Wonder what Indian Feminazi's will say about this, they call Indian Men MAMA'S BOY, what will they say about Irish men who live at home with their parents?
These are bonds that tie families together and strengthen them.
October 9, 2010
S MANY as one in three Irishmen and nearly one in six Irish women aged between 25 and 34 live at home with at least one of their parents, according to new European research.
The data, published by Eurostat, is silent on whether the quality of romance, motherly cooking and other hearty comforts have any bearing on whether young people stay at home or move out.
The survey also shows that 34 per cent of Irishwomen between the age of 18-34 are in a “consensual union”, lower than any other European country. In Finland, almost 63 per cent of women of the same age were in such relationships when the study was conducted in 2008.
Eurostat, the EU’s statistical arm, says no less than 51 million Europeans aged 18-34 lived with their mother, father or both parents in 2008. It reveals big disparities between the sexes and between prosperous northern states and southern countries. For example, only 2.8 per cent of Danish men and 0.5 per cent of Danish women in the 25-34 age bracket live at home with a parent or parents. In non-EU Norway, only 30 per cent of women and 40 per cent of men aged between 18 and 24 years live at home, while in Ireland a majority of males (83.8 per cent) and females (77.9 per cent) do so.
It suggests education, relationships and the quality or lack of employment are prime factors in determining where young Europeans live. Questions of financial self-sufficiency arise, as do cultural aspects such as the relative importance given to the nuclear family or “lifestyle arrangements” enabling children to be more independent.
Noting a higher share of women than men aged 18-34 living in a “consensual union”, they say this reflects the fact that women on average marry or move out with a partner earlier in life than men. But young Irishwomen do so in fewer numbers than other Europeans, they say.
“The highest proportions of both women and men aged 18-34 who lived in a consensual union in 2008 were observed in Finland (63 per cent for women and 51 per cent for men), Sweden (61 per cent and 48 per cent), Romania (57 per cent and 42 per cent) and France (55 per cent and 45 per cent), and the lowest for women in Ireland (34 per cent), Slovenia, Malta and Slovakia (all 37 per cent) and for men in Greece (21 per cent), Slovenia (22 per cent) and Italy (25 per cent).”
The proportion of Irishmen aged 18-34 who share a home with a partner (25.5 per cent) compares with an EU average of 35.8 per cent.
The proportion of Irishmen aged 25-34 who live with a parent (32.2 per cent) was in line with the European average of 32 per cent. The proportion of Irishwomen living at home in this age bracket (17.9 per cent) is under the European average of 19.6 per cent.
Mr.Rebates
Saturday, October 9, 2010
What happens to dads after a split?
Oct 5, 2010
Recent research shows that when a marriage ends, most fathers are left without the family home or primary care of the children. Men who feel they were mistreated by the system tell their stories to the Media.
EVERY NIGHT before he goes to sleep, Joe, a separated father, looks at a picture of his children on his computer screen and tells them he loves them.
When Tom’s marriage broke up, he slept in his car near the family home because he wanted to be close by in case something happened to the children.
Cathal weeps when he speaks of how he came home from hospital after being stabbed by his wife to find his house emptied of “everything” – including his children. His wife had left a solicitor’s letter on the counter accusing him of being mentally ill and telling him she wanted a divorce.
All three men have struggled for years in the courts to gain access to their children and believe that they should have been made primary carers, in their children’s best interests. They tell of being so alienated from their children by their ex-wives, they’ve had to watch their children’s first holy communions and confirmations from the back of the church. They speak of telling social workers about their ex-wives’ abusive behaviour and of not being believed.
“I was really, really depressed before the separation, sleeping in the back sitting room. You weren’t walking on eggshells, you were walking on razor blades,” says Cathal, who showed The Irish Times an extensive psychiatrist’s report that declares him under stress due to the separation, but well mentally otherwise.
“I know men who killed themselves because they lost contact with their children,” says Declan Keaveney, a retired garda who spent €50,000 fighting through the courts to be made primary carer of his two children and even contemplated suicide himself. He eventually succeeded in becoming primary carer.“Men have no voice – we have nothing,” he says.
Keaveney, who is now is a volunteer with Amen, a support group for male victims of domestic abuse. He listens on a daily basis to men driven to the edge by rancorous separation wars in which children are often used as ammunition. “Parental alienation syndrome”, where one parent turns the children against another, is common, he says.
A report by One Family, an advocacy group for one-parent families, finds some fathers who, despite contact orders, are refused contact with their children by their wives and cannot get the HSE to intervene and enforce their rights.
Court delays also mean fathers can go months without seeing their children. One father says he “just gave up because it was too stressful . . . [my ex-wife] was on legal aid and I had a private solicitor which cost a lot of money and I just gave up”.
There is “no deliberate bias” against men in the family law courts, believes Anne Egan, a researcher who sat in on 158 in camera cases (where cases are heard in private) for her PhD, though the court “reinforces stereotypical views” that children need to be with their mother as primary carer – the result in 88 per cent of cases.
Another PhD researcher, Róisín O’Shea, found only 2.23 per cent of 493 cases had the children living with their father. While many fathers asked for 50/50 living arrangements, O’Shea saw this ordered by the court in just two cases.
Egan, who also interviewed fathers, says most accepted the mother as primary carer, but “they would have liked more contact rather than specific times and dates”. These fathers missed the daily informal involvement with their children over breakfast, the school run or even just a few minutes in the evening to hear about a child’s day.
The second major complaint was being left out of decision-making. “Most were not happy with the situation but it was working for them,” she says.
If a father wants to be primary carer, “it’s not always fair. There’s a battle royale if you are acting for a father,” says Marion Campbell, a private family law solicitor who has been dealing with separation cases since 1981, when she started her career in the legal aid board.
Due to the recession, a growing number of men have become stay-at-home fathers whose wives work full-time. It’s often the wife who wants to separate, yet if the father wants to remain in the home as primary carer, he needs maintenance paid by the wife and her agreement to leave the family home, which is practically unheard of (O’Shea’s study found not one case of fathers receiving maintenance).
Jobless and rejected men may have no choice but to move home to their parents’ house, Campbell says. Would a stay-at-home mother be asked to leave her house with no maintenance and limited access to her children because her husband wanted a separation? The question just doesn’t arise, Campbell points out.
Another unfair perception is that men are not physically assaulted by their wives, she adds. “I’ve come across a lot of cases, but women are much stronger and more proactive in issuing proceedings. Men bury their heads and come in at the last minute and quite a number are upset because they don’t want the separation,” says Campbell.
ONE FATHER WHO WAS physically abused says he never told anyone because “it’s embarrassing”. When parents fight in court over property and children, lawyers’ briefcases heave with psychiatrists’ and social workers’ reports, although hearings can be so brief that judges don’t always see everything.
Keaveney says the men he hears from often feel social workers have sided with their wives and barely listen to them, and that the wives’ allegations are always believed.
Joe says he experienced years of false accusations by his ex-wife before he finally received a verbal apology from a social worker who said he’d been right about his wife’s fragile mental state all along. For example, his wife went to gardaí accusing Joe of exposing their son to pornography during an access visit. Gardaí investigated and The Irish Times has seen a copy of a letter from An Garda Síochana telling Joe they found no basis for the allegations. For Joe, this was just one episode in a long campaign by his ex-wife to “destroy” him, even though she had left him for another man.
“Because she’s a woman she can say what she likes, do what she likes and is getting away with it. Because I’ve moved on, the only way she can get to me is through the kids. I know guys who have not seen their kids in five to 10 years.
“One father I know, hadn’t seen his son for eight years. Then he got a call through a solicitor to say his son had attempted suicide. Can you imagine how he feels?”
Tom weeps when he speaks of living “in limbo”. After years of court battles costing in the region of €50,000, he has good access to his children but still worries about their safety. At the height of the conflict, he would drive by a place where he knew his children would be, just to see them from a distance. “I’m trying to move on, but last week, I broke down leaving the kids back to their mother. I was leaving them to somebody I don’t trust.” Sleepless nights have become routine, but he keeps going, trying to rebuild his life and his business, “for my kids”.
Recent research shows that when a marriage ends, most fathers are left without the family home or primary care of the children. Men who feel they were mistreated by the system tell their stories to the Media.
EVERY NIGHT before he goes to sleep, Joe, a separated father, looks at a picture of his children on his computer screen and tells them he loves them.
When Tom’s marriage broke up, he slept in his car near the family home because he wanted to be close by in case something happened to the children.
Cathal weeps when he speaks of how he came home from hospital after being stabbed by his wife to find his house emptied of “everything” – including his children. His wife had left a solicitor’s letter on the counter accusing him of being mentally ill and telling him she wanted a divorce.
All three men have struggled for years in the courts to gain access to their children and believe that they should have been made primary carers, in their children’s best interests. They tell of being so alienated from their children by their ex-wives, they’ve had to watch their children’s first holy communions and confirmations from the back of the church. They speak of telling social workers about their ex-wives’ abusive behaviour and of not being believed.
“I was really, really depressed before the separation, sleeping in the back sitting room. You weren’t walking on eggshells, you were walking on razor blades,” says Cathal, who showed The Irish Times an extensive psychiatrist’s report that declares him under stress due to the separation, but well mentally otherwise.
“I know men who killed themselves because they lost contact with their children,” says Declan Keaveney, a retired garda who spent €50,000 fighting through the courts to be made primary carer of his two children and even contemplated suicide himself. He eventually succeeded in becoming primary carer.“Men have no voice – we have nothing,” he says.
Keaveney, who is now is a volunteer with Amen, a support group for male victims of domestic abuse. He listens on a daily basis to men driven to the edge by rancorous separation wars in which children are often used as ammunition. “Parental alienation syndrome”, where one parent turns the children against another, is common, he says.
A report by One Family, an advocacy group for one-parent families, finds some fathers who, despite contact orders, are refused contact with their children by their wives and cannot get the HSE to intervene and enforce their rights.
Court delays also mean fathers can go months without seeing their children. One father says he “just gave up because it was too stressful . . . [my ex-wife] was on legal aid and I had a private solicitor which cost a lot of money and I just gave up”.
There is “no deliberate bias” against men in the family law courts, believes Anne Egan, a researcher who sat in on 158 in camera cases (where cases are heard in private) for her PhD, though the court “reinforces stereotypical views” that children need to be with their mother as primary carer – the result in 88 per cent of cases.
Another PhD researcher, Róisín O’Shea, found only 2.23 per cent of 493 cases had the children living with their father. While many fathers asked for 50/50 living arrangements, O’Shea saw this ordered by the court in just two cases.
Egan, who also interviewed fathers, says most accepted the mother as primary carer, but “they would have liked more contact rather than specific times and dates”. These fathers missed the daily informal involvement with their children over breakfast, the school run or even just a few minutes in the evening to hear about a child’s day.
The second major complaint was being left out of decision-making. “Most were not happy with the situation but it was working for them,” she says.
If a father wants to be primary carer, “it’s not always fair. There’s a battle royale if you are acting for a father,” says Marion Campbell, a private family law solicitor who has been dealing with separation cases since 1981, when she started her career in the legal aid board.
Due to the recession, a growing number of men have become stay-at-home fathers whose wives work full-time. It’s often the wife who wants to separate, yet if the father wants to remain in the home as primary carer, he needs maintenance paid by the wife and her agreement to leave the family home, which is practically unheard of (O’Shea’s study found not one case of fathers receiving maintenance).
Jobless and rejected men may have no choice but to move home to their parents’ house, Campbell says. Would a stay-at-home mother be asked to leave her house with no maintenance and limited access to her children because her husband wanted a separation? The question just doesn’t arise, Campbell points out.
Another unfair perception is that men are not physically assaulted by their wives, she adds. “I’ve come across a lot of cases, but women are much stronger and more proactive in issuing proceedings. Men bury their heads and come in at the last minute and quite a number are upset because they don’t want the separation,” says Campbell.
ONE FATHER WHO WAS physically abused says he never told anyone because “it’s embarrassing”. When parents fight in court over property and children, lawyers’ briefcases heave with psychiatrists’ and social workers’ reports, although hearings can be so brief that judges don’t always see everything.
Keaveney says the men he hears from often feel social workers have sided with their wives and barely listen to them, and that the wives’ allegations are always believed.
Joe says he experienced years of false accusations by his ex-wife before he finally received a verbal apology from a social worker who said he’d been right about his wife’s fragile mental state all along. For example, his wife went to gardaí accusing Joe of exposing their son to pornography during an access visit. Gardaí investigated and The Irish Times has seen a copy of a letter from An Garda Síochana telling Joe they found no basis for the allegations. For Joe, this was just one episode in a long campaign by his ex-wife to “destroy” him, even though she had left him for another man.
“Because she’s a woman she can say what she likes, do what she likes and is getting away with it. Because I’ve moved on, the only way she can get to me is through the kids. I know guys who have not seen their kids in five to 10 years.
“One father I know, hadn’t seen his son for eight years. Then he got a call through a solicitor to say his son had attempted suicide. Can you imagine how he feels?”
Tom weeps when he speaks of living “in limbo”. After years of court battles costing in the region of €50,000, he has good access to his children but still worries about their safety. At the height of the conflict, he would drive by a place where he knew his children would be, just to see them from a distance. “I’m trying to move on, but last week, I broke down leaving the kids back to their mother. I was leaving them to somebody I don’t trust.” Sleepless nights have become routine, but he keeps going, trying to rebuild his life and his business, “for my kids”.
