Running head: FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

Family Impact Analysis of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Caitlin Theisen Minnesota State University, Mankato

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

Family Impact Analysis of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) On May 7, 1996 a new bill was introduced to the House of Judiciary entitled the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). It moved to federally define marriage as between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and to establish the word spouse as only referring to a husband or wife in an opposite-sex union. The sponsors of DOMA felt that ratifying the bill would define and protect the institution of marriage. Four months later on September 21, 1996, President Clinton signed the bill into law (GovTrack.us, 1996). In the years following the bills ratification, 37 states adopted similar Defense of Marriage laws into state legislature. This included California in 2008, but the law has since been ruled unconstitutional in federal court. Further enforcement pends official Supreme Court ruling. Currently, nine states and the District of Columbia will issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples; five states allow same-sex civil unions that grant state-level marriage rights to samesex couples; four states offer nearly all spousal rights to unmarried same-sex couples in domestic partnerships; and three states offer some, but not all, marriage rights to members of domestic partnerships (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2013). Support for DOMA Supporters of the Defense of Marriage Act, though often politically conservative, belong to all parties. They propose that same-sex marriage goes against an ancient cultural tradition, and allowing it would further weaken the already suffering institution of marriage in the United States. They also point out that the union of same-sex couples does not follow the doctrines of many religious organizations in which marriage ceremonies have traditionally taken place. Proponents of DOMA feel that introducing same-sex marriage into the mainstream culture would

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

teach children that a deviant behavior is acceptable, and lead to the mainstreaming of other deviant behaviors such as incest and bestiality. Finally, they believe that as same-sex couples cannot procreate they have no business being married, and the healthiest homes for children include both a mother and a father. Therefore, same-sex couples raising adopted or foster children would not be optimal for the wellbeing of children (ProCon.org, 2013). Support for Marriage Equality The number of supporters of the freedom to marry has been steadily increasing. Although many tend to be liberal in their political views, the last few years have seen a change of opinion for some conservative politicians, several of whom have publicly admitted being gay themselves. Other politicians admit their regret for having voted for DOMA to be passed into law, including former president Bill Clinton, current vice president Joe Biden, and Senator Rob Portman, the first Republican member of the senate to support same-sex marriage. Persons for the freedom to marry believe that there is no traditional definition of marriage as human beings around the world have existed in many different kinds of cultural unions. They believe prohibiting any couple from achieving happiness through marriage defies the constitution and does not give these persons equal rights as the constitution requires. It also opens up these individuals to stigmatization. In addition, although marriage is a religious rite for many people, church and state are separated in the U.S, and the beliefs of any church should not dictate the laws in this country. Proponents of same-sex marriage challenge the belief that homosexual homes are any different than heterosexual ones for the rearing of children, as there is yet no evidence that supports that conclusion. Lastly, they argue that the institution of marriage would

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

likely be strengthened rather than weakened and cite the falling divorce rates in Massachusetts, the first U.S state to officially legalize gay marriage (ProCon.org, 2013). Families Affected by DOMA It remains unknown what determines sexual orientation in an individual, but homosexual orientation can occur in people of any subgroup. Therefore, the Defense of Marriage Act affects families of all ethnic, religious, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Additionally, the effect of DOMA is not limited to same-sex couples and their children; the parents, siblings, and close relatives and friends of each individual are also affected. DOMA denies the parents of same-sex couples the rite of passage of attending their childs wedding. Depending on the laws of the state it may also prevent them from having legal rights as grandparents. Siblings of gay individuals may not have legal rights as aunts or uncles, and all the important people in the lives of the couple are prevented from celebrating the happiness of two people through marriage. Even though DOMA is still a reality in many states, the unions of same-sex couples are rapidly becoming more recognized in the mainstream. Popular TV shows such as Modern Family now often include gay individuals and couples, and famous actors and musicians such as Ellen Degeneres and Elton John publicly share their lives with same-sex partners. An article from ABC News even predicted that the first openly gay pro-football player would gain millions for his team due to the revenue his supporters would likely bring in (Dolak, 2013). As acceptance and support for homosexuality continue to increase it is likely that more individuals currently hiding their orientation will come out to their loved ones, causing the lives of more and more people to be affected by the marriage equality issue. Many will find they have a parent,

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

child, sibling, relative, or friend who is now unable to enjoy the same rights as they did when they were straight. Effect of DOMA on Family Functions The four main family functions as defined by the guidelines for the production of a family impact analysis are family creation, economic support, childrearing, and family caregiving (Gross et al.). The Defense of Marriage Act severely impacts each one of them, beginning with the creation of a family for gay individuals. It prevents them from being recognized as being legally married in all states that have approved a DOMA, and by the federal government. In Florida, Mississippi, and Utah same-sex couples and individuals are prohibited from adopting children. In Michigan, the law says that only opposite-sex couples may adopt, preventing same-sex couples from doing so by default. In Arkansas, same-sex couples are not permitted to be foster parents (Liberty Counsel, 2007). DOMA also has an adverse effect on family economic support for same-sex couples. An article in Mens Health magazine cited a study done by Virginia Commonwealth University that showed that married men earned 22 percent more than single colleagues with similar levels of experience (Maltby, 2010). By preventing homosexual men from marrying, DOMA also prevents them from sharing this benefit. Unmarried partners are also denied many economic benefits and responsibilities that married couples receive. They typically are not responsible for their partners debt and do not have access to court-decided monetary responsibility such as alimony when a couple dissolves. Unmarried partners do not have the spousal privilege of being able to be on a family health insurance plan without paying tax, are not eligible for marriage benefits of Medicare or Medicaid, and often cannot apply for joint home or auto insurance.

