# Should marriage licenses have a requirement to disclose gender reassignment by either party? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 25, 2010, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973 "2010-07-25T20:01:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2010, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/1 "2010-07-25T20:01:25Z")
I was stuck by how sad this scenario is, where the family of a deceased firefighter is attacking the widow of their son, claiming the son had no idea he married a woman who was originally a biological man. THe widow is obviously in torment over these accusations. They are seeking to block her from access to her husband’s death benefits. Should state marriage licenses have a requirement than any party to the marriage who has undergone gender re-assignment must disclose it? As the science and procedures of gender re-assignment gets more and more sophisticated this problem might crop up more and more often. Having this requirement would make sure that people will not be attacked after the fact like this. [Video here](http://www.chron.com/video/?248171451001) Story here [Judge bars firefighter’s widow from benefits - Alleged transgendered spouse again denies fraud; case will proceed](http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7121997.html) > [@](#): > > WHARTON — A judge Friday agreed to temporarily bar the allegedly transgendered widow of a Wharton firefighter from spending or collecting his death benefits. > > State District Judge Randy Clapp ruled after hearing from Nikki Araguz that she received a check for $60,000 on Thursday, about a 10th of the total cash expected because of Thomas Araguz’s July 4 death in an egg farm inferno. > > The firefighter’s parents have filed a lawsuit alleging that the marriage is void because Nikki Araguz was born a man. > > Their attorney, Chad Ellis, said family members got what they wanted in Friday’s hearing and expect to go forward. > > “Nikki Araguz is someone who has conned people her entire life,” said Ellis, an attorney for Simone Araguz, the firefighter’s mother. “We are getting daily reports that Tommy Araguz was not the first person who this has happened to. She has deceived other men into thinking that she was born a woman.” > > If the marriage is voided in Texas, he said, all of the proceeds will go to Tommy Araguz’s two sons from a prior marriage. > > He said Thomas Araguz testified in a deposition two months ago that he did not know his wife was born a man, which was flatly disputed by Nikki Araguz. > > “I had been completely honest with him about my entire history: legally, financially, physically, mentally, and medically,” Nikki Araguz said after the hearing. “And I have evidence to prove such facts.” > > She said she looks forward to the outcome of the case. ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2010, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/2 "2010-07-25T22:01:22Z")
Of course they are claiming that the son had no idea. I wonder if it’s true? Since he’s dead we’ll never know. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2010, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/3 "2010-07-25T22:26:26Z")
I’d vote yes, but not strongly. 1. Someone who has had sex reassignment surgery cannot have children. Certainly there are women and men who are sterile, but I think most people would agree that no one can be faulted for not knowing that they were sterile going into a marriage. If they do know so ahead of time, it’s reasonable to expect them to be honest about it up-front. Marriage coupled with having and raising children is a fairly well accepted and expected thing by most people. Not being able to have children may well be a show-stopper for many. 2. It’s highly likely that eventually the partner will find out. At that point, physical violence is a distinct possibility. Marriage is based on trust. Discovering that the person you have been married to for years has been hiding a not-insubstantial revelation from you for all that time is certainly liable to cause problems, even before getting to issues of homophobia or whatever kicking in. 3. Again, marriage is based on trust. There may be places where lying or holding back the truth is perfectly reasonable, but this isn’t really one of them. Of course, items 1 and 3 are really outside the interests of the state. I would encourage people to be honest just on general principal, but I wouldn’t legislate it. Item #2 is, on the other hand, relevant to state interest. Murders, spouse abuse, etc. are best to be prevented if you can accomplish it. Such extreme outcomes are, likely, going to be a small percentage of all cases of course, but still unnecessary. Seeing as people should already be being honest, I don’t see there as being a downside. ---
**Author:** ![Tanaqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3bc359/32.png) [@Tanaqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tanaqui)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2010, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/4 "2010-07-25T22:39:30Z")
As far as I know, people are not legally obliged to disclose anything else before getting married, so why should they have to disclose this? Should I be forced to disclose the fact that I’m infertile, or that I’ve slept with women before, or that I once slept with the entire football team, or that I was adopted, or that one of my grandparents was black, or any of the other millions of things that could lead to strife if I chose to marry a moron? If such a law was passed, I can guarantee you it wouldn’t be for the protection of transgendered people. That family is disgusting. I can’t imagine what that poor woman must be feeling. Horrible human beings. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2010, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/5 "2010-07-25T23:38:45Z")
