Debate on Legalizing Divorce in the Philippines

Resolution: Should the Philippines legalize divorce?

Affirmative Side (Pro-Divorce)

Point 1: Individual Rights and Freedom

● Argument: Every individual has the right to happiness and personal freedom. Forcing
people to stay in unhappy, toxic, or even abusive marriages denies them this right.
● Supporting Facts: According to global studies, countries with divorce laws allow
individuals to escape harmful relationships, leading to improved mental and emotional
well-being.
● Counterargument: Commitment means standing by one another, even during difficult
times. Marriages require dedication, patience, and resilience. Counseling and open
communication can help resolve issues.
● Rebuttal: While commitment is important, staying in an unhappy marriage can lead to
declining mental health, resentment, and even domestic violence. Divorce offers a legal
remedy for irreconcilable differences and abusive relationships.

Point 2: Impact on Children

● Argument: Children thrive in a stable and secure environment. Divorce allows children
to escape toxic households filled with constant conflict, benefiting their long-term well-
being.
● Supporting Facts: Research (Amato & Keith, 1991; Amato & Booth, 1997) suggests
that children from highly conflicted marriages suffer more psychological distress than
those from divorced households.
● Counterargument: Children need both parents for guidance and stability. Divorce can
create emotional trauma, economic instability, and broken family ties.
● Rebuttal: While divorce is difficult, a hostile home environment is even worse for a
child’s development. A peaceful, separated family is better than a household filled with
conflict and tension.

Point 3: Societal Stability

● Argument: Divorce does not weaken society but instead allows for healthier family
structures. People can remarry and find relationships that foster love, respect, and
stability.
● Supporting Facts: In many developed nations, divorce has led to increased social
mobility, economic independence, and reduced domestic violence cases.
 ● Counterargument: Legalizing divorce might encourage an easy way out, leading to
higher separation rates and a breakdown of traditional family values.
● Rebuttal: Divorce does not destroy family values but rather protects individuals from
being trapped in broken and harmful marriages. The choice to leave a toxic relationship
should be available.

Negative Side (Anti-Divorce)

Point 1: Commitment and Responsibility

● Argument: Marriage demands dedication, patience, and resilience. Difficulties should

be resolved through reconciliation, not separation.
● Supporting Facts: Marriage counseling has a high success rate. The American
Association of Marriage and Family Therapists reports that 70% of couples experience
improved relationships after therapy.
● Counterargument: Forcing individuals to stay in unhappy marriages leads to
resentment, declining mental health, and emotional suffering.
● Rebuttal: Unhappiness is often temporary. Facing struggles together fosters personal
growth and stronger emotional bonds. Divorce should be a last resort, not an immediate
solution.

Point 2: Impact on Children

● Argument: A stable family is crucial for a child's development. Divorce disrupts routines,
education, and emotional well-being, leading to long-term negative effects.
● Supporting Facts: Studies show that children from intact families generally perform
better academically and socially (Amato, 2001). Children from divorced families are
more likely to suffer from emotional distress, poor academic performance, and
behavioral problems.
● Counterargument: A child growing up in a conflict-ridden household suffers more than
one from a peacefully separated family.
● Rebuttal: Divorce often introduces additional instability, divided parental attention, and
emotional strain. Counseling and mediation can help resolve conflicts while maintaining
family unity.

Point 3: Societal Consequences

● Argument: Legalizing divorce could increase separation rates, weaken familial bonds,
and create instability in communities.
● Supporting Facts: The Manila Bulletin (2017) reported that in the U.S., divorce rates
doubled from 20% to 45% between 1960 and 2000. Widespread divorce leads to a
weakened sense of commitment and responsibility in relationships.
● Counterargument: Divorce allows individuals to leave unhealthy relationships, creating
happier and more stable families in the long run.
 ● Rebuttal: The accessibility of divorce may make people less careful in choosing their
spouses and less committed to resolving marital problems. Societies with high divorce
rates often experience increased poverty, depression, and crime.

Key Debate Questions

1. Would legalizing divorce make it easier for people to abandon their responsibilities
instead of working on their marriage?
2. How can we claim to value the sanctity of marriage while encouraging couples to treat
divorce as a convenient solution?
3. If counseling and support can help couples navigate challenges, why should we legalize
something that discourages perseverance?
4. Can the other side guarantee that legalizing divorce won’t lead to higher separation rates
and fractured families?
5. Are we truly prepared to normalize a society where marriage is disposable and
commitment means nothing?

Conclusion
The debate on divorce in the Philippines is deeply rooted in cultural, religious, and societal
values. While proponents argue that it provides a necessary escape from toxic relationships,
opponents highlight its potential to erode commitment and stability. The key question remains:
Should the state prioritize individual freedom and well-being, or uphold the traditional sanctity of
marriage at all costs?

Final Thought: The Philippines remains one of the only countries without divorce. Is this a
safeguard against marital instability, or a denial of personal freedom?