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

Without recognized joint wealth, unmarried partners have lesser means and may be turned down for housing applications. They do not automatically inherit property upon the death of their partner and cannot transfer property to one another without penalties. They also cannot file joint tax returns or receive marriage benefits and claims on their taxes (Freedom to Marry, 2013). The loss of all of these privileges due to DOMA severely affects the economic support a same-sex couple can provide for each other and their family. The Defense of Marriage Act affects childrearing because it opens up children raised in same-sex parent homes to bullying and stigmatization. If children feel that their family is somehow wrong, or even illegal, it may have adverse effects on their psychological well-being. It also teaches children reared in opposite-sex parent homes that other types of families are abnormal. It does not promote acceptance of all people no matter what, and may make it even harder for gay children to come out to their families if they think they cannot have a normal life. DOMA affects the last main family function, family caregiving, in many negative ways. Studies show that married men live longer than their single counterparts, and men who were divorced or had never been married had much higher cancer mortality rates than married men (Maltby, 2010). Unmarried same-sex couples often do not qualify for family leave to take care of their sick partner or kids that they have no legal rights to. They are also not usually considered next-of-kin in hospital and emergency situations and are denied decision-making and visitations rights (Freedom to Marry, 2013). Implementation of DOMA Put into practice, the Defense of Marriage Act seems to have achieved what it was intended for: it has prevented same-sex couples from being recognized as legally married in

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

many states and by the federal government. However, as previously mentioned, some states have allowed same-sex couples to acquire civil unions or domestic partnerships that grant these individuals similar or parallel rights to married couples. Many supporters of DOMA do not object to this because, although the rights and privileges are comparable, the unions are still not the same as a marriage. The implementation of DOMA has certainly led to increasing controversy surrounding this issue and perhaps could be a key link to social change regarding same-sex marriage. If the act is ever fully disseminated, it would represent a huge shift in the cultural views of the United States. The Defense of Marriage Act has been in place for 17 years, and in that time it appears that the negatives have largely outweighed any positives the policy has provided. With acceptance of same-sex unions becoming ever more mainstreamed, it will only be a matter of time before other states follow New York and Californias examples and realize that penalizing homosexual individuals in this way is unconstitutional. As a future family professional, I can only see the detriments that DOMA is having on family life. As a human being, I can only imagine what it must feel like to not be able to marry the person I love and want to spend the rest of my life with. I plan on having children someday. Whatever sexual orientation they are, if they decide they want to get married, I want them to be able to do so. I want to see my child happy, and I want to be able to witness it. I think the Defense of Marriage Act has been tried and failed. The sooner it is completely discredited, the better.

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

References Beckwith, R. T. (2013, March 15). Defense of Marriage Act: 18 senators who regret voting for it. York Daily Record/York Sunday News. Retrieved from http://www.ydr.com/ci_22796976/portman-gay-marriage-doma-supporters Dolak, K. (2013). First Openly Gay Player Could Gain Millions for Team. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/US/openly-gay-nfl-player-gain-millionsteam/story?id=19035209#.UX22xLWG2So Freedom to Marry (2013). Protections Denied to Same-sex Couples and their Kids. Retrieved from http://www.freedomtomarry.org/pages/from-why-marriage-matters-appendix-b-byevan-wolfson GovTrack.us (1996). H.R. 3396--104th Congress: Defense of Marriage Act. Retrieved from http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/104/hr3396 Gross, E., Bogenschneider, K., & Johnson, C. How to Conduct a Family Impact Analysis. Retrieved from http://www.familyimpactseminars.org/fi_howtocondfia.pdf Liberty Counsel (2007). States Prohibiting Same-sex Adoption. Retrieved from http://www.lc.org/profamily/samesex_adoption_by_state.pdf Maltby, A. (2010). The Benefits of Being Married. Mens Health. Retrieved from http://www.menshealth.com/mhlists/benefits_of_marriage_and_commitment/index.php National Conference of State Legislatures (2013). Defining Marriage: Defense of Marriage Acts and Same-Sex Marriage Laws. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/issuesresearch/human-services/same-sex-marriage-overview.aspx

FAMILY IMPACT ANALYSIS OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT

ProCon.org. (2013, February 11). Gay Marriage ProCon.org. Retrieved from http://gaymarriage.procon.org/