More Divorces, Easier to Divorce?

The State of São Paulo’s registry office of notes had, last year, 9,317 divorces, an increase of 109% in relation to 2009, when there were 4,459 separations. The study was done by CNB-SP (Notary College of Brazil – São Paulo Section), an entity that represents the sector for the State.

The entity attributed the expressive growth to the ease with which couples can publish their divorce. In July of last year, via the Constitutional Amendment 66, the waiting period was extinguished. Before, couples only could part ways officially after one year of formal separation or two years while living in different houses.

Also according to the statement, the notary divorces began in 2007 following the authorization obtained through Law 11,441. That year, there were 4,080 formalizations without the need for judiciary input “because they were resolved consensually in a notary office.” That number rose to 4,394 the following year.” – Folha

My Take

Either more people wanted to divorce before, yet found the process too cumbersome, meaning it’s just an easier way out now or more people are getting divorced ‘these days’. For this year, I’m predicting drive-through divorce or divorce by text. “Sorry I didn’t get the eggs and milk like you asked…didn’t you get my text earlier???” Jokes aside, I wonder if it’s also getting easier to get married, too, in Brazil (seeing as there’s no “Sin City”, like Las Vegas, there).

The more we facilitate the break-up of the family unit, the harder it will be to bond, and when there is no one to rely on, we become more succeptable to outside influences. Soon, we’ll all be ‘alone together’ (article, video).

PS – See comments


5 thoughts on “More Divorces, Easier to Divorce?

  1. Divorce used to be illegal in Brazil. I see making divorce easier as a huge Woman’s Right’s issue, especially in a country that is still as housewife-based as Brazil is.

    I don’t know if you can define “staying together because the government won’t let us separate” as keeping the family unit together.

    The fact that women are becoming more and more dependent means they will settle less, or won’t be forced to stay with a bad husband for financial reasons.

    I don’t think making divorce (a human right) accessible will break up families. The way to keep them together is making sure that people are educated. There have been a lot of studies in the US that people with college degrees marry later and divorce less. So IF you want a morality law to keep families together, make it so people can’t get married until a certain age.

    However, a Brazilian girl I met on a bus here this weekend told me that marriage doesn’t exist anymore in the traditional sense. She said that the words “married” and “divorced” have replaced “living together” and “broken up”. Thoughts?

    • Um, while agreed that the ease of the process isn’t so much the problem as is the culture that supports taking the easy way out, there is something to say for life before feminism. If feminism is an extremely recent phenomemon, human history considered, then either that means women as far back as cavemen (oops, cavepeople, ; ) were unsatisfied and subjugated, or it means feminism is being pushed.

      My view on the big picture is revolutions are guided while revolts are more likely to be grassroots (and soon squashed). My view on movements is much the same, once it gets to be big enough, it gets taken over in certain directions by popular people or those in authority. I see no difference between, for example, ‘skinny pants’ and the ‘free love’ movement, except the former can be delegated to being a fad and the latter as an era. Both were heavily pushed and both were made for cool people. Humans of most of the last century are very much altered by attrition, updated as one might update their software.

      Merchants of Cool (recommended)

      (Though, as a historical backdrop, I recommend) Century of Self

      Anyways, to finish on the divorce subject and that of women, I believe women should not just be relegated to the home but, at the same time, their roles as nurturers and care-givers should be held in higher esteem, as those very roles surely led to the survival of the species. Oops, that wasn’t exactly on divorce….let’s say marriage and divorce are matters of the law (many include the church, too), pieces of paper, if you will, but the foundation of it all is what is important, a sound structure upon which to build. The erosion of mores in society, together with technological advances, will alter everyone on grand scales (only it will happen little by little, not all at once).

      Also highly recommend the talk below, even though given in the 80s, it’s very relevant today…and no, it has not a thing to do with black helicopters and tin foil hats.

      Psychological Warfare Techniques. Subversion & Control of Western Society


  2. I am going to honest with you, I don’t really agree with that last statement. Marriage historically in all countries hasn’t been very supportive of women. It took my mom years to divorce in the U.S. and she was coming out of an abusive relationship. I also have another friend who is separated from her husband b/c he is a cocaine addict and now has a couple of warrants out for his arrest. He refuses to agree to the divorce and has been extremely abusive towards her. She doesn’t have a lot of money and is unable to sue for divorce at this time.

    To assume that everything in the relationship is hunky dory and that they just need to talk in person to work things out is very naive.

    In the end, I would rather have an easy divorce process than to have it cost an arm and leg or to have to continue to be in an abusive relationship b/c i don’t have the money to divorce. Even if my marriage isn’t an extreme case like that if the man doesn’t want to be with me then I don’t want to be with him. nuff said.

    btw i know i just got up on my soap box, but this topic, as you know from this comment, is very personal to me and has affected me and the people that I love.

    • Hi Sharshura,

      I think you were commenting while I was replying to a comment on the same topic. If you read my comment for Danielle here, you will see I refer to the foundation of marriage and not the legal aspect of it (or even the ease or difficulty of acting on the legality). I know that wasn’t so clear in my post, but I’ll point people to the comments section.

  3. In PA and NJ they do not let you divorce super quickly as safeguards have been put in place to stress the importance of marriage.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s