Radio ~ The Current for June 01, 2009 ~ Parental Alienation
June 1, 2009
Rhonda Pisarello was eight years old when her parents divorced. Her sisters were seven and one. Rhonda's father was awarded custody of the three girls. And her mother was granted the right to see them a few days each week. A year after the divorce, Rhonda's father remarried. Rhonda is an adult now and she picked up the story from there. We aired a clip.
Rhonda's story has all the hallmarks of what we now call Parental Alienation. The number of court cases that involve Parental Alienation is getting more attention these days but it is not new to our court system.
Nick Bala has just completed the first study of how Canadian courts and judges have handled Parental Alienation over the last 20 years. He's a professor in the Faculty of Law at Queen's University and he was in Kingston, Ontario.
When you click on the following link it will take you to the CBC site. Look to the bottom of the page and click on the same link again. You will need the Adobe Flash Player installed. Listen to Part Three:
Professor Bala's Summary of the study follows my remarks on the broadcast.
"Bala seems to have picked up on the notion that Parental Alienation is real and has negative consequences 20 plus years after it received currency in the pyschological community. He even noted he found a 2-1 ratio of female/male perps but then quickly falls all over himself by indicating females have greater custody. Is he playing identity politics just trying to placate his feminist followers and acolytes by making excuses or is this an objective inference. He does not quote the actual statistics of gender custody.
His comments on the legal side seemed balanced but he still subscribes to the feminist notion that Dr. Gardiner may not be credible. He has done his homework with respect to the impact on children and almost sounded like Dr. Richard Warshak but he is a lawyer not a clinician and no more qualified (perhaps less so) than someone like me who is a target. Nevertheless, he seems to be applying more equanimity but he has a long way to go. His comments in the newspaper with respect to the little girl who was alienated from her Toronto Father and allowed to go to Saudi Arabia with her mother are beyond the pale as were Judge Leonard Ricchetti's in Elwan v el taher one of the most egregious of dysfunctional decisions rewarding a child abuser in recent memory. His recommendations are logical and reasonable. Will it take the lawmakers another generation to change the system or will judges work within their current framework and implement the necessary changes immediately while we get shared and equal parenting legislation passed along with new rules relating to conflict? Reducing the incentives to divorce will reduce couple separation and increase the likelihood of counselling. Gene Coleman, a Toronto based lawyer, did an original study of PA in Canadian court cases and presented it publicly at the Canadian Parental Alienation Syndrome Symposium in late March 2009 in Toronto. I was in attendance. Bala may be exaggerating his claim that his is the first such study. Gene's presentation is available for review here. http://www.4famlaw.com/P.A.%20Research.htm#COLMAN%27S MJM"
May 12, 2009 - Summary Parental Alienation - Myths, Realities & Uncertainties: A Canadian Study, 1989-2008 Nicholas Bala, Suzanne Hunt & Carrie McCarney Faculty of Law, Queen’s University Alienation cases have been receiving a great deal of public and professional attention in the past few months in Canada. As with so many issues in family law, there are two competing, gendered narratives offered to explain these cases. Men’s rights activists claim that mothers alienate children from their fathers as a way of seeking revenge for separation, and argue that judges are gender-biased against fathers in these cases. Feminists tend to dismiss alienation as a fabrication of abusive fathers who are trying to force contact with children who are frightened of them and to control the lives of their abused former partners. While there is some validity to both of these narratives, each also has significant mythical elements.
The reality of these cases is often highly complex, with both fathers and mothers bearing significant responsibility for the situation. Many high conflict separations are characterized by both parents denigrating their former partners and failing to support their children’s relationships with the other parent. While all children suffer from such parental behaviour, only a minority of children become “alienated” from a parent as a result of it. When a child resists visits with a parent, all children in the family and both parents must be assessed. Some cases involve emotionally abusive "pathological alienation," caused by the conduct of an alienating parent and resulting in a child having negative beliefs and feelings (such as anger, hatred or fear) that are not consistent with the child's actual experience with the rejected parent. In other cases, however, the child may be "justifiably estranged" due to conduct of the rejected parent, such as abuse or poor parenting. In some cases a child independently decides to disengage with a parent, perhaps due to tensions with a step parent. We are undertaking a study of reported Canadian cases between 1989 and 2008 dealing with claims of parental alienation. Some of the key findings of the study:
Rhonda Pisarello was eight years old when her parents divorced. Her sisters were seven and one. Rhonda's father was awarded custody of the three girls. And her mother was granted the right to see them a few days each week. A year after the divorce, Rhonda's father remarried. Rhonda is an adult now and she picked up the story from there. We aired a clip.
Rhonda's story has all the hallmarks of what we now call Parental Alienation. The number of court cases that involve Parental Alienation is getting more attention these days but it is not new to our court system.
Nick Bala has just completed the first study of how Canadian courts and judges have handled Parental Alienation over the last 20 years. He's a professor in the Faculty of Law at Queen's University and he was in Kingston, Ontario.
When you click on the following link it will take you to the CBC site. Look to the bottom of the page and click on the same link again. You will need the Adobe Flash Player installed. Listen to Part Three:
Professor Bala's Summary of the study follows my remarks on the broadcast.
"Bala seems to have picked up on the notion that Parental Alienation is real and has negative consequences 20 plus years after it received currency in the pyschological community. He even noted he found a 2-1 ratio of female/male perps but then quickly falls all over himself by indicating females have greater custody. Is he playing identity politics just trying to placate his feminist followers and acolytes by making excuses or is this an objective inference. He does not quote the actual statistics of gender custody.
His comments on the legal side seemed balanced but he still subscribes to the feminist notion that Dr. Gardiner may not be credible. He has done his homework with respect to the impact on children and almost sounded like Dr. Richard Warshak but he is a lawyer not a clinician and no more qualified (perhaps less so) than someone like me who is a target. Nevertheless, he seems to be applying more equanimity but he has a long way to go. His comments in the newspaper with respect to the little girl who was alienated from her Toronto Father and allowed to go to Saudi Arabia with her mother are beyond the pale as were Judge Leonard Ricchetti's in Elwan v el taher one of the most egregious of dysfunctional decisions rewarding a child abuser in recent memory. His recommendations are logical and reasonable. Will it take the lawmakers another generation to change the system or will judges work within their current framework and implement the necessary changes immediately while we get shared and equal parenting legislation passed along with new rules relating to conflict? Reducing the incentives to divorce will reduce couple separation and increase the likelihood of counselling. Gene Coleman, a Toronto based lawyer, did an original study of PA in Canadian court cases and presented it publicly at the Canadian Parental Alienation Syndrome Symposium in late March 2009 in Toronto. I was in attendance. Bala may be exaggerating his claim that his is the first such study. Gene's presentation is available for review here. http://www.4famlaw.com/P.A.%20Research.htm#COLMAN%27S MJM"
May 12, 2009 - Summary Parental Alienation - Myths, Realities & Uncertainties: A Canadian Study, 1989-2008 Nicholas Bala, Suzanne Hunt & Carrie McCarney Faculty of Law, Queen’s University Alienation cases have been receiving a great deal of public and professional attention in the past few months in Canada. As with so many issues in family law, there are two competing, gendered narratives offered to explain these cases. Men’s rights activists claim that mothers alienate children from their fathers as a way of seeking revenge for separation, and argue that judges are gender-biased against fathers in these cases. Feminists tend to dismiss alienation as a fabrication of abusive fathers who are trying to force contact with children who are frightened of them and to control the lives of their abused former partners. While there is some validity to both of these narratives, each also has significant mythical elements.
The reality of these cases is often highly complex, with both fathers and mothers bearing significant responsibility for the situation. Many high conflict separations are characterized by both parents denigrating their former partners and failing to support their children’s relationships with the other parent. While all children suffer from such parental behaviour, only a minority of children become “alienated” from a parent as a result of it. When a child resists visits with a parent, all children in the family and both parents must be assessed. Some cases involve emotionally abusive "pathological alienation," caused by the conduct of an alienating parent and resulting in a child having negative beliefs and feelings (such as anger, hatred or fear) that are not consistent with the child's actual experience with the rejected parent. In other cases, however, the child may be "justifiably estranged" due to conduct of the rejected parent, such as abuse or poor parenting. In some cases a child independently decides to disengage with a parent, perhaps due to tensions with a step parent. We are undertaking a study of reported Canadian cases between 1989 and 2008 dealing with claims of parental alienation. Some of the key findings of the study:
- A total of 145 cases were found in this period in which the court made a decision about whether or not there was “parental alienation”, with 18/34 in 1989-1998 having a finding of alienation, and 71/111 in 1999-2008 having a finding of alienation. Thus there was a significant increase over time in the number of cases raising the issue of parental alienation and in the number of cases in which there were findings of alienation, though the increase in the rate of findings (53% to 64%) was not statistically significant.
- Although courts continue to use the concept of “parental alienation,” starting in 2005, Canadian judges began to recognize that the issue of whether this is a “syndrome” is controversial, and that mental health professionals should resolve this issue, not judges.
- Mothers are twice as likely as fathers to alienate children from the other parent, but this reflects the fact that mothers are more likely to have custody or primary care of their children; in only 2 out of 89 cases was a parent with only access able to alienate a child from the other parent.
- Fathers made more than three times as many unsubstantiated claims of parental alienation as mothers, but this too reflects the fact that claims of alienation (substantiated and unsubstantiated) are usually made by access parents, who are usually fathers.
- In close to half the cases in which the court declined to make a finding of alienation, it found that the child was understandably estranged from the rejected parent due to abuse or poor parenting; in about one quarter of the unsubstantiated cases the court found that the child was not “alienated” from the other parent, but simply wanted less contact. In 11 of the 56 cases where an unsubstantiated, the court declined to order access of a parent who had made a claim unsubstantiated claim of alienation; these were mainly cases of justified estrangement, where there concerns about the safety or welfare of the child in the care of that parent.
- Court-appointed mental health experts testified in 83% of these cases, and if they expressed a clear opinion about whether or not there was alienation, the court agreed in over 90% of the cases.
- Party-retained experts testified in less than a fifth of cases; judges are much less inclined to agree with these experts; in only 2 cases did the court prefer the opinion of a privately-retained expert to that of a court-appointed expert about whether alienation occurred.
- Where the court found parental alienation, the most common response was to vary custody to either give the rejected parent sole (47/89=53%) or joint custody(14/89=16%); whether the father or the mother was found to be the alienating parent, there was not a statistically significant difference in the rate of variation of custody.
- In more severe cases, courts may both change custody and suspend contact with the alienating parent; this occurred in 9 out of 89 cases (10%).
- The court ordered counselling or therapeutic intervention in 37 of 145 cases in this study (26%). These orders were made both in cases in which alienation was found, and in cases in which the court rejected the claim of alienation. The most common orders were for court ordered counselling for the children (19 cases) and for the entire family (12 cases).
- Education programs for parents on the effects of separation on children;
- Early case management by one judge of high conflict family law cases;
- Early assessment by a court-appointed mental health professional;
- Detailed court orders that are effectively enforced;
- Prevention of delay in resolving cases where alienation is alleged; and
- Provision of effective counselling and support services for children and parents involved in high conflict separations and cases where alienation issues arise.
Scholarly Paper on Parental Alienation
This Scholarly paper could be used in other Nations when going to Court to prove Parental Alienation, example in India, etc. But this is not a guarantee the Court will except it, you may want to do further research and dig up Court Judgments which maybe useful resources.
Parental Alienation - Myths, Realities & Uncertainties: A Canadian Study, 1989-2008
Summary, May 12, 2009 
By Nicholas Bala, Suzanne Hunt & Carrie McCarneyFaculty of Law, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
The paper is expected to be completed and published in early 2010.
About Nicholas Bala
Nicholas Bala B.A. (Toronto), LL.B. (Queen's), LL.M. (Harvard) is a professor at Queen's University - Faculty of Law, in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, specializing in Family and Children's Law.
Nicholas Bala B.A. (Toronto), LL.B. (Queen's), LL.M. (Harvard) is a professor at Queen's University - Faculty of Law, in Kingston, Ontario, Canada, specializing in Family and Children's Law.
As of May, 2009, his work has been cited by all levels of court in Canada , including 27 times by the Supreme Court of Canada. More.. 
Alienation cases have been receiving a great deal of public and professional attention in the past few months in Canada. As with so many issues in family law, there are two competing, gendered narratives offered to explain these cases. Men’s rights activists claim that mothers alienate children from their fathers as a way of seeking revenge for separation, and argue that judges are gender-biased against fathers in these cases. Feminists tend to dismiss alienation as a fabrication of abusive fathers who are trying to force contact with children who are frightened of them and to control the lives of their abused former partners. While there is some validity to both of these narratives, each also has significant mythical elements. The reality of these cases is often highly complex, with both fathers and mothers bearing significant responsibility for the situation.
Many high conflict separations are characterized by both parents denigrating their former partners and failing to support their children’s relationships with the other parent. While all children suffer from such parental behaviour, only a minority of children become “alienated” from a parent as a result of it. When a child resists visits with a parent, all children in the family and both parents must be assessed. Some cases involve emotionally abusive "pathological alienation," caused by the conduct of an alienating parent and resulting in a child having negative beliefs and feelings (such as anger, hatred or fear) that are not consistent with the child's actual experience with the rejected parent. In other cases, however, the child may be "justifiably estranged" due to conduct of the rejected parent, such as abuse or poor parenting. In some cases a child independently decides to disengage with a parent, perhaps due to tensions with a step parent.
