Like most websites we use cookies to improve your experience and provide us with anonymous visitor information. If you are happy with this use of cookies click OK.
Read more about our use of cookies and how you can switch off cookies in our Privacy Policy. [x] Close

Family Law Blog

Comment on divorce & family law 

Who’s at fault in Lenny divorce?

2 Comments

Comedy stars Dawn French and Lenny Henry have been granted a divorce on the grounds of his "unreasonable behaviour", various media outlets have reported this week.

Of course, all stories I have seen talk about the mythical “quickie” divorce as usual. I don’t think anyone wants to listen when we tell them that it simply doesn’t exist. Is there another way we can manage this message? Instead of fighting to get all people to use the right terminology, should we instead start using the tabloid phrasing ourselves? At least clients will then see that it is an option for all and still takes a set amount of time. The ill-advised wording simply means that both sides have agreed not to dispute the divorce, which keeps the time needed down to a minimum. The wheels of the law still turn at the same rate, celebrity or not.

Dawn and Lenny announced their separation in April after 25 years of marriage. They said it was amicable and have since, quite recently, been on holiday together with their adopted daughter.
However, because of the way our family law is set up, despite what appears to be a very grown-up relationship between the estranged lovers that should service as an example to many on how to behave, the reason given for the divorce was Lenny’s “unreasonable behaviour”. A reason has to be given in divorce papers. Blame has to be apportioned. So despite the couple seeming to manage the situation well between them and continue to be good parents to their daughter, to the outside observer, it is all Lenny’s fault.

Privately, couples will always apportion blame, but is it not time for the law to change so that it doesn’t have to be done publically? It can only cause acrimony. There are obviously no details of the “unreasonable behaviour”. I would suggest that most people might think back to allegations in the newspapers in 1999 when he is said to have spent the night in the hotel room of a blonde companion. Some people may even think it relates to the quality of the jokes he tells. Whatever the reason, it lays the fault of the marriage failure squarely at Lenny’s door, rightly or wrongly.

I believe, with a new coalition Government in power and review of the family justice system ongoing, now is the right time to look at introducing a “no fault” divorce. Only by having such an option in place can we take some of the sting out of the divorce process and help diffuse potentially volatile situations before they come to a head.


Andrew Woolley
Divorce Solicitor

Comments

Loading comments...

I totally agree. In my experience, even where the split is agreed, the decision on who is divorcing who and on what grounds can cause friction where there was little before! I wold prefer a wording and system which supports personal responsibility, even when there are “grounds”. A simple one like “I’ve changed my mind”, or “I made a mistake” should suffice?...

By Liz Sparkes on Wednesday November 3, 2010

Liz
I think you are right, although I do understand the concern of those who think divorce is already too easy and can be sought on a whim. But in reality, I cannot recall any client being told they cannot get a divorce in over 25 years of my work in this area of law! So, divorce is surely being given “upon request” already. If that is so, I find it hard to see why the law should make people drag up unpleasant details….

By Andrew Woolley on Tuesday November 9, 2010

What do you think?


Have your say

Comment



Receive your FREE guide

Your free guide will be available to download immediately and a copy sent by email. Your email address will not be used to send any further correspondence without your permission.