Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Spousal veto - labour proposal , is it really a problem now?

359 replies

Appleofmyeye2023 · 25/07/2023 11:36

Hi, did look to see if thread raised on this.
with the news yesterday about labour change in direction, but still wanting to “simplify” GRC process, they confirmed that they would still want to remove the “spousal consent” part. Obviously seen a fair amount of outcry on this.

whilst I completely agree that no one should be required to stay married when the terms of their marriage have shifted , is this need for spousal veto to end the marriage still a problem given the divorce law changes last year.

historically, the need for spousal veto was obvious. The newly trans spouse could refuse to consent to a divorce and force the other spouse to 5 years of marriage before the marriage could be divorced. Even if the trans spouse agreed , it would take 2 years plus if adultry hadn’t been committed. Undoubtedly a cruel and unnecessary burden on a spouse who didn’t want to remain in marriage to a spouse who wanted to change genders.

But, divorce laws have changed. Irrespective of any behaviours or consent of either party, a divorce now goes through a single “no blame” process and timeline. No matter what the real reason for divorce is there is now a minimum of 26 weeks time. Neither party can object. It is enough for just one party to say the marriage has irreparably broken down.

now we can argue that 26 weeks is still too long in these circumstances. When I saw the changes I was quite shocked as, imho, more critically it means people in abusive marriages have to also wait 26 weeks now, whereas in my case I completed divorce in 14 weeks due to safe guarding issues. But, this was debated and government determined that other safe guarding processes were available such as abatement orders etc

so, taking time line aside, we are now in situation that no trans partner can force a marriage to continue for years because they don’t consent to the petition. Divorce WILL proceed whatever the circumstances and whatever the views of the non petitioner

Either I’m missing something here , or I’m right in thinking that the spousal veto is no longer required, irrespective of any changes to the GRC.

can anyone explain to me why the spousal veto is still needed please

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 14:02

not clear then, has labour proposed how it would work if , in future, GRC given and non trans spouse then divorcing someone who no longer exists legally?

Labour has given zero details about how any of their proposals will work.

Brk · 25/07/2023 14:02

Use some empathy and imagination. Imagine that you are a devout Christian/ Muslim who has been raised to believe that homosexuality is a terrible sin which means you go to hell. Now imagine that you’re a man married to a woman. Suddenly the woman announces that she is changing gender, effective immediately. So although you want to divorce, and will be in 26 weeks, for those 26 weeks, you are now in a homosexual marriage with a man. Perhaps that wouldn’t upset you but to a lot people it’s horrific and socially humiliating.

The spousal veto is needed. To remove it is to subordinate the beliefs and feelings of all other communities to the demands of the transitioning person, and that isn’t ok.

Original poster
Appleofmyeye2023 · 25/07/2023 14:00

Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 13:47

I can't copy and paste text for some reason but read section 2 of Trans Widows' Voices written submission to the Women and Equalities Select Committee

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/16197/pdf/#:~:text=4.4%20The%20Spousal%20Exit%20Clause,resisted%20and%20treated%20with%20suspicion.

It allows an annulment. This is needed by some women who cannot divorce for religious reasons.

tada👏
thank you for the link
so what I’m reading is that

  1. trans person applies for GRC, has to get consent to proceed with full GRC form any spouse. - ensures spouse is told and informed this is happening
  2. interim GRC given- allowing spouse to proceed with divorce (now 26 weeks) or annulment - for those who don’t want to divorce as such . Divorce is then done under spousal gender aligning with sex . I assume that’d at least give motivation to trans spouse to not deliberately slow down the divorce process in most cases as well. Which is an issue for any divorcing couple both in terms of stress and expense.

not clear then, has labour proposed how it would work if , in future, GRC given and non trans spouse then divorcing someone who no longer exists legally?

Or Does the marriage cert automatically get changed at GRC point currently - couldn’t find that point in the link

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 14:00

I wish they'd just fucking repeal the GRA already.

This.

DinoSaw · 25/07/2023 14:00

The spousal exit clause is essentially just an annulment. OP - would you get rid of annulment altogether now the new no fault divorce is in place?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 13:59

Please read the document I linked from Trans Widows' Voices. I can't copy and paste text from it. There are accounts explaining why it's a problem for some religious women to divorce, as they have to get an annulment to be able to remarry in church in some cases.

GarlicGrace · 25/07/2023 13:56

I wish they'd just fucking repeal the GRA already.

TooBigForMyBoots · 25/07/2023 13:55

dunBle · 25/07/2023 11:48

That's no help for women from certain religious communities though, who can't divorce within their faith, and use the current process to get an annulment instead.

Can you tell me more about this? What religious communities are you talking about and how does it impact them?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 13:54

Also, even if you put aside the point about annulment, why can't the man wait 26 weeks to get his GRC?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 13:53

I answered your question, @Appleofmyeye2023

Original poster
Appleofmyeye2023 · 25/07/2023 13:52

Thelnebriati · 25/07/2023 13:48

are you saying that this law means marriages are dissolved without divorce?
No; currently, your husband cannot fully legally transition without your consent. Until you consent he is issued with an interim GRC.
Transitioning and obtaining a GRC creates an entirely new identity. New name, new documents.