We are undertaking a study of reported Canadian cases between 1989 and 2008 dealing with claims of parental alienation. Key findings include:
Some of the key findings of the study:
- A total of 145 cases were found in this period in which the court made a decision about whether or not there was “parental alienation”, with 18/34 in 1989-1998 having a finding of alienation, and 71/111 in 1999-2008 having a finding of alienation. Thus there was a significant increase over time in the number of cases raising the issue of parental alienation and in the number of cases in which there were findings of alienation, though the increase in the rate of findings (53% to 64%) was not statistically significant.
- Although courts continue to use the concept of “parental alienation,” starting in 2005, Canadian judges began to recognize that the issue of whether this is a “syndrome” is controversial, and that mental health professionals should resolve this issue, not judges.
- Mothers are twice as likely as fathers to alienate children from the other parent, but this reflects the fact that mothers are more likely to have custody or primary care of their children; in only 2 out of 89 cases was a parent with only access able to alienate a child from the other parent.
- Fathers made more than three times as many unsubstantiated claims of parental alienation as mothers, but this too reflects the fact that claims of alienation (substantiated and unsubstantiated) are usually made by access parents, who are usually fathers.
- In close to half the cases in which the court declined to make a finding of alienation, it found that the child was understandably estranged from the rejected parent due to abuse or poor parenting; in about one quarter of the unsubstantiated cases the court found that the child was not “alienated” from the other parent, but simply wanted less contact. In 11 of the 56 cases where an unsubstantiated, the court declined to order access of a parent who had made a claim unsubstantiated claim of alienation; these were mainly cases of justified estrangement, where there concerns about the safety or welfare of the child in the care of that parent.
- Court-appointed mental health experts testified in 83% of these cases, and if they expressed a clear opinion about whether or not there was alienation, the court agreed in over 90% of the cases.
- Party-retained experts testified in less than a fifth of cases; judges are much less inclined to agree with these experts; in only 2 cases did the court prefer the opinion of a privately-retained expert to that of a court-appointed expert about whether alienation occurred.
- Where the court found parental alienation, the most common response was to vary custody to either give the rejected parent sole (47/89=53%) or joint custody(14/89=16%); whether the father or the mother was found to be the alienating parent, there was not a statistically significant difference in the rate of variation of custody.
- In more severe cases, courts may both change custody and suspend contact with the alienating parent; this occurred in 9 out of 89 cases (10%).
Thus, while there are gender differences in both rates of alienating children (mainly by mothers) and in making unsubstantiated claims of alienation (mainly by fathers), this reflects the fact that alienation is almost always done by the parent with custody or primary care. There is no evidence of gender bias in judicial responses to these cases.
Changes should be made in the family justice system to ensure that alienation cases are addressed in a way that better meets the needs of children, including:
- Education programs for parents on the effects of separation on children;
- Early case management by one judge of high conflict family law cases;
- Early assessment by a court-appointed mental health professional;
- Detailed court orders that are effectively enforced;
- Prevention of delay in resolving cases where alienation is alleged; and
- Provision of effective counselling and support services for children and parents involved in high conflict separations and cases where alienation issues arise.
(Judgments) Parental Alienation Court rulings - U.S. and Other countries
Very useful court rulings on Parental Alienation from around the world, USA also include from 22 states.
June, 2008
European Court of Human Rights
European Court of Human Rights
- Familycase Koudelka/Application number: 1633/05, 20 July 2006
- Familycase Zavrel/Application number: 14044/05, 18 April 2007
Australia
- Johnson v. Johnson, 4806-11508A. FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA, July 7, 1997.
- Johnson v.Johnson, Appeal No. SA1 of 1997 No.AD6182 of 1993, 7 July 1997.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FamCA/1997/32.html
- Johnson v.Johnson, Appeal No. SA1 of 1997 No.AD6182 of 1993, 7 July 1997.
United States of America (22 States)
Alabama- Berry v. Berry, Circuit Court of Tuscaloosa County, AL, Case No. DR-96-761.01. Jan 06, 2001
- Pearson v. Pearson, Sup Ct. of AK., No. S-8973, No. 5297, 5 P.3d 239; 2000 Alas. Lexis 69. July 7, 2000.
- Chambers v. Chambers, Ct of App of AR, Div 2; 2000 Ark App. LEXIS 476, June 21, 2000.
Colorado
- Coursey v. Superior Court (Coursey), 194 Cal.App.3d 147,239 Cal.Rptr. 365 (Cal.App. 3 Dist., Aug 18, 1987.
- John W. v. Phillip W., 41 Cal.App.4th 961, 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 899; 1996.
- Valerie Edlund v. Gregory Hales, 66 Cal. App 4th 1454; 78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 671.
- Oosterhaus v. Short, District Court, County of Boulder (CO), Case No. 85DR1737-Div III.
- Case v. Richardson, 1996 WL 434281 (Conn. Super.,Jul 16, 1996).
- Metza v. Metza, Sup. Court of Connecticut, Jud. Dist. of Fairfield, at Bridgeport,
1998 Conn. Super. Lexis 2727 (1998).
- Schutz v. Schutz, 522 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 3rd Dist. Ct. App. 1988).
- Blosser v. Blosser, 707 So. 2d 778; 1998 Fla. App. Case No. 96-03534.
- Tucker v. Greenberg, 674 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).
- Berg-Perlow v. Perlow, 15th Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, Fl.,Case no. CD98-1285-FC. Mar 15, 2000. ( An exceptionally strong family court decision in which five experts testified to the diagnosis of PAS. )
- Loten v. Ryan, 15th Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, FL., Case No. CD 93-6567 FA. Dec 11,2000.
- Kilgore v. Boyd, 13th Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, FL., Case No. 94-7573, 733 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) Jan 30, 2001.
- Boyd v. Kilgore, 773 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (Prohibition Denied)
- Court ruling that the Parental Alienation Syndrome has gained general acceptance in the scientific community and thereby satisfies Frye Test criteria for admissibility.
- McDonald v. McDonald, 9th Judicial Circuit Court, Orange County, FL. Case No. D-R90-11079, Feb 20, 1001.
- Blackshear v. Blackshear, Hillsborough County, FL 13th Jud. Circuit: 95-08436.
- In re Violetta 210 III.App.3d 521, 568 N.E2d 1345, 154 III.Dec. 896(Ill.App. I Dist Mar 07, 1991).
- In re Marriage of Divelbiss v. Divelbiss, No. 2-98-0999 2nd District, Ill.(Appeal from Circ Crt of Du Page Cty No. 93-D-559) Oct 22, 1999.
- Tetzlaff v. Tetzlaff, Civil Court of Cook County, Il., Domestic Relations Division, Cause No. 97D 2127, Mar 20, 2000.
- Bates v. Bates 18th Judicial Circuit, Dupage County, IL Case No. 99D958, Jan 17, 2002.
- Court ruling that the Parental Alienation Syndrome has gained general acceptance in the scientific community and thereby satisfies Frye Test criteria for admissibility.
- White v. White, 1995 (Indiana Court of Appeals) 655 N.E.2d 523. (Ind. App., Aug 31, 1995).
- In re Marriage of Rosenfeld, 524 NW 2d 212, 214 (Iowa app, 1994).
- Wilkins v Wilkins, Family Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, La., Civ. No. 90792. Nov. 2, 2000.
- White v Kimrey, Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, LA, No. 37,408-CA. May 14, 2003.
- Spencley v. Spencley, 2000 WL 33519710 (Mich App).
- Truax v. Truax, 110 Nev. 437, 874 P. 2d 10 (Nev., May 19, 1994).
- Lubkin v. Lubkin, 92-M-46LD Hillsborough County, NH. (Southern District, Sept. 5, 1996).
- Lemarie v. Oliphant, Docket No. FM-15-397-94, (Sup Crt NJ, Ocean Cty:Fam Part-Chancery Div) Dec. 11, 2002.
- Rosen v. Edwards (1990) Tolbert, J. (1990), AR v. SE. New York Law Journal, December 11:27-28.
The December 11, 1990 issue of The New York Law Journal [pages 27-28] reprinted, in toto, the ruling of Hon. J. Tolbert of the Westchester Family Court in Westchester Co. - Karen B v. Clyde M., Family Court of New York, Fulton County, 151 Misc. 2d 794; 574 N.Y. 2d 267, 1991.
- Krebsbach v. Gallagher, Supreme Court, App. Div., 181 A.D.2d 363; 587 N.Y.S. 2d 346, (1992).
- Karen PP. v. Clyde QC. Sup Ct of NY, App Div, 3rd Dept. 197 A.D. 2d 753; 602 N.Y.s. 2d 709; 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9845.
- In the matter of J.F. v. L.F., Fam. Ct. of NY, Westchester Cty, 181 Misc 2d 722; 694 N.Y.S. 2d 592; 1999 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 357.
- Oliver V. v. Kelly V., NY Sup. Ct. Part 12. New York Law Journal Nov. 27, 2000.
- Sidman v. Zager, Family Court, Tompkins County, NY: V-1467-8-9-94.
- Sims v. Hornsby, 1992 WL 193682 (Ohio App. 12 Dist., Butler County, Aug 10 1992).
- Zigmont v. Toto, 1992 WL 6034 (Ohio App. 8 Dist Cuyahoga County, Jan 16, 1992).
- Pisani v. Pisani, Court of Appeals of Ohio, 8th App. Dist. Cuyahoga Cty. 1998 Ohio App. Lexis 4421 (1998).
- Pathan v. Pathan, Case No. 96-OS-1. Common Pleas Court of Montgomery County, OH, Div. of Dom Rel.
- Pathan v. Pathan, C.A. Case No. 17729. Ct. of App. of OH, 2d Dist., Montgomery County; 2000 Ohio App. Lexis 119. Jan. 21, 2000
- Conner v. Renz, 1995 WL 23365 (Ohio App. 4 Dist., Athens County, Jan 19, 1995).
- State v. Koelling, 1995 WL 125933 (Ohio App. 10 Dist., Franklin County, Mar 21, 1995).
- Popovice v. Popovice, Court of Common Pleas, Northampton Cty, PA. Aug 11, 1999, No. 1996-C-2009.
- Ochs et al. v. Myers, App. No. 04-89-00007-CV. Ct. of App. of TX, 4th Dist., San Antonio; 789 S.W. 2d 949; 1990 Tex App. Lexis 1652, May 16, 1990.
- Ange, Court of Appeals of Virginia, 1998 Va. App. Lexis 59 (1998).
- Waldrop v. Waldrop, in Chancery No. 138517. Fairfax County Circuit Court,(Va., April 26, 1999).
- Rich v. Rich, Sup Ct, 5th Dist. Case No. 91-3-00074-4 (Douglas County) June 11, 1993.
- Janelle S. v. J.R.S., Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District 4. 1997 Wisc. App. LEXIS 1124 (1997).
- Fischer v. Fischer, Ct. of App. of WI, Dist. Two, No. 97-2067; 221 Wis. 2d 221; 584 N.W.2d 233; 1998 Wisc. App. Lexis 1534.
- In re Marriage of Rosenfeld, 524 N.W. 2d 212 (Iowa App., Aug 25 1994) McCoy v. State 886 P.2d 252 (Wyo.,Nov 30, 1994).
- McCoy v State of Wyoming, 886 P.2d 252, 1994.
Germany
- Anonymous v. Anonymous, Case No. 2xv178, Rinteln (Circuit Court) Germany, Apr. 27, 1998.
- Sch. v. Sch., Kammergericht KG Berlin. vom 30 Mai 2000 - 17 UF 1413/99.
- Fundstelle: Fam RZ 2000, 1606 (Heft 24 / 2000 vom 15. Dezember 2000)
"¤¤ 1671, 1696 BGB: Bedeutung des Parental Alienation Syndroms im AbŠnderungsverfahren" - Hervorhebungen durch Fettschrift -
Beschluss 17 UF 1413/99 - Volltext der Entscheidung
(136 F11 514/98 AG Berlin (Tempelhof-Kreuzberg Germany)
- Anon v. Anon, OLG Ffm vom 13.07.2000 unter Az. 5 WF 112/00,(Germany).
- Anon v. Anon, OLG Ffm vom 26.10.2000 unter Az. 6 WF 168/00,(Germany).
- Anon v. Anon, OLG Dresden, No. 264 - UF229/02, Aug. 29, 2002 (published in FamRZ: 50(6) 2003: 397).
United Kingdom
- Re: C (Children) (2002) CA (Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P, Thorpe LJ, Kay LJ) 20/2/2002 COURT OF APPEAL REF: 2001/1642. (Great Britain)
Israel
- Jane Doe v. John Doe.Supreme Court, Request for Civil Appeal, 3009/92.
- Jane Doe v. John Doe. Ashdod Family Court, Family Docket 2182/00. Jan. 26, 2003.
Switzerland
- Entscheid der delegierten des AmtsgerichtsprŠsidenten II con Luzern-Stadt vom 8. Februar 2001 im Verfahren nach Art. 175 ZGB (02 00 210)
(Judgments) Parental Alienation Syndrome - Canadian Court Rulings
August 6, 2008
All Canadian laws, including provincial, territorial and federal laws, and many court decisions can be viewed for free on the website of the Canadian Legal Information Institute at: www.CANLII.org
The reference to Carswell: Carwell is a legal information publisher.
