WoLF Testifies in Support of Maryland Bill Adding “Gender Transition” As Grounds For Divorce
Lauren Adams, WoLF’s Legal Director, submitted written testimony in support of Maryland House Bill 1319. HB 1319 added “gender transition” of a spouse to the grounds for absolute divorce. This means that if someone’s spouse engages in “gender transition,” that person will have grounds for divorce.
According to the bill, “gender transition” may refer to three things:
The spouse “self-identifies as a different gender than the gender at the time of marriage.”
The spouse “has undergone gender confirmation surgery.”
The spouse “has begun a course of medication with the intent to transition to a different gender.”
Overall, WoLF decided to support this bill because it could provide a way for women who need to exit from unhealthy and unsafe marriages:
“On behalf of WoLF, I stand in support of HB 1319 because it would provide a vital exit for people, especially women, who need to exit unhealthy and unsafe marriages, and may have no other recourse given to them under Maryland law.¹”
However, WoLF’s testimony addressed an obvious problem with this bill: the language used in the bill endorsed the concepts of “gender transition” and “gender confirmation surgery.” WoLF explained to legislators that these concepts are faith-based concepts and are not based on science.
WoLF’s testimony warned legislators that using these phrases in the bill would do three things:
Further entrench these beliefs into Maryland state law.
Represent state government endorsement of this faith-based belief system.
Require people seeking relief under this provision to assert that they believe in this faith-based belief system.
In other words, if MD legislators approve this bill as it is currently written, the state government will legitimize the belief that human beings are capable of “transitioning” into the opposite sex.
Additionally, women who are seeking divorce on these grounds will be forced to act as though they believe their husbands have actually “transitioned” into women. This is obviously something that WoLF does not support; women should not be legally compelled to use language about something they do not believe in, just to obtain a divorce. As WoLF’s testimony stated:
“A woman seeking a divorce on these grounds would have to nonetheless, for the purposes of divorce law, sign off on her husband’s fractured version of reality.”
WoLF encouraged Maryland legislators to educate themselves about the experiences of “trans widows” by referencing Trans Widows Voices in its written testimony.
In addition to its concerns about the state government codifying faith-based beliefs about “gender transition,” WoLF’s written testimony also urged Maryland’s legislators to completely reassess its divorce statute. This is because currently, Maryland does not make it easy for people to easily divorce. If both partners agree to a “mutual consent” “absolute divorce,” they will be able to move forward with the divorce without a waiting period. However, if one partner refuses to agree to a “mutual consent” divorce, the couple will have to be physically separated (living in separate homes) for twelve months. This requirement of a 12-month separation period undoubtedly creates financial hardships for many women.
Read WoLF’s Full testimony here.
To learn more about Maryland’s current procedures for obtaining a divorce:
Visit Maryland Courts: Divorce and The People’s Law Library of Maryland: No Fault Grounds for Absolute Divorce.