OCR Text |
Show HUSBAND DIVORCE- M INSANE WR? Salt Lake Medical Men Indignant at the Thought of Making Insanity Ground for Divorce; Suit "of Heidlesky, Seeking Seek-ing Freedom, Raises the Question. (BY ZULA NEVITT.) Is insanity just ground for divorce f When the thread of reason snaps and either husband or wife is doomed to the maniac's cell for life, is the other justified in asking of the court to dissolve the marriage vow "for better and for worse, until death?" These questions raised by a petition for divorce recently re-cently filed in the District court by Fred V. Herdlesky of Salt Lake, whoasks it on the ground that his wife was violently vio-lently and incurably insane, has raised much comment among thinking people. ' on which to be seeking divorce. A common com-mon sense of justice would prevent either husband or wife seeking a divorce di-vorce when the other was unfortunate. Especially would a man be lacking in chivalry who seeks to rid himself of the burden of a wife upon whom the hand of affliction has been laid heavily," he I said. ! Stand by the Afflicted. "The marital relations should not be j continued when either one or the other is insane. That is obvious, but Insan- I itv should not cause a separation in i the sense of the normal mate deserting the afflicted one. Possibly there might be a few cases where a man might be justified in seeking divorce from his insane in-sane wife. That would be a question -for experts in mental diseases and the best trained legal minds to decide. But in a large number of esses the husband himself is responsible for the affliction of the wife and divorce on the grounds of insanity should be moet emphatically ' denied such." Views of Physicians, Dr. E. V. Silver held that where divorce di-vorce was sought on such grounds, the i-jc should be subjected to exhaustive examination to determine the cause of insanity and whether it was latent or superinduced by treatment receivej after af-ter marriage. 1 Dr. T. B. Beattv stated that the ques tion must be decided by the conditious in each individual case. Dr. A. C. Ewing was indignant that a man should seek divorce from his wife on such gTOiinds. "That is ridiculous," said Dr. Ewing, who is & Southerner. He took her for better and for worse. Because the worst has happened Is no reason he should desert her. It Is his duty to stand by her and look after fcer. Insanity should most emphatically not be a legal ground for divorce." Almost every reason In the category from Incompatibility to Infidelity have been given in the hundreds of divorce proceedings brought throughout the country in the last few years, but insanity in-sanity is a novel ground and involves a delicate question of whether a man or a wife is Justified in seeking separation separa-tion from a spouse so afflicted. In the case in point, that of the Her-dleskeys, Her-dleskeys, Mrs. Laura V. Herdlesky suddenly sud-denly developed violent insanity on April 14, 1905, and waa committed to the State Mental hospital at Provo. She is pronounced incurable. Whether the insanity was inherited or brought on after her marriage, the complaint of her husband does not state. The two were married on February 28, 1900. This point of whether the insanity was inherited or brought on alter marriage raises another question of great mo- ment. both from a medical and legal aspect. The Governor's Opinion. "The question of whether insanitv is ground for divorce is one that requires much consideration," said Gov. .John C. Cutler. "If the woman's mental condition was caused bv the treatment received from her husband I say most emphatically no. The divorce should he refused him. If the insanity is in herited, whether it be the husband or wife, they should be released frm each other." When asked if. in his opinion, insan itv should be mad'- a legal ground for divorce in ('rah. Gov. Cutler aid: I "Tha' is a question for th- I.egis lature to settle. If anvone desires that ground incrp' rated in the divorce j laws of the S'ate, rhev nrn' put " up ; to the I.eg'sla' r re nnd In that ho.lv .ee if it wants to it'. a k e a law on the 5uh j r c t . " ' A Question of Chivairy. ' The me Ileal aspect nf the question if 1 a very interesting one and Dr. H. D. j Ji'es. ivh' se researches on menra! .lis- 1 eases have iieen deep, holds the pinion j that chivalry as well as regard for the I marriage vows should prevent a hus I hand sef king divorce from a wife af : dieted with insanity. ! "That is a very peculiar ground up I n shar: contrast to the action of Herdlesky in .seekirg a divorce from his ' afflicted wife, n the example of a hus-! hus-! band in a neighboring State, whose de-j de-j vntion to his wife, cow hopelesslv in-; in-; sane, has not been in the least diminished dimin-ished b misfortune. Mrv Lottie Bauer, the wife, attempt- e l suicide bv shooting herself in the , had a year ago last Christmas eve. i She whs the victim of attacks of j temporary insanity and fearing that ' during one of them she might harm her i infant daughter, she attempted suicide j The bullet lodged in the brain and in- ssnitv, hope'ess and rucurable. result-I result-I ei. She was removed to the countv in ! sane ward, where esch visiting dav and i Snndavs without fail her husband visits I he-, carrying her rlwers. and every day calls up to ask about hr. The wif' does not recognize him. He does hnpe for tha. But hi, devo tion is unswerving and beautiful, and though his w-ffe can never b anvthing bit a living dead woman, stupid, inert, in-ert, the hghr of reason gone, do thought of ridding himself of her bv divorce has eer been nrertained bv her husband. |