British Columbia
All Canadian laws, including provincial, territorial and federal laws, and many court decisions can be viewed for free on the website of the Canadian Legal Information Institute at:
www.CANLII.orgThe reference to Carswell: Carwell is a legal information publisher.
Alberta
- Elliott v. Elliott, A.J. No. 74 DRS 96-05285 Action No. 4806-10272 Alberta Crt of Queen's Bench, Jud. Dist. of Lethbridge/Macleod, Jan 25, 1996.
- Elliott v. Elliott, 1996 CarswellAlta 95, 193 A.R. 177, 135 W.A.C. 177, 27 R.F.L. (4th) 23 Alberta Court of Appeals. Nov 7, 1996 (Affirmed--Appeal Dismissed)
- Elliott v. Elliott, 1996 CarswellAlta 95, 193 A.R. 177, 135 W.A.C. 177, 27 R.F.L. (4th) 23 Alberta Court of Appeals. Nov 7, 1996 (Affirmed--Appeal Dismissed)
- Johnson v. Johnson, No. 4806-11508a, Jud Dist. of Lethbridge/Macleod, Oct. 09, 1997
British Columbia
- McLelland v. McLelland, British Columbia Supreme Court Docket: Nanaimo 07907. 1999 CarswellBC 1706. July 2, 1999
http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/1999/1999canlii5131/1999canlii5131.html
- Menard v. Menard, Sup. Ct of British Columbia, 2001 CarswellBC 1312; 2001 BCSC 430, Mar 21, 2001.
http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2001/2001bcsc430/2001bcsc430.html
New Brunswick
- S.O. v. S.C.O, N.B.J. No. 326, Proceeding No. FDSJ-400-98. New Brunswick Crt of Queen's Bench, Family Division-Jud. Dist. of St. John. Jul 28, 1999.
- Jefferson v. Jefferson, New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench Docket: FDSJ-6408.95. 2000 CarswellNB 15. Jan 18, 2000.
Newfoundland and Labrador
- Toope v. Toope, 2000 CarswellNfld 185, 8 R.F.L. (5th) 446, 193 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 313, 582 A.P.R. 313. New Foundland Unified Family Court June 15, 2000.
Nova Scotia
- Badakhshan v. Moradi, Nova Scotia Fam Court. 1993 CarswellNS 423;120 N.S.R.(2d) 405; 332 A.P.R. 405. Mar 2, 1993.
Ontario
- Rothwell v. Kisko, 1991 CarswellOnt 1326. Ontario Crt of Just. (Gen'l Div.) Docket# 36429/89, Mar 21, 1991.
- Davy v. Davy, Ontario Court of Justice (Gen'l Div)Docket 92-gd-21948. 1993 CarswellOnt 1630;1993 W.D.F.L 1535. Oct 7, 1993.
- Fortin v. Major, O.J. No. 3805 DRS 97-01672, Court File No. 49729/94 Ontario Crt of Justice (Gen'l Div: Ottawa), Oct 25, 1996.
- Demers v. Demers, Ontario Superior Court, Docket: Kingston 54253/96. 1999 CarswellOnt 2621. June 8, 1999.
- Orsak v Orsak, Ontario Superior Court of Justice Docket: 97-FP-234664. 2000 CarswellOnt 1574. May 5, 2000.
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2000/2000canlii22529/2000canlii22529.html
- Her Majesty the Queen vs. K.C. Superior Court of Justice, Ontario, County of Durham, Central-East Region, Court File No. 9520/01. August, 9, 2002. (Mohan Test)
- Rogerson v. Tessaro, Court of Appeal for Ontario, Docket: C44199, May 9, 2006. [mentions alienating conduct but not "syndrome."]
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2006/2006canlii15126/2006canlii15126.html
- Petternuzzo-Deschene v. Deschene, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Docket: 22661. 2007 WL 22984642007 (Ont. S.C.J.), CarswellOnt 5095. August 8, 2007. [specifically mentions PAS and cites a description of alienating behavior as abuse]
- S.P. and P.B.D., Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. 22661. August 10, 2007.
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2007/2007canlii31787/2007canlii31787.html
Quebec
- Stuart-Mills, P. v. Cher, A.J.., Sup. Ct. Quebec, Dist. of Montreal, No. 500-12-184613-895 (1991).
- V. (L.) C. H. (E.), 1992 CarswellQue 169; 45 Q.A.C. 100; 1992 R.J.Q. 855; 1992 R.D.F. 316 Cour d'appel du Quebec, Feb 26, 1992.
- R.M c. B.R, [1994] A.Q. no 947. DRS 95-09809 No 200-09-000440-948 (200-12-042928-904 C.S.Q.) (Quebec, decision in french only) Oct. 28, 1994
- R.F. v. S.P., [2000] Q.J. Np. 3412 No. 500-12-250739-004 Quebec Superior Court (Montreal) Oct. 13, 2000.
Saskatchewan
- B.S.P. and D.G.P., Queens Bench for Saskatchewan, Docket No. 005359 of 2006, Battleford, Family Law Division, Citation 2008 SKQB 63, Feb. 8, 2008.
http://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skqb/doc/2008/2008skqb63/2008skqb63.html
Female Sex Offenders: Double Standard?
June 15, 2006
Are all sex offenders treated the same? Does the public take the cases as seriously when the offender or alleged offender is a woman? Many people are asking those questions after several highly-publicized scandals involving female teachers and male students.
As Susan Koeppen observed on The Early Show Thursday, the majority of sex offenders are men, but it's the women who get a lot of the attention.
When a beautiful teacher seduces a student, some people think, "What's the harm?"
But Koeppen spoke with one student who says his "affair" with a teacher left him devastated.
"I'm still trying to battle back," Jason Eickmeyer told Koeppen. "This happened in 2003, and it's 2006, and I still can't get it out of my mind."
At 15, reports Koeppen, Eickmeyer was a champion wrestler, with dreams of going to a Division I school. But he says all that changed his sophomore year at Hammonton High in Hammonton, N.J., when, he says, he caught the eye of 26-year-old gym teacher, Traci Tapp.
"She asked me my name," Jason says, "and I said, 'Jason Eickmeyer,' and she said, 'Oh, so the rumors are true.' And I said, 'What rumors?' And she said that she thought I was pretty cute.
"It kinda fired me up a little bit, being 15 years old, that's what you wanna hear from a beautiful teacher like that."
Jason says their relationship quickly escalated from hallway flirtation to a sexual encounter at the teacher's home. Jason says he was in love.
"Our dreams were to be together forever and produce the blonde hair, blue-eyed children," he says.
He says he began skipping classes to be with Tapp, and she told him to keep their affair a secret.
But it didn't stay that way for long.
"People always saw me together with her, every day," he tells Koeppen.
Jason says teachers as well as students knew about the relationship, but no one stepped in.
When Jason finally told his mother about the relationship, she reported it to his guidance counselor, who immediately called police.
"It hurt. I mean, he's my baby, he is my youngest son," says Tina Eickmeyer.
Two years after the alleged affair began, Tapp was arrested.
Tina says she's "disgusted" that nobody stepped in to stop the relationship before it was brought to her attention.
"If it had been a male, definitely, he would have been arrested right away," she contends.
Koeppen says: "We contacted the principal of the high school and the superintendent of Hammonton schools, but neither would comment. This case raises the question: Does our society have a double standard when the alleged perpetrator is a woman?"
"We just don't take it seriously," asserts psychologist Dr. Richard Gartner, who adds such cases are often the subject of jokes.
But Gartner stresses this is no laughing matter, noting that victims of female sex offenders can suffer severe emotional scars, including depression, anxiety, addiction to drugs and alcohol, and sexual dysfunction.
Says Gartner: "This can interfere with trust; this can interfere with self-esteem. It can go beyond love relationships there can be all kinds of authority problems, because this is an authority that abused him."
Once an under-reported crime, cases of female sex offenders now make regular headlines, Koeppen says. But do the punishments fit the crimes?
"The reality is that they're just not going to be sentenced to the same kind of lengthy prison sentences that the men get," laments Tony Rackauckas, the District Attorney of Orange County, Calif.
He says he sees this double standard in the courtroom all the time.
One example: middle school teacher Sarah Bench-Salorio, convicted last year of sexually assaulting 11-, 12-, and 13-year-old boys. She faced more than 60 years behind bars. The judge gave her six.
"If she was a male teacher, I don't think she'd ever see the light of day again," Rackauckas says.
Tina Eickmeyer couldn't agree more, asserting, "There is a double standard; women can get away with it."
She says her son's relationship with his teacher took a devastating toll: His grades plummeted, he quit the wrestling team, and he was even suspended from school.
"It got to the point," Jason says, "where I didn't care if I graduated anymore, I didn't want to see anybody in that school, I didn't care about going on to wrestle, because all I could think about was her."
Charged with sexual assault, Tapp eventually pleaded guilty to "offensive touching," and walked away with no jail time at all. Her punishment? She was barred from teaching in New Jersey public schools, and had to pay a $225 fine.
"If she was a male teacher and I was a female student," Jason insists, "she would have been put away with maximum penalties. Three years of my life has been taken away because of a relationship, and I don't think justice was served at all."
The Eickmeyers say they plan to sue the school district for emotional damages, claiming the staff knew about the affair, but did nothing.
Koeppen says CBS News contacted Tapp, who declined a request for an interview, but denied having a sexual relationship with Jason.
The Early Showco-anchor Hannah Storm asked Koeppen what the allure is for female teachers who seek make student sex partners.
"Experts say many of these women were sexually abused as children," Koeppen says. "In some cases, these women say they were unpopular as teenagers, and these relationships make them feel cool and attractive."
What are the warning signs for parents that might indicate their child is having a relationship with a teacher?
"If your child is spending a lot of time with a teacher, male or female, outside the classroom," Koeppen says, "that's a major red flag. Look into it."
Many Say They Don't Get Treated As Harshly As Men
Are all sex offenders treated the same? Does the public take the cases as seriously when the offender or alleged offender is a woman? Many people are asking those questions after several highly-publicized scandals involving female teachers and male students.
As Susan Koeppen observed on The Early Show Thursday, the majority of sex offenders are men, but it's the women who get a lot of the attention.
When a beautiful teacher seduces a student, some people think, "What's the harm?"
But Koeppen spoke with one student who says his "affair" with a teacher left him devastated.
"I'm still trying to battle back," Jason Eickmeyer told Koeppen. "This happened in 2003, and it's 2006, and I still can't get it out of my mind."
At 15, reports Koeppen, Eickmeyer was a champion wrestler, with dreams of going to a Division I school. But he says all that changed his sophomore year at Hammonton High in Hammonton, N.J., when, he says, he caught the eye of 26-year-old gym teacher, Traci Tapp.
"She asked me my name," Jason says, "and I said, 'Jason Eickmeyer,' and she said, 'Oh, so the rumors are true.' And I said, 'What rumors?' And she said that she thought I was pretty cute.
"It kinda fired me up a little bit, being 15 years old, that's what you wanna hear from a beautiful teacher like that."
Jason says their relationship quickly escalated from hallway flirtation to a sexual encounter at the teacher's home. Jason says he was in love.
"Our dreams were to be together forever and produce the blonde hair, blue-eyed children," he says.
He says he began skipping classes to be with Tapp, and she told him to keep their affair a secret.
But it didn't stay that way for long.
"People always saw me together with her, every day," he tells Koeppen.
Jason says teachers as well as students knew about the relationship, but no one stepped in.
When Jason finally told his mother about the relationship, she reported it to his guidance counselor, who immediately called police.
"It hurt. I mean, he's my baby, he is my youngest son," says Tina Eickmeyer.
Two years after the alleged affair began, Tapp was arrested.
Tina says she's "disgusted" that nobody stepped in to stop the relationship before it was brought to her attention.
"If it had been a male, definitely, he would have been arrested right away," she contends.
Koeppen says: "We contacted the principal of the high school and the superintendent of Hammonton schools, but neither would comment. This case raises the question: Does our society have a double standard when the alleged perpetrator is a woman?"
"We just don't take it seriously," asserts psychologist Dr. Richard Gartner, who adds such cases are often the subject of jokes.
But Gartner stresses this is no laughing matter, noting that victims of female sex offenders can suffer severe emotional scars, including depression, anxiety, addiction to drugs and alcohol, and sexual dysfunction.
Says Gartner: "This can interfere with trust; this can interfere with self-esteem. It can go beyond love relationships there can be all kinds of authority problems, because this is an authority that abused him."
Once an under-reported crime, cases of female sex offenders now make regular headlines, Koeppen says. But do the punishments fit the crimes?
"The reality is that they're just not going to be sentenced to the same kind of lengthy prison sentences that the men get," laments Tony Rackauckas, the District Attorney of Orange County, Calif.
He says he sees this double standard in the courtroom all the time.
One example: middle school teacher Sarah Bench-Salorio, convicted last year of sexually assaulting 11-, 12-, and 13-year-old boys. She faced more than 60 years behind bars. The judge gave her six.
"If she was a male teacher, I don't think she'd ever see the light of day again," Rackauckas says.
Tina Eickmeyer couldn't agree more, asserting, "There is a double standard; women can get away with it."
