Abolishing Marriage: Can Civil Partnership Cover it?
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
This paper argues that all adult intimate relationships should be regulated under one single statute. This statute should be the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (which currently applies to same sex couples). The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (which applies to opposite sex couples), should be repealed; it should not be amended to include same sex couples. There would, as a consequence, be no such thing as (legal) marriage. Marriage as a legal construct is a heterosexual and patriarchal institution and is therefore so fundamentally flawed it is beyond the possibility of successful reform or repair. The present system of having two distinct legal means of relationship recognition is akin to sexual apartheid and is therefore unsustainable in the long term. Having a legal system which recognises only one form of legal partnership would therefore formally end a discriminatory system. Despite its drawbacks, Civil Partnership does not have the same extent of symbolic and practical degree of flaws as Marriage.
- Auchmuty, R. 2004. Same sex marriage revised: Feminist critique and legal strategy. Feminism and Psychology 14 (1): 101–126. CrossRef
- Boyd, S. 2004. The perils of rights discourse: A response to Kitzinger and Wilkinson. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 4 (1): 211–217. CrossRef
- Christian Institute. 2003. Response of the Christian Institute to Civil Partnership—a framework for the legal recognition of same-sex couples. http://www.christian.org.uk/issues/archive_html/civilpartnerships/ci_response.pdf. Accessed 28 Aug 2008.
- Church of England. 2003. Response to Department of Trade and Industry Consultation Document. http://www.cofe.anglican.org/. Accessed 30 Sept 2003.
- Clive, E. 1980. Marriage: An unnecessary legal concept? In Marriage and cohabitation in contemporary societies: Areas of legal, social and economic change, ed. J. Eekelaar and S. Katz. London: Butterworths.
- Department of Trade, Industry (Women and Equality Unit). 2003. Responses to civil partnership: A framework for the legal recognition of same-sex couples. London: The Department of Trade and Industry.
- Hoggett, B. 1980. Ends and means: The utility of marriage as a legal institution. In Marriage and cohabitation in contemporary societies: Areas of legal, social and economic change, ed. J. Eekelaar and S. Katz. London: Butterworths.
- O’Donovan, K. 1984. Legal marriage—who needs it? Modern Law Review 47 (1): 111–118.
- O’Donovan, K. 1985. Sexual divisions in law. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.
- O’Donovan, K. 1993. Family law matters. London: Pluto Press.
- Poulter, S. 1979. The definition of marriage in English law. Modern Law Review 42 (4): 409–429.
- Wright, W. 2006. The tide in favour of equality: Same-sex marriage in Canada and England and Wales. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family 2006 20 (3): 249–285. CrossRef
- Abolishing Marriage: Can Civil Partnership Cover it?
Liverpool Law Review
Volume 30, Issue 1 , pp 1-12
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Civil partnership
- Opposite sex
- Same sex
- Industry Sectors