May 1996, Vol. 2, No. 3

Same-Sex Marriage: Out of the Closet and into the Court
By Vicky DiProva, first-year SSA student.

Over the past few years more and more lesbians and gays have emerged from the closet into the hands of social workers and the courts as they struggle to win for their families some of the basic rights the average heterosexual takes for granted, like the right to legally marry the person you love.

This past April the Illinois General Assembly overwhelmingly passed SB 1773, the anti-same sex marriage bill. This was passed even though it is already illegal for gays and lesbians to marry in Illinois, as it is in all of the 50 states. SB 1773 is a preemptive bill that declares that Illinois will not recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. This legislation was introduced as an "emergency" bill in anticipation of the Baehr v. Lewin case scheduled for trial this July, which is almost certain to legalize same-sex marriage in Hawaii. Due to the United States Constitution's Full Faith and Credit clause, it is expected that same-sex civil marriages performed in one state would be recognized as valid in all others.

Some conservative arguments used to justify this SB 1773, and similar bills, have popped up around the country. One is that the marriage between two people of the same sex threatens the very institution of marriage and notions of family stability. Herein lies an important catch 22: if homosexuality is believed to discourage this stability, why not encourage commitment between homosexuals? If it is a greater good for society when two people commit to legally sanctioned relationships, why is it harmful for gays and lesbians to do so? It has also been said that this would force religious institutions to legitimize homosexual relationships in opposition to their beliefs. However, in this country religious organizations are not obligated to recognize civil marriages. Remarkably, several religions such as the Unitarian Universalists, the Quakers, and the Reform Jews, recognizing the fairness and rightness of respecting family relationships, already celebrate same-sex unions.

Anyone who is involved in social work knows the value and impact of the family in the life of the individual. The ability to form family relationships and strengthen those families legally through marriage is important. Homosexuals want to marry for the same mix of emotional, political and economic reasons as heterosexuals. They want the right to adopt children, to have next-of-kin status for important medical and death decisions, to sign joint insurance policies, have inheritance rights, immigration rights for their partners from foreign countries, tax benefits, etc. There are an estimated 170 benefits and responsibilities that come with civil marriage. Thousands of same-gendered couples already have taken on many of these responsibilities without the emotional, social or legal security marriage provides.

The distinction has been made that it is marriage that is needed, and not domestic partnership. This is because the domestic partnership policies and ordinances enacted thus far have not included the same benefits and responsibilities provided to married partners. They do not provide equal protection and recognition. They vary from institution to institution, and from county to county, where they have been adopted. Furthermore, because they are local, they do not extend the full range of benefits that married partners receive on a state level. They do not deliver federal, or out-of-state benefits and protections. But even if domestic partnership were equal to marriage, it would still be separate. Marriage is marriage.

Same-sex marriages and homosexual families challenge the "family values" rhetoric because they require people to expand their definition of family. They shift the focus from the composition of family (nuclear, number of parents, gender) to the quality of the relationships, the love and commitment present. The institution of marriage, like the family, has changed slowly throughout history to meet the values and needs of the people. At one time marriage was considered to be a union of two people of the same religion or the same race. These "traditional" views changed to reflect the equality of all individuals, and the importance of personal choice.

As social workers we spend a great deal of time debating the ways we can strengthen and support the family. On a micro level we study systems theory to better understand the effects of the environment on the individuals. We study family theory and child development. And on a macro level we advocate for its survival through more compassionate and effective public policies. The NASW asks us to recognize that discrimination and prejudice directed at any particular group is damaging to the social, emotional, and economic well-being of not only that group, but the entire society. If we are truly committed to the preservation of the family, we must also recognize and understand the importance of marriage to the lesbian and gay community and its families. We should support them in their struggle to win this basic human and civil right.

Vicky DiProva is a first-year SSA student.
Her field placement is at Harold Washington College.

Return to the Table of Contents

Back to Adovocate's Forum