But...

We say we're married too, about 99% of the time, but what about that 1% when it makes a serious legal difference, how you answer?

In Cole's case this morning, she was talking to the insurance company of the guy who hit her. A company she googled and found nothing but evidence of litigation against them for failing to pay. So she was not looking to be cute, feisty or potentially incriminate herself by misrepresenting something and getting called on it in court.

Not that it will probably get that far (we hope), but these kinds of things are trickier than me telling the telemarketer that Cole isn't home, being asked if her husband is home and claiming that I am her husband. (Believe it or not, the telemarketers don't miss a beat when I do that.)

See, I think we need to make more or this. Because we truly are in a weird legal bind of the government's making with the dumb DOMA.

When we were headed up to Canada to marry, I asked Cole "so what if we wanted to marry men in the U.S.? Would they allow it?" Because gee, a bit awkward on that honeymoon to the Canadian side of Niagra Falls, huh? What if I wanted to marry a Canadian man in the U.S.? Would the U.S. let me and then give him residency? What if, what if, what if...

What if you married a same-sex partner in Massachusettes, moved out of state, and wanted to marry an opposite sex partner, then move back to Massachusettes? Which marriage counts? I'd love to see someone test the DOMA by trying to do that kind of thing.

They have created these crazy Catch-22's for us and I'd like to see them answer to them. Basically we're stuck having to not just feel bad that we may need to erase our families on legal forms, but we're stuck lying--especially when our relationships are legally recognized as marriages somewhere.

Comments

[Dana]

I used "married" (which I am, in MA) with a Texas insurance company a few weeks ago, and it actually helped get me the information I needed despite my partner being the primary name on the account. I wouldn't count my incident as a serious one, but it was nice to play the marriage trump card and see it work, even across state lines. Here's the full story:
http://mombian.com/2007/05/09/marriage-counts-when-you-least-expect-it/

Conversely, I sometimes check "partnered" rather than "married" on a form if it's simply for tracking purposes and I want to make the point that I'm in a same-sex relationship.

As you say, though, it's a tangled web.

[mijk]

I think I would say something like you did here.
"We are legally married in Canada but unfortunately U.S. government doesn't recognize our marriagge."

Put the blame where it belongs!

[Nancy]

I think the only way to get around "lying" or providing information that is less than truthful is to mention the complications in your answer: "Yes, in Canada but not in the U.S." or something like that.

I think that saying no to the insurance person is not lying, fraud or even misinformation. That question is not intended to gather information about your family status around the globe. It is only intended to get at whether there are any legal ties that might impact insurance proceedings (i.e. is there anyone else on your polisy or do you have joint assets, etc.). So if the intent of the question is "are you married in the legal sense in the U.S.?" then there really is no issue here. The answer is no. And it's not lying or misrepresenting.

However, it does not at all solve the issue of how unjust the situation is. In which case, keeping various people on the phone with complicated answers and political commentary is perhaps just the solution. I don't think that is so much about not lying as it is voter education, political demonstration, and creating a disturbance.

[Nicole]

I am waiting for some cases to challenge the marriage laws so we can get some clear legislation as to what marriage in one state means. Oh, if only my liberal leanings ruled the law. . .