G.R. No. 255706 – ROWENA MANLUTAC GREEN, petitioner, vs. JEFFERY A. GREEN and THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.

LEONEN, J.

Rule Synopsis

Psychological assessments based on testimonies of petitioner, respondent, respondent’s mother, and the spouses’ mutual friend may be given credence, unless there are reasons to believe that the testimonies are fabricated. As long as the totality of the evidence establishes petitioner’s psychological incapacity, the declaration of nullity of marriage is warranted.

Facts

Jeffery A. Green (Jeffrey), a US Navy retiree, and Rowena Manlutac-Green (Rowena) met in 2006. Then, Rowena had two children from previous relationships and Jeffrey’s divorce with his former partner was still pending. In 2008, Rowena gave birth to a third child, for whom Jeffrey acknowledged paternity. Jeffrey and Rowena married in 2010. After marriage, Jeffrey stayed and worked in Makati. Rowena stayed with him three or four times a week, then returned to her children in Angeles City, Pampanga.

In July 2014, Jeffery filed a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage with Rowena based on both parties’ psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. Jeffrey submitted documentary evidence of Rowena’s infidelity, lies, and debts, and a Psychiatric Evaluation Report prepared by Dr. Ma. Bernadette Manalo-Arcena (Dr. Manalo-Arcena). The said report was based on interviews with Jeffery, Rowena, Rowena’s mother, and the spouses’ mutual friend. The report also summarized the factual bases for Jeffery’s filing of the petition as follows:

Rowena sustained P4million debts, more or less, and she is a pathological gambler;
Rowena’s third child was not fathered by Jeffrey yet still accepted by him;
Jeffrey saw picture of Rowena hugging and holding hands with another man;
Rowena lies about money relationship and activities;
The house which Jeffrey thought he invested in was gone due to Rowena’s mishandling of money, Rowena also falsified the title of the house;
Rowena had three (3) abortions and was using abortifacients;
Rowena was dishonest, cheating, and verbally abused Jeffrey.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) declared the marriage between Jeffrey and Rowena void ab initio on ground of the latter’s psychological incapacity, which the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed.

Hence, the instant petition.

Issues

Is Rowena psychologically incapacitated to comply with her marital obligations, so as to make her marriage with Jeffery annullable under Article 36 of the Family Code?

Ruling and Discussion

Yes. Rowena is psychologically incapacitated to comply with her marital obligations, so as to make her marriage with Jeffery annullable under Article 36 of the Family Code.

Psychological incapacity is neither a mental incapacity nor a personality disorder that must be proven through expert opinion. There must be proof, however, of the durable or enduring aspects of a person’s personality, called “personality structure,” which manifests itself through clear acts of dysfunctionality that undermines the family. The spouse’s personality structure must make it impossible for him or her to understand and, more important, to comply with his or her essential marital obligations. Psychological incapacity consists of clear acts of dysfunctionality that show a lack of understanding and concomitant compliance with one’s essential marital obligations due to psychic causes. It is not a medical illness that has to be medically or clinically identified; hence, expert opinion is not required. Each case of Article 36 must be judged according to its own facts.

Here, the totality of the evidence presented proved Rowena’s psychological incapacity to comply with her marital obligations. Aside from the Psychiatric Evaluation Report by Dr. Manalo-Arcena, Jeffrey attached documentary evidence such as copies of collection cases filed against Rowena, the DNA test result on Abigail’s paternity, and pictures of Rowena hugging and holding hands with another man. The Psychiatric Evaluation Report of the parties is further given probative value, since it was offered in evidence and the psychologist conducted a series of standard tests and interviewed Jeffrey, Rowena, Rowena’s mother, and the spouses’ mutual friend.

Moreover, psychological incapacity, as a ground to declare the nullity of marriage must be characterized by gravity, juridical antecedence, and incurability. The incapacity must be grave or serious such that the party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties required in marriage; it must be rooted in the history of the party antedating the marriage, although the overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage; and it must be incurable or, even if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party involved.

Here, the Psychiatric Evaluation Report establishes the gravity, incurability, root cause, and permanence of the parties’ personality structures. According to Dr. Manalo-Arcena, Rowena’s personality structure is due to problems of trust during her early childhood and her poor parental model figures. Her personality structure is found to be continuing and incurable considering that “the obligations to live together, provide love, give respect, loyalty and fidelity among each other were no longer existent in their marriage.” As further noted by Dr. Manalo-Arcena, Rowena’s personality with Borderline Personality Disorder and Antisocial Personality Disorder makes it difficult for her to assume essential marital obligations with Jeffrey. Her unstable interpersonal relationship, self-image and emotions, impulsivity, deceitfulness, consistent irresponsibility, and lack of remorse resulted to “[her refusal] to live with Jeffery, they have no fixed family domicile, she lied about Abigail’s paternity, she was a gambler and a spendthrift but was entirely dependent on Jeffery’s support, and she made one lie after another and got deeper and deeper in debt, resulting in civil and criminal cases.”

dispositive

Petition denied. Decision and Resolution of the CA affirmed.