Marry me or be a father

B

BB-Leo

Guest
681750-pregnant.jpg


Marry me or be a father


July 11, 2011


A MAN whose girlfriend refused to terminate her pregnancy unless they got married has been granted a divorce - because he was "under duress" when he agreed to wed.


The couple, who cannot be named, were in an on-off relationship for six years, and lived together for six months.
The Family Court heard the man had told his girlfriend last year he wanted to break up because "he did not want a serious relationship" - only to discover she was pregnant.
He said his girlfriend had terminated pregnancies before as neither wanted to have a baby. But this time she told him: "I'm possibly not going to terminate the pregnancy unless you marry me."
He told the court she said to him: "We were meant for each other and I want to make sure that you don't leave me again."
"(I said) to her, 'I don't want to get married' and she replied, 'Well I'm not terminating the pregnancy unless we get married'," the man added.
They wed two months later, with the man telling the court: "I only consented to that marriage because I felt I had no other choice. I say that, but for the fact that (she) would not terminate her pregnancy unless I married her, I would never have married her.

"I felt therefore there was nothing I could do but to marry her to ensure she undertook the termination."
His wife had the abortion a short time later, but the pair soon split up.
The man told the court that neither he nor his ex-partner had told their parents of their marriage and they had only two witnesses at the civil ceremony.
The court heard that, in a telephone call with his wife shortly after their split, the man said - "you know I didn't want to get married but you pressured me" - to which she replied: "I'm sorry, I never really intended it to be that way."
In seeking a divorce after less than year of marriage, the man referred to a part in the Marriage Act that states the union "is void in circumstances where the consent of either (person) is not a consent freely given as it was obtained under duress".
The woman did not give evidence in the matter.
In his decision, Justice Peter Rose said: "With some hesitation, I have concluded duress has been established by the husband due to the unchallenged facts which led to him entering into the marriage."

 
Back
Top