:: wikimiki.org ::

Domestic Partnership

Domestic partnership

Domestic partner or domestic partnership identifies the personal relationship between individuals who are living together and sharing a common domestic life together but are not joined in any type of legal partnership, marriage or civil union. Some legal jurisdictions recognize that individuals who live together after a long period of time, while not entitled to common-law marriage status may be entitled to some protection under the legal concept of domestic partnership. In some places parties that live together enter into domestic partnership agreements in order to contractually agree to certain issues between them in relation to joint property ownership, support obligations and similar issues to that found in marriage. See effects of marriage and palimony. In some jurisdictions domestic partnerships are created by statute rather than having been the invention of judicial decisions. One of the reasons for the creation of the relation of domestic partnership is to recognize the contribution of one partner to the property of the other. In the common law such devices such as the constructive trust are available to protect spouses, in legal marriage or in common-law marriage. In civil law jurisdictions this type of legal concept is generally not available so courts have tried to find alternative ways to protect the partner who has contributed to the other partner's property. Some jurisdictions have instituted domestic partnerships as a way to recognize same-sex unions.

In the United States

On September 4, 2003 the California legislature passed an expanded domestic partnership bill, extending nearly all the legal rights of married couples to people in same-sex partnerships. This effectively transformed California domestic partnerships into civil unions. Potentially serious legal issues arise from the conflict between state domestic partnership and same-sex-marriage laws, and the structure of U.S. Federal law, which, under the Defense of Marriage Act, explicitly does not extend Federal law recognition to those unions. This means that, for example, though they may essentially be "married" under the law of some states, partners would not be entitled to spousal "collateral" rights to Social security and will not be treated as "spouses" for purposes of any Federal tax law. For example, Kevin Norte and Don Korotsky of Hollywood, California entered into a Domestic Partnership and Don Korotsky changed his name to Don Norte. It is believed that they are the first same gender couple in California to utilize the domestic partnership legislation to effectuate such a change. Don Norte had his driver's license re-issued by the California Department of Motor Vehicles ("DMV")under his new name. More momumental however was the fact that the federal government recognized the name change in changing Don Norte's name on his re-issued Social Security Card. Furthermore, Don Norte used the mail-in renewal process to renew his United States State Department passport and included his Domestic partnerhsip registration as proof of the name change. In California this process was only previously available for persons who had his or her name changed by court order or marriage license. The State Department, however, recognized the Domestic Partnership registration as sufficient legal proof of the name change as issued the renewed passport using the procedure previously only available for married couples. Kevin Norte (1962-present)is a career court research attorney with the Los Angeles Superior Court ("LASC"). Don Norte (1962-present)is one the City of West Hollywood (including the Sunset Strip)'s main parking planners and former president of the California Public Parking Association ("CPPA")

Personal relationship

An interpersonal relationship is a social association, connection, or affiliation between two or more people. It varies in differing levels of intimacy and modes of connection, implying discovery or establishment of common ground, and may be centered around something(s) shared in common. Its study is one of the concerns of the social science known as sociology, and, to a lesser extent, of psychology and anthropology.

Types of interpersonal relationships

- Kinship relationships, including family relationships, being related to someone else by blood (consanguinity), e.g. fatherhood, motherhood; or through marriage (affinity), e.g. father-in-law, mother-in-law, uncle by marriage, aunt by marriage.
- Formalized intimate relationships or long term relationships through law and public ceremony, e.g. marriage and civil union.
- Non-formalized intimate relationships or long term relationships such as loving relationships or romantic relationships with or without living together; the other person is often called lover, boyfriend or girlfriend (not to be confused with just a male or female friend), or significant other. If the partners live together, the relationship may be similar to marriage, and the other person may be called husband or wife. Over a certain length of time they are so regarded by common law. Mistress is a somewhat old fashioned term for a female lover of a man who is married to another woman, or of an unmarried man. She may even be an official mistress (in French maîtresse en titre); an example is Madame de Pompadour.
- Soulmates, individuals who are intimately drawn to one another through a favorable meeting of the minds and who find mutual acceptance and understanding with one another. Soulmates may feel themselves bonded together for a lifetime; and, hence, they may be sexual partners but not necessarily.
- Casual relationships, relationships extending beyond one night stands that exclusively consist of sexual behavior, the participants of which may be known as friends with benefits when limited to considering sexual intercourse or sexual partners in a wider sense.
- Platonic love is an affectionate relationship into which the sexual element does not enter, especially in cases where one might easily assume otherwise.
- Friendship, which consists of mutual love, trust, respect, and unconditional acceptance, and usually implies the discovery or establishment of common ground between the individuals involved; see also internet friendship and pen pal.
- Brotherhood and sisterhood, individuals united in a common cause or having a common interest, which may involve formal membership in a club, organization, association, society, lodge, sorority, fraternity. This type of interpersonal relationship also includes the comradeship of fellow soldiers in peace or war.
- Partners or coworkers in a profession, business, or a common workplace.
- Acquaintanceship, simply being introduced to someone or knowing who they are by interaction.

Factors affecting interpersonal relationships

The discovery or establishment of common ground between individuals is a fundamental component for enduring interpersonal relationships other than familial relationship. Loss of common ground, which may happen over time, may tend to end interpersonal relationships. Interpersonal relationships through consanguinity and affinity would persist despite the absence of love, affection, or common ground. When these relationships are in prohibited degrees, sexual intimacy in them would be the taboo of incest. Marriage and civil union are relationships reinforced and regularized by their legal sanction to be "respectable" building blocks of society. In the United States the de-criminalization of homosexual sexual relations in the landmark Supreme Court decision, Lawrence v. Texas (2003) facilitated the "mainstreaming" of gay long term relationships, and broached the possibility of the legalization of same-sex marriages in that country. In intimate relationships there is often, but not always, an implicit or explicit agreement that the partners will not have sex with someone else monogamy. The extent to which physical intimacy with other people is accepted may vary. For example, a husband may be more receptive to his wife being physically affectionate with her female friend if she has one than with her male friend (see also jealousy). In friendship there is some transitivity: one may become a friend of an existing friend's friend. However, if two people have a sexual relationship with the same person, they may be competitors rather than friends. Accordingly, sexual behavior with the sexual partner of a friend may damage the friendship. See love triangle. Sexual relations between two friends may alter that relationship by either "taking it to the next level" or severing it if the sexual relationship ends. Sexual partners may also be friends: the sexual relationship may either enhance or depreciate the friendship. The rise of popular psychology has led to an explosion of concern about one's interpersonal relationships (often simply called: "relationships"). Intimate relationships receive particular attention in this context, but Sociology recognises many other interpersonal links of greater or less duration and/or significance. Relationships are not necessarily healthy. Examples include abusive relationships and co-dependency. In sociology there is a hierarchy of forms of activity and interpersonal relations, which divides them into: behavior, action, social behavior, social action, social contact, social interaction and finally social relation.

Theories of interpersonal relationships

- Social psychology has several approaches to the subject of interpersonal relationships, among them closure and also trust, as trust between parties can be mutual. This may lead to enduring relationships.
- Social exchange theory interprets relationships in terms of exchanged benefits. The way people feel about relationships will be influenced by the rewards of the relationship, as well as rewards they may potentially receive in alternate relationships.
- Equity theory is based on criticism of social exchange theory. Proponents argue that people care more than just maximizing rewards, they also want fairness and equity in their relationships.
- Relational dialectics is based on the idea that a relationship is not a static entity. Instead, a relationship is a continuing process, always changing. There is constant tension as three main issues are negotiated: autonomy vs. connection, novelty vs. predictability, and openness vs. closedness.
- Attachment styles are a completely different way of analyzing relationships. Proponents of this view argue that attachment styles developed in childhood continue to be influential throughout adulthood, influencing the roles people take on in relationships.

External links

- [http://www.love-calculator.info Love Calculator]
- [http://www.abookoflove.com Using romantic roleplay and bedroom games to bring greater dimension into relationships]
- [http://samvak.tripod.com/friend.html Altruism and egoism in interpersonal relationships]
- [http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1396917,00.html What are friends for?] - three part article in UK Guardian newspaper
- [http://www.ipfeurope.com International Pen Friends] IPF is the biggest pen friends organization in the world, with more than 300,000 members in 192 countries.
- [http://www.intellectualwhores.com/masterladder.html Master Ladder Theory]: based on the idea that men and women cannot be friends, this theory (while sounding extremely tongue-in-cheek) is very thorough and interesting.
- [http://news-for-two.cloudworth.com/ News-for-Two] Daily edited review of headlines related to human relatioships, love and interpersonal communication.

