Mini_B wrote:Hey FG's! A friend of mine has a kid with his JP wife. She took off with the kid the other day and went to her parents. She's not in contact with him and she won't let him see his kid. She wants him to sign divorse papers but he's reluctant to sign them as he feels there is still a chance. Obviously she has different feelings.

What rights (if any) does my German friend have? Is she allowed to swipe the kid from him like that?

AssKissinger wrote:If you spell it with a c and run it through the search engine you'll learn your friend is fucked.

Tsuru wrote:Most European countries don't allow dual citizenship... however, the real question is whether and how it's enforced.

oyajikun wrote:Then you would want to have the western family name used on the foriegn passport, and the Japanese family name used on the Japanese passport.

Jack wrote: I ask because the Japanese consulate would not let my daughter carry my last name when we had her registered in Japan. It had to be a JAPANESE name (so the mother's) written in Japanese.

Tommybar wrote:..Therefore it is best to have a JN name on JN passport and U.S. name on U.S. passport.

Tommybar wrote:As for divorce situations, the name on the JN passport will not help at all. Nor the fact that the child has a U.S. passport. Ditching with the kids is a JN wifes right here in Japan..

GuyJean wrote:But it seems like there would be some legal avenues if the child was also considered to be a US citizen, with a US passport, and with the same last name of a US citizen..

Tommybar wrote:The longest you can have dual citizenship in Japan or the U.S. is 23.

GomiGirl wrote:It was me - I have two passports!! British and Australian Dual citizen. That is why I talk funny.

dimwit wrote:
. . .If male singers who get castrated are referred to as castrati what would you call a female singer who gets added accessories?

momotobananaoishii wrote:We don't have any kids. I heard that mutual divorce is easy

momotobananaoishii wrote:and that the man can remarry again immediately but the woman has to wait 6 months (because of possibility of carrying the previous husband's baby).

momotobananaoishii wrote:If my wife doesn't want to divorce what is the best way for me to divorce her besides trying to prove she's crazy.

momotobananaoishii wrote:Can I divorce in Canada by myself and bring those papers to Japan or something?

FG Lurker wrote:Yes, it is very easy. You fill out the form, both hanko it, and then you take it to the city/ward/village office and register the divorce.

Q: Can Americans get a "Ward Office" divorce? A: Since January 1, 1990 Japanese law has allowed "mutual consent divorce" in cases where at least one spouse is a Japanese national. Thus, "mutual consent divorces" between American citizens and their Japanese citizen spouses are now legal in Japan.
As with marriage registration, the American spouse need not be physically present at the ward office to register the divorce providing that the registration documents have been properly signed and sealed beforehand by both parties.

Be warned, however, that the United States has no procedure for extra-judicial divorce and the legality of this procedure in various states in the U.S. is uncertain.

FG Lurker wrote:

Originally Posted by momotobananaoishii
and that the man can remarry again immediately but the woman has to wait 6 months (because of possibility of carrying the previous husband's baby).

Correct.

ttjereth wrote:...I thought I recalled it saying you had to wait a year before remarrying, but it might have been having to wait a year before being able to get another spousal visa with a different spouse. Anybody know more about this?

Article 14 of the 1947 Japanese constitution provides that "all of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family origin." Article 15 enfranchised women and Article 24 gave them equality in matters of marriage and divorce. However, there are still some areas of gender disparity in the current marriage and divorce laws. Article 24 of the Japanese Constitution (1947) declares:
"Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis. (2) With regard to choice of spouse, property rights, inheritance, choice of domicile, divorce and other matters pertaining to marriage and the family, laws shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes."
Article 24 clearly says that equality and mutual respect should be the basis for marriage and divorce. Despite the stated aims, at the beginning of the Twenty-first Century there are still some elements of gender bias in the Civil Code. With regard to the marriage, Article 731 of the Civil Code states that "Males under eighteen years of age and females under sixteen years of age are not eligible for marriage." Today, many people believe that it is time to make the legal age of marriage equal for both men and women.
Perhaps the most contentious aspects of the current law is the ban on women re-marrying immediately after divorce (Civil Code Article 733). A man can remarry as soon as he divorces, but a woman has to wait six months. The original reasoning behind the half year interval was to minimize confusion and disputes arising over determining the paternity of any child born in the months following a divorce (Civil Code Article 772). In 1947, contraceptives were unreliable and DNA tests non-existent, giving some justification for this measure. However, by the nineties and beyond, this stipulation seemed positively anachronistic.
From a strictly scientific standpoint, DNA testing can reliably determine parenthood which makes Article 733 redundant. Moreover, during the nineties, the courts themselves were allowing DNA tests to be used in divorce related cases involving disputed lineage. One such illustrative case was a 1994 paternity dispute at the Oita District Court that was based around DNA evidence. During an earlier 1992 divorce suit, a former wife had revealed that her 26 year old son was not her ex-husbands biological child. This caused the father to initiate the 1994 petition.* This case also clearly demonstrates that there is nothing to stop a woman having another man's child while married, which further erodes the relevance of Article 733.
Despite scientific advances, the Supreme Court upheld the legitimacy of Article 733 in a 5 December 1995 ruling (Supreme Court Third Petty Bench Decision 1563 Hanji 81). The litigation was brought by a couple from Hiroshima prefecture whose marriage registration had been rejected in December 1988 because of the six month rule. This meant that the couple were unable to formally adopt the women's children by her previous marriage and had to wait until June 1989 when the marriage was legally recognized. In the original ruling, the Hiroshima district court rejected the couples' argument that the six month waiting period violated the constitution. The court said that its decision was based on the fact that "only women can become pregnant" and therefore Article 733 did not infringe equality under the constitution. The constitutionality of this provision was later upheld by the Hiroshima High Court on 28 November 1991. The Supreme Court also concurred with the lower court's decision and the six month ban still remains in force in 2002.
The 1995 Supreme Court decision angered women's rights campaigners who questioned the legitimacy and relevance of the article in the high-tech nineties. Since the decision, some judicial experts have argued that the waiting period should be shortened to a hundred days while others have said the article should be completely removed from the Civil Code. Despite the legal debate and scientific advances, the government has made no plans to revise or abolish the article.
Legally disputed biological relationships are clearly best resolved by accurate scientific means rather than by cumbersome legislative measures. The need for women to have to wait six months longer than men to remarry seems hard to justify. Marriage is the foundation stone of the Japanese family and should be built on equitable laws. Some lawmakers point out that Japan is not alone amongst developed countries in having unequal marriage and divorce codes.** However, it would be a positive step towards creating a more egalitarian society if outdated statutes were abolished and men and women were treated equally under the law.