Examining Injustice in Alimony Laws on Examples of Divorce Cases in Quebec

In Canada, the first ever official divorce laws were adopted in 1960. Back then, marriage was the norm for couples. However, nowadays, couples tend not to get married and opt for common law unions. Despite this situation, spousal support laws haven’t been changed. This essay will demonstrate that the current alimony laws in Quebec are not fair, based on empiricism. The pay gap between men and women and the current legislation will be discussed, and for the purposes of this discussion, divorce cases in Quebec will be looked at.

First, women currently earn less than men. In 2008, the Average Total Income for men was $39,600. 00 and, in comparison, only $28,500. 00 for women (Statistics Canada). Moreover, in 2016, the median total income of tax filers with total income for men was $40,980. 00. In contrast, the medial total income of women that year was $29,210. 00 (Statistics Canada). These two statistics illustrate that there is still a drastic pay gap between men and women. Thus, in a heterosexual union, whether the couple is married or not, the woman doesn’t make as much as the man. If the couple separates, the woman is disadvantaged, as she makes less on her own than her ex-partner does. Second, current divorce laws do not offer protection for de facto unions. [Justifications] With regard to the information above, this argument is based on empiricism, because it built on the observation of a situation.

Empiricism presents many positive aspects. For one, it enables a way to justify information and knowledge. It is also highly reliable, as it is based on sense perception, which generally isn’t false. However, while it provides many upsides, the knowledge theory doesn’t come without flaws; scientific theories and laws evolve, and observations and data can be interpreted differently based on who interprets them. Thus, this makes the discussion of whether or not the alimony laws are fair up to interpretation on some degree; while one could argue that they aren’t fair since they don’t offer de facto couples protection, another could argue that they are fair since they offer de facto couples protection, in a way. !1Does the teacher want us to print the grid Despite the possible flaws in the argument, it is imperative to question the current alimony laws in Quebec, as more and more people are in a de facto union instead of a marriage. “Today, first unions among Canadian couples are more likely to be co-habitations rather than marriages. […] In 2016, 39. 9 % of couples in Quebec were common- law couples. [. . . ] Under the Civil Code in Quebec, common-law relationships are not recognized as they are in other provinces’’ (The Canadian Encyclopedia). Thus, the current number of de facto unions is not negligible, and, according to the current trend, it should continue to increase as time goes on. In addition, the high-profile divorce case of Eric and Lola recently made headlines in Quebec. After asking for spousal support to multiple court hierarchies in Quebec and in Canada, Lola was denied spousal support as she was not married to her ex-spouse (Informelle).

Therefore, the questioning of the current alimony laws in Quebec is quite relevant in the current socio-economic context. In conclusion, since women currently earn less than men, current divorce laws do not offer protection for de facto unions, the number of de facto unions is high in Quebec, then the current alimony laws in Quebec are not fair, based on empiricism, which is what the above points are based on. Perhaps the spousal support laws should include protection for de facto unions, as they are becoming more and more popular, or the government could investigate onto why people prefer to form common-law unions instead of marriages and revaluate.