She says her son's relationship with his teacher took a devastating toll: His grades plummeted, he quit the wrestling team, and he was even suspended from school.
"It got to the point," Jason says, "where I didn't care if I graduated anymore, I didn't want to see anybody in that school, I didn't care about going on to wrestle, because all I could think about was her."
Charged with sexual assault, Tapp eventually pleaded guilty to "offensive touching," and walked away with no jail time at all. Her punishment? She was barred from teaching in New Jersey public schools, and had to pay a $225 fine.
"If she was a male teacher and I was a female student," Jason insists, "she would have been put away with maximum penalties. Three years of my life has been taken away because of a relationship, and I don't think justice was served at all."
The Eickmeyers say they plan to sue the school district for emotional damages, claiming the staff knew about the affair, but did nothing.
Koeppen says CBS News contacted Tapp, who declined a request for an interview, but denied having a sexual relationship with Jason.
The Early Showco-anchor Hannah Storm asked Koeppen what the allure is for female teachers who seek make student sex partners.
"Experts say many of these women were sexually abused as children," Koeppen says. "In some cases, these women say they were unpopular as teenagers, and these relationships make them feel cool and attractive."
What are the warning signs for parents that might indicate their child is having a relationship with a teacher?
"If your child is spending a lot of time with a teacher, male or female, outside the classroom," Koeppen says, "that's a major red flag. Look into it."
Date rape, violence not just girls' problem
August 27, 2001
San Francisco - Nearly one in 10 girls and one in 20 boys say they have been raped or experienced some other form of abusive violence on a date, according to a study released Sunday at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association.
Psychologist Diann Ackard and public health researcher Dianne Neumark-Sztainer of the University of Minnesota used the 1998 Minnesota Student Survey to assess the health attitudes, behaviors and experiences of more than 81,000 public high school students in Minnesota.The ninth- and 12th-graders were asked questions about date violence and rape such as "Have you ever been the victim of violence on a date?" and "Have you ever been the victim of date rape?" Other questions covered topics ranging from emotional well-being to suicide and binge eating behavior.
The study is unusual in examining the experiences of boys, but Ackard said the state-administered survey didn't ask about the boys' dates. "So we don't know if it's boys dating boys, boys dating men, or girls being more forceful," she said.
The authors also found that adolescents who experienced date rape or date violence were more likely to develop eating disorders.
"Disordered eating behaviors may be a way for youth who have been abused to project the painful experience onto their body," explained Ackard. "They punish their body for the abuse or try to manipulate their body into becoming 'unattractive' to others."
Boy, 8, found dead; mom faces charge
Aug. 16, 2006.
SLE LA MOTTE, Vt. A Montreal mother recovering from alleged self-inflicted wounds will be charged in the coming days with murdering her 8-year-old son, whose body was found in Lake Champlain, a Vermont state attorney said today.
I am going to prepare a charge of first-degree murder, Grand Isle States Attorney David Miller said in a telephone interview.
But when she is well enough is something I have no control over. . . I'm hoping, at the latest, it will be Friday but, again, it could be next week too.
The body of Nicholas Desnoyers-Langlois was found last night in about a metre of water just offshore near the Vermont town of Isle La Motte.
The five-kilometre-wide island is located near the Canadian border.
Louise Desnoyers, 48, was found by police lying in a fetal position inside a lakeside shed on the other side of the island from where her sons body was recovered.
The woman, whom police said was despondent over recent marital problems, was taken to hospital for what authorities first described as life-threatening, self-inflicted injuries. Her condition later improved.
Richard Hill called police after he found an SUV with Quebec licence plates on his 20-hectare property.
I approached the vehicle and there was blood on the exterior of the door and there was blood splatter on the inside of the drivers window and on the inside of the windshield, he said.
On the passenger seat was sand and a bloody jug of half-consumed anti-freeze, the contractor said.
After briefly looking near trees and long grass in the remote area, Hill called police. They located the woman with the help of a canine unit.
Hill said Desnoyers apparently knew the area from having visited friends a couple of years ago.
My guess is . . . that she looked for a place nearby that was secluded so she could do away with herself.
The event has upset the entire community of the small island, which was the scene a double murder involving local residents three years ago, he said.
We've had some bad experiences in the past but certainly nothing as bad as this.
The boy and his mother entered the United States at Rouses Point, N.Y., Monday evening.
Montreal police say the woman and the child were reported missing Monday by her husband, Real Langlois.
He travelled to Vermont last night to identify his son, Miller said.
The case against Desnoyers shouldn't be complicated by the involvement of two countries, Miller added.
Most everything that happened, happened on this side of the border.
SLE LA MOTTE, Vt. A Montreal mother recovering from alleged self-inflicted wounds will be charged in the coming days with murdering her 8-year-old son, whose body was found in Lake Champlain, a Vermont state attorney said today.
I am going to prepare a charge of first-degree murder, Grand Isle States Attorney David Miller said in a telephone interview.
But when she is well enough is something I have no control over. . . I'm hoping, at the latest, it will be Friday but, again, it could be next week too.
The body of Nicholas Desnoyers-Langlois was found last night in about a metre of water just offshore near the Vermont town of Isle La Motte.
The five-kilometre-wide island is located near the Canadian border.
Louise Desnoyers, 48, was found by police lying in a fetal position inside a lakeside shed on the other side of the island from where her sons body was recovered.
The woman, whom police said was despondent over recent marital problems, was taken to hospital for what authorities first described as life-threatening, self-inflicted injuries. Her condition later improved.
Richard Hill called police after he found an SUV with Quebec licence plates on his 20-hectare property.
I approached the vehicle and there was blood on the exterior of the door and there was blood splatter on the inside of the drivers window and on the inside of the windshield, he said.
On the passenger seat was sand and a bloody jug of half-consumed anti-freeze, the contractor said.
After briefly looking near trees and long grass in the remote area, Hill called police. They located the woman with the help of a canine unit.
Hill said Desnoyers apparently knew the area from having visited friends a couple of years ago.
My guess is . . . that she looked for a place nearby that was secluded so she could do away with herself.
The event has upset the entire community of the small island, which was the scene a double murder involving local residents three years ago, he said.
We've had some bad experiences in the past but certainly nothing as bad as this.
The boy and his mother entered the United States at Rouses Point, N.Y., Monday evening.
Montreal police say the woman and the child were reported missing Monday by her husband, Real Langlois.
He travelled to Vermont last night to identify his son, Miller said.
The case against Desnoyers shouldn't be complicated by the involvement of two countries, Miller added.
Most everything that happened, happened on this side of the border.
WOMEN: THE FORGOTTEN CHILD MURDERERS
Read how women get away with Murder, thanks to Feminazi Witches, women can do no wrong attitude of judicial system. Laws need to be equal to all.
These types of attitude from the Feminazi's is being exported around the world in the name of Woman's Empowerment, its criminal to think women should be treated differently for similar crimes.
Feb. 3, 2001
Women who kill their children are given sympathy and sentenced to "treatment" while men who do the same thing are charged with murder and sentenced to life.
Perhaps it is not a coincidence that women are many times more likely to murder their offspring than men.
A hospital in Great Britain installed hidden cameras to survey children who they feared to be at risk of abuse by their parents. They found dozens of cases and made headlines about abuse by "parents" and "step-parents". The Life Channel chronicled the story (this version was translated and ran on Canal Vie as well).
What all the commentators carefully hid was who these "parents" were: there was one grandmother, one father... and thirty-seven mothers. Judging from the references to "step-parents", I suspect that the man wasn't really a father either.
How did the hospital choose the people to watch? Every case involved previous children who had died in mysterious circumstances. To be more precise, 37 killer moms murdered 40 children. Total jail sentences imposed: 0, even though some of the women confessed when confronted afterwards.
About 1300 child murders took place in the US last year. About 500 perpetrators were non-parents, roughly divided between men and women. Of the rest, only 30 (!) were fathers. In other words, mothers were more than 25 times more likely to kill their progeny than fathers. Yet somehow, men are viewed as being more dangerous to their children than women.
In Canada, many crime statistics are presented in such a way as to hide female malevolence. As an example, we do not break down statistics on child murder by sex of the offender. Consequently, this information is not available here. However, there is no reason to assume that things are any different north of the border.
This favoured treatment of women is not limited to child murder. Rose Cece and Mary Taylor, a lesbian couple in Toronto, decided on a lark to kill a police officer. Had a man done so, he would have been convicted with first-degree murder almost without regard to the facts. If not, police associations across the country would have been outraged. In fact, Cece and Taylor were convicted of manslaughter and no one commented.
At least they went to jail. Women are often let off with suspended sentences. As the Ottawa Citizen said in one case, "husband-killer Lilian Getkate's sentence of two years less a day at home is an insult to our sense of natural justice." The murderer herself reacted by saying: "I was startled. I took someone's life and I'm not going to jail. Of course I'm surprised by that." Once again, the Crown did not appeal.
Getting away with murder
This reluctance to convict women murderers goes back a long way. In fact, it is the reason for the invention of the crime of infanticide at the turn of the last century. Juries refused to convict women of murdering their own children.
Or their parents, it would appear.
Lizzie Borden took an axe
Gave her mother forty whacks
When she saw what she had done
She gave her father forty-one.
What the ditty doesn't mention is that the 1892 Boston jury let Lizzie off. One of the main reasons for this is that her judge, like the one in the Getkate case, practically directed the jury to acquit. Plus a change...
One difference between women who are committed to jail and those who are not appears to be familial relationships. Only two women have ever been convicted of first-degree murder in this country. Yvonne Johnson killed a man she barely knew. Sarabjit Kaur Minhas strangled her nephew. In other words, women are given greater latitude when they kill their husbands, parents or children. Of course, they always get some slack Cece and Taylor are proof enough of that.
The discrimination of the courts in favour of women is not limited to murder. It is true of all crimes. Officially, women commit 15% of serious crimes in Canada, almost certainly an understatement of the facts. Whatever the real number, they form approximately 1% of the people in our prisons. Texas statistics indicate that women are actually more likely to commit fraud than men. Despite this, men are ten times more likely to serve time for the offence.
There seems to be a fundamental refusal to admit that women are capable of committing crimes. When they do, we tend to downplay the act and to view her as the victim, not as the victimizer. A book has been written about the Johnson case. Its title is Stolen Life. Guess whose life the author feels was robbed. It isn't the man she killed.
While feminism may be partially responsible for this, the answer appears to be more profound. Lizzy Borden's parents died long before the appearance of this form of collective insanity. The reality is that people, in all societies, assume that the female of the species must be protected, even from the consequences of her own actions.
Whatever. The bottom line is that male misbehaviour, however you to define this word, is treated far more severely than equivalent female crimes.
These types of attitude from the Feminazi's is being exported around the world in the name of Woman's Empowerment, its criminal to think women should be treated differently for similar crimes.
Feb. 3, 2001
Women who kill their children are given sympathy and sentenced to "treatment" while men who do the same thing are charged with murder and sentenced to life.
Perhaps it is not a coincidence that women are many times more likely to murder their offspring than men.
A hospital in Great Britain installed hidden cameras to survey children who they feared to be at risk of abuse by their parents. They found dozens of cases and made headlines about abuse by "parents" and "step-parents". The Life Channel chronicled the story (this version was translated and ran on Canal Vie as well).
What all the commentators carefully hid was who these "parents" were: there was one grandmother, one father... and thirty-seven mothers. Judging from the references to "step-parents", I suspect that the man wasn't really a father either.
How did the hospital choose the people to watch? Every case involved previous children who had died in mysterious circumstances. To be more precise, 37 killer moms murdered 40 children. Total jail sentences imposed: 0, even though some of the women confessed when confronted afterwards.
About 1300 child murders took place in the US last year. About 500 perpetrators were non-parents, roughly divided between men and women. Of the rest, only 30 (!) were fathers. In other words, mothers were more than 25 times more likely to kill their progeny than fathers. Yet somehow, men are viewed as being more dangerous to their children than women.
In Canada, many crime statistics are presented in such a way as to hide female malevolence. As an example, we do not break down statistics on child murder by sex of the offender. Consequently, this information is not available here. However, there is no reason to assume that things are any different north of the border.
This favoured treatment of women is not limited to child murder. Rose Cece and Mary Taylor, a lesbian couple in Toronto, decided on a lark to kill a police officer. Had a man done so, he would have been convicted with first-degree murder almost without regard to the facts. If not, police associations across the country would have been outraged. In fact, Cece and Taylor were convicted of manslaughter and no one commented.
At least they went to jail. Women are often let off with suspended sentences. As the Ottawa Citizen said in one case, "husband-killer Lilian Getkate's sentence of two years less a day at home is an insult to our sense of natural justice." The murderer herself reacted by saying: "I was startled. I took someone's life and I'm not going to jail. Of course I'm surprised by that." Once again, the Crown did not appeal.
Getting away with murder
This reluctance to convict women murderers goes back a long way. In fact, it is the reason for the invention of the crime of infanticide at the turn of the last century. Juries refused to convict women of murdering their own children.
Or their parents, it would appear.
Lizzie Borden took an axe
Gave her mother forty whacks
When she saw what she had done
She gave her father forty-one.
What the ditty doesn't mention is that the 1892 Boston jury let Lizzie off. One of the main reasons for this is that her judge, like the one in the Getkate case, practically directed the jury to acquit. Plus a change...
