Posthumous divorce’s technical but less popular name is a “notification of marital relationship termination” (inzoku kankei shuryo todoke) which means one is officially severing ties with the family of a deceased spouse. What’s particularly strange about it is that it doesn’t really serve any purpose for a vast majority of people aside from a government-approved official statement that someone finds their in-laws unbearable.
Do you have any legal responsibilities towards your in-laws in either direction in Japan?
And can your in-laws also divorce you, when your partner- their child dies?oh man knowing the number of folks that love their spouse but not the spouses family I could see this happening a lot if it was a thing. The only reason I had anything to do with you people was because of this person who is now dead so I officially renounce you.
t doesn’t really serve any purpose
As someone who had unberable in laws, yes it does. If it happened to me I would be divorcing them while still.in the funeral
But you have to stray married to your in-laws if you divorce your spouse.
It’s a custom to protect people from unnecessary not-theirs-pet loss just because they live with the other family.I would imagine that it also has to do with the family registry. If a woman marries a man, she is taken from her own Family Registry and entered in her husband’s. I would imagine that upon the husband’s death nothing changes for the wife, but she has the option of returning to her own family registry.
I’m not 100% sure that this is how it works, or the reason for this termination, but it seems like a valid one.
Yes, I’m pretty sure you’re right. I get to deal with that registry as an American married to a Japanese woman and the irony is I don’t have this problem some the registry practically refuses to acknowledge my side of the family exists. But it’s a big deal, and the termination likely is so the person doesn’t have that connection of families in the web of family tree data the government tracks.
I’m a Canadian, and I was married to a Japanese woman. She was on the family registry, and our children were, but I was a comment. Way to show a commitment to treating all people equally, Japan!
Yep, we had to send info on the kids within a year. Upside, they get duel citizenship (kind of) until 20. Japan doesn’t recognize dual citizenship otherwise (although you can just not inform them).
Its dual, unless you are picking a fight with the Japanese government for citizenship.
As much as I want to fight them to the death over it, I fixed the spelling. My wife is still reluctant to get US citizenship, so I’m ready to duel on her behalf!
Who wants to tell them?
Citizenship by combat!
With how geriatric the Japanese government is, I like those odds.
Service guarantees citizenship!
The Japanese government wants people to choose citizenship by the end of their 20th year, because 20 is the age of majority in Japan. But if you don’t say anything, they won’t ask, and you can keep renewing your Japanese passport along with your other nationality’s.
Oh right, 20. Thanks for the reminder, I mix those up. I’ll edit my comment haha
What’s particularly strange about it is that it doesn’t really serve any purpose for a vast majority of people aside from a government-approved official statement that someone finds their in-laws unbearable.
That’s a pretty good purpose. Everybody can save face by taking part in bureaucracy. That sounds like I’m being facetious, but I’m serious. Think about the alternative: avoiding them awkwardly all the time or telling them to screw themselves directly, which will engender negative feelings. At least with the bureaucracy, the sentiment gets filtered through a impartial, uncaring medium.
I would think that it might not serve a government purpose, but it could serve a social one.
For a lot of societies, care of the elderly is supposed to be performed by the children. A marriage has the implication that care isn’t just for their own parents, but the in-laws as well. I expect a divorce like this servers that familial connection, people no longer have to care for their in-laws.
This is a HUGE deal in aging Japan, so this makes sense.
Filling out a form to stop talking to someone seems way more of “engendering negative feelings”.
Konrad Hermes energy
“oh no, not the crack slam!!”
To me it feels more like someone has gone out of their way wayyyy further to involve bureaucracy and make it official when just saying “I would rather not” would do.
Yeah this just feels like government approved passive aggression.
Sounds like Japan
Exactly
