Legal Intervention For Implementation Of Conjugal Rights Essay

Two New York residents, both women, married lawfully in Canada. When one of the spouses, Thea Spyer, died, she left her estate to the other spouse, Edith Windsor. Windsor was not able to claim the estate tax exemption for surviving spouses because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a federal law that excluded same-sex partners from the definition of “spouse” in its statutory use. Both the district court and the court of appeals found that portion of the statute unconstitutional.

The LGBT communities have been and continue to struggle with equal rights with their straight counterparts. Many people will argue the notion that they support the LGBT community and feel they should have equal rights as heterosexual individuals; however how many of them will agree that LGBT communities should have the right to marry, adopt, etc. The minute the issue of marriage is brought up, many people will argue that marriage is a union between man and woman. Same sex marriage or marriage among the LGBT community is an issue dating back to the 1970’s. Some people will argue for same sex marriage/marriage among the LGBT community, stating marriage should be a union between two people no matter what their sexual preference is.

My short answer is "no", but let me explain. Before answering what I think the situation should be, it is helpful to look at what the situation is. Currently family law is a matter left to a great extent to the states. States have the power to decide who may marry, the legal process required to do so, and what the legal consequences of that marriage are within the state. In all these matters states differ from each other. The state is limited in its actions, though, to the requirement of its own constitution as well as the constitution of the United States. What those constitutions require is often a matter of great debate, but the ultimate judge is the state's highest court for matters pertaining to its own constitution, and

Under Hamilton statutory law, where common law marriage is defined as an agreement to be married, living together after agreement to be married, and they presenting to others as that they are married, does a common law marriage exist when the couple has discussed being married, live together after the discussion, and don’t correct others when they are referred to as a couple?

The other traditional justifications for the marital exemption were the common law doctrines that a woman was the property of her husband and that the legal existence of the woman was ‘incorporated and consolidated into that of a husband.’

Tasha, thank you for your informative post. As mentioned in your post the impact of common law marriage is different between men then it is women, as I concur, this doctrine helped to protect women who sought separation from common law husbands, to safeguard financial stability for themselves and their children (Primrose, 2013). In addition, another group that had to use the informal arrangement of common law marriage were slaves, as they were not afforded legal rights to be married. Even after the Emancipation Proclamation many African American families continue to stay in common law marriage as it was financially prohibitive to obtain licenses from racially motivated gatekeepers within State government (Adler, 2010).

Girls all over the world are forced into marriages due to financial necessity, tradition and to ensure their future. Most of these girls married are at a young age: “One third of the world’s girls are married before the age of 18 and 1 in 9 are married before the age of 15”( “Child Marriage Facts and Figures”). The young ages of those being married reveal how crucial it is to resolve this problem. When child marriage occurs the parents of the bride usually chose the groom for their daughters; and these grooms can be three times older than the young brides. Some children are brought into the world of marriage at the of 8 or sometimes less depending on their cultural views. The following can be used to help reduce the impact of early

For this journal entry, I have decided to review the Respect for Marriage Act. The Respect for Marriage Act, was introduced in 2009, as a repeal to Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which deems that the federal government does not recognize marriages of same sex couples. The Respect for Marriage Act was then reintroduced in 2015. The Respect for Marriage Act is a bill to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect for State regulation of marriage (https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/29)., amends the Defense of Marriage Act to repeal a provision that prohibited state, territory, possession, or Indian tribe from being required to recognize any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state,

In the immediate, the two persons who want to get involved in a marital relationship have to discuss what they really want. The only person who can help them to do the right choice is a notary. They have to know all the rules if they choose to get married or not. And if they choose not, they must sign a notarized commitment and a will, before it is too late. On the other hand, government has to change the family law to be in accordance with the society. He has to write laws that will protect both spouses: the weak (against the more strong), the sick (not to be left with nothing but in the same time, not taking all the wealth of the other one), the poor (to help him to get back to the work force) and the hard worker (against a lazy spouse). It is never easy to change laws and preventing any inequity. Comities have to be set up to evaluate all alternatives and consequences. Nevertheless, this will not solve all the problems that can happen. Relationship and family have many faces today. It is not like before where a young man married a young woman to build a traditional family. Now, the spectrum of relationships is infinite. As a society, it is important to discuss what is acceptable when somebody get involved in a marital relationship. The new generation was hurt by the divorce of their parents. People did not know how to divorce properly and their emotions drove the process. The result was that they hurt the trust in marriage of the people around them, especially their children. Now it is time to define what a satisfactory relationship is and define laws as bracket to protect and respect both partners and the way they want to live their

The Act envisages the establishment of Family Courts by the State Government by a Notification in the Official Gazette, after consultation with the High Court of the State. As observed by the Supreme Court, State Governments should establish Family Courts not only because it is so provided in the Act, but also to discharge its social obligation to provide a less formal platform for resolving family disputes. (Gangadharan v. State of Kerala, AIR 2006 SC 2360)

Marriage in Britain was a largely independent affari compared to India where, once married, the wife would proceed to live with her husband and his family. The consequence of changes to inheritance law was that, while in Britain a widow’s choice was to either keep the meager inheritance she got and enjoy her independence or remarry and share the money with her new husband, in India things got far more complicated because of deep seated notions of marriage and widowhood that hinged on unequivocally Indian norms, values and culture. If a woman were to receive money under the change in law there would be significant resentment from her late husband’s family. The widow had a high chance of still living with his family resulting in a cloistered but not sheltered existence. Sexuality and autonomy were often controlled by the families based on notions of female sexuality and as a way of preserving caste and offspring. Despite this Indian women were often sexually active, although more often than not, there was a lack of consent. Moreover, remarriage was not a viable option for most widows as the deeply rooted Hinduism in India promoted notions of ‘ascetic widowhood’. Thus slowly, almost as a reaction to the British hijacking on Indian culture and law, customary laws began to be replaced by a far more Hindu

While abortion law is a lot more straightforward and the patterns are obvious, marriage law in the United States is a bit more complicated.

Shah Bano approached the courts for maintenance from her husband, as she had no means of economically providing for herself or her children. Seven years had lapsed by the time the case reached the Supreme Court, where Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code was invoked, and she was to be given the maintenance due to her. It is to be noted here that Section 125 (Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents) applies to everyone, irrespective of caste, creed, or religion . This judgement wasn’t the first time that a divorced Muslim woman had been given maintenance under the provision.

In the case of Badri Prasad V. Deputy Director of Consolidation , the Apex Court recognized live in relationships as a valid marriage. Here, the man and the woman were living together since fifty years but were not legally married. The Supreme held that “A strong presumption arises in favour of wed-lock where the partners have lived together for a long spell as husband and wife.” However this position was not binding and the Delhi High court in the case of Alok kumar V. State of Delhi , held that “live in relation is walk in and walk out relationship and no strings are attached to it. This kind of relationship does not create any legal bond between the partners. It further held that in case of live in relationships, the partners cannot complain of infidelity or immorality.” Thus the people in such relationships were helpless and no protection was granted to

The paper seeks to discuss in great detail the legal implications and legal elements associated with and governing the live in relationship system. The latest judgment in the case of Indra Sarma vs VKV Sarma provides a base to