For over a hundred years, the separation time in Norway has been the same – NRK Trøndelag
As “Mari” and “Tom” chose to separate seven years ago, it was the consideration of the daughter that came first.
She would not have to move from one to the other.
– We shared an address for two years after the separation. The best thing for her was to move in and out of the same place, says «Mari». She and her ex-husband has told his story in the NRK podcast “Accident Commission”.
But this choice also led to the couple getting a lengthy divorce. In Norway, the rules are such that you must live separately for a whole year before a divorce is granted.
In addition, you must have two witnesses who confirm this.
– I think the rules on separation time are an over-custodial act. It is perfectly fine to have such a period, but it is not as simple as living apart from each other all the time. I don’t understand why the law has to dictate on such a level, says “Mary”.
Same wording for 100 years
The law we are dealing with dates from 1909. It was indeed renegotiated in the 70s and 80s. Until then, the time of separation was on to years if the parties were not single.
So far, two committees must have set the law on marriage from the early 20th century: Once in 1957, and a new committee set up in 1971.
In other words, there has been little discussion around the theme in Norway.
– It is a detailed management of private life by the state, and one might wonder if it is an unnecessarily strong intervention in the right to privacy. It may be time for a debate about whether it is proportionate to demand separation for a year, says lawyer Marianne Berg to NRK.
The wording when it comes to separation is roughly the same today as it was 100 years ago:
Why is it that the state interferes in our love life?
Social anthropologist Torgeir Kolshus at Oslo Met tries to explain.
The family as the nucleus of society
– There are many reasons, and some of them are historical, he says.
Kolshus explains that the family is in many ways regarded as the nucleus of society. And that the modern state is concerned with creating a form of community within its borders.
– It appears almost like a kinship system – a link to the metaphorical aspect of kinship, that you and I belong together because we are Norwegians. And again in this kinship, one of the important building blocks is precisely the family.
The professor explains that this is therefore important on an identity level. For good stability.
There are also other advantages to being a gift, compared to just being cohabitants: You save a good deal of money in the form of tax, among other things.
– Being together two by two is something the state thinks is good for us, says Kolshus.
However, he does not think it is so nice if someone feels that the rules for separation and divorce are well invasive.
Consideration for the children
But a lot is about taking care of the little ones, explains the professor. Those who have a child together have to put up with one yet greater intervention by the state than others.
– Those who are gifted and have a child, for example, must go through mediation. This can certainly seem quite invasive to some.
Because what does a wild stranger have to do with us not being able to live together anymore?
The answer to this is simply that you have to make sure that it works and cooperate with the children.
You will share this responsibility for the rest of your life, explains Kolshus.
– Detailed management
Marianne Berg is a lawyer, and helps many who want to stand out.
She says that it must be required to live apart, can be good. Many experience being “a little back and forth” in such a situation.
– For reasons of stability around and family relationships, one might think that it is important to participate in the time you need to be sure that divorce is the right solution.
But she also believes that this is detailed management on the part of the state. She is unsure whether intervention can be legitimized.
Risks prison sentence
– After all, it is a right to privacy that stands strong in both Norwegian and international law, and there must therefore be very good reasons to deviate from this right. Here, I probably don’t think there is a strong enough reason from the state’s side.
Berg says that this rule that two witnesses must confirm that the separated couple really lived apart for a year is special.
– I think the obligation to testify is a big invasion of privacy.
According to the witness statement, the witnesses risk punishment in the form of imprisonment for up to a year if they testify falsely.
– There is therefore a great responsibility on the witnesses, which I think is disproportionately burdensome.
The lawyer believes that it should be enough for the spouses themselves to declare that they have been effectively separated for one year, or that they have been in an actual breakup for two years.
A single tap
There are big differences in laws and regulations when it comes to divorce in the Nordics.
In Denmark, you can e.g. just open the computer to press a button. As long as both parties are single, you almost get divorced on the same day.
It is also much easier in Sweden and Finland than in Norway.
If this «button» had existed in Norway, would «Tom» and «Mari» have used it?
– We were in no hurry to part, but for those who actually want to move on in life, it is something about this that others have to decide what is right for the individual. I think that’s nice, says «Mari».
In Norway, approximately 20,000 couples marry each year – half of them divorce. So, in the course of a year, approximately 10,000 couples are in this somewhat complicated period of separation.