Marriage

Marriage is a relationship between individuals which has formed the foundation of the family for most societies. Marriage can include legal, social, and religious elements. In western societies, marriage has traditionally been understood as social contract between a man (husband) and a woman (wife), while in other parts of the world polygamy has been the most common form of marriage, usually in the form of polygyny (a man taking several wives) but occasionally in the form of polyandry (a woman taking several husbands). In some western societies today, same-sex marriage is recognized yet remains a controversial issue.

Definitions

Precise definitions vary historically and between and within cultures: modern understanding emphasizes the legitimacy of sexual relations in marriage, yet the universal and unique attribute of marriage is the creation of affinal ties (in-laws). Traditionally, societies encourage one to marry "out" far enough to strengthen the ties, but "close" enough so that the in-laws are "one of us" or "our kind". One exception to this rule is found in the marriage of royalty, who strengthen their aid through concentration of wealth rather than through affinal ties. Even in this case, the individual was often encouraged to marry "within" close family limits. (Further discussion and reference: Marvin Harris, late, Professor of Anthropology, Columbia University) Marriage remains important as the socially sanctioned bond in a sexual relationship. Marriage is usually conceived as a male-female relationship designed to produce children and successfully socialize them. Historically, most societies have sanctioned polygamy. The West is a major exception. Europe and the United States were monogamous cultures. This was in part a Germanic cultural tradition, a requirement of Christianity (after the sixth century CE), and a mandate of Roman Law. However, Roman Law supported prostitution, concubinage, sex outside of marriage, homosexual sex, and sexual access to slaves. The Christian West formally banned these practices. Globally, most existing societies do not sanction polygamy as a form of marriage. For example, China shifted from allowing polygamy to supporting only monogamy in the 1953 Marriage act after the Communist revolution. Most African and Islamic societies continue to allow polygamy (around 2.0 billion people). This includes India where polygamy is permitted for Muslim citizens. Probably, less than 3% of all Muslim marriages are polygamous. It is increasingly expensive in an Urban setting, but more useful in rural areas where children are a future source of agricultural labor. Most of the world's population live in societies where polygamy is less common and they are overwhelmingly monogamous. Since the latter decades of the 20th century many of society's assumptions about the nature and purpose of marriage and family have been challenged, in particular by gay rights advocacy groups, who disagree with the notion that marriage should be exclusively heterosexual. Some people also argue that marriage may be an unnecessary legal fiction. This is part of the general disruption of traditional families in the West. Since WWII the West has seen a dramatic increase in divorce (6% to over 40% of first marriages), cohabitation without marriage, a growing unmarried population, and children born outside of marriage (5% to over 33% of births), as well as an increase in adultery (8% to over 40%). A system of somewhat serial monogamy has de facto emerged. Still, legally sanctioned non-monogamous marriage arrangements are extremely rare. In modern times, the term marriage is generally reserved for a state sanctioned union (although some people disagree). The phrase legally married can be used to emphasize this point. In the United States there are two methods of receiving state sanction of a marriage: common law marriage and obtaining a marriage license. The vast majority of US states do recognize common law marriage. Many localities do support various types of domestic partnerships. Since the 12th century, marriage or holy matrimony has been a sacrament in the Catholic Church, as well as other Orthodoxies, where it is defined as a relationship between a man and a woman. The Protestant Reformation reformulated marriage as a life-long covenant. Marriage of some kind is found in most societies, and typically married people form a nuclear household, which is often subsequently extended biologically, through children. In the West the nuclear family emerged after 1100. Most non-Western societies have a broader definition of family that includes an extended family network. Alternatively, people may choose to be "childfree". Finally, they may be childless due to infertility, and possibly seek treatment or consider adoption. The term wedlock is a synonym for marriage, and is mainly used in the phrase "out of wedlock" to describe a child born of parents who were not married (see illegitimacy). In the West, marriage has evolved from a life-time covenant that can only be broken by fault or death to a contract that can be broken by either party at will. Other shifts in Western marriage since WWI include: (a) Unlike the 19th century women not men get child custody over 80% of the time, (b) both spouses have a formal duty of spousal support (no longer just the husband), (c) Out-of-Wedlock children have the same rights of support as legitimate children, (d) in most states rape can legally occur within marriage and be punished, (e) husbands may no longer physically discipline or abuse their wife, and (f) in some jurisdictions, property acquired since marriage is not owned by the title-holder. This property is considered marital and to be divided among the spouses by community property law or equitable distribution via the courts. There is a growing debate about the form(s) that marriage should take. Two of the most hotly-debated variants are discussed below: same-sex marriage - legal in some countries such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Canada (and the US state of Massachusetts) by 2005 - and, polygamy.

Types of marriages

The type and functions of marriage vary from culture to culture.

Western world

In the United States and Europe, in the 21st century, legally sanctioned marriages are monogamous (although some pockets of society still sanction polygamy socially, if not legally) and divorce is relatively simple and socially sanctioned. In the West, the prevailing view toward marriage today is that it is based on a legal covenant recognising emotional attachment between the partners and entered into voluntarily.

Eastern world

Some societies permit polygamy, in which a man could have multiple wives; even in such societies however, most men have only one. In such societies, having multiple wives is generally considered a sign of wealth and power. The status of multiple wives has varied from one society to another. In the Muslim world, marriage is sanctioned between a man and a woman, but there are verses in chapter 4 of the Qur'an which state that in certain conditions a man is allowed up to four wives. In Muslim societies, the different wives are considered equal and must be treated as such. In Indonesia, the largest Muslim majority state, marriage is allowed between a man and a woman who profess the same faith, while atheists are not allowed to marry. In Imperial China, formal marriage was sanctioned only between a man and a woman, although among the upper classes, the primary wife was an arranged marriage with an elaborate formal ceremony while concubines could be taken on later with minimal ceremony. Only the children from the official union were considered legitimate. To better control population growth after the rise of Communism, only strictly monogamous marital relationships are permitted, although divorce is a relatively simple process.

Polygamy, monogamy, and polyandry

Polyandry (a woman having multiple husbands) occurs very rarely in a few isolated tribal societies with limited resources. These societies include some bands of the Canadian Inuit, although the practice has declined sharply in the 20th century due to the change from tribal religion to the Moravian religion. Societies which permit group marriage are extremely rare, but have existed in utopian societies such as the Oneida Community. However, in 21st century Western cultures, while bigamy is illegal and sexual relations outside marriage are generally frowned-upon, divorce and remarriage have officially been relatively easy to undertake. This has led to a practice called serial monogamy. "Serial monogamy" usually refers to what occurs when a husband, usually of average to high socioeconomic status, divorces an older wife and takes on a younger wife. The younger wife is popularly referred to as the "trophy wife" by many who frown upon the practice. The modern practice of serial monogamy is strikingly similar to the marital practices observed in polygamous societies. Serial monogamy within the LGBT community refers to the practice of having one long-term relationship and then moving on to another. This practice is one of a few options for bisexuals, and is practiced by many gays and lesbians as well. (It can be argued that this is common with heterosexuals who aren't wanting or ready to "settle down" or who question the tradition heterosexual cultural norms of marriage. Whether heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual, these individuals would be offended at the view that their relationships weren't meaningful.)

Traditional cultures

Some traditional cultures still practice marriage by abduction, a form of forced marriage in which a woman who is kidnapped and raped by a man is regarded as his wife. This practice is limited to a few traditional cultures in a small number of countries, and is generally regarded as abhorrent by other cultures.

Marriage today in Belgium, The Netherlands, Canada, Spain

:Main article: Same-sex marriage These countries have the particular possibility that opposite sex as well as same sex couples may engage in marriage. Although same-sex unions have been recorded in the history of a number of cultures, marriages between same-sex partners were rare or nonexistent in other cultures. Same-sex marriage remains infrequent worldwide, especially as it is not offered in most countries. However, some countries recognize same-sex marriage, including the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, and Spain; in the United States same-sex marriage is legal in the state of Massachusetts. "Civil unions" are recognized in Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Greenland, Iceland, Germany, France, Portugal, New Zealand and the U.S. states of Vermont and Connecticut, and will be recognized in the United Kingdom from December 2005; a growing number of American states and various localities, such as Maine, recognize domestic partnerships, which offer parity of spousal rights, to different degrees, with marriage.

