Married without a wedding: Should cohabitation be equated to marriage
THIS WEEK SENATOR ANTON BELYAKOV OFFERED to equate the relationship of a woman and a man who have lived together for more than five years to the “actual marital relationship” - and if the couple have a child, reduce this period to two years. According to Belyakov, he is guided by the fact that the number of officially registered marriages is constantly decreasing - while the general life still does not guarantee the partners the protection of their rights after separation. The new bill assumes that if a couple has lived together long enough, it will receive the same rights and obligations as the “ordinary” spouses. For example, if a man and a woman did not conclude a contract, the property they acquired during the years of their life together would be considered their common property — and be divided accordingly.
While it is unlikely that the law will be accepted. Chairperson of the State Duma Committee on Family, Women and Children Tamara Pletneva criticized the draft document. Senator Elena Mizulina expressed the same point of view: she called the initiative “sabotage”. Nevertheless, the “actual marriage”, in which couples living together get the rights of their legal spouses, is found in world practice. We understand what kind of relationship this is, in which countries it has already been adopted - and whether it makes sense to introduce it in Russia.
What is the actual marriage and where is it adopted
The actual marriage is a relatively common practice in the world, although now it is less common than before. It is concluded without a civil or religious ceremony, that is, simply on the basis that the couple considers themselves married. In Europe, such marriages were common in the Middle Ages, but they were declared illegal after the Trident Cathedral of the Catholic Church in the 16th century, where it was found that only unions held in the presence of a priest and two witnesses were considered legal. In England, this practice existed until 1753, when only church unions became legal. True, the law did not extend to Scotland - so many couples went there to hide from the law.
Now the actual marriage is experiencing a rebirth - largely because the idea of a "traditional" family is gradually becoming a thing of the past. People may not register relations officially - and the legislation of different countries is increasingly seeking to reflect on it. The reasons may be very different, but more often than not, a new form of relationship appears for solving a couple's financial issues: the opportunity to receive an inheritance if one of the partners dies, to divide property or continue to live in a common house for a while if the couple breaks up, or to protect the rights of children .
Many couples who have not registered the marriage officially do not know that in the event of a partner’s death or separation it will be difficult for them to assert their rights - for example, on joint property. In addition, one of the partners may be in a more vulnerable position: for example, if a woman has not worked for several years, but has been occupied with a child and does not have her own savings. According to a British survey, among 2,000 adults surveyed, 281 people lived with a partner, without officially registering a relationship. Two thirds of them were convinced that they were in a de facto marriage - although they are not recognized by law in the United Kingdom.
In the past twenty years, more and more countries have allowed partnerships and heterosexual couples — for example, those who dislike the religious or patriarchal connotations of a “traditional” marriage.
Actual marriage under different conditions is recognized, for example, in several US states: Colorado, Iowa, Texas, Utah, Kansas, South Carolina, Montana, and New Hampshire. Norwegian laws give some rights to couples who have not formalized the relationship. First of all, this again concerns finances: partners have the right to inherit if they have children in common - in other cases it is possible only if the partner is listed in the will.
In Australia, it is believed that the couple is in the actual marriage from the moment people start living together - the minimum term, as proposed by the Russian bill, is not here. The actual marriage is taken into account, for example, when paying state benefits - in such cases the income of the second partner is taken into account. In Spain, you can become an "official couple" a year after the partners began to live together. True, just living in a shared apartment is not enough for this - you need to submit a set of documents for registration. In Ireland, unmarried couples (both heterosexual and homosexual) also give some rights that official spouses have - but to a lesser extent; they relate to property, child custody, adoption, inheritance and more.
In some countries, there is a civil partnership process - another opportunity to register a relationship if the couple does not want or cannot marry. Most often, it is aimed at homosexual couples who do not have the right to marry under the law, but would like to get the right to inherit or solve the issue of child custody. In some cases, such as in Finland, it becomes the first step towards legalizing homosexual marriages. True, in the last twenty years, more and more countries have allowed forging partnerships and heterosexual couples - for example, those who dislike the religious or patriarchal connotations of a “traditional” marriage. In Europe, eleven countries allow civilian partnerships to any couples - among them, for example, the Netherlands, France, Greece, Malta and Estonia.
Do I need an actual marriage in Russia?
Considering how widespread civil partnerships and de facto marriages are in the world, the idea of equating partners who have lived together long enough to be official spouses in order to protect their rights does not seem so radical. True, in Russia it raises many questions - from the conditions of entering into an “actual marriage” (why exactly five years and two years?) To possible polygamy or polyandry, if one of the partners is not officially divorced, but is in a relationship with another person.
The lawyer Alisa Obraztsova believes that such an initiative contradicts article 12 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, which speaks of the mutual and voluntary consent of the man and the woman. So the parties will face legal consequences, although they themselves did not want to - and this violates the freedom of expression. “Whether or not the couple registers their relations in the civil registry offices independently depends on their personal circumstances,” Obraztsova said. “The state does not have the right to interfere in the area of private life, the inviolability of which is guaranteed by article 23 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Moreover, according to the Convention on Protection human rights and fundamental freedoms of 11/4/1950, marriage is a right, not a duty. "
Candidate of Law, Anna Vivina, head of the Violent Internet project, notes that if the law is passed, the question still remains: “Why are there such deadlines? And if only four and a half years have passed? And if the child has already turned one and a half?” she says. “It is clear that in the legal context there should be an upper and lower frame. But if there is no legal evidence, for example, a man can say that a couple lives together since he spent the night in this apartment for the first time, but a girl who, for example, is not ho a deal with him nothing because he's home aggressor, says that they have nothing in common. It may be interested in the fact that he was not able to bind to it from a legal point of view. "
Such an initiative contradicts article 12 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, which speaks of the mutual and voluntary consent of a man and a woman. So the parties will face legal consequences, although they themselves did not want
In addition, Anna Rivina notes that difficulties may also arise with how many such families will be in Russia, since people perceive cohabitation in different ways. "How can mothers protect the interests of children, if she invested in property on an equal footing - is it possible to guarantee that another woman will not come later, if a man lived for two families, and would not say that she has her own financial interests?" she says.
There is also no consensus on whether such an initiative will help protect the rights of the child in case of separation. “If we talk about the consequences for a common child, then legally it doesn’t matter to him whether the parents are married or not,” says Alisa Obraztsova. “The rights and obligations in relation to the child stem from the fact of origin: who is recognized as father and mother, according to If you wish, parents who are not married may conclude an agreement on the procedure for communication, but if there is no agreement between them, then regardless of whether the marriage is formally formalized, this issue will be resolved in court. "
“Many people might think that this initiative is good to protect women who have given birth to children, live with a man with whom they did not register the marriage, so that in case of separation she had some rights. But I suppose that our women you need to teach others: to love yourself, respect yourself and make choices based on your interests, ”says Anna Rivina, Ph.D., head of the Violence.net project.“ I think it is much more important to change social and cultural patterns of behavior, to create such conditions, so that women do not have to protect schat their interests in such a non-transparent method of Marriage -. it is still a voluntary union, and the attitude to it should be easy. "
Photo:nordroden - stock.adobe.com, sosiukin - stock.adobe.com