One difference between women who are committed to jail and those who are not appears to be familial relationships. Only two women have ever been convicted of first-degree murder in this country. Yvonne Johnson killed a man she barely knew. Sarabjit Kaur Minhas strangled her nephew. In other words, women are given greater latitude when they kill their husbands, parents or children. Of course, they always get some slack Cece and Taylor are proof enough of that.
The discrimination of the courts in favour of women is not limited to murder. It is true of all crimes. Officially, women commit 15% of serious crimes in Canada, almost certainly an understatement of the facts. Whatever the real number, they form approximately 1% of the people in our prisons. Texas statistics indicate that women are actually more likely to commit fraud than men. Despite this, men are ten times more likely to serve time for the offence.
There seems to be a fundamental refusal to admit that women are capable of committing crimes. When they do, we tend to downplay the act and to view her as the victim, not as the victimizer. A book has been written about the Johnson case. Its title is Stolen Life. Guess whose life the author feels was robbed. It isn't the man she killed.
While feminism may be partially responsible for this, the answer appears to be more profound. Lizzy Borden's parents died long before the appearance of this form of collective insanity. The reality is that people, in all societies, assume that the female of the species must be protected, even from the consequences of her own actions.
Whatever. The bottom line is that male misbehaviour, however you to define this word, is treated far more severely than equivalent female crimes.
3 in 4 B.C. boys on street sexually exploited by women
May 27, 2008
VANCOUVER - Canada's largest study into the sexual exploitation of street kids and runaways has shattered some myths about who the abusers might be - with the most surprising finding being that many are women seeking sex with young males.
"Some youth in each gender were exploited by women with more than three out of four (79 per cent) sexually exploited males reporting exchanging sex for money or goods with a female," said Elizabeth Saewyc, associate professor of nursing at the University of British Columbia and principal investigator for the study conducted by Vancouver's McCreary Centre Society.
"I must admit it wasn't something we were expecting."
The results were drawn from interviews with 1,845 youth - some as young as 12 - in surveys taken across the province between 2000 and 2006.
The stereotypical model of the child being abused - a teenage female being sexually abused by a male - was wrong, said Saewyc.
Sexual exploitation is defined as youth under 19 trading sexual activities for money, drugs, gifts, food, services, shelter, transportation or anything similar.
This can include work in brothels, escort services, pornography and Internet sex but it also includes what's described as "survival sex," where a child provides sex in exchange for a place to sleep, a meal or a ride.
It found one in every three of children living on the street have been sexually abused although many didn't seem aware that they had been exploited, said Saewyc.
"It's a shocking number. The law is clear: any adult who has sex with children for any form of consideration is exploiting them and it's illegal," she said.
The study found 94 per cent of females reported they had been sexually exploited by men.
But the study found that young males were being preyed upon by sexual predators of both sexes, yet the social systems in place to deter and prevent sexual predation were only designed to help females and the criminal justice system wasn't concerned with what was happening to young males.
"Women seeking young men and boys offer transportation or other things and some go to nightclubs and bars where they can pick up under-age youth. And a certain percentage have been picked up by couples," she said.
Saewyc said it was indicative of the prevailing myths about sexual abuse that the rehabilitation program for persons arrested by police for attempting to buy sexual favours on the street was called "John School".
"I think it's time we had a Jane School. There should be an equal opportunity school for women predators," she said.
"Part of the challenge is that young males are not seen as being exploited because they are not coming to the attention of the police and the police aren't out there picking up the perpetrators. The system is set up to handle the sexual exploitation of young women, not young men," she said.
Community research associate Jayson Anderson said most of the programs to deal with sexual exploitation were designed by women for women. "There's really nothing out there for males. So we need programs for young boys," he said.
The study showed that the following youth were most likely to suffer from sexual predation:
- those who were lesbian, gay or bisexual
- Aboriginals
- those with physical or mental health issues
- those who had been abused by family members
- youth that had been in government care.
VANCOUVER - Canada's largest study into the sexual exploitation of street kids and runaways has shattered some myths about who the abusers might be - with the most surprising finding being that many are women seeking sex with young males.
"Some youth in each gender were exploited by women with more than three out of four (79 per cent) sexually exploited males reporting exchanging sex for money or goods with a female," said Elizabeth Saewyc, associate professor of nursing at the University of British Columbia and principal investigator for the study conducted by Vancouver's McCreary Centre Society.
"I must admit it wasn't something we were expecting."
The results were drawn from interviews with 1,845 youth - some as young as 12 - in surveys taken across the province between 2000 and 2006.
The stereotypical model of the child being abused - a teenage female being sexually abused by a male - was wrong, said Saewyc.
Sexual exploitation is defined as youth under 19 trading sexual activities for money, drugs, gifts, food, services, shelter, transportation or anything similar.
This can include work in brothels, escort services, pornography and Internet sex but it also includes what's described as "survival sex," where a child provides sex in exchange for a place to sleep, a meal or a ride.
It found one in every three of children living on the street have been sexually abused although many didn't seem aware that they had been exploited, said Saewyc.
"It's a shocking number. The law is clear: any adult who has sex with children for any form of consideration is exploiting them and it's illegal," she said.
The study found 94 per cent of females reported they had been sexually exploited by men.
But the study found that young males were being preyed upon by sexual predators of both sexes, yet the social systems in place to deter and prevent sexual predation were only designed to help females and the criminal justice system wasn't concerned with what was happening to young males.
"Women seeking young men and boys offer transportation or other things and some go to nightclubs and bars where they can pick up under-age youth. And a certain percentage have been picked up by couples," she said.
Saewyc said it was indicative of the prevailing myths about sexual abuse that the rehabilitation program for persons arrested by police for attempting to buy sexual favours on the street was called "John School".
"I think it's time we had a Jane School. There should be an equal opportunity school for women predators," she said.
"Part of the challenge is that young males are not seen as being exploited because they are not coming to the attention of the police and the police aren't out there picking up the perpetrators. The system is set up to handle the sexual exploitation of young women, not young men," she said.
Community research associate Jayson Anderson said most of the programs to deal with sexual exploitation were designed by women for women. "There's really nothing out there for males. So we need programs for young boys," he said.
The study showed that the following youth were most likely to suffer from sexual predation:
- those who were lesbian, gay or bisexual
- Aboriginals
- those with physical or mental health issues
- those who had been abused by family members
- youth that had been in government care.
Maintenance for live-in woman: issue for larger Bench
Oct 9, 2010
The Supreme Court has referred to a larger Bench a question of law whether a man and woman living together for long, without a valid marriage, would raise a presumption of valid marriage entitling her to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.PC.
A Bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and A.K. Ganguly, though prima facie held the view that women in live-in relationships would be entitled to maintenance, referred the issue to Chief Justice of India S.H. Kapadia for determination by a larger Bench having regard to the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which provided for maintenance.
The Bench framed questions including “whether a marriage performed according to customary rites and ceremonies, without strictly fulfilling the requisites of Section 7(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, or any other personal law would entitle the woman to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.PC. We think the larger Bench may also consider the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act. This Act assigns a very broad and expansive definition to the term `domestic abuse' to include even economic abuse. Therefore, women in live-in relationships are also entitled to all reliefs given under the Act.” Writing the judgment, Justice Ganguly quoted from the rulings of the House of Lords and the Privy Council to hold that cohabitation, with the required repute, as husband and wife was proof that the parties between themselves had mutually contracted the matrimonial relationship. The Bench noted that in the instant case both appellant Chanmuniya and first respondent Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha were related and lived in the same house and by a social custom were treated as husband and wife. Their marriage was solemnised with ‘katha' and ‘sindur'. “Therefore, following the ratio of the decisions of the House of Lords, this court thinks there is a very strong presumption in favour of marriage.”
(Judgment) Court: abuse on spur of moment not valid ground for divorce
View Judgment at bottom.
Oct 9, 2010
Oct 9, 2010
Making certain statements or using abusive language on the spur of the moment and expressing certain displeasure about the behaviour of elders by the spouse may not be characterised as cruelty, warranting ground for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has held.
A Bench of Justice P. Sathasivam and Justice B.S. Chauhan said, “mere trivial irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of married life which happens in day-to-day life in all families would not be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty. Sustained unjustifiable and reprehensible conduct affecting physical and mental health of the other spouse may lead to mental cruelty.”
Writing the judgment, Justice Sathasivam said: “The married life should be assessed as a whole and a few isolated instances over a certain period will not amount to cruelty. The ill-conduct must be precedent for a fairly lengthy period where the relationship has deteriorated to an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a spouse, one party finds it extremely difficult to live with the other party no longer may amount to mental cruelty.”
The Bench said, a Hindu marriage solemnised under the Hindu Marriage Act could be dissolved only on any of the grounds specified therein. It said: “Cruelty has not been defined under the Act. It is quite possible that a particular conduct may amount to cruelty in one case but the same conduct necessarily may not amount to cruelty due to change of various factors, in a different set of circumstances. The aggrieved party has to make a specific case that the conduct of which exception is taken amounts to cruelty.”
In the instant case, appellant Gurbux Singh, principal of a college was married to Harminder Kaur, working as librarian in a government institute in November 1997 and a male child was born to them in May 1999. Irked by certain remarks made by his wife against his parents, the appellant moved the trial court seeking divorce on the ground of ‘cruelty.' The trial court rejected the petition and the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed his appeal. The present appeal is directed against that order.
The Bench said: “We are satisfied that on the basis of such instances, marriage cannot be dissolved. An isolated friction on some occasion like the festival of Lohri even in the presence of others cannot be a valid ground for dissolving the marriage.”
On the appellant's plea that there was irretrievable breakdown and that the marriage should be dissolved by the Supreme Court invoking its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Bench said: “Though, on a rare occasion, this court has granted the extraordinary relief de hors to the grounds mentioned in Section 13 of the HM Act in view of the fact that the issue has been referred to a larger Bench about permissibility of such course at present, we are not inclined to accede to the request of the appellant. If there is any change of law or additional ground [irretrievable breakdown of marriage] included in Section 13 by the Act of Parliament, the appellant is free to avail the same at the appropriate time.”
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5010 OF 2007
Gurbux Singh .... Appellant (s)
Versus
Harminder Kaur .... Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
P. Sathasivam, J.
1) The appellant, a Principal in ITI College, Sirhali,
Amritsar, has approached this Court against the judgment
and final order dated 11.05.2007 of the High Court of
Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in FAO No. 252-M of
2006 whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the
appeal filed by him against the judgment and order dated
11.10.2006 of the Additional District Judge (Ad hoc),
Amritsar, dismissing the petition filed under Section 13 of
1
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as
"the Act") for a decree of divorce against the respondent-
wife, who is working as a Librarian in Government
Institute DIET at Verka, Amritsar on the ground of
`cruelty'. Both the courts have rejected the claim of the
appellant herein on the ground that he has failed to prove
`cruelty' sufficient for grant of a decree of divorce.
The case of the Appellant
2) (a) On 23.11.1997, the appellant got married with the
respondent at Amritsar according to Sikh rites and
customs. Even on the date of marriage, the respondent
had been working as a Librarian in a Government
Institute DIET at Verka, Amristar. From the very
beginning, the respondent expressed her dislike towards
the appellant and his family and gradually started
misbehaving with them. She started exhibiting short-
tempered behaviour and treated the parents of the
appellant with cruelty and disrespect. The father of the
2
appellant is aged about 80 years and his mother is more
than 75 years. In the month of January 1998, on the first
Lohri festival after their marriage, the respondent being
annoyed with the appellant on a trivial issue, abused his
mother in filthy language in the presence of their relatives
and neighbours causing immense pain to the entire
family. Since then, the respondent started insisting that
she cannot live with the parents of the appellant who are
mental and nuisance in her life and pressed upon the
appellant to have a separate abode from his parents.
(b) On 15.05.1999, a male child was born out of the
wedlock. Even after the birth of the child, there was no
improvement in the behaviour of the respondent. She
always insisted that she being financially independent is
not in need of the appellant and his family.
(c) Just five days before the third birthday of their child
i.e. on 10.05.2002, the respondent, without any justifiable
reason left the matrimonial home leaving the child
3
unattended and went to her parents house and staying
there since then. The appellant having failed in his efforts
to bring back the respondent to the matrimonial home
and in view of the consistent cruelty filed HMA Case No.
19 of 2003 before the Addl. District Judge, Amritsar,
praying for a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Act.
The stand of the Respondent
3) In reply to the divorce petition, while denying all the
averments made by the appellant, the respondent has
stated that the appellant is a greedy person and not
satisfied with the dowry articles received in marriage. He
always misbehaved and maltreated her and abused on
several occasions. She alleged that the appellant is a
habitual drinker and used to threaten her to kill with
poison. She also alleged that the appellant pulled her hair
and gave merciless beatings in the presence of his
parents.
4
Decision of the District Court and High Court
4) By judgment dated 11.10.2006, the Additional District
Judge, Amritsar, after analyzing the plea of both the
parties, oral and documentary evidence concluded that
the appellant-husband failed to substantiate the
allegations of `cruelty' and dismissed his divorce petition.
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant approached the High
Court by filing FAO No. 252-M of 2006. The learned single
Judge of the High Court, by the impugned order dated
11.05.2007, while agreeing with the conclusion of the
Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal filed by
the appellant. Questioning the above said orders, the
appellant has filed the present appeal by way of special
leave petition.
