About the author- litigation lawyer in telecoms, taxation, criminal, labor, appellate, family law and corporate; a radio broadcaster, speaker, author a husband, a father, advocate for consumers, for justice www.angkapatiran.org and a sinner who wants to
be a saint. hilman1108@yahoo.com
norstadt8@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
> The ’separada’ phenomenon
>
> WHOEVER said that in the Philippines, it is better
> to
> be a separada rather than a single? Indeed, many of
> our better halves took this piece of advice. Look
> around, maybe half of our married friends are
> separated and the other half single. Soon, forms
> will
> add one more tick box on the query on civil status.
>
> Nowadays, it is downright fashionable to say, “I am
> separated.” It is a topic-starter and is a prelude
> to
> the swapping of stories and I don’t mean the bedtime
> kind. A close high-school friend married for seven
> years had this to say: “When you decide to get
> married, think long and hard. Think twice, think
> thrice, think a hundred times. The vow ‘to be
> together
> till death do us part’ can take a very, very long
> time.”
>
> Being separated means a few things. One, I gave it a
> shot but it didn’t work out. At least I tried. That
> is
> our society’s mantra anyway—try and try until you
> succeed, or until you die. Two, someone actually
> loved
> me enough to marry me. I am worthy. My self-esteem
> is
> intact. Very much unlike the singles forever haunted
> with the question, “what’s wrong with me?” Three,
> aha,
> I have kids and don’t have to worry about the
> biological clock ticking away. When I grow old, I
> will
> have company. That is if the kids are with you and
> don’t actually abandon you after a few years. Four,
> I
> may or may not work—for those whose spouses are not
> delinquent with support. Five, I am available again.
>
>
> Legally speaking, there is no separate category of
> “separated.” Either you are married or you are not.
> If
> the marriage is on the rocks, you can apply for a
> legal separation. The marriage bonds, however, are
> not
> dissolved. Legal separation simply gives the spouses
> the right to be away from each other, physically and
> property-wise.
>
> The other mode is of course annulment—our Catholic
> version of divorce. To get this decree, you have to
> go
> through a lengthy and expensive court process. The
> fastest will be at least one year and it will cost
> you
> upward of P100,000. There is no guarantee that a
> petition for annulment will succeed. In any event, a
> calendar and a few pesos are a small price to pay to
> get rid of your spouse and regain your freedom, so
> goes conventional thinking.
>
> Not surprisingly, in all the annulment cases I have
> come across, there is not one person who admitted
> that
> it was his/her fault that the marriage did not last.
> In fact, the blame game is intense and, needless to
> say, very personal. It takes a hundred and one
> reasons
> to hold on to a marriage and only one excuse to tear
> it down. After that, marriage becomes a miscarriage.
>
>
> Is there a difference between a separada and a
> separated guy? You bet there is. For one, I am not
> aware of a separate term for the separated guy.
> There
> is a certain stigma to being a separada although as
> explained earlier, it is fast becoming a status
> symbol. Guys who are separated may also be more
> attractive than the usually married ones who are not
> happy with their wives.
>
> What about the children? Well, the standard line is
> that their welfare is most important, paramount
> even.
> There is an arrangement for joint custody or
> visitation rights as in the American system. The
> kids
> are juggled back and forth with the accompanying
> roller-coaster feelings. In some cases, a parent
> will
> even hostage the children to get back at the spouse
> or
> to exact some concession.
>
> In modern times, it is still the innocents who
> suffer.
> Sacrificing for the children and keeping the family
> intact for their sake is no longer a viable option.
> The individual’s quest for happiness becomes
> primordial; everything else is secondary. Either a
> marriage is a sand trap or a prison.
>
> This is not to discount the legitimate reasons like
> pathological violence and infidelity for opting out
> of
> a marital union. The age-old dilemma is: when do we
> call it quits and decide that enough is enough? This
> unanswered hard question helps us understand why
> annulments are becoming the norm.
>
> Regardless of the heartaches and the trauma, people,
> single or separated, never cease to dream and
> continue
> to hope to meet the right person whom they can spend
> their lives with together forever.
