Married couples should be able to access "no fault divorce" to allow them to break up without "throwing mud" at each other, a Tory MP has suggested.
Richard Bacon moved a new motion in the Commons to add the measure to family law, telling MPs his proposal would take longer than a "quickie divorce" currently available but would be much less acrimonious.
Mr Bacon's No Fault Divorce Bill was opposed by fellow Tory Sir Edward Leigh, who told the Commons similar laws in other developed nations drove up divorce rates.
Moving a 10-minute rule motion, South Norfolk MP Mr Bacon said: "I do not wish to make divorce easier because I do not think divorce should be easy.
"Currently one can get divorced in just five months - so what is called quickie divorce is already available. A couple wishing to take advantage of my proposal would take somewhat but not inordinately longer to get divorced, probably one year, but without any requirement to throw mud at each other as is currently the case.
"And with more time for reflection on whether divorce is what they really wanted for themselves and for their children."
Mr Bacon said divorce was a "tragedy" which should not be encouraged.
But he added: "The previous legislation, however well intentioned, was trying to accomplish too much.
"I propose one simple amendment to the law - the option of divorce without blame - where a petitioner who wished to do so, rather than offering the court one of the five facts currently required of adultery, unreasonable behaviour, desertion etc, could instead satisfy a court a marriage had broken down irretrievably with a sixth fact.
"Namely, when both parties to a marriage both separately had signed a declaration the marriage had broken down irretrievably."
Gainsborough MP Sir Edward said: "If it were merely a matter of allowing a few occasions of obvious breakdown to be done more quickly, cheaply, less destructively, there's very few people who would oppose that idea.
"But while that is what you seek to achieve very honourably, that is not the sole impact of no fault divorce. Unfortunately, all the available evidence points to the introduction of no fault divorce having a large, widespread and demonstrable effect on the societies in which it has been introduced.
"Bringing in no fault divorce while seeking to ameliorate one problem... would make divorce easier and thus increasing the number of divorces. That's the crucial point."
Mr Bacon's Bill was accepted at first reading by MPs but is unlikely to become law in its current form.
Legal firms welcomed Mr Bacon's Bill.
Sarah Thompson, a divorce lawyer at Slater and Gordon, said: "It takes two to make a marriage but only one to break it.
"However, most family lawyers and judges will tell you that the end of a marriage is nearly always 'six of one half a dozen of the other'."
She added: "The proposal that couples can get divorced without blaming the other and without waiting two years to do so should reduce the level of animosity that can be present even with the most sensitively-drafted unreasonable behaviour petitions."
Head of family law at Co-Operative Legal Services Sam Hickman said: "In a society that encourages mediation and putting the needs of children first, it can only be counter-productive to have a system that is based on finding fault.
"It's more important now than ever that individuals are able to mutually divorce without one party having to take the blame."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel