“Out! Get out of this house!” Doña Concha, the old woman played by actress Amelia de la Torre in the series Golden Rings, angrily expels Lola and Ramón (Ana Diosdado and Imanol Arias) when she was about to rent them an office upon discovering the law firm they plan to open. In her home she will specialize in processing divorces in the heat of reform of the Civil Code of 1981. Although, in the game of misunderstandings of the script, the owner was willing to rent the space as furniture or as a brothel, always with discretion, what Hosting an office where marriages were legally broken was completely unacceptable.
The parody was still a faithful portrait of a society that had just emerged from the dictatorship and was still divided over an issue that was so delicate at the time that the 1978 Constitution addressed it sideways, leaving its future regulation explicitly to the legislator in its article 32. : “The law will regulate the forms of marriage, the age and capacity to contract it, the rights and duties of the spouses, the causes of separation and dissolution and their effects.”
The law known as the Divorce Law, however, was approved in haste, and both its drafting and defense were carried out by the UCD Government, although its vote took place after the resignation of Adolfo Suárez, on June 22, 1981. with Leopoldo Calvo Sotelo in the presidency. The text reached Congress at the proposal of the Minister of Justice, Francisco Fernández Ordóñez, and both in its debate and in its secret vote, the division that existed on the issue within the Government party was evident, accelerating a galloping crisis that would lead to its rapid dismemberment.
Before the debate reached the public forum, the Center for Sociological Research carried out two opinion studies on divorce. The first in January 1978, when the debate had not yet burst onto the political scene. Secondly, in June 1980, in the midst of drafting the law proposal and with a more formed opinion of Spanish society. Only three months away, furthermore, from the premiere of Kramer vs. Kramer in Spain, a film that, although not focused on divorce, but rather on the new roles of the couple and parenthood, influenced the debate.
Conducted on a universe of 2,460 people of different sex and social status from 38 provinces and 118 municipalities, this survey, which had the generic title “Human Couple”, showed the division that existed among Spanish public opinion on the subject, as well as the acceptance of roles and customs around marriage despite not being satisfactory for those interviewed. In this sense, it is striking that 35.8% accepted as true the statement “in the majority of marriages sexual relations are not satisfactory”, compared to 28.0% who denied it. For their part, 36.2% preferred not to respond due to modesty or any other reason.
Although 41.1% of those surveyed agreed that couples who lived together without having married were “the result of the evolution of customs and we must adapt to them,” the majority defended marriage for life. In this way, a resounding 77.0% considered that the average of 45 years in which marriages were situated at that time in Spain was proof that living together as a couple could be long and lasting, although for 88.4 % of those who saw it this way required “overcoming many difficulties and crises.”
Despite these majority opinions, a good part of those interviewed recognized that marriage was a union “that can be broken in exceptional cases” (36.25%), although a similar percentage considered it a union “indissoluble for life.” (34.6%). Those who believed that it should be a union “that can be broken by simple agreement of the parties” (25.5%) were in the minority, giving full freedom of dissolution to its protagonists. It should be taken into account that in the debate of the time, it was considered normal that it was one of the spouses who had to file for divorce, and not that it was a decision by mutual agreement.
The reasons for arguing this indissolubility of marriage were mostly religious (for 32.7%), although also for a reason of principles, “a commitment made for life (31.9%). Paradoxically, these two reasons outweighed common children (12.1%). However, even if divorce were legalized in Spain, those surveyed considered that the number of marriages that would end up broken would be high (46.1%) or very high (26.2%). In short, the majority seemed to be clear that the declared integrity would not be true when push came to shove.
Among the reasons or circumstances that would justify a divorce, in a series of multiple induced responses, the majority opted for the mistreatment of one of the spouses towards the other (75.8%), abandonment of the home (70.4%). , wife’s adultery (65.8), husband’s adultery (61.8%), homosexuality (64.6%) or lack of love and understanding (64.1%).
In any case, the majority opted not to grant divorce to couples with children under 6 years of age (45.5%) or under 12 years of age (40.2%), although between 32.7% and 35, 2% would do so depending on the circumstances. Along these lines, between 41.9% and 43.3% considered that divorce would have serious or very serious consequences, respectively, for the children. It should be noted that for 46.7% of those interviewed, one that agreed in advance not to have children could not be considered a marriage.
Emphasizing the aforementioned aspect of the “guilt” of one of the members of the couple for the judicial granting of the divorce, 44.1% of those surveyed believed that only in “certain cases”, without the induced response specifying any, Divorce should be possible without the judge finding one or both spouses guilty, and only for 20.6% it should be granted in “all cases.” In any case, a resounding 70.3% stated that the judge should try to make an attempt at reconciliation with the spouses before starting the process.
Given the dilemma that it was the interviewee himself who had to intervene in a relationship crisis, again the majority chose to maintain the marriage, so that 47.9% would advise the couple to try to overcome it. The option of permanent separation or initial divorce was only the best option for 3.1%.
The image of divorced people was not at all favorable for the participants in the study even before they legally existed. To the point of becoming a stigma. There was still debate about the option of marrying a divorced man or woman without children, and 24.8% indicated that they would do it while another 24.8% were clear that they would not. If the divorced man or woman had children, 31.3% assured that they would not marry him or her with any certainty. Voting for a divorced candidate or having your children have a divorced teacher was not, however, a big problem.
The Divorce Law, however, was pushed forward with the simple majority of Congress, Doña Concha died after the first chapter of Gold Rings and her sister, as conservative or even more so, accepted that the office be installed in her house. from where Lola and Ramón managed all types of marriage breakups in a series that marked an era in Spain.
