Consent is needed for marriage, not divorce - agree or disagree?

Question

Exactly as put - to get married (or in a relationship) both people must consent, but for divorcing (or breaking up) only one spouse needs to make the decision.

A pal of mine is divorcing his wife, and apparently she "doesn't agree" with it. In my opinion that she agrees or not is irrelevant, a person can't be forced into a marriage or relationship they no longer want part in, especially if they have a good reason for wanting out.

My wife disagrees with me, says that even if law doesn't require for the spouse getting divorced to agree, it's still a "bastard thing" to divorce without even giving a chance of reconciliation.

lucasnabizada · Accepted Answer

I want to write a substantial response to this-The shorter answer is: is it YES.. In an ideal world would it be- No

Here's the way I see it, the institution of marriage is degraded to it's very core. Now marriage is merely though of as a temporary union between people as long as they get along. That is NOT what you sign up for in your vows- Till death do us part- has totally left people's minds, even if that's the very vow they took. That's worth nothing anymore-not to mention people who will use divorce as a way to take half of other people's stuff when they leave.

People simply do not choose their spouses wisely, and don't have the talk regarding ideals and values that they should have before getting married. Because in their mind they know they'll just divorce and change. They think they will get married and everything is going to be fine and dandy forever-sorry sunshine. Ideally it should concentrate on the fact that being married and maintaining their marriage is probably going to be the hardest thing they'll ever do-but should resign to one another FOR LIFE-Ie escaping vows is not even an option so there is no need to contemplate it-I'm not saying people that come to hate each other should necessarily stay married i'm simply stating if that was their mindset at the onset of marriage, I truly think most people would have a better chance of working things out.

In my mind wether you consider it a contract or a spiritual union marriage should not be a unilateral arrangement precisely because there are two people involved, and both of them made vows

D_Bone_Steak · Accepted Answer

It's a recent change... look up "No-fault divorce."

Back in the day, the powers that be would try to get you two to just fix your problems... like you actually needed a really good reason for divorce. And there were penalties if you were the one at fault and causing the divorce. Marriage is supposed to be a legally binding contract... something you can't just break.

Then they started letting "people" strip people for cash and prizes... that makes the powers that be a lot of money. Laws remain that were originally designed to protect a woman that can't really work and has to stay at home with the kids, from becoming destitute. Times have changed... she can work too, but there is still money to be made... for the powers that be.

... and this has enabled "people" that look for marriage in bad faith to take advantage of other types of "people," financially.

I'll leave it at that before I start going on a rant about family court and how jacked up that system is.

sage2021 · Accepted Answer

If children are involved, the divorce should be done in a court of law to have child support, health care provided for the children by the one that wants out. That us very important. And alimony will be decided in the court as well. Visiting rights will be established as well.
It is better to have all of this done in a court for the broken family to have the legalities of the divorce done in a court of law.
When I was young and getting married, not only did we have to get apply for a marriage license signed by both of us, but we both had to go to a doctor and have blood checked to see if our Rh factors matched so there would be any children born with birth defects - at least from incompatible Rh factors. It was a big deal at one time.

AmandaYVR · Accepted Answer

It makes sense to me, the way it is.

Yes, both people need to consent before entering into a contract.

But being in a relationship is a choice. Choice to enter, choice to leave.

"Bastard" is irrespective of all that. "Bitch", too.

AviatorTom · Answer

I agree. Marriage is a contract. It takes two to make a contact, but either party can break it. Of course, there are consequences of breaking a contract, and getting divorced, that's where alimony, child support and dividing up assets comes in.

OlderAndWiser · Answer

In my jurisdiction, the other spouse's consent to divorce is not required. In my experience, trying to force someone to remain in a relationship that they don't want is a fool's errand.

Guy13 · Answer

This seems to be the case most of the time.

dynamicyandere · Answer

A marriage should be treated seriously and a divorce should be treated seriously.

