Authored By: Christopher Pearsall, RI Divorce Attorney
a.k.a. " The Rhode Island Divorce Coach ℠ "
A Woman Sues Two Solicitor Firms in the UK for Not Explaining to Her that a Divorce Would End her Marriage?
See the Article at http://dailym.ai/1cdIo6r
Attorney Pearsall's Insights into Society and Marriage in this Case
No, we don't live in a litigious society! We live in a world of looney toons!
Just when I thought I'd seen it all this article was commented about on Linkedin. Questions ran through my head to try to explain away what seems on it's surface to be an absurdity. How old is the woman? Has she been sheltered? What is her level of education? Is she mentally challenged, handicapped, or learning impaired?
If none of these things apply and there is nothing to explain away, at least in my mind, the lack of comprehension about divorce, then what would cause any person not to know that a divorce by it's definition and even it's typical meaning in society is and probably always has been the termination of a marriage.
If anyone runs across anything that could possibly explain this, please let me know. I understand that some people may be sheltered but could it be that this woman never even heard the word "divorce" before or knew what a "divorce" was?
The comments further down in the article about other strange divorces aren't so far out of reality that one can't understand the oddities of some people. I have even seen a case regarding the issue of the toothpaste tube mentioned in the article. As strange as it may be, I can still even comprehend that. But this.... Catholic or not, we are not priests to counsel people on whether they choose to go against the tenets of their own beliefs. We may respect the manner in which things should be done when the client brings those avenues to light because of their own concerns that they discuss with the lawyer or solicitor, but ultimately the person's / client's decision is their own.
If this woman was so "lost" for lack of a better term that she didn't understand what divorce is, then wouldn't it be better to re-marry the man she divorced if both he and she did not want the divorce. Or might it not have been better rather than blaming the solicitors for her own ignorance on a subject that has been known by even young children to ask the court to nullify the divorce decree. It is a rarity I agree, but no more so than trying to blame solicitors for something fundamental to the very definition of divorce.
If you see it this way Ms. Mulcahey, two wrongs do not make a right! Nor does the possible availability of a legal separation as a legal mechanism mean that you have actually abided by your religious standards because you have not chosen a legal route which terminates the marriage.
If Ms. Mulcahey believes this to be so, she makes a distinction without a difference yet blames the Solicitors in her case just the same.