# Marriage license without being married?



## smhbbag (Mar 26, 2006)

So here's my situation, and one potential solution that I want yall's opinions about:

I plan to get married next May (14 months from now). My future wife graduates from college this December. As many of you may know, health insurance coverage for a daughter expires when she is no longer a 'dependent' - and her 'dependent' status will expire with her graduation.

Problem: So from January to May of next year, my future wife will have no health insurance. To me, this is completely unacceptable. We will get it for her somehow.

My employer provides health insurance, at no charge, for me, my spouse, and our future dependents.

So one obvious solution immediately comes to mind: Why not get married in January? Well, for a dozen reasons that aren't all that relevant right now, but let's just say that May is certainly the best time for us due to other factors.

Here's the question: What Biblical and moral issues/problems would you see with us getting a marriage license from the state in January, even while we won't have the wedding, live together (essentially act married) etc. until May? 

Like all young couples, our finances are going to be tight, but manageable, at first. And the last thing we need is to shell out 100-200 a month for 4 months for health insurance for her, especially knowing that such coverage is free (with better insurance) if we just get the 'piece of paper.'

I'm not entirely comfortable with the idea, and the potential deceit involved, just curious what you guys think. Thanks

[Edited on 3-26-2006 by smhbbag]


----------



## blhowes (Mar 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by smhbbag_
> Here's the question: What Biblical and moral issues/problems would you see with us getting a marriage license from the state in January, even while we won't have the wedding, live together (essentially act married) etc. until May?


I'm by no means an expert on marriages licenses, having only been married once, and that quite a number of years ago, but isn't the marriage license valid only after the pastor or justice of the peace signs it, in which case you'd be legally married?


----------



## fivepointcalvinist (Mar 26, 2006)

> _Originally posted by smhbbag_
> So here's my situation, and one potential solution that I want yall's opinions about:
> 
> I plan to get married next May (14 months from now). My future wife graduates from college this December. As many of you may know, health insurance coverage for a daughter expires when she is no longer a 'dependent' - and her 'dependent' status will expire with her graduation.
> ...



if you think its deceitful, you probably shouldnt do it. also trust God to protect you and your wife from ailment. when i was in college, i had no insurance and life was a gamble, but i trusted God would keep me safe; He did.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Mar 26, 2006)

For a marriage license to become completely valid you would have to marry, either before a judge or a minister.

Regardless of whether you lived together or not, have a "wedding ceremony" or not, you will be MARRIED.

Potential problem? Being married and not living together is NOT good. You would be defrauding yourselves and others. Secondly, there is no backing out...engagement is over, you are MARRIED...thus, if you changed your mind for some reason you would have to get a divorce and scriptural mandates would still apply...consumated or not.


----------



## SRoper (Mar 26, 2006)

Start shoping around for health insurance. A year ago, before I had my current job, I was able to get it for under $80/mo. as a smoker. I had a $3000 deductable, but I only had it in case of a major event.


----------



## smhbbag (Mar 26, 2006)

> Potential problem? Being married and not living together is NOT good. You would be defrauding yourselves and others. Secondly, there is no backing out...engagement is over, you are MARRIED...thus, if you changed your mind for some reason you would have to get a divorce and scriptural mandates would still apply...consumated or not.



Well, to calm this concern, I take the scriptures to teach that no engagement can be broken for any reason where a divorce would not also be justified. I think engagement promises have no smaller commitment than marriage vows, so this is not really a concern.

And yes, I understand that we would need to go to the courthouse and take the vows in front of the justice of the peace, etc. to make the license valid. We would not view ourselves as married yet, still just betrothed, but the state would treat us legally like husband and wife. 

Again, to us, we would not be married, so there is no defrauding, sexually or otherwise. It is simply that the state would view me as having the responsibilities of a husband. I think this was also the case (or close to it) for Mary and Joseph. They were just engaged/betrothed, but she was counted among his household by the state in the census. She was his, but they were not yet consummated or 'married' as we would think of it. He had the headship and responsibility, minus the living together and sexual rights. I see us potentially in the same situation. 