Unique Practices

Some parts of India follow a custom in which the groom is required to marry with an auspicious plant called Tulsi before a second marriage to overcome inauspicious predictions about the health of the husband. However, the relationship is not consummated and does not affect their ability to remarry later. One should note that this is not a norm found across the entire Indian sub-continent. In the state of Kerala, India, the Nambudiri Brahmin caste traditionally practices henogamy, in which only the eldest son in each family is permitted to marry. In Mormonism, a couple may seal their marriage "for time and for all eternity" through a "sealing" ceremony conducted within the LDS temple. The couple is then believed to be bound to each other in marriage throughout eternity if they live according to their covenants made in the ceremony. Mormonism also allows living persons to act as proxies in the sealing ceremony to "seal" a marriage between ancestors who have been dead for at least one year and who were married during their lifetime. According to LDS theology, it is then up to the deceased individuals to accept or reject this sealing in the spirit world before their eventual resurrection. A living person can also be sealed to his or her deceased spouse, with another person (of the same sex as the deceased) acting as proxy for that deceased individual. Other unusual variations include marriage between a living human and a ghost (Taiwan), a living human and a recently-deceased human with whom they were emotionally involved (France), and between a human being and God (Catholic and Orthodox monasticism). Again, these lack the social meaning of ordinary marriage and belong rather to the realm of religion or (in the case of weddings of dogs to other dogs, Kermit the Frog to Miss Piggy, and the like) pure spectacle.

Recognition

Couples usually seek social sanction for their marriages, and many societies require official approval of a religious or civil body. Sociologists thus distinguish between a marriage ceremony conducted under the auspices of a religion and a state-sanctioned civil marriage. In many jurisdictions the civil marriage ceremony may take place during the religious marriage ceremony, although they are two distinct entities. In most American states the marriage may be officiated by a priest, minister, or religious authority, and in such a case the religious authority acts simultaneously as a religious authority and an agent of the state. In some countries such as France, Germany and Russia, it is necessary to be married by the state before having a religious ceremony. Some states allow civil marriages which are not allowed by many religions, such as same-sex marriages or civil unions, and marriage may also be created by the operation of the law alone as in common-law marriage, which is a judicial recognition that two people living as domestic partners are entitled to the effects of marriage. Conversely, there are examples of people who have a religious ceremony which is not recognized civilly. Examples include widows who stand to lose a pension if they remarry and so undergo a marriage in the eyes of God, homosexual couples, some sects of Mormonism which recognize polygamy, retired couples that would lose pension benefits if legally married, Muslim men who wish to engage in polygamy that is condoned in some situations under Islam and immigrants who do not wish to alert to the immigration authorities that they are married either to a spouse they are leaving behind or because the complexity of immigration laws may make it difficult for spouses to visit on a tourist visa. In Europe it has traditionally been the churches' office to make marriages official by registering them. Hence, it was a significant step towards a clear separation of church and state and also an intended and effective weakening of the Christian churches' role in Germany, when Chancellor Otto von Bismarck introduced the Zivilehe (civil marriage) in 1875. This law made the declaration of the marriage before an official clerk of the civil administration (both spouses affirming their will to marry) the procedure to make a marriage legally valid and effective, and reduced the clerical marriage to a mere private ceremony.

Rights and obligations

Typically, marriage is the institution through which people join together their lives in emotional and economic ways through forming a household. It often confers rights and obligations with respect to raising children, holding property, sexual behavior, kinship ties, tribal membership, relationship to society, inheritance, emotional intimacy, and love. Marriage sometimes: establishes the legal father of a woman's child; establishes the legal mother of a man's child; gives the husband or his family control over the wife's sexual services, labor, and/or property; gives the wife or her family control over the husband's sexual services, labor, and/or property; establishes a joint fund of property for the benefit of children; establishes a relationship between the families of the husband and wife. No society does all of these; no one of these is universal (see Edmund Leach's article in "Marriage, Family, and Residence," edited by Paul Bohannan and John Middleton). Marriage has traditionally been a prerequisite for starting a family, which usually serves as the building block of a community and society. Thus, marriage not only serves the interests of the two individuals, but also the interests of their children and the society of which they are a part. In most of the world's major religions, marriage is traditionally a prerequisite for sexual intercourse: unmarried people are not supposed to have sex, which is then called fornication and is socially discouraged or even criminalized. In practice, most of these societies have tacitly accepted sex between unmarried people if they marry as soon as pregnancy occurs (see shotgun wedding). Sex with a married person other than one's spouse, called adultery, is even less acceptable and has also often been criminalized, especially in the case of a person who is a representative of the government (e.g. president, prime minister, political representative, public-school teacher, military officer).

Marriage restrictions

Societies have always placed restrictions on marriage to relatives, though the degree of prohibited relationship varies widely. In almost all societies marriage between brothers and sisters is forbidden, with Ancient Egyptian, Hawaiian, and Inca royalty being the rare exception. In many societies marriage between some first cousins is preferred, while at the other extreme, the medieval Catholic church prohibited marriage between distant cousins. The present day Catholic Church still maintains a standard of required distance (in both consanguinity and affinity) for marriage. Marriage gives the couple various rights allotted only to married individuals in many societies. In Indian Hindu community, especially in the Brahmin caste, marrying person of the same Gothra is prohibited, since persons belonging to the same Gothra are said to have identical patrilineal descension. In ancient India when Gurukul was in existence, the shishyas (the pupils) were advised against marrying any of Guru's children as shishyas were considered Guru's children and it would be considered marriage among siblings (though there were exceptions like Arjuna's son Abhimanyu marrying Uttra, the dance student of Arjuna in Mahabharatha). Many societies have also adopted other restrictions on whom one can marry, such as prohibitions on marrying persons with the same surname, or persons with the same sacred animal. Anthropologists refer to these sort of restrictions as exogamy. One exception to this pattern is in ancient Egypt, where marriage between brothers and sisters was permitted in the royal family; this privilege was denied commoners and may have served to concentrate wealth and power in one family (See also incest). The consequence of the incest-taboo is exogamy, the requirement to marry someone from another group. Anthropologists have thus pointed out that the incest taboo may serve to promote social solidarity. The "one man one woman" model for the Christian marriage was advocated by Saint Augustine (354-439 AD) with his published letter The Good of Marriage. To discourage polygamy, he wrote it "was lawful among the ancient fathers: whether it be lawful now also, I would not hastily pronounce. For there is not now necessity of begetting children, as there then was, when, even when wives bear children, it was allowed, in order to a more numerous posterity, to marry other wives in addition, which now is certainly not lawful." (chapter 15, paragraph 17) Sermons from St. Augustine's letters were popular and influential. In 534 AD Roman Emperor Justinian criminalized all but monogamous man/woman sex within the confines of marriage. The Justinian Code was the basis of European law for 1,000 years. Societies have also at times required marriage from within a certain group. Anthropologists refer to these restrictions as endogamy. An example of such restrictions would be a requirement to marry someone from the same tribe. Racist laws adopted by some societies in the past, such as Nazi-era Germany, apartheid-era South Africa and most of the southern United States and Utah prior to 1967, which prohibited marriage between persons of different races (miscegenation) could also be considered examples of endogamy. As tolerance of homosexuality has become more widespread in Western cultures, some governments have recognized a right to marriage by people of the same sex. This has in turn created a general backlash, most notably in Great Britain, where the Church of England has officially banned gay marriage, and in the United States, where several states have specifically outlawed gay marriage, often by popular referenda. At the United States federal level, the Defense of Marriage Act has created a federal definition of marriage as between a man and a woman as well as allowing one state not to recognize a same sex marriage recognized by another state. Arguments have been made that the DOMA conflicts with the United States Constitution, and could conceivably be overturned on this basis. To ensure this does not happen, some, including President George W. Bush, support amending the Federal Constitution to prohibit same-sex marriages. Some countries and one U.S. state currently recognize same-sex marriage, and legal challenges to marriage restrictions may soon expand the recognition of same-sex marriages to Washington, New York, and other states. Nevertheless, while [http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm opinion polls] indicate support by the general majority of Europe and North America for legal recognition of homosexual partnerships for the purpose of granting rights and immunities equivalent to those of heterosexual marriages, [http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm the same polls] indicate wide majorities, as much as two-thirds, disapproving of a change to the legal definition of marriage to include homosexual unions.

Termination

Many societies provide for the termination of marriage through divorce. Marriages can also be annulled or cancelled, which is a legal proceeding that establishes that a marriage was invalid from its beginning.