5) Heard Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr. Seeraj Bagga, learned counsel for the
respondent.
5
6) The only question for consideration in this appeal is
whether the appellant-husband has made out a case for
divorce on the ground of `cruelty' by the respondent-wife.
7) Section 13 of the Act specifies the grounds on which a
decree for divorce may be obtained by either party to the
marriage. Though in the divorce petition filed before the
Additional District Judge, Amritsar in HMA No. 19 of
2003, the appellant had sought divorce merely mentioning
Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage by decree
of divorce, and did not specify the grounds on which he is
entitled to decree of divorce. In the petition, the appellant
has highlighted only one aspect, namely, that after the
marriage, in the month of January 1998, on first festival
of Lohri, when they were enjoying the festival, the
respondent-wife abused his mother and the father in the
presence of relatives and neighbours. In para 6 of the
petition, the appellant has alleged that:
6
".....She called nuisance, idiot and mental to the parents of
the petitioner and the respondent openly said that she did
not want to live with the petitioner if he live with his old
parents."
In para 10, the appellant has stated:
"That on 10th May of 2002, the respondent left her
matrimonial home without giving any information to any
member and she also left her child in the matrimonial home
this shows that the respondent did not have any love and
affections towards petitioner and his family members. She is
living in her parental house for the last more than one year.
Hence, the necessity has been arisen to file the present
petition....."
Except the above allegations, the appellant has not
highlighted any other instance(s) about cruelty by the
respondent. Though learned counsel for the appellant
attempted to argue "desertion", in the absence of any
plea/evidence and material, we disallowed him to pursue
the said point.
8) In the reply to the petition under Section 13 of the Act,
the respondent has highlighted her stand and in fact
denied all the allegations against her. She also projected
her case that the custody of the child was forcibly taken
7
by the appellant when she returned from her matrimonial
home. She also highlighted that the appellant used to
force her to bring cash from her parents as he wanted to
purchase a car in the month of February 2000. When she
refused to bring cash, she was mercilessly beaten by the
appellant. She also stated that in February 4, 2000, her
parents gave Rs. 50,000/- to the appellant and thereafter
the appellant agreed to keep the respondent in her
matrimonial home. She also alleged that the appellant is
habitual of taking liquor and under influence of liquor, he
used to beat her. She further alleged that the appellant's
maternal uncle's daughter used to interfere in their family
affairs.
9) Apart from the above pleadings, both parties filed
statement in the form of an affidavit/petition and also let
in evidence reiterating their respective pleas. As
discussed earlier, the only instance highlighted by the
appellant for divorce was that the respondent-wife abused
8
his parents on the day of festival of Lohri in the presence
of relatives and neighbours.
10) In Samar Ghosh vs. Jaya Ghosh, (2007) 4 SCC 511,
a three-Judge Bench of this Court while considering
Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act laid down certain guidelines.
The analysis and ultimate conclusion are relevant which
reads as under:-
"98. On proper analysis and scrutiny of the judgments of
this Court and other courts, we have come to the definite
conclusion that there cannot be any comprehensive
definition of the concept of "mental cruelty" within which all
kinds of cases of mental cruelty can be covered. No court in
our considered view should even attempt to give a
comprehensive definition of mental cruelty.
99. Human mind is extremely complex and human
behaviour is equally complicated. Similarly human ingenuity
has no bound, therefore, to assimilate the entire human
behaviour in one definition is almost impossible. What is
cruelty in one case may not amount to cruelty in other case.
The concept of cruelty differs from person to person
depending upon his upbringing, level of sensitivity,
educational, family and cultural background, financial
position, social status, customs, traditions, religious beliefs,
human values and their value system.
100. Apart from this, the concept of mental cruelty cannot
remain static; it is bound to change with the passage of time,
impact of modern culture through print and electronic media
and value system, etc. etc. What may be mental cruelty now
may not remain a mental cruelty after a passage of time or
vice versa. There can never be any straitjacket formula or
fixed parameters for determining mental cruelty in
9
matrimonial matters. The prudent and appropriate way to
adjudicate the case would be to evaluate it on its peculiar
facts and circumstances while taking aforementioned factors
in consideration.
101. No uniform standard can ever be laid down for
guidance, yet we deem it appropriate to enumerate some
instances of human behaviour which may be relevant in
dealing with the cases of "mental cruelty". The instances
indicated in the succeeding paragraphs are only illustrative
and not exhaustive:
(i) On consideration of complete matrimonial life of the
parties, acute mental pain, agony and suffering as would not
make possible for the parties to live with each other could
come within the broad parameters of mental cruelty.
(ii) On comprehensive appraisal of the entire matrimonial life
of the parties, it becomes abundantly clear that situation is
such that the wronged party cannot reasonably be asked to
put up with such conduct and continue to live with other
party.
(iii) Mere coldness or lack of affection cannot amount to
cruelty, frequent rudeness of language, petulance of manner,
indifference and neglect may reach such a degree that it
makes the married life for the other spouse absolutely
intolerable.
(iv) Mental cruelty is a state of mind. The feeling of deep
anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused
by the conduct of other for a long time may lead to mental
cruelty.
(v) A sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment
calculated to torture, discommode or render miserable life of
the spouse.
(vi) Sustained unjustifiable conduct and behaviour of one
spouse actually affecting physical and mental health of the
other spouse. The treatment complained of and the resultant
danger or apprehension must be very grave, substantial and
weighty.
(vii) Sustained reprehensible conduct, studied neglect,
indifference or total departure from the normal standard of
conjugal kindness causing injury to mental health or
deriving sadistic pleasure can also amount to mental cruelty.
(viii) The conduct must be much more than jealousy,
selfishness, possessiveness, which causes unhappiness and
dissatisfaction and emotional upset may not be a ground for
grant of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty.
(ix) Mere trivial irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of
the married life which happens in day-to-day life would not
10
be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of mental
cruelty.
(x) The married life should be reviewed as a whole and a few
isolated instances over a period of years will not amount to
cruelty. The ill conduct must be persistent for a fairly
lengthy period, where the relationship has deteriorated to an
extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a spouse,
the wronged party finds it extremely difficult to live with the
other party any longer, may amount to mental cruelty.
(xi) If a husband submits himself for an operation of
sterilisation without medical reasons and without the
consent or knowledge of his wife and similarly, if the wife
undergoes vasectomy or abortion without medical reason or
without the consent or knowledge of her husband, such an
act of the spouse may lead to mental cruelty.
(xii) Unilateral decision of refusal to have intercourse for
considerable period without there being any physical
incapacity or valid reason may amount to mental cruelty.
(xiii) Unilateral decision of either husband or wife after
marriage not to have child from the marriage may amount to
cruelty.
(xiv) Where there has been a long period of continuous
separation, it may fairly be concluded that the matrimonial
bond is beyond repair. The marriage becomes a fiction
though supported by a legal tie. By refusing to sever that tie,
the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of
marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the
feelings and emotions of the parties. In such like situations,
it may lead to mental cruelty."
11) A Hindu marriage solemnized under the Act can only
be dissolved on any of the grounds specified therein. We
have already pointed out that in the petition for
dissolution of marriage, the appellant has merely
mentioned Section 13 of the Act and in the body of the
petition he highlighted certain instances amounting to
cruelty by the respondent-wife. Cruelty has not been
11
defined under the Act. It is quite possible that a
particular conduct may amount to cruelty in one case but
the same conduct necessarily may not amount to cruelty
due to change of various factors, in different set of
circumstances. Therefore, it is essential for the appellant,
who claims relief, to prove that a particular/part of
conduct or behaviour resulted in cruelty to him. No prior
assumptions can be made in such matters. Meaning
thereby that it cannot be assumed that a particular
conduct will, under all circumstances, amount to cruelty,
vis-`-vis the other party. The aggrieved party has to make
a specific case that the conduct of which exception is
taken amounts to cruelty. It is true that even a single act
of violence which is of grievous and inexcusable nature
satisfies the test of cruelty. Persistence in inordinate
sexual demands or malpractices by either spouse can be
cruelty if it injures the other spouse. There is no such
complaint by the appellant. In the case on hand, as stated
earlier, the appellant has projected few instances in
12
which, according to him, the respondent abused his
parents. We have verified all the averments in the
petitions, reply statement, written submissions as well as
the evidence of both parties. We are satisfied that on the
basis of such instances, marriage cannot be dissolved.
12) The married life should be assessed as a whole and a
few isolated instances over certain period will not amount
to cruelty. The ill-conduct must be precedent for a fairly
lengthy period where the relationship has deteriorated to
an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a
spouse, one party finds it extremely difficult to live with
the other party no longer may amount to mental cruelty.
Making certain statements on the spur of the moment and
expressing certain displeasure about the behaviour of
elders may not be characterized as cruelty. Mere trivial
irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of married life
which happens in day to day life in all families would not
be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty.
13
Sustained unjustifiable and reprehensible conduct
affecting physical and mental health of the other spouse
may lead to mental cruelty. Both the appellant and
respondent being highly qualified persons, the appellant
being Principal in ITI College, the respondent working as a
Librarian in a Government Institute, an isolated friction
on some occasion like festival of Lohri even in the presence
of others cannot be a valid ground for dissolving the
marriage.
13) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant by
drawing our attention to certain allegations made by the
respondent-wife in the reply to the petition under Section
13 of the Act before the Addl. District Judge submitted
that by considering all these aspects it is just and
reasonable to consider and grant divorce on the ground of
cruelty. In support of the same, he relied on the decision
of this Court in Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate vs.
Neela Vijaykumar Bhate, (2003) 6 SCC 334. No doubt,
14
in that decision, this Court has held that allegations made
in the written statement or suggested in the course of
examination and by way of cross-examination satisfying
the requirement of law has also to be taken note of while
considering the claim of either party. In the case on hand,
it is true that the respondent-wife has made certain
allegations against her husband-appellant. However,
admittedly based on the same, the trial Court has not
framed any issue and no evidence let in in support of the
same. In such circumstances, the said decision is not
helpful to our case. Admittedly, no such issue was framed
by the trial Court or any point determined by the High
Court based on such averments in the reply/written
statement. Accordingly, we reject the said contention.
14) As regards the allegations about beating her child
and not feeding him, the High Court, after analyzing the
entire materials, disbelieved the same. It is also brought
to our notice that the appellant condoned the alleged act
15
of cruelty as he wanted to bring back the respondent to
his house. As such, the allegations of cruelty do not
appear to be truthful. It is also proved that the appellant
is not interested to keep the respondent as his wife and he
wants divorce by any means. As observed earlier, except
the grounds enumerated in Section 13, a Hindu marriage
solemnized under the Act cannot be dissolved on any
other grounds.
15) Finally, a feeble argument was made that both the
appellant and respondent were living separately from 2002
and it would be impossible for their re-union, hence this
Court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the
Constitution their marriage may be dissolved in the
interest of both parties. Though, on a rare occasion, this
Court has granted the extraordinary relief de hors to the
grounds mentioned in Section 13 in view of the fact that
the issue has been referred to a larger Bench about
permissibility of such course at present, we are not
16
inclined to accede to the request of the appellant. If there
is any change of law or additional ground included in
Section 13 by the act of Parliament, the appellant is free to
avail the same at the appropriate time.
16) In the light of the above discussion, we are unable to
accept the claim of the appellant, on the other hand, we
are in entire agreement with the conclusion arrived at by
the Addl. District Judge as well as the High Court.
Consequently, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed
with no order as to costs.
..........................................J.
(P. SATHASIVAM)
..........................................J.
(DR. B.S. CHAUHAN)
NEW DELHI;
OCTOBER 8, 2010.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5010 OF 2007
Gurbux Singh .... Appellant (s)
Versus
Harminder Kaur .... Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
P. Sathasivam, J.
1) The appellant, a Principal in ITI College, Sirhali,
Amritsar, has approached this Court against the judgment
and final order dated 11.05.2007 of the High Court of
Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in FAO No. 252-M of
2006 whereby the learned single Judge dismissed the
appeal filed by him against the judgment and order dated
11.10.2006 of the Additional District Judge (Ad hoc),
Amritsar, dismissing the petition filed under Section 13 of
1
the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as
"the Act") for a decree of divorce against the respondent-
wife, who is working as a Librarian in Government
Institute DIET at Verka, Amritsar on the ground of
`cruelty'. Both the courts have rejected the claim of the
appellant herein on the ground that he has failed to prove
`cruelty' sufficient for grant of a decree of divorce.
The case of the Appellant
2) (a) On 23.11.1997, the appellant got married with the
respondent at Amritsar according to Sikh rites and
customs. Even on the date of marriage, the respondent
had been working as a Librarian in a Government
Institute DIET at Verka, Amristar. From the very
beginning, the respondent expressed her dislike towards
the appellant and his family and gradually started
misbehaving with them. She started exhibiting short-
tempered behaviour and treated the parents of the
appellant with cruelty and disrespect. The father of the
2
appellant is aged about 80 years and his mother is more
than 75 years. In the month of January 1998, on the first
Lohri festival after their marriage, the respondent being
annoyed with the appellant on a trivial issue, abused his
mother in filthy language in the presence of their relatives
and neighbours causing immense pain to the entire
family. Since then, the respondent started insisting that
she cannot live with the parents of the appellant who are
mental and nuisance in her life and pressed upon the
appellant to have a separate abode from his parents.