Personally I think that child support should be ring fenced and the marriage automatically annulled. The wife can always re-marry after he obtains his GRC, if she chooses.

That’s still not answering the question. I know they currently can’t fully transition,
but my question still remains - if you’re going to divorce anyway why does this make any difference now that divorce is all “fast track” and no blame anyway

really? Am I being exceptionally thick here …I thought this was a simple question …why does it still matter in terms of the logistics of ending the marriage as quickly as possible

OP posts:
Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 13:52

Are you clear on it now OP?

GarlicGrace · 25/07/2023 13:51

Ah, thanks @Thelnebriati. Going to stop cross-posting now 😬

Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 13:50

You will see the exact legal position in the document I linked.

WorkingItOutAsIGo · 25/07/2023 13:50

Because within that 26 weeks one partner can legally change sex and force the other partner to be in a homosexual marriage!

GarlicGrace · 25/07/2023 13:50

SunnyEgg · 25/07/2023 13:44

Agree

Show quote history

Of course.

My, possibly inaccurate, understanding is that a spousal 'sex change' is an automatic cause for divorce - that is, the spouse can't contest it and the court must grant it.

However, that would take six months or longer. With 'no cause' divorce now in effect, anyone can divorce without the distressing process of demonstrating cause. And it will take six months, same or better than before.

The remarks about people whose religions impede divorce have made me think I was wrong and the marriage is regarded as void, rather than ended. In that case, it does need further examination.

Original poster
Appleofmyeye2023 · 25/07/2023 13:49

SunnyEgg · 25/07/2023 13:44

Agree

Show quote history

I’m not debating whether it’s right to allow the non consenting person to exit the contract 🤦‍♀️ of course I agree with that. There’s no debate in that for most humane people

what my question is about is the logistics of ending the marriage.

Why do we still need the exit clause if divorce, since last year, is now no fault, and faster and no trans person can coercively control the none consenting spouse into remaining in a marriage for 5 years against their will.

OP posts:
Thelnebriati · 25/07/2023 13:48

are you saying that this law means marriages are dissolved without divorce?
No; currently, your husband cannot fully legally transition without your consent. Until you consent he is issued with an interim GRC.
Transitioning and obtaining a GRC creates an entirely new identity. New name, new documents.

Personally I think that child support should be ring fenced and the marriage automatically annulled. The wife can always re-marry after he obtains his GRC, if she chooses.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 25/07/2023 13:47

I can't copy and paste text for some reason but read section 2 of Trans Widows' Voices written submission to the Women and Equalities Select Committee

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/16197/pdf/#:~:text=4.4%20The%20Spousal%20Exit%20Clause,resisted%20and%20treated%20with%20suspicion.

It allows an annulment. This is needed by some women who cannot divorce for religious reasons.

SunnyEgg · 25/07/2023 13:44

Mythicalcreatures · 25/07/2023 13:19

Marriage is a legal contract if one of the people in the marriage now say they are now the opposite sex that original contract has been broken, off course you should be able to exit the contract ( marriage)

Agree

GarlicGrace · 25/07/2023 13:40

I don't properly understand this, either. Does the current process void the marriage entirely, or is it a divorce?

Original poster
Appleofmyeye2023 · 25/07/2023 13:40

Thelnebriati · 25/07/2023 13:15

Its a massive problem. You can't divorce someone that no longer exists.

Ok, so I’m reading something about a GRC gives rights to trans spouse to reissue the marriage certificate or that the person named on cert ceases to exist.
can someone please explain fully what this is and Then I can understand.
I’m mostly getting comments that are short and dismissive…I’m not attacking any rights that spouses have, I simply am genuinely ignorant of why this still matters and want a detailed and logical explanation that I can then explain to others.

im not alone in thinking that the marriage exists, to opt out you have to divorce anyway, and the original point was to prevent non consenting partners to divorce irrespective of consent given.

help me understand here…are you saying that this law means marriages are dissolved without divorce?

OP posts:
Original poster
Appleofmyeye2023 · 25/07/2023 13:34

dunBle · 25/07/2023 11:48

That's no help for women from certain religious communities though, who can't divorce within their faith, and use the current process to get an annulment instead.

I don’t disagree, but that was always case and still is, even if this new legislation did go through

OP posts:
WorkingItOutAsIGo · 25/07/2023 13:33

The point is not about keeping someone locked in a marriage, it is about forcing someone to be in a homosexual marriage when they entered a heterosexual marriage. So before the legal sex of one partner can change, the other is allowed to exit the marriage.

Original poster
Appleofmyeye2023 · 25/07/2023 13:33

LoobiJee · 25/07/2023 11:45

Inaccurately calling it a “spousal veto” instead of accurately calling it the “spousal exit clause” is a campaign tactic by the Men’s Sexual Entitlement lobbyists.

Ok, sorry, not my intent.
putting the semantics to one side please
what am I missing here re rights to divorce trans spouse without need to consent

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread