Paying the Price

When Katie Price took to the airwaves in order to explain on primetime Saturday evening television why her marriage to Peter Andre was over, even a highly experienced divorce lawyer such as myself felt a certain sorrow. It wasn’t necessarily for the individuals involved, but for a very sad example of modern marital union, then separation.

The majority of marriage failures are both unfortunate and hurtful, especially when children are involved, but the reason I feel a certain sympathy (and element of puzzlement) for this couple’s particular plight was due to the way their extraordinary public lives had trapped them into a bizarre way of communicating with each other.

Whether it be through magazine deals, autobiographies or reality television shows, they laid their entire lives bare to the media and while this no doubt brought financial gain, it seems the couple have literally paid the ‘Price’ for this media-induced lifestyle.

In her televised interview with Piers Morgan, Price blames the fact that their career as a professional couple was partly to blame for their split, but my suspicion is that it was their lack of a genuinely private life that inevitably led to their problems in relating to each other on a personal level. Bickering, squabbling and outright rowing made for entertaining television and may have made viewers feel better about their own relationships, but when the cameras were off, what was there left to say?

There are always two sides to marital breakdown . If Andre didn’t want a wife who sought out media attention, was the woman who became famous as topless model ‘Jordan’ the most suitable person for him to marry? If Price loved her husband so much, why did she head off to Ibiza and give a television interview within two months of the separation rather than talk to Andre?

In the interview, Price said that she knew she would come across as a cold businesswoman, but that she had now moved on. When she lost composure and broke down in tears half way through the programme, my suspicions that this might not be the case were confirmed.

One of the most important elements to an amicable separation, especially involving parents of young children, is communication. In my experience, the majority of family lawyers recognise that positive, open communication between parents is the best way to achieve a lasting workable relationship post separation and this is often achieved by adopting various options of mediation. This is not evident with Price and Andre.

Either a ‘round table’ meeting or collaborative process involving sensible, proactive professionals who can assist parents and separating couple through their hurt and emotional distress secures their long term interests with genuine dialogue.