But the whole thing is still a tough question for me.

And thanks, Scott, for the health insurance encouragement. Who did you get that with for 80/month if I may ask? That wouldn't be worth making much of a stink over


----------



## satz (Mar 26, 2006)

If the thing that is bothering you is the idea of deceit, have you considered simply being upfront with the insurance company, telling them you have the certificate but are not holding the ceremony until later? I am not sure how they would view it, but basically if the insurance company knows the full facts and is willing to give you the coverage, surely you can put your conscience at ease?

I cannot at the moment think of any thing from the bible that prohibits a 'time lapse' between a civil marriage license and the actual marriage itself. You may want to look further into what exactly the state takes that license as meaning though.


----------



## smhbbag (Mar 26, 2006)

thanks Mark, hadn't thought of that first part, although it's obvious enough . I'll give 'em a call and see what they say.


----------



## LadyFlynt (Mar 26, 2006)

Personally, I hold the same view on engagement...however, I know that is a subject of debate.

Anyhow...whether you "see" yourself as married or not, you are (will be) as viewed by both your own vows before the judge and the state.


----------



## smhbbag (Mar 27, 2006)

I thought I remembered you holding to that same position from a discussion long ago. I'm just glad I wasn't imagining things 

And this is also just a bump so a new crop of posters sees this in Today's Posts. More input, please. Dissenting opinions especially. I expected someone to come out hard and fast against it. But I've been terribly disappointed, lol.


----------



## Ambrose (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeremy, you said a couple of times *"we would not be married"*, yet you are considering making it appear that you are married so that your "wife" can get free insurance. Sounds like you want to have your cake and it it too. Can you be "married" and "not married" at the same time?


----------



## Arch2k (Mar 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> For a marriage license to become completely valid you would have to marry, either before a judge or a minister.
> 
> Regardless of whether you lived together or not, have a "wedding ceremony" or not, you will be MARRIED.
> ...





Are the reasons you are waiting to get married scriptural ?



> Westminster Larger Catechism
> Q139: What are the sins forbidden in the seventh commandment?
> A139: The sins forbidden in the seventh commandment, besides the neglect of the duties required,[1] are, adultery, fornication,[2] rape, incest,[3] sodomy, and all unnatural lusts;[4] all unclean imaginations, thoughts, purposes, and affections;[5] all corrupt or filthy communications, or listening thereunto;[6] wanton looks,[7] impudent or light behavior, immodest apparel;[8] prohibiting of lawful,[9] and dispensing with unlawful marriages;[10] allowing, tolerating, keeping of stews, and resorting to them;[11] entangling vows of single life,[12] *undue delay of marriage;[13]* having more wives or husbands than one at the same time;[14] unjust divorce,[15] or desertion;[16] idleness, gluttony, drunkenness,[17] unchaste company;[18] lascivious songs, books, pictures, dancings, stage plays;[19] and all other provocations to, or acts of uncleanness, either in ourselves or others.[20]
> 
> ...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by smhbbag_
> And yes, I understand that we would need to go to the courthouse and take the vows in front of the justice of the peace, etc. to make the license valid. We would not view ourselves as married yet, still just betrothed, but the state would treat us legally like husband and wife.



Marriage vows taken before a justice of the peace are just as binding as marriage vows taken before a minister. Therefore, if vows are taken before a justice of the peace, you would both be married not only in the eyes of the state but in the eyes of God, with all the obligations and privileges that this entails. 

I would echo the question about the reasons for the delay of marriage -- not that you have to divulge issues that are private on this public forum, but merely for consideration of whether pragmatic concerns are overtaking principial concerns. 

I believe marriage licenses in North Carolina and many other states are valid for 60 days (in some states it may be up to one year), ie., one must have a civil or religious ceremony and have the document signed by the minister or justice of the peace before it expires to take effect. A delay of up to 60 days between getting the license and performing the ceremony due to circumstances is not unreasonable; however, a delay of 5 months would require a new marriage license, at least in North Carolina, and would raise the question of undue delay of marriage, I think. 