It shouldn’t be a light matter at all and I believe that a couple that has committed to marriage should try to resolve things if possible.

However, consent from both parties shouldn’t be needed for divorce.

Abusive spouses are an example of where it would be unfair for the victim of abuse to have no way out because the abuser does not consent to them leaving.

If there is no abuse, and it’s just “irreconcilable differences” (aka legal jargon for they just can’t get along) I still believe people deserve the right to be able to leave if they have no hope for a fulfilling marriage.

Quackthulu2 · Answer

Consent is mandatory for any type of relationship. Dating, casual sex, marriage, even roommates, coworkers or doctor/patient. Everyone involved needs to continually consent to that relationship. Although it doesn’t have to be verbally stated.

You don’t need consent to leave a relationship, ever.

Anonymous · Answer

It really depends on the situation. There are many places that allow you to get a divorce without the other's consent so long as you can prove you've been separated for a certain amount of time. Divorces can also be super messy if the couple shared a lot of finances during the marriage.

NostalgiaSenpi · Answer

Agreed, to get married (or in a relationship) both people must consent, but for divorcing (or breaking up) only one needs to make the decision. You might convince them to not go through with it, but ultimately, only one party needs to. Laws may vary, though. I don't know about most countries.

Leopard23 · Answer

I believe that 80% of divorces wouldn't happen if there was no alimony and default child custody was 50/50 with no child support

serious · Answer

Disagree. Consent is needed for both marriage and divorce. I am sure there is a legal term called as divorce with mutual consent.

molonski2 · Answer

Gee , I'm sitting on the fence , really I agree with you and your wife , but without being in the ( divorce ) relationship , you'd need to know what going on on the inside , tough one.

DarkLegacy · Answer

No i disagree. Different laws around the world of course but a wronged party can sue for divorce and there is nothing the other party can do about it. That used to be the law here in the UK but now anyone can divorce without a just cause.

Mangospacho · Answer

Depending on the state, sometimes you only need one person to initiate a divorce. It makes sense, though, if a woman is being beaten by her husband, she shouldn’t have to get his blessing to divorce him.

Jamie05rhs · Answer

Technically you're correct. But I agree with your wife.

Anonymous · Answer

Do you think she'd disagree so adamantly if it were the wife wanting out?

NathanDavis · Answer

I'm sure the law in any country, state, province... has a word to say about this

JustinTheGreat · Answer

Agree. It would be pretty messed up if you needed both partners consent for divorce. A lot of people would be trapped in marriages they don’t want to be in because their partner would refuse to let them go.

Rangers · Answer

I'll go there, no fault divorces need to be illegal Marriage needs to be the soul to soul merger that it was for thousands of years until the 90s

genericname85 · Answer

well i think if your spouse doesn't consent to the divorce, you shouldn't get alimony or any of their shit.

suzzieQ · Answer

Lol it's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, it's a matter of fact.

Anonymous · Answer

Consent is not needed for marriage in most civilised countries

MountAverage · Answer

I wouldn't call what your qife suggests "consent" though.

MrShaun · Answer

Entering into marriage is both a legal and religious agreement. Ending it is no different.

Anonymous · Answer

Don’t Forget Your Vows… In Good Times And Bad, In Sickness And In Health, Until Death Do Us Part… No One Understands Those Vows Anymore…

msc545 · Answer

I am fairly sure this is correct.

LiamJHayden · Answer

Under the laws where I live, yes.

melanieeeB · Answer

I agree lol

Agape93 · Answer

I agree entirely.

lottiebannotie · Answer

Clearly that's the case

Nikki1989 · Answer

I agree

jimmy2 · Answer

Well if that how you want it ok

Anonymous · Answer

Yeah I agree

Consent is needed for marriage, not divorce - agree or disagree?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Is consent important?

Consent is needed for marriage, not divorce - agree or disagree?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Is consent important?

We're glad to see you liked this post.