This is another case when a marriage has been declared a nullity on the ground of psychological incapacity arising from serious personality disorder pursuant to Article 36 of the Family Code. This case once more emphasizes that in declaring a nullity of marriage pursuant to this article, the court is not demolishing the foundation of families, but is actually protecting the sanctity of marriage because it refuses to allow a person afflicted with psychological disorder, who cannot comply with or assume the essential marital obligations, from remaining in that sacred bond. This is the case of Nita and Rod. One of the issues raised here is whether it is necessary for the psychological expert to personally examine the spouse afflicted with personality disorder before she can competently testify on the said spouse’s psychological incapacity.
Nita was the eldest of five siblings whose parents had very limited education. As the eldest her parents expected her to be the role model of the younger siblings so she had been restricted and sometimes physically punished to toe the line. Hence she developed a growing resentment towards her father and had a growing obsession to leave the family at the first opportunity. It was at this time in her life at age 23 when Rod came along.
Rod on the other hand was 28 years old and the third among five boys. His father who was perceived to be weak and his two older brothers were working as seamen. He was always available to his mother’s needs so he became an easy prey engulfed into her system. The relationship was symbiotic that led to a prolonged and abnormal dependence on his mother who became his role model for being the stronger and dominant parent. The reversal of roles however became confusing as it led to ambivalence on the part of Rod regarding his identity, and grave dependence on his mother.
And so one and a half months after their first meeting, Nita and Rod got married. After their marriage, it was Rod’s mother who got a room for them near Rod’s family home and it was his mother who paid the monthly rentals. Nita was the one working while Rod never bothered to look for a job despite obtaining a degree in computer science and instead always asked his mother for financial assistance. Nita constantly encouraged him to look for a job but he invariably had excuses like being overage for the job and having no clothes and shoes to wear. When Nita tried to inspire him by buying shoes and clothes for him to wear in job interviews, Rod finally told her later on that he already found a job. After some weeks however, Nita learned that Rod didn’t actually get a job and just went to his mother who gave him his supposed salary. When confronted about the matter, Rod cried like a child and told her he did it only so that Nita would stop nagging him. Nita found that Rod was so dependent on his mother such that all his decisions and attitudes in life should be in conformity with those of his mother.
Then also, every time Rod would get drunk he became physically violent towards her. They only had sex once a month and she never enjoyed it. When they discussed about it Rod would always say that sex was sacred and should never be enjoyed or abused. He also did not want them to have a child because he was not yet ready. And when he requested Rod to move to another place than live near his parents, Rod did not agree. Because of this Nita was forced to leave their residence and see if he will follow her. But he did not.
Hence after four years of marriage Nita filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code. At the hearing where Rod did not appear and filed an answer and after finding there was no collusion between the parties, Nita’s testimony as above set forth was corroborated by Rod’s first cousin. Nita also presented a psychiatrist who testified about the psychological capacity of Nita and the psychological incapacity of Rod to perform his marital duties and responsibilities. The psychiatrist concluded that Rod was suffering from Dependent Personality Disorder associated with severe inadequacy related to masculine strivings.
Based on the totality of the evidence presented by Nita, the RTC declared the marriage between her and Rod as null and void ab initio. Was the RTC correct?
(Continued tomorrow)
Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.
* * *
E-mail at: jcson@pldtdsl.net