[1] vAL\
yOU WRITE VERY WELL. If you got no annulment what did you do file for legal separation and or divorce your wife n thailand? yes we have to simplify our law n annulment so even the poor can avail of it.
filing fee and the annotation of the decision with the nso and civil registry costs about ten thousand pesos, if there is no property dispute nor custody dispute then the hearings and decsion should come within a year. 100,000 pesos plus extra if the case is filed in Makati or Paranaque or Pasayor out of town. fair cost. other firms charge up to 250,000 pesos. the public attorneys ofice shud accept annulment cases
Adrian. how did you discover my blog?
I was actually searching for blogs from one of my "non-busy" hours when I stumbled on yours which I find really interesting.
BTW, sorry for the confusion, I was not married nor has any serious relationship with a Thai (at least not at the moment :p); my latest partner is still a Pinay. I'm still technically married with my "ex-wife" and have not filed anything legal as of now. It's just more of a mutual agreement between the two of us that I keep custody of our children then she go ahead and live her life with her new family. We neither have any valuable property to settle anyway, maybe that's why things are a bit simpler to handle on my end.
I'm still very much interested in the possibility of an annulment but I'm not sure if I do have any good grounds in my case. I don't see Legal Separation as a viable option now. Perhaps you can help me out on this one 
Again, nice blog you got here.
Cheers!
Posted by Van Helsing at July 14, 2006, 9:03 amAll comments are moderated. Your comments will not appear here unless approved by the blog owner. Thank you.
True, true…
I was a separated man myself (for more than 9 years now) after my "ex-wife" of 10 years left me for my "now-ex-best friend". This proves that passing the what-they-call "7-year itch" does not apply to everyone. On the first few years of being separated, particularly if you were the offended party, you cannot help but think of what the real problem was for things like that to happen. And this I believe is what actually makes it hard for someone to recover, refusing to accept the current situation thus giving that someone a hard time to move on with his/her life.
We must admit, marriage comes with pride in it. This pride is your greatest enemy after a separation especially if the man becomes the aggrieved party. This is also where our "machismo" culture steps in - the feeling of "nabawasan ang iyong pagka-macho" after your wife leaves you. But as with any worst things that can happen to anyone, one has to learn to accept things and move on. Learn from the past to minimize stumbling in the future.
You have two options in moving on with your life-after-marriage. Either you battle it out legally or plainly accept the facts and move on in a “quieter” setting. For me, I chose the latter as aside from having not enough financial resources for a legal battle, I also considered the fact that the more “noise” I create out of the situation, the more it affects my loved ones particularly my children. I find it best later to settle things with my ex-wife with the least effect on our children as possible.
You may ask if the thought of going through an annulment process ever crossed my mind — of course it did! But I don’t really see it now as an “honest” solution to the problem because the way that law was made, the law as contained in the Family Code was very impartial and discriminating. It is like making a divorce law which will only be available to the rich or those who can truly afford it. Go ahead and observe; how come the rich and selected celebrities can easily get the annulment that they wanted? Would you believe that one of them are truly “mentally incapacitated”, which incidentally is the most common reasons used in court? Hahah, it’s just like using your own money to cheat yourselves.
Posted by Van Helsing at July 5, 2006, 12:55 pmWell, I’m now happy with my 3rd “serious” relationship and living my life, working here in Bangkok. And one of the few good things I observed here with the Thais is that it is more tedious here to get married than to be separated. A divorce in Thailand can be obtained in the following manner: (1) Mutual consent which is made in writing, certified by signatures of at least two witnesses, and evidenced by registration of the written agreement at the office of the District Officer and by producing Personal Citizenship Identification Card, Copy of household registration, Vital marriage documents of both parties. (2) If a divorce is not possible through mutually consent then the court to be approached to obtain a divorce through judgment of the court. See how fair and simple it can be?! “Mutual consent” is the key word here. I strongly believe that our lawmakers and the Church as well, must now accept the reality that forcing two hostile people to live together does not save the family from breaking apart but only adds more damages to an already wrecked family. It takes two to tango! Why not ease up on the "break-up" law and look more on the "healing" side of separation.