By SAM RUSSELL

Soviet divorce law in tangle —
people want something done

MOSCOW

ADICAL reform of Soviet
divorce laws is now being
actively discussed here as a
result of a growing feeling that
present laws and court prac-
tice have completely failed.

How extensive the problem
is it is difficult to discover, as
statistics are not available on
the number of divorces each
year. Even if statistics were
available, however, they would
give’ little idea of the size of
the problem, because faced
with the existing: tortuous
court procedure many people
just do not apply to the courts.

As a result many children
are born with the stigma of il-
legitimacy attached to them.
And while officially there is
no stigma, in fact on the birth
certificate of such a child the
space for the father’s name is
left blank; in fact, visiting the
sins of the fathers on the chil-
dren—if sin is there.

The existing divorce laws
originally provided that a mar-
riage could be dissolved if the
principles of “socialist moral-
ity” were contradicted by the
husband and wife discontinu-
ing to live together.

In practice, however, the
courts only grant a divorce
as a last resort, and even the
actual granting of the divorce
once the court had taken a de-
cision is put off interminably.

In 1949 the Supreme Court
of the USSR took a decision
which stated that courts were
granting divorces on insuffic-
ient grounds. And it instanced
a case where a court had
granted a divorce because the
husband, who was the petit-
ioner was no longer living
with his wife and was living
with another woman.

According to the Supreme
Court the granting of.a divorce
in this case was “contrary to
socialist morality.”

t 50 o

Such a situation is obvious-
ly ridiculous and_ discussing
the matter with ordinary peo-
ple I have found that strong
feeling exists that something
should be done to change the
situation.

The widespread discussion
of the matter has now found
its way into the columns of
the newspapers, and recently
a reporter of the Literary Ga-
zette carried out an extensive
investigation of the divorce
question. The paper also quotes
extracts from numerous let-
ters it has received on the
subject.

“I have talked with dozens
of judges, lawyers, procura-

tors, engineers and physicians,
workers and collective farm-
ers, people widely differing
in education and age,” reports
Vladimir Kiselev, of the Lit-
erary Gazette.

“And not one of them—not
a single one—agreed with our
present judicial divorce prac-
tice. Everyone without excep-
tion held that the situation
should be ‘changed.”

Present Soviet divorce prac-
tice provides for efforts to be
made to reconcile husband and
wife. It is now conceded, how-
ever, that by the time either
party applies for a divorce the
hope of reconciliation has long
disappeared and all that hap-
pens is that the agony is pro-
longed, often with disastrous
and tragic results for the

for nine years. He has a legal
wife with whom he only lived
for three months, but he is
unable to get a divorce.

“I have been living with
him for nine years,” the wom-
an writes, “and we have no
intention of parting. We have
two girls aged four and seven.
The elder, Larissa, received a
birth certificate with a blank
in answer to the question —
‘Father.’

“The younger girl still has
no birth certificate because I
do not want to take one in
which ‘Father’ is struck out
This is wrong in fact because
my children have a father and
he loves them very much.”

a 50s %

Some people have tried to
justify. the existing divorce

“ . . . Tragic for the people concerned and for the children.”

people concerned and for the
children.

And it appears that in all
too many cases the court con-
siders that its only duty is,
to use the official phrase, “to
incline the parties to recon-
ciliation’ — in a_ situation
where in most cases both par-
ties already hate the sight of
each other.

“In practice,” says the chair-
man of the Supreme Court of
the Ukrainian Republic, Peter
NoSshchenko, “it is rare’for a
husband and wife to become
reconciled after the case has
been heard in ocurt. Even
when finally the court refus-
es a divorce, the couple by
this time generally no longer
live together anyhow.

“Indeed, if husband and wife
do not love each other and
have acquired other families,
can they really be induced to
live together again by en-
treaties or court. hearings? My
personal opinion is that the ex-
isting marriage and divorce
legislation needs serious im-
provement.”

$e o ©

Here is a case which is ap-
parently typical of many oth-
ers. A woman writes that she
has been living with a man

practice by claiming that it
aims at preserving the family,
and that for the good of the
children every effort should
be made to prevent the break-
up of a marriage.

The facts ‘seem to show,
however, that in the Soviet
Union, as in Canada, children
suffer much more in a family
where the parents do not love
each other, where they fre-
quently quarrel and poison
the lives of their children.

Soviet lawyers and jurists
have many pressing problems
to sort out, particularly in the
field of criminal law and crim-
inal procedure.

Last February at the 20th
congress of the Soviet Commu-
nist party, President Vorosh-
ilov said: “A new criminal
code and a criminal proced-
ure have already been drafted;
their enactment will play an
important part in strengthen-
ing Socialist law and order
and safeguarding the rights of
citizens.” These drafts have
not yet been published.