(b) On 15.05.1999, a male child was born out of the
wedlock. Even after the birth of the child, there was no
improvement in the behaviour of the respondent. She
always insisted that she being financially independent is
not in need of the appellant and his family.
(c) Just five days before the third birthday of their child
i.e. on 10.05.2002, the respondent, without any justifiable
reason left the matrimonial home leaving the child
3
unattended and went to her parents house and staying
there since then. The appellant having failed in his efforts
to bring back the respondent to the matrimonial home
and in view of the consistent cruelty filed HMA Case No.
19 of 2003 before the Addl. District Judge, Amritsar,
praying for a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Act.
The stand of the Respondent
3) In reply to the divorce petition, while denying all the
averments made by the appellant, the respondent has
stated that the appellant is a greedy person and not
satisfied with the dowry articles received in marriage. He
always misbehaved and maltreated her and abused on
several occasions. She alleged that the appellant is a
habitual drinker and used to threaten her to kill with
poison. She also alleged that the appellant pulled her hair
and gave merciless beatings in the presence of his
parents.
4
Decision of the District Court and High Court
4) By judgment dated 11.10.2006, the Additional District
Judge, Amritsar, after analyzing the plea of both the
parties, oral and documentary evidence concluded that
the appellant-husband failed to substantiate the
allegations of `cruelty' and dismissed his divorce petition.
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant approached the High
Court by filing FAO No. 252-M of 2006. The learned single
Judge of the High Court, by the impugned order dated
11.05.2007, while agreeing with the conclusion of the
Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal filed by
the appellant. Questioning the above said orders, the
appellant has filed the present appeal by way of special
leave petition.
5) Heard Mr. Vinay Kumar Garg, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr. Seeraj Bagga, learned counsel for the
respondent.
5
6) The only question for consideration in this appeal is
whether the appellant-husband has made out a case for
divorce on the ground of `cruelty' by the respondent-wife.
7) Section 13 of the Act specifies the grounds on which a
decree for divorce may be obtained by either party to the
marriage. Though in the divorce petition filed before the
Additional District Judge, Amritsar in HMA No. 19 of
2003, the appellant had sought divorce merely mentioning
Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage by decree
of divorce, and did not specify the grounds on which he is
entitled to decree of divorce. In the petition, the appellant
has highlighted only one aspect, namely, that after the
marriage, in the month of January 1998, on first festival
of Lohri, when they were enjoying the festival, the
respondent-wife abused his mother and the father in the
presence of relatives and neighbours. In para 6 of the
petition, the appellant has alleged that:
6
".....She called nuisance, idiot and mental to the parents of
the petitioner and the respondent openly said that she did
not want to live with the petitioner if he live with his old
parents."
In para 10, the appellant has stated:
"That on 10th May of 2002, the respondent left her
matrimonial home without giving any information to any
member and she also left her child in the matrimonial home
this shows that the respondent did not have any love and
affections towards petitioner and his family members. She is
living in her parental house for the last more than one year.
Hence, the necessity has been arisen to file the present
petition....."
Except the above allegations, the appellant has not
highlighted any other instance(s) about cruelty by the
respondent. Though learned counsel for the appellant
attempted to argue "desertion", in the absence of any
plea/evidence and material, we disallowed him to pursue
the said point.
8) In the reply to the petition under Section 13 of the Act,
the respondent has highlighted her stand and in fact
denied all the allegations against her. She also projected
her case that the custody of the child was forcibly taken
7
by the appellant when she returned from her matrimonial
home. She also highlighted that the appellant used to
force her to bring cash from her parents as he wanted to
purchase a car in the month of February 2000. When she
refused to bring cash, she was mercilessly beaten by the
appellant. She also stated that in February 4, 2000, her
parents gave Rs. 50,000/- to the appellant and thereafter
the appellant agreed to keep the respondent in her
matrimonial home. She also alleged that the appellant is
habitual of taking liquor and under influence of liquor, he
used to beat her. She further alleged that the appellant's
maternal uncle's daughter used to interfere in their family
affairs.
9) Apart from the above pleadings, both parties filed
statement in the form of an affidavit/petition and also let
in evidence reiterating their respective pleas. As
discussed earlier, the only instance highlighted by the
appellant for divorce was that the respondent-wife abused
8
his parents on the day of festival of Lohri in the presence
of relatives and neighbours.
10) In Samar Ghosh vs. Jaya Ghosh, (2007) 4 SCC 511,
a three-Judge Bench of this Court while considering
Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act laid down certain guidelines.
The analysis and ultimate conclusion are relevant which
reads as under:-
"98. On proper analysis and scrutiny of the judgments of
this Court and other courts, we have come to the definite
conclusion that there cannot be any comprehensive
definition of the concept of "mental cruelty" within which all
kinds of cases of mental cruelty can be covered. No court in
our considered view should even attempt to give a
comprehensive definition of mental cruelty.
99. Human mind is extremely complex and human
behaviour is equally complicated. Similarly human ingenuity
has no bound, therefore, to assimilate the entire human
behaviour in one definition is almost impossible. What is
cruelty in one case may not amount to cruelty in other case.
The concept of cruelty differs from person to person
depending upon his upbringing, level of sensitivity,
educational, family and cultural background, financial
position, social status, customs, traditions, religious beliefs,
human values and their value system.
100. Apart from this, the concept of mental cruelty cannot
remain static; it is bound to change with the passage of time,
impact of modern culture through print and electronic media
and value system, etc. etc. What may be mental cruelty now
may not remain a mental cruelty after a passage of time or
vice versa. There can never be any straitjacket formula or
fixed parameters for determining mental cruelty in
9
matrimonial matters. The prudent and appropriate way to
adjudicate the case would be to evaluate it on its peculiar
facts and circumstances while taking aforementioned factors
in consideration.
101. No uniform standard can ever be laid down for
guidance, yet we deem it appropriate to enumerate some
instances of human behaviour which may be relevant in
dealing with the cases of "mental cruelty". The instances
indicated in the succeeding paragraphs are only illustrative
and not exhaustive:
(i) On consideration of complete matrimonial life of the
parties, acute mental pain, agony and suffering as would not
make possible for the parties to live with each other could
come within the broad parameters of mental cruelty.
(ii) On comprehensive appraisal of the entire matrimonial life
of the parties, it becomes abundantly clear that situation is
such that the wronged party cannot reasonably be asked to
put up with such conduct and continue to live with other
party.
(iii) Mere coldness or lack of affection cannot amount to
cruelty, frequent rudeness of language, petulance of manner,
indifference and neglect may reach such a degree that it
makes the married life for the other spouse absolutely
intolerable.
(iv) Mental cruelty is a state of mind. The feeling of deep
anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused
by the conduct of other for a long time may lead to mental
cruelty.
(v) A sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment
calculated to torture, discommode or render miserable life of
the spouse.
(vi) Sustained unjustifiable conduct and behaviour of one
spouse actually affecting physical and mental health of the
other spouse. The treatment complained of and the resultant
danger or apprehension must be very grave, substantial and
weighty.
(vii) Sustained reprehensible conduct, studied neglect,
indifference or total departure from the normal standard of
conjugal kindness causing injury to mental health or
deriving sadistic pleasure can also amount to mental cruelty.
(viii) The conduct must be much more than jealousy,
selfishness, possessiveness, which causes unhappiness and
dissatisfaction and emotional upset may not be a ground for
grant of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty.
(ix) Mere trivial irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of
the married life which happens in day-to-day life would not
10
be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of mental
cruelty.
(x) The married life should be reviewed as a whole and a few
isolated instances over a period of years will not amount to
cruelty. The ill conduct must be persistent for a fairly
lengthy period, where the relationship has deteriorated to an
extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a spouse,
the wronged party finds it extremely difficult to live with the
other party any longer, may amount to mental cruelty.
(xi) If a husband submits himself for an operation of
sterilisation without medical reasons and without the
consent or knowledge of his wife and similarly, if the wife
undergoes vasectomy or abortion without medical reason or
without the consent or knowledge of her husband, such an
act of the spouse may lead to mental cruelty.
(xii) Unilateral decision of refusal to have intercourse for
considerable period without there being any physical
incapacity or valid reason may amount to mental cruelty.
(xiii) Unilateral decision of either husband or wife after
marriage not to have child from the marriage may amount to
cruelty.
(xiv) Where there has been a long period of continuous
separation, it may fairly be concluded that the matrimonial
bond is beyond repair. The marriage becomes a fiction
though supported by a legal tie. By refusing to sever that tie,
the law in such cases, does not serve the sanctity of
marriage; on the contrary, it shows scant regard for the
feelings and emotions of the parties. In such like situations,
it may lead to mental cruelty."
11) A Hindu marriage solemnized under the Act can only
be dissolved on any of the grounds specified therein. We
have already pointed out that in the petition for
dissolution of marriage, the appellant has merely
mentioned Section 13 of the Act and in the body of the
petition he highlighted certain instances amounting to
cruelty by the respondent-wife. Cruelty has not been
11
defined under the Act. It is quite possible that a
particular conduct may amount to cruelty in one case but
the same conduct necessarily may not amount to cruelty
due to change of various factors, in different set of
circumstances. Therefore, it is essential for the appellant,
who claims relief, to prove that a particular/part of
conduct or behaviour resulted in cruelty to him. No prior
assumptions can be made in such matters. Meaning
thereby that it cannot be assumed that a particular
conduct will, under all circumstances, amount to cruelty,
vis-`-vis the other party. The aggrieved party has to make
a specific case that the conduct of which exception is
taken amounts to cruelty. It is true that even a single act
of violence which is of grievous and inexcusable nature
satisfies the test of cruelty. Persistence in inordinate
sexual demands or malpractices by either spouse can be
cruelty if it injures the other spouse. There is no such
complaint by the appellant. In the case on hand, as stated
earlier, the appellant has projected few instances in
12
which, according to him, the respondent abused his
parents. We have verified all the averments in the
petitions, reply statement, written submissions as well as
the evidence of both parties. We are satisfied that on the
basis of such instances, marriage cannot be dissolved.
12) The married life should be assessed as a whole and a
few isolated instances over certain period will not amount
to cruelty. The ill-conduct must be precedent for a fairly
lengthy period where the relationship has deteriorated to
an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a
spouse, one party finds it extremely difficult to live with
the other party no longer may amount to mental cruelty.
Making certain statements on the spur of the moment and
expressing certain displeasure about the behaviour of
elders may not be characterized as cruelty. Mere trivial
irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of married life
which happens in day to day life in all families would not
be adequate for grant of divorce on the ground of cruelty.
13
Sustained unjustifiable and reprehensible conduct
affecting physical and mental health of the other spouse
may lead to mental cruelty. Both the appellant and
respondent being highly qualified persons, the appellant
being Principal in ITI College, the respondent working as a
Librarian in a Government Institute, an isolated friction
on some occasion like festival of Lohri even in the presence
of others cannot be a valid ground for dissolving the
marriage.
13) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant by
drawing our attention to certain allegations made by the
respondent-wife in the reply to the petition under Section
13 of the Act before the Addl. District Judge submitted
that by considering all these aspects it is just and
reasonable to consider and grant divorce on the ground of
cruelty. In support of the same, he relied on the decision
of this Court in Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate vs.
Neela Vijaykumar Bhate, (2003) 6 SCC 334. No doubt,
14
in that decision, this Court has held that allegations made
in the written statement or suggested in the course of
examination and by way of cross-examination satisfying
the requirement of law has also to be taken note of while
considering the claim of either party. In the case on hand,
it is true that the respondent-wife has made certain
allegations against her husband-appellant. However,
admittedly based on the same, the trial Court has not
framed any issue and no evidence let in in support of the
same. In such circumstances, the said decision is not
helpful to our case. Admittedly, no such issue was framed
by the trial Court or any point determined by the High
Court based on such averments in the reply/written
statement. Accordingly, we reject the said contention.
14) As regards the allegations about beating her child
and not feeding him, the High Court, after analyzing the
entire materials, disbelieved the same. It is also brought
to our notice that the appellant condoned the alleged act
15
of cruelty as he wanted to bring back the respondent to
his house. As such, the allegations of cruelty do not
appear to be truthful. It is also proved that the appellant
is not interested to keep the respondent as his wife and he
wants divorce by any means. As observed earlier, except
the grounds enumerated in Section 13, a Hindu marriage
solemnized under the Act cannot be dissolved on any
other grounds.
15) Finally, a feeble argument was made that both the
appellant and respondent were living separately from 2002
and it would be impossible for their re-union, hence this
Court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the
Constitution their marriage may be dissolved in the
interest of both parties. Though, on a rare occasion, this
Court has granted the extraordinary relief de hors to the
grounds mentioned in Section 13 in view of the fact that
the issue has been referred to a larger Bench about
permissibility of such course at present, we are not
16
inclined to accede to the request of the appellant. If there
is any change of law or additional ground included in
Section 13 by the act of Parliament, the appellant is free to
avail the same at the appropriate time.
16) In the light of the above discussion, we are unable to
accept the claim of the appellant, on the other hand, we
are in entire agreement with the conclusion arrived at by
the Addl. District Judge as well as the High Court.
Consequently, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed
with no order as to costs.
..........................................J.
(P. SATHASIVAM)
..........................................J.
(DR. B.S. CHAUHAN)
NEW DELHI;
OCTOBER 8, 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)