Shift from women-centric marriage law to fairer system
I refer to the report “Maintenance could be given based on need, not gender” (July 24), and the letter “Spouse who earns more should pay alimony” (July 26).
I refer to the report “Maintenance could be given based on need, not gender” (July 24), and the letter “Spouse who earns more should pay alimony” (July 26).
Many men get married without knowing the odds stacked against them under the Women’s Charter if the marriage fails, and there is no reason for men to be discriminated against on the sole basis of gender.
We must overhaul marriage legislation such that it is fairer and more family-centric, rather than women-centric. The matter must be taken seriously; extrapolating from current statistics, about one in four marriages will end in a divorce.
If the Charter remains one that penalises only men, even when they are not at fault for the breakdown of a marriage, men may choose not to get married and be bound by a contract that is prejudicial to them.
Does the Ministry of Social and Family Development think it is fair for a long-term unemployed or retired man to provide his ex-wife with monthly financial support, especially if she has monthly income from work?
If a woman has chosen to walk out of a marriage through no fault of her husband, would it be fair for him to continue to support her financially for life, when she has, in fact, deserted him?
Justice Choo Han Teck said in a recent judgement that maintenance was not an unalloyed right of women. So, what is the ministry’s stand on women claiming maintenance, token or otherwise, in cases where they earned more than their ex-husband did?
I cannot fathom what is holding Singapore back from adopting a fairer needs-based spousal support system.