On Philippine Divorce

This entry focuses on the Divorce question in the Philippines. Divorce is one of those issues that the Philippines has not gotten around to implement due to a combination of strong Catholic traditions and strong Church influence on national affairs. In my own little way and through this little blog, I would just like to add my voice to the thousands (and hopefully millions) of Filipinos who are crying out for a smart and reasonable government policy on marital dissolution. I do not find it necessary to post the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution that supposedly forbid the legalization of divorce. Google is readily available for that. However, what I am going to do is discuss my reasons and my stand as to why Divorce should be legalized in my dear country.

First of all, I find it lamentable that the principle of separation of Church and State is gradually being weakened in Philippine political life. Back in the day (both pre-martial law and martial law years) when the two-party system was in place, there was only one religious group that voted as a bloc, the Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC). Though politicians courted the INC's vote, their numbers, as a percentage of the Filipino population, were not big enough to significantly dictate or influence national policy.

Today, we have a multi-party system in place where no single political party commands a clear majority in Congress. As a result, the Filipino electorate has been spliced and diced so many times over to the point that these days, not only do we have an INC vote, but we also now have an urban poor vote, the left-wing vote, the Muslim vote, the military vote, and the Catholic vote, to cite a few examples. The Catholic vote has even been split further between the traditional Catholic and the El Shaddai factions. It is political niche marketing at its best, albeit with potentially disastrous repercussions.

The splintering of the political parties and the Filipino electorate had the unfortunate result of unduly increasing the influence of the Catholic Church on the country's political affairs. Thanks to the current President's lack of political spine, the Church has been allowed to infringe on government policy. I watch with alarm as the Church's influence on our lives has grown to the point that it now has an indirect say on what movies we can watch, how many children we can have, when and for what reasons are we allowed to have sex, and why the State should continue supporting a policy that would permanently trap couples into a loveless and, oftentimes miserable, marriage. In a lot of ways, it seems that the Spanish Friars are back in town except this time, their skin is brown.

Here is a plain and simple truth. Not all Filipinos belong to the Roman Catholic Church. Not all Filipino Roman Catholics hear Mass. And of those who do attend Mass regularly and actually listen to the homilies, I believe that it is safe to say that not all of them subscribe to the Church's views on birth control.

On a personal level, my parents consider themselves as devout Catholics. However, when it came to matters such as birth control and family planning, they parted ways with the Church. Being an outcome of an unsuccessful attempt at birth control, I asked them one time why this was so. Their response was that when it came to sex, they saw no reason to listen to the lectures and to be faithful to the rules being set by someone or a group who supposedly abstains from it. If they can't do the walk, why listen to them talk? Religion served as a spiritual guide, not a practical reference. I don't believe that their view is unique for I am pretty confident that millions of intelligent and responsible Filipino couples feel the same way.

I also do not share the view of some anti-divorce activists that legalizing divorce would encourage family breakups. I strongly disagree. Imposing a total ban on divorce is tantamount to a denial that family breakups occur. The current absence or lack of divorce/annulment statistics prevents our country from obtaining a clear and objective picture of the state of the Filipino family. Is it a wonder then that in the absence of such statistics/information, intelligent government policy and laws that would oversee the breakup of a family are pretty much non-existent in our country?

Yes, we do have marital annulments in our country. The Family Code allows a marriage to be annulled if it can be proved that one party was "psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage." In this case, what constituted "psychological incapacity" was based on Canon law. Examples of psychological incapacity included homosexuality; lesbianism; emotional immaturity or irresponsibility; criminality; satyriasis; habitual alcoholism; and epilepsy. (Can you believe that last one?)

However, the problem with the annulment process is that it is quite onerous to the average Filipino. It can be quite costly as it usually requires spending hundreds of thousands of pesos. However, spending that amount of money does not guarantee a successful conclusion. Other factors could also come into play and affect the outcome such as the attitude of the presiding judge. Does the judge have a conservative/liberal bent? Is the judge rabidly pro-family or one who realizes the realities of life and marriage?

The process could also drag on if the other half decides to contest the annulment. Appeals, if any, could also cost quite a bit of money and could drag on for years. As is the case with the original lawsuit, there is also no guarantee that an appeal would succeed. Thus, given the odds against them, a lot of couples in loveless marriages are then left with no recourse but to either live apart but stay married in name only or stay together and make their lives and those of their kids a "living hell".

What do we say to a battered wife who suffers daily at the hands of a physically and/or psychologically abusive husband? What do we say to a husband/wife who toils overseas but whose hard-earned earnings are being misspent by a cheating spouse? What do we say to a wife whose children are being sexually molested or emotionally abused by a husband? How many times have we heard of single mothers who work hard to support their children without any help from the husband? How many families do we know off where one spouse just ran off with another partner and left the family to fend for themselves? What do we say to the kids who are emotionally abused in a loveless household? What do we say to these victims? Do we just tell them, "Sorry guys, that's the hand fate dealt you. Deal with it."?

We do not have to agree with Divorce to support its legalization. I strongly disagree with people who equate advocating the legalization of divorce to a disrespect for the sanctity of marriage. That's a very narrow and simplistic view in my humble opinion. Offering divorce as a legal option is an acceptance of a social reality. Not all marriages work. People, being human, commit mistakes everyday. And sometimes, mistakes are made in choosing a partner for life. For those people who are in failing marriages, the laws should provide one or both of the people involved a way out; an option to start over.

