Exploring the Polysemy of Voice and Silence

This chapter addresses the complex interplay between voice and silence in US LGBT communities. In terms of voice, the chapter focuses on Evan Wolfson, founder of Freedom to Marry and colloquially known as “Mr. Gay Marriage,” whose public comments on same-sex divorce before and after the Supreme Court ruling on marriage equality focused on two central themes: (1) fairness and (2) protection. In terms of silence, the chapter focuses on the largely absent discourse about same-sex divorce in mainstream LGBT online media to explore its multiple meanings. The analysis explores three major themes: (1) that same-sex divorce is a recent phenomenon, (2) that same-sex divorce may not be relevant to unconventional long-term relationships, and (3) that creation of a pseudo charmed circle suppresses the visibility of same-sex divorce. The chapter concludes by exploring the implications of the multiple meanings of voice and silence surrounding same-sex relational dissolution.

Transition Through a Shattered Crystal Snowglobe

In this essay, the author reflects on her life and the impact that transitioning from male to female had on her marriage, her children, and her life. The piece examines the coming out process; the discovery by her wife (i.e., after an episode of cross-dressing); telling their children; the couple’s attempts to keep their marriage intact despite intrapersonal, interpersonal, and financial strain; and, ultimately, the process of first separation and then divorce. In addition to exploring the experience of transitioning, and the role of this transition in the author’s separation and divorce, the chapter also addresses how employment and financial stresses—incurred in large part because of trans-related discrimination—exacerbated existing intrapersonal, interpersonal, and familial stresses.

Legal Issues in Divorce for Transgender Individuals

This chapter examines the legal issues faced by transgender people in divorce and child custody cases. Despite trans people’s increased visibility, and gains in legal rights and protections, many people—including judges—continue to harbor misconceptions about transgender people. Attorneys representing transgender clients must anticipate the possibility of judicial bias and take proactive steps to address it. Attorneys must be prepared for the unique legal issues that arise when a spouse transitions during an existing marriage. Even under modern “no-fault” divorce regimes, attorneys must be prepared to rebut the claim that coming out as transgender constitutes misconduct or justifies awarding the other spouse more marital property or spousal support. In custody cases, attorneys must anticipate and rebut misinformation and negative judicial attitudes toward transgender parents. Finally, even after Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), attorneys representing transgender clients who married before Obergefell must be prepared to explain why that decision is retroactive.

Tying Tight or Splitting Up

In this reflexive autoethnography, the author uses performative writing and evocative personal narrative to recount the dissolution of his parents’ relationship and explore the implications of such dissolutions for children of same-sex relationships. The lack of legal and social support structures available to LGBTQ families in the 1980s, and the prevalence of anti-LGBTQ rhetoric focused on the effects of LGBTQ parents on children, both increased the already traumatic impact of family dissolution on the author. As a child, like members of many groups under “political threat,” the author feared that discussing the difficulty of his parents’ separation would validate anti-LGBTQ rhetoric. For the author, labeling the dissolution of his parents’ relationship as “divorce,” and finding friendship with other young people from divorced families, was insufficient; only peer support from other people with LGBTQ parents helped the author to find a safe space to share the trauma of parental relationship dissolution.

Social Science Research on Heterosexual Relationship Dissolution and Divorce Where One Parent Comes Out as LGB

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) parenthood post-heterosexual relationship (PHR) dissolution was the focus of much of the early social science research on sexual minority parenting from the 1980s onward, and remains relevant today. The initial legal cases contesting LGB parenting involved mainly lesbian mothers seeking custody of their children PHR. Yet the focus of most research on LGB parenting and legislation in the twenty-first century has been on children brought up in planned LGB-parent families. This chapter highlights the key issues of sexual identity disclosure and identity intersection for LGB parents PHR. It considers family transition through single parenthood, nonresidential parenting, and stepfamily formation that might particularly marginalize LGB parents and their children PHR. The review focuses on studies of LGB parents, new same-gender partners, and children in these families. When relevant, it considers how family law relates to sexual minority identity empowerment and disempowerment PHR.

