RSS slams live-in relationships, says it is against humanity

[beetle]

Women themselves play a crucial role when it comes to property settlements. For one, they do not themselves believe that they deserve a part in the property event though the law is clearly on their side and two, the mothers and mothers in laws usually favor the male children themselves no matter how much they themselves suffered because of the bias. It's a tradition that women love to carry forward. If women really want, they can get rid of it.

sad but true....

[beetle]

For Indian women, divorce is still a raw deal Much has been written about divorce being on the rise in India, sometimes accompanied by hand-wringing about the egos and inflexibility of younger couples, who seem less willing than their parents to stay in marriages they are not happy with. National statistics don't exist on divorce in India, but some local records do show a rise. Still, some experts say the divorce rate in India continues to be artificially low, because of how biased the system is against women, who can be left financially destitute even if their husband is wealthy. "Divorce rates have not increased as much as they should have," said Kirti Singh, who practices family and property law in India. The government is likely to consider a proposal later this week to amend the existing marriage laws in India. The amendment seeks to introduce the irretrievable breakdown of marriage, as a basis for couples to seek divorce. It also proposes to waive or reduce the "cooling-off period," or mandatory waiting period before divorce can be granted, which can be six to 18 months. The Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill 2010 was first introduced in the upper house of Parliament, or Rajya Sabha, in August 2010. Ms. Singh, who says she has fought "thousands" of divorce cases in her 31-year career, is part of a group that proposes even more significant changes to India's marital laws, including the introduction of a new legislation which will give women the right to marital property. If this legislation is passed, "women will become equal owners of property," she said. "Within the existing system there is no such option for women." Women in India stay in failing marriages for many reasons, Ms. Singh said. Most of these emanate from the social and financial pressures that divorced women are left to face. The courts can take several years to settle a case and often women cannot afford the several rounds of litigation involved. Even if a woman does go to the court, in most cases it is an "uneven fight" between a man and a woman, she said. "Men have more access" to the legal system in India, Ms. Singh said. Under the Indian legal system, a separation or divorce entitles a woman to "maintenance" from her spouse, in the form of financial support. The amount requires authorization from a court and is based on the income of the man. But it is the woman who has to produce evidence of her spouse's earnings before the court. In India, where tax authorities estimate just 3 per cent of the population pays personal income tax and "black money" or under-the-table cash is common, the man's actual earnings are often hidden, Ms. Singh says. Additionally, the wife may not have access to documents that prove what her husband earns, Ms. Singh says. Even if she does, the maintenance amounts are tiny. Citing courtroom experience, Ms. Singh says judges generally fix a share of 2 per cent to 10 per cent of the husband's annual earnings for maintenance amounts. When a woman leaves a marriage, unless she is very well to do, "there is very little left to her," to be able to sustain herself, Ms. Singh notes. The property goes to the person in whose name it is, and in most cases assets are in the name of a man, she points out. While most recent media reports have focused on changing social values behind most divorces, a study authored by Ms. Singh to be published later this year finds more than 80 per cent of the more than 400 separated or divorced women surveyed blame "cruelty or domestic violence in their marital homes," for their split. Two-thirds of the women surveyed suffered from physical violence. The most common reasons for domestic violence were "dowry demands, extra-marital affairs or a second marriage of the spouse and the suspicious nature of the spouse," the report states. The violence took place even though 87.92 per cent of the women lived in extended families. The study, called "The Economic Rights & Entitlements of Separated and Divorced Women India," was conducted by a team of researchers, women's rights activists and lawyers, for the Economic Research Foundation of India between October 2008 and September 2009 and will be published later this year. It surveyed 405 Indian women who were either separated or divorced or deserted. The women were randomly selected from cities, towns and villages in north, east, south and west of India in an attempt to understand what happens to women when marriages fail. Most women surveyed "did not want a divorce even if they have faced violence in their marital homes as they feel both financially and socially insecure outside the marriage," the study finds. A large number of women "live at the mercy of their husbands during the subsistence of marriage" and even after a separation or divorce they are financially dependent on their natal family, the report states. The study points out: "Not giving a divorce is also the only tool that separated women have to negotiate terms of settlement with their spouse as their legal rights are insignificant." This is corroborated by the statistic, which shows that only 73 out of 405, or 18 per cent women surveyed were divorced while 81.7 per cent were separated. In more than 60 per cent of the cases, women claimed that marriage affected their career opportunities, because they either could not work after marriage or were able to work in a limited capacity. In about 85 per cent of the cases, separated women "bear the burden of looking after their children single-handed." http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/for-indian-women-divorce-is-still-a-raw-deal-189116?pfrom=home-topstories

[ViruRulez]

lol @ people getting excited about these new rulings... I am seeing a divorce case in India very closely and trust me, women HAVE NO POWER in Indian court. They cant get property as its not on husbandÃÔ name in Indian families, guy can just disown kids and never pay any child support and claim he is poor when his family has hospitals and he is a millionaire. Poor woman has to prove everything.. there is no justice and its all ****ed up so bad that one cant even imagine. The husband can decide not to show up in the court and when he does then his lawyers can claim that everything he owns is actually his mummyÃÔ .. records can be changed overnight, judges can be bribed .. its all BS. I hate to say this but I would never want to live in a country where people cant even trust the courts

I understand what you are referring to. So, that is not yet resolved? Agree about the change of proof and other things. But then there is a difference between a normal lady and a gold digger which is what DomainK etc. were referring to. In a socially conservative country like India, a lot of the live-in partners (female) are gold diggers and it is quite well known. So, it was such things that we were referring to. To be honest, India is sadly wrong at many levels. In some classes and especially for someone with some amount of power and political or high society backing it will be easy to change the cases in their favor. But at the same time, there are a lot of false cases too from girl's end at times in modern times. In India, you can hardly trust anyone be it govt., courts, news channels or anybody else. The more I realize, the more I keep on realizing that India is "perhaps not so mahaan". The public would never change too and so, this sh!t will continue forever it seems. I seriously doubt even Gandhiji would have been able to change India in today's date. The malaise spread in the Indian fabric is far too deep to be cured.