Divorce does break up a family. There's no debate about that. However, it is not and should not be viewed as the cause of a marital breakup. The Divorce process gives people an option to start over; the chance at a new and hopefully, better life. The process is not and should not be limited to marital dissolution. Though Divorce puts an end to a marriage, it does not let one spouse off the hook, so to speak. There are consequences to a divorce due to the fact that the divorce process also decides on areas such as child custody, spousal support or alimony, child support, child visits, and a fair and equitable redistribution of a couple's assets. I strongly believe that this process is a much better and humane alternative for it protects a family's well-being. That alone makes it a much better option than breaking up a family through abandonment.

The absence of a reasonable Divorce law/process is another one of those signs that we live in an unjust society. Its continued absence denies people one of their basic rights: the right to be happy. We can't call ourselves a genuine and respectable democracy if we continue to stigmatize and ignore the plight of certain sectors of our society through the absence or lack of a coherent national policy. We are all Filipinos and all laws should equally apply to all of us. No law should favor one sect over another.

From an economic standpoint, a happy person is a very productive person. If our society is to move forward economically, we need to do so with all engines running. So please, let us have a sober and mature discussion about Divorce and come up with a way to finally implement it.

The Worst Irony

Doesn't it sadden us no end when we have to do things we absolutely hate doing simply because we love?

A Hard Day's Night

If you had noticed my avatar, you would rightly conclude that I am a big Beatles fan. I am. They rose to worldwide fame way before I was born and their fame was at its height during my toddler years. I only became a fan in my early elementary years long after the band had broken up.

I still remember the exact moment when I got turned on to the Beatles. It was on a weekday afternoon after coming home from school. I was in first grade then. One of the TV stations, RPN-9, had a daily afternoon feature called "Daily Matinee" where they showed foreign movies from 1 pm to 3 pm. I had just finished my lunch when I decided to turn the tv on. A voice on the tv announced that for that afternoon, they were featuring a movie called "A Hard Day's Night". I had no idea what it was about but decided to tune in. The following scene was what greeted me:

Needless to say, the opening scene piqued my interest and made me watch the rest of the movie. I was never the same afterwards.

Just a bit of trivia: One of the many fans on the film running after the Beatles is a young Phil Collins. Quite hard to spot but he's there. :)

A Shot Across The Bow

You seduce and flatter them through your mastery of the written word.
You use their love for books as bait to lure them to your lair.
Word is out on who and what you really are.

Better make sure no harm comes to any of them because I'm watching you. Closely.

What A Waste

Discriminatory hiring has long been a problem in Philippine business. Though an obvious bane to Philippine economic development, it remains as the proverbial elephant in the room. It's there. It's a big problem but nobody bothers to deal with it.

Earlier today, I browsed through some job ads for positions in the Metro Manila area. Some of the ads I saw showed the following requirements for the positions mentioned:

Finance Manager - female; 37-45 years old; preferably living in Quezon City
Accounting Staff - preferably single; not more than 27 years old
Training Specialist - not more than 32 years old
HR Assistant - 23 to 28 years old
Account Executive - female; 21 to 26 years of age; graduate of Business or Marketing course from reputable schools

These discriminatory hiring practices have been in place for generations. They are a national embarassment. In other countries, finding the above language on job ads would trigger job discrimination lawsuits and would be a public relations disaster for any self-respecting company. I am wondering as to why, after all these years, both the Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) and the Philippine Congress have not stepped up to the plate to address this matter.

Congressman Rozzano Rufino "Ruffy" Biazon filed House Bill No. 1997 ("An Act Prohibiting Discrimination in the Hiring of Employees or Workers in General With Regard to Their Age and Education Institution From Which They Earned Their Degrees, and For Other Purposes") back in 2004 in an effort to address and halt discriminatory hiring practices based on age and schooling. As to why he did not include sex, marital status, and disability-based discrimination escapes me at the moment. A check on Congress' website showed that this bill was submitted to the House Committee on Labor and Employment in August 2004 for appropriate action. Sad news is that the bill seems to have stalled because it remains in a "Pending" status with the same committee more than three years since its submission.

These hiring practices are a deplorable waste of available human talent and skill. They also send the wrong message to the country's youth in that "form" is much more valued than "substance". It does not matter what a person has to offer in terms of intelligence, skills, and/or work ethic. A higher premium is placed on a person who has a pleasing personality (which is difficult to determine with objectivity), graduated from the right school, is of the right gender, of a certain height, and below a certain age.

Discriminatory hiring practices deny people the opportunity to improve their lot in life. They reflect an unjust and short-sighted society. How could a skilled father or mother raise and educate two or three kids to be productive, tax-paying citizens in the future if he/she is denied employment? How could we get a skilled but handicapped person off the government's welfare rolls and reallocate the funds that used to support him/her to other uses if he/she is denied employment?

These practices are also a form of economic sabotage for how could the benefits of economic growth trickle down to the masses when they are denied a fair opportunity to compete for jobs? How could we effectively address the problems of poverty, hunger, and poor education if we deny a skilled father or mother the chance to properly nourish and educate his/her children? Discriminatory hiring sentences skilled people to a life of economic irrelevance.

The government has pulled out all the stops to support OFWs because they bring much needed dollars into the country. They help prop up an otherwise frail economy. But any comprehensive economic development plan should also include putting policies and laws in place that would prohibit discriminatory hiring against workers who choose to remain within the country. For local businesses and the economy to grow, we need to tap all the skills and talent that are readily available to us.

We need to put an end to our country's economic equivalent of a caste system. It's about time that it be replaced with a system that places more value in what a person has to offer. I just hope for everyone's sake that these discriminatory practices be put to an end within our lifetime.