Weddings

The ceremony in which a marriage is enacted and announced to the community is called a wedding. A wedding in which a couple marry in the "eyes of the law" is called a civil marriage. Religions also facilitate weddings, in the "eyes of God." In many European and some Latin American countries, where someone chooses a religious ceremony, they must also hold that ceremony separate from the civil ceremony. Certain countries, like Belgium and the Netherlands even legally demand that the civil marriage has to take place before any religious marriage. In some countries, notably the United States, the United Kingdom, the Republic of Ireland and Spain both ceremonies can be held together; the officiant at the religious and community ceremony also serves as an agent of the state to enact the civil marriage. That does not mean that the state is "recognizing" religious marriages; the "civil" ceremony just takes place at the same time as the religious ceremony. Often this involves simply signing a register during the religious ceremony. If that civil element of the full ceremony is left out for any reason, in the eyes of the law no marriage took place, irrespective of the holding of the religious ceremony. Whilst some countries, such as Australia, permit marriages to be held in private and at any location, others, including England, require that the civil ceremony be conducted in a place specially sanctioned by law (ie. a church or registry office), and be open to the public. An exception can be made in the case of marriage by special emergency licence, which is normally granted only when one of the parties is terminally ill. Rules about where and when persons can marry vary from place to place.Some regulations require that one of the parties reside in the locality of the registry office. Because of Australia's very lax rules on marriage, many famous people, including Michael Jackson and Elton John, have opted to marry in Australia, so as to have a private ceremony. The way in which a marriage is enacted has changed over time, as has the institution of marriage itself. In Europe during the Middle Ages, marriage was enacted by the couple promising verbally to each other that they would be married to each other; the presence of a priest or other witnesses was not required if circumstances prevented it. This promise was known as the "verbum". As part of the Reformation, the role of recording marriages and setting the rules for marriage passed to the state. By the 1600s many of the Protestant European countries had heavy state involvement in marriage.

Marriage and religion

:Main article: Religious aspects of marriage Many religions have extensive teachings regarding marriage. Most Christian churches give some form of blessing to a marriage; the wedding ceremony typically includes some sort of pledge by the community to support the couple's relationship. In the Roman Catholic Church "Holy Matrimony" is considered to be one of the seven sacraments, in this case one that the spouses bestow upon each other in front of a priest and members of the community as witnesses during a "Nuptial Mass". In the Eastern Orthodox church, it is one of the Mysteries, and is seen as an ordination and a martyrdom. In marriage, Christians see a picture of the relationship between Jesus and the Church. In Judaism, marriage is viewed as a coming together of two families, therefore prolonging the religion and cultural heritage of the Jewish people. Islam also recommends marriage highly; among other things, it helps in the pursuit of spiritual perfection. The Bahá'í Faith sees marriage as a foundation of the structure of society, and considers it both a physical and spiritual bond that endures into the afterlife. Hinduism sees marriage as a sacred duty that entails both religious and social obligations. By contrast, Buddhism does not encourage or discourage marriage, although it does teach how one might live a happily married life. It's also worth noting that different religions have different beliefs as regards the breakup of marriage. For example, the Roman Catholic Church does not permit divorce, because in its eyes, a marriage is forged by God. The Church states that what God joins together, humans cannot sunder. As a result, people who get a civil divorce are still considered married in the eyes of the Catholic Church, which does not allow them to remarry, even if they are allowed a civil marriage. In some special cases, however, Catholics can be permitted an annulment. With a nullity, religions and the state often apply different rules, meaning that a couple, for example, could receive a divorce from the state and not have their marriage annulled by the Catholic Church because the state disagrees with the church over whether an annulment could be granted in a particular case. This produces the phenomenon of Catholics getting Church annulments simultaneously with state divorces, allowing the ex-partners to marry other people in the eyes of both the Church and the State. Islam does allow divorce; however, there is a verse stated in the Qur'an describing divorce as the least desirable act allowed between people. The general rule is for a man to allow his wife to stay until the end of her menstrual period or for 3 months if she so wishes after the divorce. During this period they would be divorced in that they would simply be living under the same roof but not functioning as man and wife. The Qur'an scholars suggest that the main point is to prevent any decisions by the woman from being affected by hormonal fluctuations as well as to allow any heated arguments or differences to be resolved in a civil manner before the marriage is completely terminated. However, there is no obligation on the woman to stay, if she so wishes she may leave. The man is also obligated to give his wife a gift or monetary sum equivalent to at least half her mahr (gift or monetary sum which is given to the wife at the commencement of the marriage). Specific conditions as to how a divorce is conducted also apply if a woman is pregnant, or has given birth just prior to the divorce. refer Qur'an 2:228-232, 236, 237, 241 and 65:1-7. See also 4:35.

Marriage and economics

The economics of marriage have changed over time. Historically, in many cultures the family of the bride had to provide a dowry to pay a man for marrying their daughter. In other cultures, the family of the groom had to pay a bride price to the bride's family for the right to marry the daughter. In some cultures, dowries and bride prices are still demanded today. In both cases, the financial transaction takes place between the groom (or his family) and the bride's family; the bride has no part in the transaction and often no choice in whether or not to participate in the marriage. In many modern legal systems, two people who marry have the choice between keeping their property separate or combining their property. In the latter case, called community property, when the marriage ends by divorce each owns half; if one partner dies the surviving partner owns half and for the other half inheritance rules apply. In some legal systems, the partners in a marriage are "jointly liable" for the debts of the marriage. This has a basis in a traditional legal notion called the "Doctrine of Necessaties" whereby a husband was responsible to provide necessary things for his wife. Where this is the case, one partner may be sued to collect a debt for which they did not expressly contract. Critics of this practice note that debt collection agencies can abuse this claiming an unreasonably wide range of debts to be expenses of the marriage. The cost of defense and the burden of proof is then placed on the non-contracting party to prove that the expense is not a debt of the family. The respective maintenance obligations, during and eventually after a marriage, are regulated in most jurisdictions; see alimony. It is possible to analyze the institution of marriage using economic theory; see [http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Academic/Price_Theory/PThy_Chapter_21/PThy_Chap_21.html David Friedman, Price Theory: Chapter 21: The Economics of Love and Marriage].

Criticisms of marriage

Under the principle of church-state separation, libertarians criticize the government regulation of and the state's involvement in marriage, because many now consider marriage a religious institution. The libertarian view is that if government must recognize marriage at all, it should be treated as a contract like any other between two freely consenting parties, which would essentially reduce family law to a subset of contract law. The religious aspects should remain the province of one's church and that church's ecclesiastical courts (if it has them). Relatively new legal developments like palimony have already tilted certain governments slightly in this direction. Other commentators have argued that marriage has a significant dark side. They sometimes condemn individual local practices and sometimes even the entire institution of marriage. A good many of these are feminist critiques, which claim that in many cultures marriage is particularly disadvantageous to women. [http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm] With the divorce rate half that of the marriage rate, [http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/p60-225.pdf] 15% of men are awarded custody, unchanged since 1994 (cf. p. 1), and [http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/004012.html] annual support payments increasing 18% to $40 billion paid by 7.8 million separated parents, 6.6 million are fathers with [http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title04/0458.htm] cash incentives of up to $4.1 billion available to states that create support and arrearage orders, and then collect (cf. 6B, 6C, & 6D), it may help to explain the conclusion of a [http://marriage.rutgers.edu/Publications/SOOU/SOOU2004.pdf] recent marriage report by Rutgers University. "Continuing decline of the marriage rate accompanied by an increase in the number of cohabiting couples; a small increase in the percentage of children living in fragile families and born out of wedlock; and a sharp increase among teenage boys in their acceptance of unwed childbearing and a slight decrease in agreement among teenagers, especially girls, that "living together before getting married is a good idea." says 2004 Social Health of Marriage in America. Marriage strike behavior although not explicit. Further, during a litigated divorce allegations of domestic violence, child custody, paternity, alimony, child support, fathers' rights create additional concerns, especially with divorce attorneys rates up to $300.00 per hour. [http://www.eleventhdistrictcourt.state.nm.us/stats/mckinley/dvcumulative.pdf] 85% of orders of protections are awarded to females, 7% of petitions denied. Since the enactment of the Violence Against Women Act of 1995, [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/vawo/about.htm] more than $1 billion spent to police and prosecutors. Since 1995, when a wife feels fearful, it is domestic violence. Divorce attorneys practice leveraging this assault charge into an order of protection to get a spouse, usually the man, out of the home, physically separating him from children and his property. In many areas of the world, when a woman was in her early teens her father arranged a marriage for her in return for a bride price, sometimes to a man twice her age who was a stranger to her. Her older husband then became her guardian and she could be cut off almost completely from her family. The woman had little or no say in the marriage negotiations, which might even have occurred without her knowledge. Some traditions allowed a woman who failed to bear a son to be given back to her father. This reflected the importance of bearing children and extending the family to succeeding generations. Often both parties are expected to be virgins before their marriage, but in many cultures women were more strictly held to this standard. One old tradition in Europe, which survived into the twentieth century in rural Greece, was for this to be proven by hanging the bloody bed sheet from the wedding night from the side of the house. Similarly, sexual fidelity is very often expected in marriage, but sometimes the expectations and penalties for women have been harsher than those for men. In some traditions marriage could be a traumatic, unpleasant turn of events for a girl. "The Lot of Women" written in Athens in the mid 5th century BC laments this situation: :Young women, in my opinion, have the sweetest existence known to mortals in their father's homes, for their innocence always keeps children safe and happy. But when we reach puberty and can understand, we are thrust out and sold away from our ancestral gods and from our parents. Some go to strange men's homes, others to foreigner's, some to joyless houses, some to hostile. And all this once the first night has yoked us to our husband we are forced to praise and say that all is well. On the other hand, marriage has often served to assure the woman of her husband's continued support and enabled her to focus more attention on the raising of her children. This security has typically been greater when and where divorce has been more difficult to obtain. Some older wedding traditions still survive in some form in today's ceremonies. Women may still be symbolically "given away" by their fathers. Some brides still vow to "love and obey" their husbands and some bridegrooms vow to "care for" their wives. A groom might remove his bride's garter, a symbol of her virginity, as a public representation of his claim on her sexuality. Brides toss their bouquets towards a group of single women, who compete to catch the bouquet; the woman who catches the bouquet is believed to have the good fortune to be the next woman to get married. One very common tradition is that of the groom carrying the bride over the threshold of their house. Investigating the origin of this tradition around 100 AD, Plutarch postulated three different possibilities. The first was that the act of picking up the bride was a symbolic re-enactment of the Rape of the Sabines. Another was that it symbolized the bride's reluctance to surrender her virginity, which she did only under duress. And the last suggested marital faithfulness - having been carried into the house by her husband she would only leave it the same way. This of course was in the context of a patriarchal culture in which it was said that a woman should only leave her house when she was so old that people would not ask whose wife she was, but whose mother. It has also been said to originate from a Roman belief that it was bad luck for a bride to stumble while entering her new home. These traditions, though often attacked by critics and scholars, nevertheless remain a treasured part of many ceremonies, cherished by both bride and groom.