If your fiancee is living at home from January to May, I would think, biblically, that it would be the father's responsibility to provide for her health insurance regardless of her insurance status as a dependent.

I'm sure there are circumstances here that are beyond my knowledge or even need to know, but my advice would be not to get a license until ready for marriage within the terms of the license, and to do everything possible to prepare for and expedite the time when you are both ready to be married legally, financially and in every other capacity.


----------



## py3ak (Mar 28, 2006)

If you design your wedding right, you can make a profit on it (I did). Then you could use that money to pay for her insurance.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 28, 2006)

Jeremy,

I think it is disingenuous to be married but pretend like you're not married until the time that you decide you want to be really married.

Without revealing the reasons as to "Why wait until May" it seems the reason might be that you and your fiancee want to have a big wedding with friends and family. At the same time, however, you're trying to take care of your fiancee to keep her from being without health insurance.

Scripture does give us a Biblical reason to get married right away and not wait ("...better to marry than to burn for one another...") but does not give a reason to get married and then pretend like we're not married so we can create a later memory of that "Special Day".

Granted it's just a guess but if you guys want your wedding, and the memory of it, to be special then I think your plan will undermine that goal. The reality of your actual marriage will overshadow the event. I'll be honest with you also - being married is much more important than the memories of the ceremony. I enjoyed my wedding but neither my wife nor I look back on the ceremony or the day and muse over how special the day was. We're just happy we're married.

If it's just a guess that the issue is that you want to make the day of your wedding big and speical then please disregard that particular warning.

As for a more practical consideration, if you are worried about her health insurance expiring after she graduates then another option is that she not graduate in December. Why does she not just fall a few credit hours shy of graduation in December and graduate the same time you do?


----------



## smhbbag (Mar 28, 2006)

I kept the details to a minimum just for brevity, and didn't have the time when I was making that post. So I guess more details are in order.....

She goes to Dordt College in Iowa, and her parents live in Norfolk, VA. I live and work in Raleigh/Durham, NC. 

Rich, your guess was the same as mine would be when hearing of someone delaying the wedding that long, but it's not actually the reason. We're planning on a very small wedding with just closest friends and family, and so that's really not an issue.

We had considered January for a number of reasons, but still always wind up leaning toward May. 

Some of those reasons - As of January, I will still have 30ish credit hours left for my degree, and will need to go to school full-time in the Spring. As a single, I can work my 25+ hours/week nightshift and go to school full-time. As a newlywed, I'd fear the impact that would have on my marriage. So, if we wait until May - I can work closer to full-time once we're married, and just take 6 hours/semester for two semesters to graduate. This would make my school much less intrusive to that crucial first year. With my schedule like it is right now, I couldn't in good conscience marry her. And I don't want to leave 2 years of part-time school to be done after marriage. 

Second - finances. Andrew - Her dad is dead broke, bluntly put, and cannot pay for her insurance, should she need him to next Spring. She will also need a car before she moves down here, which her dad likewise cannot provide - so that Spring of full-time work for her living at home in Norfolk will be very helpful in getting that.

Third - even if all this was not the case, I highly doubt he would allow marriage before next May. It hasn't been asked, but May is tough enough of a sell. I can imagine either outright laughter or anger as a response before openness to it 

So January looks extremely difficult on a number of levels.....but praise the Lord the risk for physical temptation typical in waiting isn't as much the case - we can only do so much from either 1000 or just 200 miles away. I do not believe we are at risk of violating I Cor. 7 and its admonition to marry sooner rather than later. If we were living in the same city all this time, it would be a much bigger issue, because we are both extremely physically affectionate people. But that's neither here nor there....

Andrew, thanks for that point on marriage licensing in NC, I was not aware.



> Jeremy, you said a couple of times "we would not be married", yet you are considering making it appear that you are married so that your "wife" can get free insurance. Sounds like you want to have your cake and it it too.