True....and it is even sadder that women rarely get any part of the father's property.(Although they legally can) Specially in families with children of both sexes....it is always the son who is considered the real heir to property.If the daughter asks for it... it is almost like she is being a rebel or breaking tradition. Often the reasoning is that the family gives dowry to the girl but in most cases it does not belong to the girl.The expenses in a girl's marriage is also considered to be the equalizer but a guy's wedding costs the same. Most of these problems are also because of joint families and joint property.A woman who marries into a joint family is lost as a person for most of her life.It is only when she become the "saas " does she have some place in the family.

Do not agree with your point there. It depends on families. Hardly have I seen any family in my relatives where the girl has got no share at all. At times, it is more share for the boys compared to the girls (which is also what I am against) but share of property for all children has always been there in most Indian families from what I have seen in my family genealogy. To be honest, even dowry is not a big problem and I have never seen any dowry demand in anywhere in my family genealogy including distant relatives and neighbors etc. Even the 1-2 children limited family has been there at least in the post 60s generation in almost all my relatives and so, the girl's share is also quite fair enough. So, that depends on families and upbringing and ethic behavior of parents rather than anything else. If a boy demands full property without sharing with his sister, then he would be disowned by his parents as well as relatives in our family genealogy. :giggle: It is both the parents' as well as brother's/boy's ethic duties to make sure the property is equally shared among all offsprings and no partiality is done to boys. And it is also important for parents not to give to any "demand of dowry" as that would make them feel their daughters to be a burden and that might initiate such biased feelings. Though I am a near atheist but to be honest, equal property rights for daughter and not giving in to dowry demands or for that matter not letting any dowry system prevail is one good thing in my religion Islam. I am not that religious but it is one thing which I appreciate. Dowry or inequality in terms of distribution of property is quite less in Muslims. But at least in my family genealogy to be honest, females have always been considered to be equals and far more open thinking by Indian standards. Yes, there might be some minimal bias towards the boy in one of two families but overall it is quite fair compared to the rest of India. Especially North India needs to do a lot in terms of fixing up dowry issues (end it forever including the Marwaris, Baniyas, Gujjus etc. too where it is massively prevalent) and also make sure equal rights to property are given to all offsprings.

[ViruRulez]

Women themselves play a crucial role when it comes to property settlements. For one, they do not themselves believe that they deserve a part in the property event though the law is clearly on their side and two, the mothers and mothers in laws usually favor the male children themselves no matter how much they themselves suffered because of the bias. It's a tradition that women love to carry forward. If women really want, they can get rid of it.

AFAIK legally a women can get a share of the property. It is definitely not the case with the whole of India. In some parts of India, there are also cases where women are the legal owners of any family property and men do the support stuff. :giggle: Jokes apart, if there is any such hypocrisy then women must end as legally it is allowed for them to get a share of the family property. At the same time, the dowry system prevailing quite openly in some parts of India must also be abandoned forever.

[beetle]

@viru rulez In most hindu families as far as I know ...woman generally are not considered heirs to property.They are now legally allowed to ask for it but it is not common and it is not considered `good'. We( my community) don't have a dowry system and no self respecting man or his family asks for it but when it comes to property...the boy is considered the heir to the immovable property.The girls may get other stuff but property is always seen as the sons right.So daughters get nothing other than a fairly liberal(in comparison to some other parts of India)upbringing .I have seen a few daughters ask for and get their share but I have seen how people roll their eyes when they talk about these`daughters'.Almost like they are bhai ki dushmam. To be fair...I have seen families now changing.Some families with both sons and daughters are making sure that the sons know their sisters are also going to get a part of the property.

[Prakat]

Absolutely, beetle. Even in my mother's side which had a brother and six sisters, the family property was divided between the seven equally after my grandfather died. All seven of them were well educated and had made their own fortunes and didn't really need it but it was done because my grandpa felt it was only the right thing to do.

[Tiger80]

@viru rulez In most hindu families as far as I know ...woman generally are not considered heirs to property.They are now legally allowed to ask for it but it is not common and it is not considered `good'. We( my community) don't have a dowry system and no self respecting man or his family asks for it but when it comes to property...the boy is considered the heir to the immovable property.The girls may get other stuff but property is always seen as the sons right.So daughters get nothing other than a fairly liberal(in comparison to some other parts of India)upbringing .I have seen a few daughters ask for and get their share but I have seen how people roll their eyes when they talk about these`daughters'.Almost like they are bhai ki dushmam. To be fair...I have seen families now changing.Some families with both sons and daughters are making sure that the sons know their sisters are also going to get a part of the property.

In majority of families it is the sons take care of parents.In most of cases they inherit property when they are in 40s or 50s.In many business Families if the father's health is not well ,then elder son is asked to join business immediately ,sometimes even leaving the studies.Also a sons income is considered as the income of family,they are expected to contribute in every expense of family and even pay the loans that father had taken,contribute towards dowry and marriage expenses of sister .So in these cases it is fair that sons inherit property.