Same-Sex Couples

Abstract

In this article, the authors present a typology for organizing our current knowledge regarding same-sex couples in the United States who have and have not established legal ties between partners. This framework is complemented by a discussion of key rulings that define what is legally possible as well as the introduction of “legal consciousness,” a construct for examining how perceptions of legal authority drive engagement with the legal system. Finally, the authors use their analysis to generate questions for future research and discuss policy and practice implications.

Contextual Relational Uncertainty Model: Understanding Ambiguity in a Changing Sociopolitical Context of Marriage

“…Similarly, when Florida allowed for same-sex marriage at the state level, some regional courthouses continued to refuse licenses to same-sex couples, with similar occurrences elsewhere (e.g., Kentucky; Campo-Flores, 2015). Thus, many individuals are left with uncertainty regarding whether this legal recognition will remain as a result of persistent political opposition (e.g., Stack & Dias, 2018;Weisman, 2015) Beyond being just a barometer of acceptance, recognition of a relationship's legality is salient because legal recognition provides rights and protections (Oswald & Kuvalanka, 2008), relationship security and confidence (Whitton et al, 2007), and structural and moral barriers to leaving the union (Johnson, Caughlin, & Huston, 1999; see also Herek, 2006;Lannutti, 2011). For example, before same-sex marriage was legalized, many couples sought ways to provide a sense of security and certainty, such as filing power of attorney to establish legal interdependence (see Oswald, 2002;Riggle, Rostosky, Prather, & Hamrin, 2005; see also Porche & Purvin, 2008).…”

Marriage (In)equality: The Perspectives of Adolescents and Emerging Adults With Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Parents

“…We also draw from the notion of legal consciousness (Ewick & Silbey, 1998), which encompasses the bidirectional and historically changing tensions between individual engagement with the legal system and the structural and practical constraints that govern such engagement. Ewick and Silbey (1998) differentiated among three types of legal consciousness-(a) before the law, (b) with the law, and (c) against the law-that attend to ''both the constraints and opportunities of law and the ways in which people negotiate their lives within these parameters'' (Oswald & Kuvalanka, 2008, p. 1053. When individuals perceive themselves as positioned before the law, they view the legal system as a powerful external authority to which they submit.…”

“…When individuals perceive themselves as positioned before the law, they view the legal system as a powerful external authority to which they submit. A child with LGB parents who accepts her or his family's lack of legal rights as unchangeable and not worth challenging is standing before the law (Oswald & Kuvalanka, 2008). When individuals position themselves with the law, they strategically engage with the law for their own benefit.…”

“…Whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry is a topic of considerable debate within the United States (Woodford, 2010). After the 1996 passage of the federal Defense of Marriage Act , which defined marriage as exclusively heterosexual for federal purposes, several states passed laws or constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman (Oswald & Kuvalanka, 2008). Only six states (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont) and the District of Columbia currently allow same-sex couples to enter into civil marriages, and California remains in limbo while a federal district court judge's decision to overturn the state's recent constitutional amendment restricting marriage to heterosexual couples is appealed (Associated Press, 2010).…”

Social, Economic, and Environmental Justice for All Families

“…Same-sex partners in the United States do not have equal opportunity to marry or otherwise have their relationship recognized by the state or religious institutions (Oswald & Kuvalanka, 2008). The resulting "marriage inequality" means that same-sex couples are denied legal rights, responsibilities, and benefits that heterosexual spouses automatically receive by virtue of their legally married status.…”