A warning: this article requires parental guidance. Children and minors, stop reading. The query goes like this: “Atty, kasal po ako pero in 2 months nagpasya kaming maghiwalay kasi di me satisfy sa kanya at dipa sia manganganak.” I really have to retain the gist of that query, even if I have to make slight changes on how it is worded. The issue is this: if the wife cannot conceive (or, conversely, if the husband is infertile) and the spouses cannot have children, is this enough ground for annulment? The related issue: if a spouse is not sexually satisfied with his/her partner, is this a ground for annulment?
First, check the grounds for annulment. If you’ve gone through the article, and its discussion on the grounds for annulment, you’ll discover that infertility is NOT a ground for annulment. Yes, impotence is a ground for annulment, but impotence is NOT. Impotence is being “physically incapable of consummating the marriage with the other.” Impotence relates to the sexual act. Infertility is being able to do the sexual act, yet not being able to conceive. Infertility is not a ground for annulment.
Sexual satisfaction (or the lack of it), on the other hand, is a bit tricky. It is not in that list of grounds for annulment. However, the obstinate and unjustified refusal to engage in sexual congress may serve as basis for a finding of psychological incapacity, a separate ground to declare a marriage void from the very beginning. The retained lawyer has to sift through the facts, determine which are relevant and make an assessment whether there is ground to support a petition for annulment or declaration of nullity. So, who says family law practice isn’t interesting?