It leaves the following:
The Petitioner made attempts to discuss and resolve these issues, but the Respondent was uncooperative.
As a result of the Respondent’s unreasonable behaviour the Petitioner was extremely distressed and found it impossible to continue to live with the Respondent.
The first paragraphs are as follows:
The Respondent has been habitually violent in word and deed towards the children, in particular towards the two girls. On the afternoon of Sunday 25th November 2012 the Respondent was violent towards the youngest child, Roisin Murphy, and the Respondent was arrested. The Petitioner was deeply distressed and believed that the violent behaviour would escalate further and result in serious harm to one or more members of the family if the Respondent continued to live at the family home.
In August 2010 the Petitioner awoke late at night to find the Respondent attempting sex with her. When the Petitioner confronted the Respondent the following day his only explanation was that he had ‘misread the signals’. The Petitioner was shocked and upset by the incident and felt that the Respondent had completely destroyed her trust in him.
The Respondent refused to cooperate in sorting out family financial matters causing great distress to the Petitioner.
I used the yardstick of 'first, worst, last' and re-wrote these several times before reaching this version. These are my grounds for divorce and I couldn't see how to tone them down without making a complete nonsense of the statement. I guess that's why it is more usual to agree terms, but I couldn't see what else to do without making something up! I have been consistent throughout all the paperwork (incl child contact) in relying on these statements.