Nothing exemplifies a double-edged sword better than a recent observation by a Madras High Court bench on a maintenance case. Justice P Devadass said that a Hindu man must not expect his wife to earn and self-maintain.
Rejecting the revision petition against a Family Court’s direction to pay maintenance, filed by a Central Government employee, the bench invoked the Hindu Law. Although the court safeguarded the interests of the estranged wife, such surmising appears damaging to the cause of women empowerment at large.
Invocation of a religious philosophy has, unfortunately, taken the sheen off an otherwise fair judgement in this case. Would it have seen a different outcome if the two parties concerned belonged to a different community? More importantly, does this observation inadvertently place the wife under the financial control of her husband? Surely, we can be more nuanced than proposing a blanket obligation of a man towards his wife.
Maintenance As Extortion?
A Uniform Civil Code ensures, in principle, that all women of all religions have the same legal rights within marriage. Variegated treatment meted out to women owing to different religious philosophies needs to be shunned. Dependence on the latter for upholding certain rights is a slippery turf as has been observed time and again in many cases. Invoking religious philosophies in courts may also feed contestations and turf wars in the public sphere for the spot of “best religion,” which is highly avoidable.
Coming to the question of maintenance, it is largely disappointing that even to date socio-legal discourse sees marriage as an unequal partnership. The retrograde idea of women being subservient to men gains currency when complemented with economic arguments. It is high time that in case of unemployed wives, their labour within the household is taken cognisance of. Maintenance, thus, becomes a right and not extortion or dole.
Fair Compensation
Considering the bias against women in society that manifests itself in the workplace in the form of skewed gender ratio in workforce as well as pay-gap, even employed women need not be precluded from the grant of alimony or maintenance should the marriage dissolve. This is a purely economics-driven argument.
In the case of women, marriage usually makes a serious dent in career progression, putting them several notches behind their male counterparts. Should they not be suitably compensated for the same?
On the other hand, a stay-at-home wife’s contribution to the husband’s career by easing the burden of domesticity off his shoulders needs to be recognised in monetary terms. Till the time there is a price tag for all the services rendered, toils of a woman within the household will remain neglected.
Division of labour — a favourite phrase with those who believe in gender stereotypical roles — is to be interpreted as such, the operative word here being ‘labour’. Yes, let the wife assume the prime role within the four walls of the household, if she so wishes or if the circumstances force the same, but do not deny her a fair compensation for it.
Gender Equality
Maintenance and alimony have become embarrassing words for women who take pride in being self-maintained. Why should this be the case? Do employees not get severance pay when their association with an organisation is dissolved? Marriage has far more financial implications than are usually acknowledged.
On the other hand, there is also resentment against the idea of marriage being interpreted as a social contract and not a sacrament. It can’t be stressed enough that gender equality can only take roots in the terra firma of economic self-reliance. For this, it needs to be ensured that no service rendered by women to the family is ignored.
When a woman is denied dignity of labour, either at workplace or at home, her socio-economic status takes a beating. This is where the legal system should step in. Benevolent paternalism, whether it comes from religion or law, rarely makes a difference. It can win women only the ‘conditions apply’ variety of equality.
(The writer is Associate Fellow (Gender) at Observer Research Foundation. She can be reached at @TedhiLakeer )
Also read:
Counterview: Uniform Civil Code will Simplify Justice Delivery
Your Honour, Denying Alimony to a Divorced Woman is Injustice
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)