1
   

Divorce granted to woman whose husband had affair with man

 
 
Reyn
 
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2005 10:36 pm
B.C. judge grants divorce to woman whose husband had affair with another man

at 18:11 on August 30, 2005, EST.
CAMILLE BAINS

VANCOUVER (CP) - A Vancouver woman was granted a divorce Tuesday after a B.C. Supreme Court judge decided the woman's husband had indeed engaged in an adulterous affair with another man, despite the current definition of adultery involving people of the opposite sex.

Justice Nicole Garson said she had been persuaded that she had the authority to make a change in the definition of adultery. The traditional definition of adultery, developed through the courts, is voluntary sex between a spouse and someone of the opposite gender, to whom the person is not married.

Garson also granted the Justice Department's request to ban publication of the couple's name and referred to the case as P. versus P.

Christian Girouard, spokesman for the federal government, said the department had intervener status in the case to ensure the Divorce Act would be interpreted consistent with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to reflect same-sex marriage legislation.

"In this case the court was being asked to rule on whether adultery also includes sexual behaviour with a person of the same sex," Girouard said.

The judge's decision is expected to have far-reaching consequences across the country because of the increasing number of same-sex marriages that will inevitably lead to same-sex affairs, said barbara findlay, the woman's lawyer, who spells her name all lower-case letters.

"We argued, and the federal government agreed with us, that the court can make what is called in law an incremental change in light of current circumstances so that divorce will, from now on, be understood to be available where there is, for example, intimate genital contact between two people, one of whom is married," findlay said.

Because adultery is not defined through federal legislation, judges hearing similar cases in other provinces will no doubt be persuaded by Garson's decision, she said.

And there are bound to be plenty of court hearings in other jurisdictions involving similar circumstances.

"It's likely to happen a lot because same-sex partners are predictably more likely to have affairs with other people of the same gender than with people of the opposite gender," findlay said.

"It's going to be important for lesbian and gay men whose partners commit infidelity to enable them to get divorced immediately instead of having to wait a year."

She also launched a constitutional challenge based on the Charter, saying the definition of adultery discriminates against gay and lesbian couples because it makes divorce less accessible to them compared to homosexuals.

She said her 44-year-old client had been married for almost 17 years.

The woman filed for divorce after she discovered last October that her husband was having an affair with a man.

Garson was concerned that she did not have jurisdiction to grant a divorce and in February requested that the woman hire a lawyer to argue why the definition of adultery should include same-sex affairs.

The judge's written decision is expected to be released in two weeks.

Source[/color]
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,009 • Replies: 16
No top replies

 
Reyn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 08:36 pm
Does anyone know anybody who has gone through this experience? It puts an interesting slant on modern divorce.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 09:29 pm
I do...it's even more heartbreaking for the wife and very hard on the kids.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 09:37 pm
Reyn, in BC do couples need a valid reason before a
divorce is granted?
0 Replies
 
Reyn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 10:00 pm
CalamityJane wrote:
Reyn, in BC do couples need a valid reason before a
divorce is granted?

I'm not absolutely sure about these days, although I think so.

I divorced way back in 1973 and I needed one, albeit a "trumped up" one, between my wife at the time, and myself. We both mutally agreed that we should go our separate ways. Fortunately, no children were involved.

I never would like to go through that again. Happily married since 1979. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Noddy24
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 10:38 pm
Personally, I think adultery is adultery and the sex of the partner has nothing to do with the degree of betrayal.

I believe that Gay Marriage is a right.

I believe that betrayal with a warm body of either sex is ground for divorce.
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Sep, 2005 11:59 pm
I agree with Noddy.
0 Replies
 
Reyn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 07:21 am
Noddy24 wrote:
Personally, I think adultery is adultery and the sex of the partner has nothing to do with the degree of betrayal.

Makes sense to me. Marriage is marriage.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 07:27 am
Cheating is cheating, no matter what the sex of the person.
0 Replies
 
Bekaboo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 09:43 am
Yup I'm with you guys on this...

Not least because I think cheating basically amounts to betrayal of trust. So some couples may consider a sexual act to be cheating while to others it may be intercourse, and to some swingers... we I don't know... I don't know any swingers!!!

But you get what I mean.
0 Replies
 
shewolfnm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 09:47 am
I agree as well and I cant see a reason divorce wouldnt be granted.
2 people know when they can not make a marriage work no matter what the reason.
We are free to marry who we choose, we should be just as free to divorce.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 10:08 am
I do know of a relationship where this situation occurred and I agree that it is more difficult for the spouse to cope with the concept of a same-sex affair than one of the opposite sex.

I'm fully in favor of same-sex marriage and don't want to sound like I'm not, but I do think it is more difficult for the spouse to discover her partner has a sexual leaning he/she was unaware of than discovering a typical extra-marital affair. It's as if you were married to a ghost. or figure you never knew.

It was also difficult for the children of this marriage to explain why their parents divorced. Many kids are used to talking about divorce these days but the children of divorce resulting from same-sex affairs have it harder.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 12:49 pm
Here's where it gets sticky.
Ex moves in with boyfriend and has joint custody of 12 year old boy. Now Mom is scared to let him spend overnights there
0 Replies
 
Noddy24
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Sep, 2005 03:27 pm
Very few hetrosexuals molest children.

Very few homosexuals molest children.

Mothers!
0 Replies
 
1863sd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2005 11:47 am
Reyn wrote:
Does anyone know anybody who has gone through this experience? It puts an interesting slant on modern divorce.


My mother-in-law divorced my father-in-law because of this. I believe they were married about 10 years when she found out - she received an anonymous phone call from someone about it. My husband was about 9 at that time, and his younger sister was 6. Just from stories he's told me, they had to go through all sorts of testing for STDs; it was very traumatic for them. His sister (now 23) won't really acknowledge her father's sexuality and avoids visiting him at all costs when his "boyfriend" is around. From what I understand, the parents never really sat the kids down and explained anything to him. They just let them figure it all out on their own.

Surprisingly, however, MIL and FIL do get along pretty well considering. She's told me they maintained a friendship for the sake of the children. However, she's on her 3rd marriage now, which isn't doing all that well, so I'm not sure what kind of emotional damage it did to her.

FIL is in a committed relationship with another man now. He's pretty much only dated men since "coming out" around the time of their divorce.

But oh my goodness - I definitely think this is adultery. I don't know how anyone could think it's NOT grounds for divorce.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2005 12:03 pm
On one of the original posts I noticed that the question is not that is it grounds for divorce, but is it grounds for not waiting a year, which I gather you have to do there if it is not a matter of adultery.

I am not used to the waiting a year business, since that isn't true where I live, which is in California; it seems quaint to me, as if adults don't have control of their decisions. I can understand arguments for waiting, re any divorce, but disagree with them.
0 Replies
 
Reyn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2005 05:10 pm
Thank you '1863sd' for your story.
0 Replies
 
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Divorce granted to woman whose husband had affair with man
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/20/2024 at 06:24:55