In the 1920s, divorce in the USSR was an easy and, one might say, everyday procedure. But under Stalin, everything changed: in the "struggle for the purity of the moral character of citizens", which, as you know, accompanies any lack of freedom, divorce became a difficult procedure and a stain on the reputation of any Soviet citizen.
Before the October Revolution, an average of less than 1,000 marriages were annulled throughout Russia per year. Only the church could dissolve the “sacred sacrament”.
After 1917, the procedure for “liquidating” a marriage became easier than ever. A statement from one of the spouses was enough. The second was simply informed about the act of divorce. People were bred not by the courts, but by the registry offices. (At the same time, the concept of de facto marriage was introduced.)
Thus, the USSR already in the 1930s became the first in the world in terms of the number of divorces. (And today Russia almost every year becomes the "champion" in this area.)
Tightening the nuts
In 1936, the Stalinist leadership began to take steps to establish control over the personal and intimate life of citizens. For starters, abortion without medical indications was banned.
The country's leadership focused especially on the family life of citizens at the end of the Great Patriotic War - largely due to the death of a large number of people in the war.
Promotional video:
In 1944, a very complicated procedure for divorce through the courts was introduced, a decree was adopted "On increasing state aid to pregnant women, mothers with many children and single mothers, strengthening the protection of motherhood and childhood, establishing the honorary title" Mother Heroine "and establishing the Order of" Maternal Glory "and medals "Medal of Motherhood" ". Now lawyers recognized only legal marriages, not actual ones.
Divorces were required to submit an ad to the newspaper. Divorced through the courts. Moreover, the court could refuse to dissolve the marriage, even if both spouses did not want to be together anymore.
After the introduction of these draconian measures, statistics began to delight the country's leadership.
And people were frightened not only by the prolonged procedure. Now in the dissolution of marriages through the courts began to participate in prosecutors, who were associated in the minds of citizens exclusively with criminal prosecution and prison. These officials with partiality interrogated the participants in the "case" if it was about the calculation of alimony or the division of property.
Since 1944, the fee for divorce has become not 100-200 rubles, as before, but 500-2000 rubles. If someone divorced again, then more money was taken from him for this. The judges were instructed not to dissolve the marriages of couples who approached the divorce case “irresponsibly”.
An "irresponsible" approach
What was considered an "irresponsible" approach? After the war, more often men filed for divorce, who often acquired younger partners and managed to have children with them without divorcing their legitimate wives.
And even in such cases, the judges considered the question of whether it was worth breaking the bonds of Hymen. There should have been good reasons for wanting to leave. Moreover, in any legal documents did not say what reasons to consider as valid.
Here is an excerpt from a statement written at that time describing the reason for wanting to dissolve the marriage: “I am in a cultured society. My friends - engineers, chess players - often visit my home. I am an amateur chess player. My wife is a backward, uncultured person. She works as a cook. She not only does not read fiction, but she rarely even reads newspapers. She cannot play the piano, has no idea about chess and is not interested in it. I am ashamed in front of my comrades for such a wife. Please dissolve our marriage."
The court refused to dissolve this marriage, considering the wife's lack of culture as an insufficient reason to liquidate the “social unit”.
Still, divorce was easier to achieve for those who had a child in the next relationship.
For example, for some time they refused to divorce one general, although he had long lived with another woman and had children from her. The very first wife categorically refused to divorce. The unfortunate academician was saved by the fact that he did not have common children with his first wife. And the lawyers were able to prove: the legal spouse is obsessed with greed. She longs to take possession of her husband's property. It is not known how the litigation would have ended if this successful man had not had children from the next relationship or if he had offspring from a legal wife.
In 1949, the nuts were tightened. The USSR Supreme Court ruled that local courts are being too lenient when considering divorce cases. Resolved: the desire of the spouses to dissolve the marriage is not a sufficient basis for divorce. However, as well as having children in the next family. The people's courts were criticized for the fact that they did not "persuade" the spouses to reconcile, so to speak, did not contribute to the preservation of healthy Soviet families.
But even this measure did not lead to a decrease in the number of divorces. From 1949 to 1950, the number of divorces increased by 7%. And in Latvia, the Supreme Court did not dissolve 39% of marriages, despite the fact that these cases were considered on appeal.
Indestructible Stalinist format
Under Khrushchev, liberalization of many spheres of life took place. But the divorce proceedings still took place in the Stalinist format.
These are the complaints from Soviet citizens received at that time in the Central Committee of the CPSU. Someone Isaeva writes: “In 1938 I married a citizen S. Ye. Isaev. In 1941, he was evacuated to Kirov with the plant number 32 and in 1942 he married again. I have a daughter, she is now 16 years old, he pays alimony accurately. I lived alone, and I did not need a divorce. Two years ago I met a good person, we live together, we want to sign, but then it all started. The first husband does not want to get a divorce, because he has no money, and his family is big. I earn 410 rubles, I also cannot get a divorce. Everyone in the house management knows that I live alone without my husband, and only a small stamp on my passport testifies to marriage, it, this stamp, does not matter, but ruins 4 lives."
And here is a letter from a certain Ivanova: “I lived with my husband for 9 years, we had four children, he was afraid of such a family and left us. While I was deciding the issue of alimony in the courts, two children died, and for two I received alimony with great interruptions, because my husband was constantly hiding. In 1950, he begged me to get along with him, and he again registered on my square. After living for four months, he again left me, leaving me pregnant. In 1951, I gave birth to a baby by caesarean section. The regional security service in Stupino does not give me benefits, because I am not divorced from my husband, and I have nothing to pay for a divorce. For five years now, I have been raising children alone with my salary - 260 rubles. I ask you to repeal the law on the collection of fees for divorce and establish a state allowance for raising children for me."
Only under Brezhnev, the painful procedure for divorce was simplified. In 1965, a decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR was issued, which significantly simplified the procedure for divorce in courts. The two-stage court procedure was canceled. Now there was no need to "announce" the proceedings in the newspaper.
These changes brought the divorce rate from 360,000 in 1965 to 646,000 in 1966. It is clear: people, taking advantage of the granted opportunity, in 1966 hastily terminated relations that had long existed only on paper.
In 1968-1969, new indulgences appeared: childless couples who did not want to share property could now dissolve marriages not in court, but in the registry office.
Maria Konyukova