Pragmatic marriage

A Pragmatic (or 'Arranged') marriage that is facilitated by formal procedures of family or group politics. A responsible authority sets up or encourages the marriage. The authority could be parents, family, a religious figure or a consensus. The former two often start the process with informal pressure, social pressure, whilst the latter two often start the process with a formal system or statement. In both cases, the authority has a compelling veto over the marriage, and this system is socially supported by the rest of community so that to deny it is extreme and drastic. Once declared, an engagement is implicit, which follows through with a formal marriage ceremony. Those who uphold pragmatic marriage frequently state that it is traditional, that it upholds social morals, that it is good for the families involved.

Differences of opinion

Those who believe in romantic marriage will often criticize pragmatic marriage, considering it is oppressive, inhuman, or immoral. Defenders of pragmatic marriage disagree, often pointing to cultures where the success rate of pragmatic marriages is seen to be high, and holding that nearly all couples learn to love and care for each other very deeply. Those who believe in pragmatic marriage also have some traditional criticisms of romantic marriage, saying that it is short-term, overly based on sexual lust or immoral. Defenders of romantic marriage would hold that it is preferable to achieve an emotional bond before entering into a lifelong commitment. Cultures that aspire to create relationships after couples marry are those with institutionalized practices of pragmatic marriage. Cultures that come to think that marriages should only be tried once a short-term compatibility already exists adopt romantic marriages. It is debatable whether either method is more correct or that either set of ideas about marriage is more right - the underlying assumptions are different. Much criticism of the "other" form of marriage to what one person accepts is based on misunderstanding assumptions about marriage made from different cultural starting-points and what different groups of people consider marriage to be.

External links

- [http://Ouchmytoe.rediffblogs.com Funny Marriage Advice] - Ouchmytoe - A Blog on Marriage & the problems it brings
- [http://dontmarry.com/ Don't Marry] - A dissenting opinion on the social convention of marriage in Western society.
- [http://www.unmarried.org The Alternatives to Marriage Project ] Advocating for equality and fairness for unmarried people
- [http://nikah.com/marriage/default.asp Muslim Marriage Information]
- [http://www.acfc.org/ The American Coalition for Fathers and Children (ACFC)]
- [http://www.zionwedding.com Jewish Matrimony and Personals] - Jewish Matrimony and Personals
- [http://www.islamimatrimonials.com/muslim_marriage_rights.htm Muslim Matrimonial] - Rights of Spouses in Islam
- [http://www.freedomtomarry.org/ The Freedom to Marry Coalition]
- [http://weddings.iloveindia.com/features/types-of-hindu-marriages.html Types of Hindu Marriages]
- [http://marriage.rutgers.edu/publicat.htm The National Marriage Project]
- [http://nikahsearch.com/marriage/marriage.htm Marriage in Islam] - Hadith, Marriage Conditions and Etiquettes of Muslim Marriage
- [http://www.fatherhood.hhs.gov/charting02/Family.htm#tff1.1 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Survey]
- [http://www.nikah.com Muslim Matrimonial Service]
- [http://www.islamfrominside.com/Pages/Articles/Marriage%20in%20Islam.html Marriage (Nikah) in Islam]
- [http://www.muslimmatrimonial.com Muslim marriage and Advice]
- [http://www.growthtrac.com Christian Marriage Resources at Growthtrac]
- [http://nikahsearch.com/marriage/conditions.htm Conditions of Muslim Marriage]
- [http://family-marriage-counseling.com The Family & Marriage Counseling Directory]
- [http://www.fisheaters.com/holymatrimony.html The Catholic Sacrament of Holy Matrimony] includes the rite used before Vatican II and by traditional Catholics today
- [http://www.chabad.org/article.asp?AID=313716 Laws and Customs of the Jewish Wedding] chabad.org
- [http://www.originalintent.org/edu/marriage.php Treatise on Common Law Marriage] Category:Divorce Category:Family
- Category:Wedding ko:혼인 ja:結婚

Common-law marriage

Common-law marriage (or common law marriage), sometimes called informal marriage or marriage by habit and repute is, historically, a form of interpersonal status in which a man and a woman are legally married. The essential elements of a common law marriage are that a man and woman, both of whom are of legal age to contract a statutory marriage, mutually consent to live together and hold themselves out to the world as husband and wife. By definition, there is nothing in writing between the parties. They can draft a document between them as to certain parameters of their marriage, but the marriage would not rest upon it for its validity. Thus, the written marriage contract of Jewish tradition is not common law marriage; nor does a written non-marital relationship contract (or 'palimony agreement') create a common law marriage. Additionally, no marriage license is obtained from the government and there is no solemnization of the marriage subsequent thereto (or it would be a statutory marriage, not a common law marriage). The State of Utah does require a declaration of marriage be obtained by a court of competent jurisdiction, at least within a year of a common law marriage's dissolution, for the marriage to be recognized by the state - but that is merely a question of post-marital housekeeping that recognizes the existence of the marriage after the fact. It is not a license, nor is it a solemnization. As with statutory marriage, a common-law marriage can only be dissolved by a formal divorce decree. This is because marital dissolution did not exist at common law (though marital annulment has always been possible). Common-law marriage is very similar, but distinguishable from civil unions, reciprocal beneficiaries relationships, and non-marital relationship contracts (aka, 'palimony agreements'). Since the mid-1990's, the term "common-law marriage" has been used in parts of Europe, Israel and Canada to describe various types of domestic partnership between persons of the same sex as well as persons of the opposite sex. Although these interpersonal stati are often, as in Hungary, called "common-law marriage" they differ from true common-law marriage in that they are not legally recognized as "marriages" but are a parallel interpersonal status, known in most jurisdictions as "domestic partnership" or "registered partnership."

General History

Most marriages in Europe were common law marriages until the Council of Trent convened 1545 - 1563. Thereafter, a marriage was only legal in Roman Catholic countries if it were performed by a priest of the Roman Catholic Church. This was not accepted in the newly Protestant nations of Europe, of course; nor by Protestants who lived in Roman Catholic countries or their colonies in the Americas or elsewhere; nor by Eastern Orthodox Christians, of course. Nevertheless, all Protestant and Eastern Orthodox countries eventually abolished "marriage by habit and repute" with the sole exception of Scotland - which last considered abolition in 1992, and decided it was not necessary to bother. The practice persevered in Scotland because the Act of Union of 1707 provided she retained her own legal system separately from the rest of the Kingdom of Great Britain. Thus, Lord Hardwicke's Act, passed the British Parliament in 1753, did not apply to Scotland. It did apply to England and Wales, however(and apparently to Ireland, after the Act of Union, 1801), where marriages were only valid in law if they were performed by a priest of the Church of England - unless the participants in the marriage were Jews or Quakers, both of whom were exempt from that provision. Lord Hardwicke's Act did not apply to Britain's overseas colonies at that time, so the practice continued in the future United States. Marriages may still be contracted as at common law in ten states and the District of Columbia.

