Issue Number 1000 | A Transcontinental Affair | Advocate.com A Transcontinental Affair  |  | Advocate.com

Health Promo 03 (Getty) | Advocate.com
||  First Person  ||
 

A Transcontinental Affair

Andrew Solomon married his partner this spring in England, where officials were enthusiastic about the union. Would that be the case back home in America?
From The Advocate  January 15, 2008
A Transcontinental Affair

I was not the one who wanted to get married. John Habich, my partner since the summer of 2001, had brought up a commitment ceremony from time to time, but without legal meaning, the whole idea felt like a sham to me. Our families, colleagues, and widely dispersed friends all knew that we planned to spend the rest of our lives together; I wasn’t sure that any purpose was served in making them gather at an inconvenient location in further recognition of our affection. But John saw a ceremony in personal rather than political terms and fantasized about the gratification to be had by pledging our troth publicly before our chosen community, whether or not any civil rights were attached. I believe fervently in partnership parity for gay and straight couples, and holding a ceremony without such equality had for me the taint of giving in -- virtually consenting to prejudice in a smiling submissiveness worthy of Uncle Tom. We could get married, I thought, if and when we could really get married.

The matter hovered in a state of suspended indecision until the United Kingdom passed the Civil Partnership Act, which went into effect in late 2005. It grants same-sex couples all the rights associated with marriage, with two notable exceptions: It is not legally called marriage, and it cannot be conferred by a member of the clergy. These provisos notwithstanding, everyone calls it marriage, and many people annex a religious blessing to the registrar’s official proclamation. Since I am a dual national with British as well as American citizenship, our marriage under the new law would offer real meaning. Among other rights, it would entitle John to residence in the United Kingdom and ultimately to British citizenship. If we ever decided to give up our U.S. citizenship, we would not have to pay inheritance tax on each other’s estate. We would be automatically recognized as next of kin in any medical emergency. I wish the ceremony were called marriage, but as a nationally acknowledged set of protections, it gratified my yen for meaningful social progress.

So we decided in mid 2006 to marry in England the following summer, when our friends could bring their children. It was surprising how many people asked why we hadn’t just gone to Massachusetts instead. I explained that, quite apart from the fact that we don’t live or own property there, marriage is a national institution, and that what we were going to do in England had meaning in that entire sovereign nation. While Massachusetts marriages came with some rights, they wouldn’t have any weight in the most crucial areas of the law -- never mind that our home base is New York.

Page: 1 | 2 | 3
Solomon is the author of The Noonday Demon: An Atlas of Depression, which won the 2001 National Book Award for Nonfiction.

Reader Comments

These comments are reproduced as written by visitors to this Web site. They have not been edited for content, grammar, or spelling. The viewpoints appearing here are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or views of advocate.com, The Advocate, or its affiliates.

Be the first to comment on this story.

Back to top

Submit a comment for this story:

*Type your comment here (Required, 1000 characters max.):

*Name (Required): 

*Hometown (Required): 

*E-mail address: (Required, but will not be displayed)

Is this comment for publication? 
Yes   No

Daytime phone number: (Required for print publication only and will not be displayed)

Please enter the words you see in the box, in order and separated by a space. Doing so helps prevent automated programs from abusing this service.

  

If you would like to submit a comment for posting, please fill out the form above. 

All comments submitted via this form are subject to posting or publication. (To send a private letter to an Advocate editor or writer, please use the e-mail button at the top of the page, or use snail mail.) If you would like your comment considered for publication in The Advocate magazine, please include your full name, your city of residence, and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours so that we can confirm your identity. Your e-mail address and telephone number are strictly confidential and will not be shared or used for any purpose other than to contact you about your comment.

See the Contact page for sending comments for reasons other than responding to Advocate editorial and news stories.

Please note that comments sent by fax or snail mail are unlikely to be posted, although they will be considered for publication along with all letters received via e-mail or via this Web page. Comments that chiefly concern Advocate.com content will be considered for posting only on the Web site. The Advocate reserves the right to edit submitted comments for grammar, spelling, obscenities, or libel; we will, however, do our best to preserve the original comment's style and intent. Comments considered for publication in The Advocate magazine may also be edited for length.