Verified by 
Key points
- Comparing the options beyond marriage means identifying four basic elements of marriage.
- The way we arrange ourselves intimately with each other will shape public policy.
- Public policy requires ongoing conversations among members of our society.
Marriage in Western societies, historically tied to Christianity, is based on an 1866 English law, “…the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others.” Marriage between one man and one woman is promoted as the best form of family because it fosters self-management, interdependence, mutual support, friendship, and the vital function of nurturing children. Marriage has been society's way of defining the relationship between men and women. It has generally promoted motherhood for wives and provider for husbands. But things are changing:
- Heterosexual couples are rejecting the patriarchal and Christian history of marriage.
- The gendered structure of marriage has been critiqued since the 1970s.
- Marriage is out of reach for many with diminished economic and employment options.
- Marriage is not available to a variety of forms of cohabitation that currently exist.
These restrictions and limitations suggest the need for an alternative "menu" of relationship possibilities beyond marriage.
Beyond Marriage: Three Options
Marriage is often the default heterosexual relationship. It is sanctioned and supported by the state because it is interested in how new members enter society, how men and women care for one another, and how children are cared for. This is the model against which other forms of relationships will be evaluated.
Consider these three other forms of relationships:
- "Critical familism"—reconstructing marriage.
- "Functional families"—equal regard between men and women in relationships.
- "Marriage plus"—multiple family forms not sanctioned by the state.
1. Critical Familism
Theologian Don Browning of Hofstra University advocates reconstructing marriage and family to support an "equal regard" mother-father team with equal privileges and responsibilities in the public worlds of politics and employment, and the private world of home and child-rearing.
This approach to marriage defines marriage primarily with its child-rearing tasks, stressing the biological importance of the mother-infant dyad. Marriage is how to solve the “male problem,” i.e., the theorized evolutionary tendency of men to procreate but not care for their offspring.
The challenge is to secure men’s responsibility to women and children without supporting patriarchal control within the family. Supporting the equal-regard-mother-father team will require “heroic redefinitions of inherited cultural patterns” associated with the patriarchy.
2. Functional Families Based on Equal Regard
Judith Stacey, Professor of Sociology and Women’s Studies at UC Davis, picks up the “equal regard” concept but wants to create family diversity. She calls for the separation of conjugal and parental interests because marriage does not work for many couples and is out of reach for those with poor economic and employment prospects. Her alternative is to support a form of ‘registered kinship,’ which allows for a broader array of families not organized around only an adult-adult dyad. She urges support and “equal regard” for all “functional” families including, same-sex relationships.
3. Marriage Plus
Martha Fineman, Professor of Law at Emory University, wants to “dethrone” marriage from its exclusive prominence in family law and policy. Neither heterosexual nor same-sex marriage would be the basis for state regulation, support, and protection. The adult heterosexual affiliation that lies at the core of marriage would cease to define “family.” Sexual relationships would be managed through contracts. The state would have minimal interest in the regulation of sexuality—except for forced sex and protecting children. For Fineman, the caretaking function is the most important contemporary function of families and should be the focus of state recognition, support, and protection. Fineman supports the trend toward contractually defining the various forms of functional families.
How to Compare the Options
The following elements are basic to these options and are either included or excluded by the different approaches to marriage and beyond:
Legal Joining of Conjugality (Sexual Relations) and Caretaking
In marriage, conjugal (sexual) and parental interests are united ensuring that children are conceived by a mother and father committed to raising them in the stable conditions of a lifelong relationship. This view of marriage is described as the ‘natural’ model and is organized for the good of both society and the church.
Promoting Gender Complementarity in Relationships
Complementarianism is the idea that men and women are created to occupy separate but parallel spheres. Religious proponents of marriage and evolutionary psychologists argue that gender complementarity is an essential feature of human existence and marriage.
Men are stereotypically viewed as stronger, bolder, and more reasonable; women are stereotypically seen as weaker physically but stronger morally, more refined, more understanding, and more sensitive. These differences are historically explicitly associated with the different spheres men and women occupied, public and private, respectively. Assigning different marital tasks to men and women creates an interdependence, which is theorized to instill the civic skills of mutual respect and cooperation necessary to support the bonds of citizenship.
State Sanction and Support for Marriage and Dependent Children
The government generally supports the ‘traditional’ male-headed, single-earner marriage because it promotes the voluntary assumption of mutual rights and obligations by adults committed to each other’s well-being and care of the children they bear or adopt.
- States, however, have wide latitude in defining the rules for marriage and divorce.
- States regulate alimony and child support in the event of divorce.
- The US tax code is deeply entangled with marital status.
- Social programs (including Social Security) use marital status to determine benefits.
Promoting Commitment to and Caring for Each Other—Interdependence
Marriage between a man and woman is theorized to foster self-management, mutual support, friendship, and interdependence.
Promoting Civic Virtue and Engagement
The gender-complementary structure of marriage is thought to be the basis for “constituting virtuous citizens” because:
- The family is the model for a well-ordered society with the husband as the “governor” of the household with its different roles and functions.
- The gendered organization promotes the civic skills of mutual respect and cooperation.
- The gendered organization promotes civic virtue because women who are reflective, nurturing, and virtuous will “tame the savage masculine beast.”
Comparing the Options
The options described have all endorsed the state sanctioning and supporting the caretaking of children. They have all criticized the imposition of complementary sex roles on men and women as being detrimental to women personally and as citizens of our society.
Moving beyond marriage suggests that the state should not be in the business of sanctioning the sexual activities of people. The need for linking men and women in a state-sanctioned relationship to ensure paternity is no longer necessary.
Both the Functional Families and Marriage Plus approaches want to support a variety of ways adults choose to live together and care for each other. The Functional Families approach establishes a state-sanctioned ‘kinship registry’ to include a variety of ways people can live with each other and care for children.
The Marriage Plus approach supports traditional marriage and kinship arrangements but marriage would not be state-sanctioned. The possibility that marriage will regulated by private religious and ethnic institutions should be evaluated.
Legally sanctioning marriage and kinship arrangements is thought to promote commitment and interdependence among the adults involved. The cooperation and commitment shown to each other in these arrangements are theorized to promote civic virtue and engagement. That marriage uniquely promotes these desirable attributes should be assessed.
All the elements noted in this discussion of moving beyond marriage must be considered to determine what we support and sanction as families. The many ways we can assort ourselves for our benefit and the benefit of the society in which we live will shape our public policy. Such public policy requires ongoing conversations among all members of our democratic society.
