When a Hike Turns Deadly: Understanding “Alpine Divorce” Through a Legal Lens

Like many of us, I spend way too much time each day reading the news feed on my phone. Recently I came across an article about “alpine divorce.” Of course, I clicked on this, thinking it would have stories of the European ultra-rich figuring out how to distribute the chalet in St. Moritz, the top-of-the-line Porsche Cayenne GTS, and other magnificent assets, but the actual subject is nowhere near that. It was a concept much more dark and sinister than I thought, and something I had never heard of before.

Apparently the term “alpine divorce” has been trending online of late, partly in response to a recent case in Austria where a young man left his girlfriend about 164 feet from the summit of 12,461 foot Grossglocknor Peak in Austria’s Tyrol. The two attempted an assent of the mountain in January 2025 with no one else. Apparently the girlfriend had been crying and screaming as it was getting darker and colder. The boyfriend claimed that his significant other asked him to go to get help, so he left her there in high winds and without an emergency blanket. Rescuers later found her hanging upside down from a cliff, having died of hypothermia. The boyfriend was charged with gross negligent manslaughter and was convicted by a judge with mountaineering experience and, in my opinion, got a very favorable five-month suspended sentence and a fine of €9,600 (about $11,300.00).

The associated online traffic seems to indicate that situations like this are more common than one would imagine. Specifically, where two people romantically involved go on a hike or other wilderness adventure. One has much more outdoor experience than the other and either starts to pick up the pace of the hike or, in some other way, separates him or herself from the other partner, leaving that partner to fend for him or herself, sometimes with disastrous results. The term “alpine divorce” comes from a 19^th century short story by Scottish writer, Robert Barr. In the story a husband and wife go hiking in the Swiss Alps. While the husband has thoughts of pushing his wife off a cliff, she tells him the joke is on him and jumps off the cliff in a suicide and, therefore, frames him with her murder. Certainly a crazy twist on “romanticism.”

As a lawyer, and family lawyer in particular, I have two thoughts on this dark and, apparently growing trend. Does possibly losing someone in the woods or on a mountain inadequately prepared for the elements constitute “abuse” in a protection from abuse context? And second, does it constitute a crime?

Of course, any such case is going to be fact-specific and for a protection from abuse case, as crazy as it sounds, the party needs to survive. If there have been prior incidents of questionable behavior on behalf of the more experienced outdoorsperson, that is certainly relevant, as are the representations made to the victim to get him or her into the dangerous situation in the first place.

While I do read Pennsylvania’s Protection from Abuse Statute as covering an attempted alpine divorce, I would suspect that a criminal case for recklessly endangering another person, or in an extreme situation, manslaughter, might be easier to prove and get more attention from the responsible authorities.

A common theme in my blogs is for parties in a relationship, either a marriage or a dating relationship, to be safe. This post takes a different spin on that concept. If you are in a relationship and your significant other wants you to go on a long hike or some other activity in a remote and possibly inhospitable area, no matter how much you may care for this person and believe that your feelings are reciprocated, use your common sense. While you may be in an area with limited or no cell phone service, take a fully charged phone and a back up battery anyway. Take water and snacks and don’t get separated from them. Maybe you invite another couple to go with you on this adventure. Tell family and friends where you plan to go and how long you anticipate being gone. The legal machinations after the fact are nowhere near as important as you getting home safely.