Consensual Dispute Resolution with Same-Sex Couples

This chapter discusses the role of consensual dispute resolution (CDR), which allows parties to resolve their disputes outside of the judicial system, in same-sex relationship dissolutions. Two forms of CDR are mediation and collaborative law. In mediation, the parties meet with a neutral professional who helps the parties identify and resolve their disputes. In collaborative law, each party is represented by a collaborative attorney. The chapter, outlines characteristics of mediation and collaborative law, including their similarities and differences, and the tenets of a collaborative divorce. It then describes how the history of discrimination in the courts has affected LGBTQ families and made the use of CDR a more satisfactory and safe way to uncouple. It examines the unique issues that arise for some LGBTQ clients. Lastly, it reviews the skills a CDR professional needs to work with LGBTQ clients.

Dissolution of Polyamorous Relationships, Multiple Parent Families, and Other Complex Arrangements

This chapter explores the challenges facing multipartner and multiparent families in family law during dissolution. It first explores society’s idealization of the traditional husband-wife-child family, which persists despite the fact that a diversity of family forms have long existed in the United States and are becoming increasingly common today. It explains how this idealized construct underlies family law in the United States and disadvantages multipartner and multiparent families in a variety of ways. Courts and legislatures have been slow to recognize and provide for legal rights among multipartner and multiparent families, and even where courts have recognized more than two parents, the results have been unsatisfactory. Statutes in California and Maine, by contrast, are more progressive toward multipartner and multiparent families. Preparation and education are vitally important to multipartner and multiparent families. The chapter discusses how the trust, honesty, and communication that define many polyamorous families can impact dissolution.

The Role of Gender and Gender Dynamics in Same-Sex Divorce and Dissolution

This chapter identifies ways researchers, policymakers, therapists, lawyers, and couples should attend to the role of gender and gender dynamics facing same-sex couples upon divorce or relationship dissolution. When same-sex couples marry, gender roles associated with a particular vision of different-sex couples—in reference to which the legal institution of marriage developed historically—may be projected onto same-sex couples both socially and by judges adjudicating their relationship dissolutions, often in a manner conflicting with couples’ intentions and practices. Thus, couples consisting of two men and couples consisting of two women may be differentially affected. Gender and gender dynamics are likely to affect the bases for dissolution (e.g., whether one of the spouses committed adultery or whether there is a basis for annulment); the financial aspects of dissolution; and determination of child custody. The chapter suggests directions for future research regarding the impact of gender on the dissolution of same-sex relationships.

Family, Loss, and Change

Same-sex relationship dissolution has reverberations for individuals beyond the nuclear family. This chapter discusses a lesbian-parent family, consisting of two moms and two kids—when it broke up nearly two decades ago, many other family members, including the donor and his husband, were deeply affected. This chapter reflects on this experience from the author’s perspective of a family scholar and an activist for LGBTQ family rights. In the absence of legal marriage and thus legal divorce, family lives turned out in ways that even the most careful, deliberate efforts could not anticipate nor protect. The experiences described highlight many losses and regrets, despite the intentional love and concern for all of the parents, children, and extended family members involved. These reflections on this experience are intended to honor the family as it once was and the families they have become.

Child Custody in the Context of LGBTQ Relationship Dissolution and Divorce

This chapter discusses how families headed by LGBTQ people can engage in transformative advocacy during child custody disputes. It presents cases that demonstrate how parental sexual orientation identity can be used to bolster parental claims of fitness and bids for more custodial time with a child. It discusses how advocacy efforts for same-sex marriage and equal treatment of LGBTQ parents have often used assimilative strategies to gain legal protection. Now that many state jurisdictions expand and align their marriage-related rules to include child custody decisions, it is likely that courts will rely on assimilative narratives when making custody decisions for children of LGBTQ parents. As a result, LGBTQ families that fall outside of the stereotypical monogamous, white, wealthy, family configuration may find themselves precluded from legal protection. Deploying a wider range of LGBTQ-positive arguments in child custody cases could help courts recognize ongoing forms of bias against LGBTQ families.