then wait years.

“A couple have to put together a petition where they have to say negative things about each other to get it through the court, otherwise they would have to wait.”

Now Leanne deals with the extra issues bought up from divorce through mediation – and she thinks this path will be enhanced by the new law.

“If people can be more positive then there is going to be less focus on the emotional aspects of the relationship and removing it from the practical side of it,” she adds.

“They can now say they have had their differences and say that divorce is the best way forward.”

Kurt Whittwer is a mediator at Black Country Family Mediation and he has welcomed the changes.

“I think anything that can be done to reduce conflict around divorce, especially where children are involved, can only be a good thing,” he says.

“One of the things we actually try and encourage in mediation is to leave blame out of it. Blame can become a back and forth thing and it is going to make it hard for them to work together.”