It remains to be seen wheth-
er the lawyers and jurists will
be any quicker in responding
to the popular demand for a
reform of the divorce laws
and divorce procedure.

Prizewinning letters

Each week the Paci-
fic Tribune will present
a book to the writer of
the most interesting, en-
tertaining and. .,; topical
letter published on this
page. Contributors are
urged to keep their let-
ters to a reasonable
length.

Last week’s winner
was Norman Pritchard

of Courtenay, B.C.

Explanation wanted

B. WHEELDON, Squamish,
B.C.: Can anyone explain why
it is almost impossible here-
abouts to buy eggs not “pro-
duced in USA”.as evidenced
by a stamp or two or three on
every carton?

‘Is the Canadian farmer do-
ing so well he has not enough
to. meet the demand? Or so
poorly he has sold off-all his
chickens?

At 80 cents per dozen for
“large” there must be some
deep explanation.

Not only private domestic
sales of eggs are involved, but
the big mining companies such
as Britannia Mining and Smel-
ting who purchase in case lots
apparently prefer to do busi-
ness across the dollar curtain.

Perhaps someone cah throw
some light on this situation!

Overdone phrases

V. MORRIS, Toronto: Like
many another reader I was
amused, and enjoyed a good
healthy laugh by your review
of the American pamphlet
Lifeitselfmanship.

However I am. slightly
piqued by your. implication
that Canadians have added
nothing to the language of
the Left. As a matter of fact
when it comes to the fashion
word or phrase, we do not
need-to stand aside for any
other L’s. Like the followers
of Dior, we introduce a word
or phrase, display it every-
where, then like the Pink and
Black ties, discard it for some-
thing new. For example:

1954 season — “‘grass-roots.”

1955 season — “fresh winds.”

This was the season that
“perspective’’ was introduced.
But this little item, almost al-
ways incorrectly used (per-
spective is NOT prospects) is
promising to become a stable
one, and like the shirtmaker
frock,.is finding its way per-
manently into the wardrobe of
special words and phrases. So
popular is it, that it may even
outrank the “baby and the
bath water’ or the “omelet
with scrambled eggs.”

Now of course, it’s “healing
the split” and so lovingly does
this phrase roll off the tongue,
or from the end of a pen, that
it is no longer necessary to
add any ornaments. Starkly
it can stand alone, without
even adding the bustle “of
the labor movement.” Every
IL, knows what it means. I
suggest_ave offer a prize for
the first person who puts this
same thought in a fresh way.

BERT PADGHAM, ee

dale, B.C.: The rece!

som

election brought Ut “ay

very - interesting facts ie .
Fraser. Valley and expose ie
political bankruptey ©
two old-line parties an ihe
the failure of the COE ig
advantage of the ee
among the farmers a ‘f
Socred sellout policy ®
fects them. atti
The CCF and Liberal?
ran candidates in chill ihe
both of whom fled Big
Soviet Union to 58° iif
dom” in Cones ae
we u i
mice allem they arn iy
this did not teach i gt
only through struge. got
unity can farmers 2%, ¢ i
ers achieve conditions | acai!
Canadian economy * yor
of giving to every ™ atidt:
an and child in out saate va

gains

The Socred cand unl! |

also a victim of My id®
Thirties but he alS0 ll
learn from that st
trophe.

naidate*
All these ca i cks

ye"
fh i

united in their alee pew”
People’s Democrat? iyi}:

lics, of which they 2 cd

5 oN aa
little. In the 1S nai

so many new C4 2 We
this type have coe cat
Fraser Valley that peal a
dates made thelr nat it
votes to this ely F
their nazi-fascist idea” joht

fra
I believe the ere

that sent the socred cont

ed the people theY ; anal!
ceive a, $28 tax
ly even though thee so
idea of just how 9
would work The ®
into their hands J0% com,
to them, though of © pose!
will have to pay OP og i
that they will get per el sf
I am firmly convl y
if the CCF had Pt 180
same candidate the ep ‘i
1953 he would have © 7)
Socreds a really 1 get
and might have
which would B the
great victory for
labor movement —, gfalt«.
It is really a SAcg oly
affairs when the use!
date let himself bee do 4
certain interests "  y¢a
want the farmers and
and prefer disunity (ay iis
I hope that in the ealit® iy
he will come % 5 the i
need for unity aM? tell
mers and help pring
the B.C. Farmers the CO
not get caught 1% 1 grid
the Federation © — js tor
whose main func me! ig
vent the Hees
etting organlZ p-
ti take all the ore oe

the farmer gets ay
milk. jon is 0% Me
Another electin anitite gf

the work of OTB. fa

education among at they i ;

must go on SO dh
have a decent stand pel w
ing along with the
ers of B.C. cb

OCTOBER 26, 1956 — PACIFIC {TRIBUNE —

Election aftertholl 2