Civil Unions are inadequate substitute for marriage anywhere

By:Anne Stanback, Executive Director
Love Makes a Family

Nearly three years ago, the Connecticut legislature approved the creation of civil unions, a legal designation that would confer all the state rights, benefits and obligations of marriage to same-sex couples. While historic in many ways, the legislature stopped short of giving same-sex couples the legal designation they had hoped for and still seek: marriage. Soon, the legislature's Judiciary Committee will hold a public hearing on "An Act Concerning Civil Unions." The individuals testifying today will highlight the inadequacy, the confusion, and the unintended consequences that have resulted from creating a separate and unequal marital status as a substitute for marriage.

As hundreds of same-sex couples in Connecticut have reported to Love Makes a Family since the law went into effect on October 1, 2005, civil unions are not the same as marriage. Same-sex couples have been denied services (or had services delayed) in hospitals, funeral homes, state agencies and courts because the concept of civil union is confusing and unclear. Additionally, many couples have incurred significant financial disadvantages because of these issues.

Civil unions are misunderstood by the general public, as well as by those individuals and institutions who are in the positions of authority to enforce the law.  It is unfair that loving, committed couples should face additional burdens and hardships because they are denied access to the word “marriage” and its universally-understood legal status.

More importantly, there is no good reason to continue to exclude thousands of same-sex couples from the dignity and respect, as well as the clarity and legal and financial security, that marriage provides.

Some have argued that the state of Connecticut needs more time to make civil unions work.

Others have said that without a change in federal law, marriage would be no improvement over civil unions. Below is an excerpt from the Introduction of the First Interim Report from the New Jersey Civil Union Review Commission (February 19, 2008) that points out the errors of both these arguments:

Additionally, the Commission heard testimony that New Jersey's Civil Union Act is likely not to provide equality with the passage of time. An expert from Vermont, which in 2000 became the first jurisdiction in the United States to enact a civil union law, testified that civil union couples there still face problems with the law today. In fact, as a result of the inequities, Vermont has established a new commission to study whether to amend its state law to now provide full marriage equality to its same-sex committed couples.

This Commission also heard testimony that the term “marriage,” were it applied to the relationships of same-sex couples, could remedy the shortcomings of the Civil Union Act and make a significant difference in providing equality to same-sex couples in New Jersey, even with the challenges of federal law not recognizing same-sex relationships. An expert from Massachusetts, which in 2004 became the first U.S. state to allow same-sex couples to marry, testified that same-sex married couples there do not face many of the problems that New Jersey and Vermont civil union couples face today, even in the context of federal law.

For more information on the Vermont and New Jersey civil union experiences:

VERMONT: Attorney Beth Robinson, Chair of Vermont Freedom to Marry, 802-363-7565

NEW JERSEY: Steven Goldstein, Executive Director, Garden State Equality, 917-449-8918

Love Makes a Family is a statewide grassroots organization working for marriage equality in Connecticut. This article can be found at www.lmfct.org/.