Would Joseph be accused of the same? Surely Mary received the legal benefits and obligations due her from Joseph while they were yet betrothed. She was counted among his household...she was HIS...and so, legally, benefits do go to her as well as adding responsibilities for him. He was obligated to provide and care for her in all ways appropriate. I will likely be supporting her entirely at that point in our engagement (in addition to whatever she makes, when she finds work) - especially if she moves to Raleigh before our wedding. I'll be paying for her apartment, car, the move, etc., so why then should the other benefits not accrue to her? We have already made, at that point, a binding lifelong-commitment to each other.

I'm still not entirely comfortable with the idea, and I think the reason is just that it still seems like deceit at some level. Unlike Mary and Joseph, this thinking is entirely antithetical to the system as it currently exists, and we would have to, in some sense, play both ends of it to make it work. Don't marriage licenses necessarily entail a legal responsibility to consummate? Obviously we wouldn't. That, in itself, could be the straw that breaks it. I think my thoughts are getting even more muddle, I have exams to attend to.....more input appreciate  And thank you guys for giving it the thought you have. It's been helpful.

[Edited on 3-28-2006 by smhbbag]


----------



## smhbbag (Apr 10, 2006)

anybody?


----------



## tcalbrecht (Apr 10, 2006)

> _Originally posted by smhbbag_
> anybody?



Did I miss this one ... why doesn't she just get a job and buy her own insurance until May?


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Apr 11, 2006)

> _Originally posted by tcalbrecht_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by smhbbag_
> ...




Also look into the regulations of the state. Many states require insurane companies to insure you for an additional 3-6 months to allow you time to find new insurance.


----------



## gwine (Apr 11, 2006)

> _Originally posted by puritansailor_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by tcalbrecht_
> ...



On the Federal level there is COBRA, the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, passed in 1986, permitting up to 18 months of insurance to qualifying employees. You can check out the government site here. Like almost all government laws, there are restrictions that may be a problem. And it is not cheap, either. When my son left our insurance because he reached the magic age, he received a letter informing him that he could continue to receive benefits to the tune of about $500 a month, which didn't even cover the vision or dental that he was getting.

But, for a very short term and to help in case of a major illness or accident, it could be valuable. Insurance is a gamble (oops, did I just say that? ) and you takes your chances (Providence.) The first time we went without insurance for about 4 months and we had 2 youngsters. The second time I opted to get catastrophic insurance for the 9 months I had to wait at about $100 a month - pricey at the time. Neither time did I need to see any doctors, but it could have turned out different.


----------



## smhbbag (Apr 11, 2006)

> Did I miss this one ... why doesn't she just get a job and buy her own insurance until May?



She will be working January until mid/late April up in Norfolk, before she will move down here into what will eventually be our apartment a few weeks before the wedding in May. And she'll be living at home that time, paying no rent....but still, 300-600 dollars saved on insurance over those couple months can make a big difference. We're gonna be tight, and it's tough to shell out that money, knowing it could be free.




> Also look into the regulations of the state. Many states require insurane companies to insure you for an additional 3-6 months to allow you time to find new insurance.



I had not thought of this - are you saying there may be some sort of "minimum" time that the insurance is offered (and we would have to pay), and this might be longer than the 3-4 months we'd need it? I'll look into that, thanks for the heads up.


----------



## Ambrose (Apr 11, 2006)

Personally, I wouldn't be too worried about going without medical insurance for awhile. But if you are, you don't need to get an expensive plan. Just buy a catastrophic policy in the event of a major incident, or join up with Samaritan Ministries which is very reasonable.


----------



## smhbbag (Apr 11, 2006)

^That's sounding like the best option. And just delay any non-covered, non-urgent appointments until after the wedding, or get them now before she loses coverage.

And if something major comes up that's not covered under catastropic insurance in that time, then maybe a quick trip to the courthouse is in order 

Thanks guys.


----------

