Gemma Tognini: Why Australian Family Association’s proposed divorce law changes will lead to more pain

There are some topics you approach with a certain wariness. A sense of, touch it and you’ll get burnt. I feel like this is one of them. Try as I might to fix my mind on other things, I’ve failed miserably, so may as well just dive into the fire. The end of my marriage was like a shipwreck. That’s how I used to describe it at the time. Not a modern one though. Think more the Batavia than Costa Concordia. That’s how I saw it at the time. That’s how I felt at the time. Like someone wandering dazed, cut and bruised along some lonely beach with nothing but wreckage strewn around me. The passing of years tends to temper such memories, perhaps it ended with more of a whimper than a roar but the fact remains for all who’ve walked that road, that somewhere in the middle of what each person recalls is where the whole truth lies. Over the years, I’ve found that talking about the end of a marriage can be almost like Fight Club. It has the same first rule. Which is weird when you consider that sadly half of all marriages end in divorce. It’s not like it’s an experience confined to the few. The reason I’m talking about it at all is because the Federal Parliament is conducting an inquiry into family law in an attempt to reform the cumbersome, slow and difficult Family Court system. Thankfully I never needed the courts to sort things out but anyone who has, will tell you it’s not great. The Parliament is right to look at what can be done better, and is reviewing submissions from various groups and individuals. One such submission from the Australian Family Association has suggested a range of amendments for consideration. Another way of putting it is this. The AFA has asked the inquiry to drag us all back in time, by suggesting a change to double the period of time a couple needs to wait before being allowed to file for divorce. In Australia, it’s one year, they believe it should be two (with exemptions for cases of family violence and the like) and point to the fact that some European countries require a three-year waiting period. It says increasing the waiting period in Australia to two years, would give couples a chance to reconcile. Let me gently, but firmly say this. Reconciliation in marriage is a matter of the heart not a matter of the law. Preventing two adults from ending a marriage that is no longer viable simply to impose some sort of moral code shows an incredible lack of empathy and understanding. Drawing out an already painful process would simply provide another opportunity for either person to control the life of the other. What may provide protection in one set of circumstances will inevitably open the door for abuse of the system or the person, in another. Especially when financial control or custody matters are concerned. What’s needed is certainty and clarity, not death by a thousand cuts over 24 long months. As if this suggestion wasn’t disconnected enough from reality, the AFA submission also contains a suggestion that the Federal Government end no-fault divorce, which would give wounded partners the right to demand damages for infidelity. It argues that marriage should not be the only contract which can be breached without the ability to seek financial recompense. Damages for breach of marriage contract. What’s next, public naming and shaming? Welcome back to 1950, folks. Let’s just take this one for a second and shake the tree a little because we all know that there are many reasons marriages end, infidelity being an obvious one. Let me poke the bear a little here and ask this, what if infidelity is a symptom of a problem, not the actual problem itself? Then what? Going further still, what if getting divorced is actually the best thing that could happen in the circumstances? What if reconciliation (for a thousand reasons) would be a terrible idea? I get where the AFA is coming from. As a Christian, there was a double layer of complexity for me to navigate on a person level but I say humbly and somewhat guardedly that for me, I’m grateful for the road that I eventually chose and have since walked. I would change nothing. Not one thing. That’s not to say it’s been easy. It hasn’t. It’s not to say it wasn’t painful, it was. But I’d walk every step again to become the person I am today, where I am today, with whom I am today. I don’t say that lightly. Life is a thousand shades of grey at any given time. Marriage breakdown is a symptom of many things, none of which can be addressed by retrograde legislation nor offering another tool for vengeance. Yes, the system is broken but so is our humanity. Perhaps if we start with acknowledging that, we might actually get somewhere. GemmaTognini is founder and executive director of GT Media