Australia

In Australia the term de facto marriage is used to refer to relationships between men and women who are not married but are effectively living as husband and wife for a period of time. Many laws make provision for such relationships, such as social support laws.

Canada

Canadian federal law does not have "common law marriage", but various federal laws include "common law status," which automatically takes effect once two people (of any gender) have lived together in a romantic relationship for one full year. Partners may be eligible for various government benefits of married spouses based upon their relationship with the individual who is eligible for some type of family based benefit. As family law varies between provinces, there are differences between the provinces regarding the recognition of common law marriage. In Ontario, a common law province, the Ontario Family Law Act specifically recognizes common law spouses in sec. 29 dealing with spousal support issues; the requirements are living together for three years or having a child in common and having "cohabitated in a relationship of some permanence." However, the part that deals with marital property excludes common law spouses as sec. 2 defines spouses as those who are married together or who entered into a void or voidable marriage in good faith. Thus common law partners do not always evenly divide property in a breakup, and the courts have to look to concepts such as the constructive or resulting trust to divide property in an equitable manner between partners. Another difference that distinguishes common law spouses from married partners is that a common law partner can be compelled to testify against his or her partner in a court of law. In 1999, after the court case M. v. H., the Supreme Court of Canada decided that same-sex partners would also be included in common law relationships. Québec, which unlike the other provinces has a Civil Code, has never recognized common-law partnership as a kind of marriage. [http://www.justice.gouv.qc.ca/english/publications/generale/union-a.htm See about De Facto Marriage in Québec]. However, many laws in Québec explicitly apply to common-law partners (called "de facto unions" or conjoints de fait) as they do to spouses. [http://www.justice.gouv.qc.ca/english/publications/generale/union-a.htm#free See a List of These Rights and Freedoms] As in the other provinces, same-sex partners may become common-law spouses in Québec. A recent amendment to the Civil Code of Québec recognizes a type of domestic partnership called civil union that is similar to common-law marriage and is likewise available to same-sex partners. A federal bill passed in 2005 now recognizes statutory marriages between same-sex couples. This follows upon the decisions of several federal courts that have struck down, within the provincial bounds of their jurisdiction, that portion of the federal Marriage Act which limits statutory marriage to opposite-sex couples.

United Kingdom

The term "common law marriage" is frequently used in England and Wales, however such a "marriage" is not recognised in law, and it does not confer any rights or obligations on the parties. See also English law. Genuine (that is, legal) common-law marriage was for practical purposes abolished under the Marriage Act, 1753. (It survives only in a few highly exceptional circumstances, where people who want to marry but are unable to do so any other way can simply declare that they are taking each other as husband and wife in front of witnesses. British civilians interned by the Japanese during World War II who did so were held to be legally married.) Under Scots law, there were several forms of "irregular marriage" (including marriage by correspondence), but all but one of them was abolished by 1947. Today, Scotland remains the only European jurisdiction never to have abolished the old style common-law marriage or, as it is known in Scots Law, "marriage by habit and repute". As in the American jurisdictions that have preserved it, this type of marriage can be difficult to prove. It is not enough for the couple to have lived together for several years, but they must have been generally regarded as husband and wife, e.g., their friends and neighbours must have known them as "Mr. and Mrs. So-and-so" (or at least they must have held themselves out to their neighbours and friends as Mr. and Mrs. So-an-so). And, as with American common-law marriages, it is a form of lawful marriage, so that nobody can say they are common-law spouses, or husband and wife by habit and repute, if one of them was legally married to somebody else when the relationship began. It is a testament to the influence of English and American legal thought that 57% of the Scots surveyed, for a study conducted in year 2000, either believed "common-law marriage" was synonymous with "marriage by habit and repute" (which is correct - indeed, many U.S. jurisdictions legally define "common-law marriage," in whole or in part, as "marriage by habit and repute"); or they believed it was synonymous with domestic partnership, which Hungary and some other countries modernly call "common-law marriage" (which is wrong). [http://www.scotland.gov.uk/cru/resfinds/lsf43-00.asp See Year 2000 Scottish Survey].

Israel

Israeli law recognizes common-law marriage (ידועים בציבור), particularly since an apparatus for civil marriage is absent, and many couples choose to avoid a religious marriage or are barred from it. Israeli law makes provisions for common-law spouses, but is murky as to the period of time that needs to pass before a relationship can be recognized as common-law marriage. Unlike marriage, the spouses need to supply proofs of their relationship in order to gain access to the various benefits and rights which accompany a common-law marriage. Since 1994 a series of rulings have extended the meaning of common-law marriage so as to include same-sex couples as well as heterosexual ones.

United States

In Meisher v. Moore, 96 U.S. 76 (1877), the United States Supreme Court ruled that marriages are contracts found in common law, and that common-law marriages shall only be invalidated by state passing a statute expressly forbidding such marriages. States which have abolished common-law marriage include: California (1895), Florida (1968), Georgia (1997), Idaho (1996), Illinois (1905), Indiana (1986), Michigan (1957), Minnesota (1941), Mississippi (1956), Missouri (1921), Nebraska (1923), Nevada (1942), New York (1933), New Jersey (1939), Ohio (1991), Pennsylvania (2005), South Dakota (1959), and Wisconsin (1917) (See [http://fl.bna.com/fl/19980804/j01998.htmStaudenmayer v. Staudenmayer, (Pa. M.D. 1998)]). All of these states still recognize the common-law marriages which were contracted prior to abolition; and all U.S. states, as a matter of comity, recognize all common-law marriages contracted in those states where they can still be lawfully contracted. The states of Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah, and the District of Columbia still permit marriages to be contracted as at common law before Lord Hardwicke's Act. So does the State of New Hampshire, but only for the purposes of settling decedants' estates after one of the parties to a common-law marriage has died. Contrary to popular belief, the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which has never been used even to validate a sister state statutory marriage, does not apply to common law marriages, except for certain common law marriages from Utah only. The Clause explicitly applies to sister state public acts, public records and judicial proceedings. "Public act" means statutory laws passed by individual states. Because common law marriages operate under common law, not statutory law, there are no public acts pertinent to common law marriage for a sister state to recognize. Likewise, there are no public records to recognize, because common law marriages generate no marriage certificates. Finally, with the sole exception of Utah, there are almost never any judicial proceedings pertinent to a common law marriage for a sister state to recognize. Thus, with the exception of some common law marriages from Utah, it is entirely impossible to invoke the Full Faith and Credit Clause for sister state recognition of a common law marriage. That would never be necessary anyway, because U.S. jurisdictions recognize each other's marriages under their own rules of comity. The only exception is when the foreign marriage would violate the public policy of the home jurisdiction as an "odious" marriage (e.g., an incestuous marriage, a polygamous marriage, etc.). Under the Defense of Marriage Act (Public Law 106-199), the terms "marriage" and "spouse" are defined to mean only an opposite-sex relationship, for purposes of federal law only. Additionally, the Act allows each U.S. state, territory, etc., to decline recognition of a same-sex relationship that is treated as a marriage under the law of another jurisdiction. That is an empty permission, however, since all states already had that right pursuant to the judicially created public policy exception to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. And there remains the fact, of course, that the Full Faith and Credit Clause has never been used to validate any sister state marriage. The requirements for a common law marriage to be valid differ from state to state:

Alabama

The requirements for a common-law marriage are: "(1) capacity; (2) present agreement or mutual consent to enter into the marriage relationship ...; (3) public recognition of the existence of the marriage; and (4) cohabitation or mutual assumption openly of marital duties and obligations." See [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=al&vol=1981820&invol=2 Creel v. Creel, 763 So. 2d 943 (Ala. 2000)], quoting Adams v. Boan, 559 So. 2d 1084, 1086 (Ala. 1990).

