Read
about a divorce with a pending dispute, the former is in these modern
times one in a dozen, run of the mill daily occurrence. The latter
part, however, is quite unusual, at least something I have never heard
of, except maybe in or as a joke. As one of the conditions of the
divorce, the husband asked for his kidney back, which in 2001 he had
donated to the wife or she would likely have died. If the kidney is not
returned, he asked for 1 million Euro.
He declared that he make this demand because he was fed up with the jiggery-pokery on her part and that of her lawyers. Purely for the stigma of being a man, he is not allowed to see his 3 children more than once every few months. That the kidney he had given for love and to save her life, but merely 18 months later the wife had hooked up with a lover. Even so, his lawyer offers him no hope of recuperating his kidney nor even sure about the million Euro.
I don't find this demand too disproportionate. It's to be presumed that the 2 of them are not going to be put on the operation tables again to take out the kidney from her and put back in him. Seeing that today in a divorce case one disputes who gets what even up to the last teacup, it doesn't seem unreasonable that a kidney should be put on one of the plates of the scale, if into both parts are already the car, the 3-piece suite and the summer apartment. Of course, one can argue that a kidney is a gift while the TV set or the coffee pot is not.
Maybe the marriage pre-agreement should be made legal and compulsory, and stating too that in the case of the donation of a body organ, it should be entered legally into the agreement as patrimony like the family home! Not all that long ago, people looked at such pre-marriage agreements with distaste; now it's almost a requirement like part of the marriage certificate.
What about the much practised custom of authors who often dedicate their books to their beloved wife/husband/a special friend? Months or years later, separated, divorced or now strangers or enemies, the dedication still stays forever to show the once upon a time love or friendship, but now the void of affection that never truly was but forever mocks. More so if the void is a hole where was the kidney, once part of you, palpating with your love for another human being that you had considered part of you too.
If one can't trust another with material stuff like a piece of furniture or a painting, why trust him/her with your heart and your love to begin with?
- Current Mood:
Contemplative
No comments:
Post a Comment