Colorado

The elements of a common-law marriage are, if both spouses: (1) are legally free to contract a valid ceremonial marriage, (2) hold themselves out as husband and wife; (3) consent to the marriage; (4) cohabitate; and (5) have the reputation in the community as being married ([http://www.ago.state.co.us/FAQ/CLM_FAQ.cfm Colorado Attorney General - FAQ: Common-Law Marriage]). See also: [http://www.colorado-family-law.com/colorado-common-law-marriage.htm Colorado Common Law Marriage Article]

District of Columbia

The elements of a common-law marriage are: (1) "an express, mutual, present intent and agreement to be husband and wife"; "followed by" (2) "cohabitation in good faith." See Jackson v. Young, 546 A.2d 1009 (D.C. App. 1988), quoting Johnson v. Young, 372 A.2d 992, 994 (D.C. App. 1977).

Iowa

"The three elements of a common-law marriage are: (1) the present intent and agreement to be married; (2) continuous cohabitation; and (3) public declaration that the parties are husband and wife. [http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/supreme/opinions/20040616/03-0355.asp Martin, 681 N.W.2d at 617]. The public declaration or holding out to the public is considered to be the acid test of a common-law marriage. In re Marriage of Winegard, 257 N.W.2d 609, 616 (Iowa 1977)." See [http://www.judicial.state.ia.us/appeals/opinions/20041115/03-1925.asp Snyder-Murphy v. City of Cedar Rapids (Iowa 2004)]

Kansas

Under [http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/getStatute.do?number=12265 Kansas Statute 23-101 (2002)], both parties to a common-law marriage must be 18 years-old. The three requirements which must coexist to establish a common-law marriage in Kansas are: (1) capacity to marry; (2) a present marriage agreement; and (3) a holding out of each other as husband and wife to the public. See [http://www.kscourts.org/kscases/ctapp/1999/19991001/82974.htm In the Matter of the Petition of Lola Pace (Kan. 1999)]

Montana

A common-law marriage is established when a couple: "(1) is competent to enter into a marriage, (2) mutually consents and agrees to a common law marriage, and (3) cohabits and is reputed in the community to be husband and wife." See [http://www.lawlibrary.state.mt.us/dscgi/ds.py/GetRepr/File-37819/html Snetsinger v. Montana University System, 325 Mont. 148, 104 P.3d 445], quoting In re Ober, 314 Mont. 20, 62 P.3d 1114.

New Hampshire

"Persons cohabiting and acknowledging each other as husband and wife, and generally reputed to be such, for the period of 3 years," are recognized by the state as being legally married after one spouse dies. Thus, the state posthumously recognises common-law marriages ensuring that a surviving spouse inherits without any difficulty. See: [http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XLIII/457/457-39.htm NH RSA 457:39 Cohabitation, etc.]

Oklahoma

The criteria for a common-law marriage is: (1) "an actual and mutual agreement between the spouses to be husband and wife;" (2) "a permanent relationship;" (3) "an exclusive relationship, proved by cohabitation as man and wife;" and (4) "the parties to the marriage must hold themselves out publicly as husband and wife." [http://wyomcases.courts.state.wy.us/applications/oscn/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=9575 See Estate of Stinchcomb v. Stinchcomb, 674 P.2d 26, 28-29 (Okla. 1983)].

Rhode Island

The criteria for a common-law marriage is: (1) the parties seriously intended to enter into the husband-wife relationship; (2) the parties’ conduct is of such a character as to lead to a belief in the community that they were married. See [http://www.courts.state.ri.us/supreme/pdf-files/01-174.pdf DeMelo v. Zompa, 844 A.2d 174, 177 (R.I. 2004)] (pdf).

South Carolina

The criteria for a common law marriage is: (1) when two parties have a present intent (usually, but not necessarily, evidenced by a public and unequivocal declaration) to enter into a marriage contract; and (2) "a mutual agreement between the parties to assume toward each other the relation of husband and wife." See [http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/opinions/displayOpinion.cfm?caseNo=3444Tarnowski v. Lieberman (S.C. Ct. App. 2002)]. The minimum age for such a marriage is sixteen years-old as established by [http://www.scstatehouse.net/code/t20c001.htm South Carolina Code of Laws 20-1-100 (2004)].

Texas

Common-law marriage is known as an "informal marriage," which can be established either by declaration (registering at the county courthouse without having a ceremony), or by meeting a 3-prong test showing evidence of (1) an agreement to be married; (2) cohabitation in Texas; and (3) representation to others that the parties are married. However, if a couple does not commence a proceeding to prove their relationship was a marriage within two years of the end of the relationship, by law the marriage never existed in the first place, and no agreement to be married was ever present. See [http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/FA/content/htm/fa.001.00.000002.00.htm Texas Family Code Sec. 2.401].

Utah

For a common-law marriage to be legal and valid, "a court or administrative order must establish that it arises out of a contract between a man and a woman" who: (1) "are of legal age and capable of giving consent"; (2) "are legally capable of entering a solemnized marriage under the provisions of Title 30, Chap. 1 of the Utah Code; (3) "have cohabited"; (4) "mutually assume marital rights, duties, and obligations"; and (5) "who hold themselves out as and have acquired a uniform and general reputation as husband and wife" (See [http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE30/htm/30_01010.htm Utah Code Ann. 30-1-4.5 (2004)]).

External links

- [http://www.originalintent.org/edu/marriage.php Treatise on Common Law Marriage]
- [http://www.unmarried.org/common-law-marriage.html Demystifying Common Law Marriage] Category:Marriage Category:Family law

Palimony

Palimony is a slang term referring to a court judgment for property or support in a lawsuit between unmarried cohabitants. The term, a portmanteau of pal (see interpersonal relationship) and alimony, was coined by attorney Marvin Mitchelson in 1977 when his client Michelle Marvin (the former Michelle Triola) filed an unsuccessful suit against actor Lee Marvin. Ms. Marvin claimed that the actor, who was still married at the time, had promised to support her for the rest of her life. In legal jargon, a palimony case is sometimes called a "Marvin" case. The word "palimony" would seem to suggest some relationship to alimony. However, in most jurisdictions, palimony cases are civil suits, which means that they are not heard in family courts and are not subject to family law. Palimony developed as a branch of contract law and palimony claims usually allege that there was an oral or implied contract by which one party promised to support or share property with the other. See Marvin v. Marvin, 18 Cal. 3d 660 (1976)^{[http://online.ceb.com/calcases/C3/18C3d660.htm]}. Other theories on which a palimony suit can be based include promissory estoppel and quantum meruit. Sometimes, unmarried cohabitants may wish to structure their legal relationship so as to closely resemble those of spouses in a marriage, yet not marry (because they do not want to or they are barred from marrying on the basis that they are the same sex). The result often looks like palimony, but the contract is express, not implied. Lawyers have coined the term "Marvinizing" to describe the process of drawing up the necessary contracts. On the other hand, unmarried couples sometimes wish to avoid any possibility that one will sue the other based on a palimony theory. Such couples may enter into a cohabitation agreement specifying that their assets are separate and that neither one has an obligation to support the other.

Notable cases

- Lee Marvin, as described above. (1977)
- In 1982, famous pianist Liberace was sued for US$113,000,000 in palimony by his live-in boyfriend Scott Thorson (though Liberace denied being homosexual). Most of Thorson's claim was dismissed, but he did receive a settlement of US$95,000.
- Following Rock Hudson's 1985 death from AIDS, his live-in lover, Marc Christian, filed a palimony lawsuit against his estate and won.
- In 1996, Van Cliburn was sued by his former assistant, Thomas Zaremba, for a share of his wealth following a 17-year relationship during which Zaremba helped maintain Cliburn's household. Dismissed for lack of written agreement. Zaremba also accused Cliburn in the suit of subjecting him to the fear of AIDS through Cliburn's alleged unprotected liasons with third parties. The emotional distress claim was also dismissed. http://www.glbtq.com/arts/cliburn_v,2.html http://www.aegis.com/aidsline/1997/dec/M97C1497.html
- Brian Orser, homosexual Canadian figure skater (1998)
- In 2004, Bill Maher was sued for 9 million dollars by his ex-girlfriend, Nancy Johnson a.k.a. "Coco Johnsen", for palimony. On May 2, 2005, a superior court judge dismissed the lawsuit.

External links

- [http://www.jlaskin.com/ jlaskin.com]: Attorney's site with articles and information about palimony and cohabitation agreements. Category: Civil law

Common law

:For other meanings of the term, within the field of law, see common law (disambiguation). The common law forms a major part of the law of many countries, especially those with a history as British territories or colonies. It is notable for its inclusion of extensive non-statutory law reflecting a consensus of centuries of judgments by working jurists.

History of the common law

Common law originally developed under the auspices of the adversarial system in historical England from judicial decisions that were based in tradition, custom, and precedent. Such forms of legal institutions and culture bear resemblance to those which existed historically in continental Europe and other societies where precedent and custom have at times played a substantial role in the legal process, including Germanic law recorded in Roman historical chronicles. The form of reasoning used in common law is known as casuistry or case-based reasoning. The common law, as applied in civil cases (as distinct from criminal cases), was devised as a means of compensating someone for wrongful acts known as torts, including both intentional torts and torts caused by negligence and as developing the body of law recognizing and regulating contracts. Today common law is generally thought of as applying only to civil disputes; originally it encompassed the criminal law before criminal codes were adopted in most common law jurisdictions in the late 19th century, although many criminal codes reflect legislative attempts to codify the common law. The type of procedure practiced in common law courts is known as the adversarial system; this is also a development of the common law. Before the institutional stability imposed on England by William the Conqueror in 1066, English residents, like those of many other societies, particularly the Germanic cultures of continental Europe, were governed by unwritten local customs that varied from community to community and were enforced in often arbitrary fashion. For example, courts generally consisted of informal public assemblies that weighed conflicting claims in a case and, if unable to reach a decision, might require an accused to test guilt or innocence by carrying a red-hot iron or snatching a stone from a cauldron of boiling water or some other "test" of veracity (trial by ordeal). If the defendant's wound healed within a prescribed period, he was set free as innocent; if not, execution usually followed. In 1154, Henry II became the first Plantagenet king. Among many achievements, Henry institutionalized common law by creating a unified system of law "common" to the country through incorporating and elevating local custom to the national, ending local control and peculiarities, eliminating arbitrary remedies, and reinstating a jury system of citizens sworn on oath to investigate reliable criminal accusations and civil claims. The jury reached its verdict through evaluating common local knowledge, not necessarily through the presentation of evidence, a distinguishing factor from today's civil and criminal court systems. Henry II's creation of a powerful and unified court system, which curbed somewhat the power of canonical (church) courts, brought him (and England) into conflict with the church, most famously, with Thomas Becket, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Things were resolved eventually, at least for a time, in Henry's favor when a group of his henchmen murdered Becket. For its part, the Church soon canonized Becket as a saint. As early as the 15th century, it became the practice that litigants who felt they had been cheated by the common-law system would petition the King in person. For example, they might argue that an award of damages (at common law) was not sufficient redress for a trespasser occupying their land, and instead request that the trespasser be evicted. From this developed the system of equity, administered by the Lord Chancellor, in the courts of chancery. By their nature, equity and law were frequently in conflict and litigation would frequently continue for years as one court countermanded the other, even though it was established by the 17th century that equity should prevail. A famous example is the fictional case of Jarndyce and Jarndyce in Bleak House, by Charles Dickens. In England, courts of law and equity were combined by the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875, with equity being supreme in case of conflict. In the United States, parallel systems of law (providing money damages) and equity (fashioning a remedy to fit the situation) survived well into the 20th century in most jurisdictions. In the federal courts there is no separation between law and equity; Delaware still has separate courts of law and equity, and in many states there are separate divisions for law and equity within one court.

Common law legal systems

The common law constitutes the basis of the legal systems of: England and Wales, the Republic of Ireland, the states of the United States (except Louisiana), Canada (except Quebec civil law), Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Brunei, Pakistan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and many other generally English-speaking countries or Commonwealth countries. Essentially, every country which has been colonised at some time by Britain uses common law except those that had been colonized by other nations, such as Quebec (which follows French law to some extent) and South Africa (which follows Roman Dutch law), where the prior civil law system was retained to respect the civil rights of the local colonists. India's system of common law is also a mixture of English law and the local Hindu law. The main alternative to the common law system is the civil law system, which is used in Continental Europe, and most of the rest of the world. The former Soviet Bloc and other Socialist countries used a Socialist law system. The opposition between civil law and common law legal systems has become increasingly blurred, with the growing importance of jurisprudence (almost like case law but in name) in civil law countries, and the growing importance of statute law and codes in common law countries (for instance, in matters of criminal and commercial law). Scotland is often said to use the civil law system but in fact it has a unique system which combines elements of an uncodified civil law dating back to the Corpus Juris Civilis with an element of common law long predating the Treaty of Union with England in 1707. Scots common law differs in that the use of precedents is subject to the courts seeking to discover the principle which justifies a law rather than to search for an example as a precedent and that the principles of natural justice and fairness have always formed a source of Scots Law. Comparable pluralistic legal systems operate in Quebec, Louisiana and South Africa. These systems are referred to as mixed legal systems. The U.S. state of California has a system based on common law, but it has codified the law in the manner of the civil law jurisdictions. The reason for the enactment of the codes in California in the nineteenth century was to replace a pre-existing system based on Spanish civil law with a system based on common law, similar to that in most other states. California and a number of other Western states, however, have retained the concept of community property derived from civil law. The California courts have treated portions of the codes as an extension of the common-law tradition, subject to judicial development in the same manner as judge-made common law. (Most notably, in the case Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 13 Cal.3d 804 (1975), the California Supreme Court adopted the principle of comparative negligence in the face of a California Civil Code provision codifying the traditional common-law doctrine of contributory negligence.) The state of New York, which also has a civil law history from its Dutch colonial days, also began a codification of its laws in the 19th century. The only part of this codification process that was considered complete is known as the Field Code applying to civil procedure. The original colony of New Netherlands was settled by the Dutch and the law was also Dutch. When the British captured pre-existing colonies they continued to allow the local settlers to keep their civil law. However, the Dutch settlers revolted against the English and the colony was recaptured by the Dutch. When the English finally regained control of New Netherlands -- as a punishment unique in the history of the British Empire -- they forced the English common law upon all the colonists, including the Dutch. This was problematic as the patroon system of land holding, based on the feudal system and civil law, continued to operate in the colony until it was abolished in the mid-nineteenth century. The influence of Roman Dutch law continued in the colony well into the late nineteenth century. The codification of a law of general obligations shows how remnants of the civil law tradition in New York continued on from the Dutch days.

Basic principles of common law

Statutes which reflect English common law are understood always to be interpreted in light of the common law tradition, and so may leave a number of things unsaid because they are already understood from the point of view of pre-existing case law and custom. This can readily be seen in the area of criminal law, which while remaining largely governed by the common law in England, has been entirely codified in many US states. Codification is the process where a statute is passed with the intention of restating the common law position in a single document rather than creating new offences, so the common law remains relevant to their interpretation. This is why even today American law schools teach the common law of crime as practiced in England in 1750, since the colonies (and subsequently the states) deviated from the common law as practiced in England only after that date. By contrast to the statutory codifications of common law, some laws are purely statutory, and may create a new cause of action beyond the common law. An example is the tort of wrongful death, which allows certain persons, usually a spouse, child or estate, to sue for damages on behalf of the deceased. There is no such tort in English common law; thus, any jurisdiction that lacks a wrongful death statute will not allow a lawsuit for the wrongful death of a loved one. Where a wrongful death statute exists, the damages or compensation available are limited to those outlined in the statute (typically, an upper limit on the amount of damages). Courts generally interpret statutes that create new causes of action narrowly -- that is, limited to their precise terms -- because the courts generally recognize the legislature as being supreme in deciding the reach of judge made law unless such statute should violate some "second order" constitutional law provision (compare judicial activism). Where a tort is rooted in common law, then all damages traditionally recognized historically for that tort may be sued for, whether or not there is mention of those damages in the current statutory law. For instance, a person who sustains bodily injury through the negligence of another may sue for medical costs, pain, suffering, loss of earnings or earning capacity, mental and/or emotional distress, loss of quality of life, disfigurement, and more. These damages need not be set forth in statute as they already exist in the tradition of common law. However, without a wrongful death statute, most of them are extinguished upon death.

Domestic partnership

In the United States

See also

Personal relationship

Types of interpersonal relationships

Factors affecting interpersonal relationships

Theories of interpersonal relationships

External links

See also

Marriage

Definitions

Types of marriages

Western world

Eastern world

Polygamy, monogamy, and polyandry

Traditional cultures

Marriage today in Belgium, The Netherlands, Canada, Spain

Unique Practices

Recognition

Rights and obligations

Marriage restrictions

Termination

Weddings

Marriage and religion

Marriage and economics

Criticisms of marriage

Pragmatic marriage

Differences of opinion

See also

External links

Common-law marriage

General History

Australia

Canada

United Kingdom

Israel

United States

Alabama

Colorado

District of Columbia

Iowa

Kansas

Montana

New Hampshire

Oklahoma

Rhode Island

South Carolina

Texas

Utah

External links

Palimony

Notable cases

External links

Common law

History of the common law

Common law legal systems

Basic principles of common law

Works on the common