> [@Tanaqui](#): > > As far as I know, people are not legally obliged to disclose anything else before getting married > **[Criminal transmission of HIV](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_transmission_of_HIV)** > > Criminal transmission of HIV is the intentional or reckless infection of a person with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). This is often conflated, in laws and in discussion, with criminal exposure to HIV, which does not require the transmission of the virus and often, as in the cases of spitting and biting, does not include a realistic means of transmission. Some countries or jurisdictions, including some areas of the U.S., have enacted laws expressly to criminalize HIV transmission or e > **[WTOP | Washington’s Top News | DC, MD & VA News, Traffic & Weather](https://wtop.com/?nid=104&sid=1995167)** > > WTOP delivers the latest news, traffic and weather information to the Washington, D.C. region. See today’s top stories. > **[Direct Appeal: Evidence of marriage fraud is sufficient for conviction if it...](http://directappeal2.blogspot.com/2005/08/evidence-of-marriage-fraud-is.html)** ---
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2010, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/6 "2010-07-25T23:55:28Z")
> [@Tanaqui](#): > > If such a law was passed, I can guarantee you it wouldn’t be for the protection of transgendered people. Bingo. And in fact, if such a law was passed, it would mean that trans\* people wouldn’t be getting married in most states in the country, because of nonsensical chromosomal absolutism in the laws that do not reflect psychological or physical realities of 2010. ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/7 "2010-07-26T00:26:31Z")
> [@tumbleddown](#): > > > [@Tanaqui](#): > > > > If such a law was passed, I can guarantee you it wouldn’t be for the protection of transgendered people. > > Bingo. And in fact, if such a law was passed, it would mean that trans\* people wouldn’t be getting married in most states in the country, because of nonsensical chromosomal absolutism in the laws that do not reflect psychological or physical realities of 2010. Sorry, there’s a base physical reality to chromosomal (i.e. biological) sex that is still valid and important in 2010. ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/8 "2010-07-26T00:31:58Z")
To answer the OP: I’m not as crushed by this as you seem to be. Texas (rightly or wrongly) does not allow homosexual marriage. A transgender person marrying someone from the same sex is, by definition, a homosexual marriage. Ergo, the marriage is void ab initio. As for the requirement that one not procure a marriage by fraud, yeah, that should be a requirement. And it is. As for ferreting out said fraud by asking for it on a marriage license, I can’t really see the problem with it, and it would save a lot of subsequent heartache for those woefully obtuse to certain… things… about the marriage. (edit: I suspect if and when homosexual marriage is permitted that then would be a good time to start asking about this) On a related note, I seriously question the relationship if the dead person/alleged fraud victim wasn’t aware of her sexual/gender issues, so I probably suspect that he was fully aware of it and didn’t care. However (again, rightly or wrongly) that’s probably irrelevant in this case. ---
**Author:** ![Harriet\_the\_Spry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Harriet\_the\_Spry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harriet_the_Spry)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/9 "2010-07-26T00:55:09Z")
Although I can see how such a policy could be used against people, it seems like in this case it may have been to the advantage of Nikki Araguz. It would have documented that the late husband knew. On the other hand, would the requirement mean everyone would need to get tested for their chromosomal gender before marriage? Because that would certainly be a PITA. Only a handful of states require any blood testing before marriage anymore. I don’t know that anyone has ever verified my gender at the chromosomal level. And with any test given to a large population you get some incorrect results. That would create some headaches. Can you imagine the Bridezilla insanity when results got switched in the lab or something? ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/10 "2010-07-26T01:02:54Z")
> [@Harriet\_the\_Spry](#): > > Although I can see how such a policy could be used against people, it seems like in this case it may have been to the advantage of Nikki Araguz. It would have documented that the late husband knew. > > On the other hand, would the requirement mean everyone would need to get tested for their chromosomal gender before marriage? Because that would certainly be a PITA. Only a handful of states require any blood testing before marriage anymore. I don’t know that anyone has ever verified my gender at the chromosomal level. And with any test given to a large population you get some incorrect results. That would create some headaches. Can you imagine the Bridezilla insanity when results got switched in the lab or something? the OP posits not a requirement to get tested but a requirement to disclose if you’ve undergone gender reassignment. Surely one would know this. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/11 "2010-07-26T01:28:04Z")
> [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > …Sorry, there’s a base physical reality to chromosomal (i.e. biological) sex that is still valid and important in 2010. Biological sex isn’t always as simple as having XY or XX chromsomes. For example a person with complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome would have XY chromosomes, but an entirely female (even hyperfeminine) body type and genitalia. The vagina, breasts, and other secondary sex characteristics would have developed one their own, without medical intervention. This person would have been raised as a female, indentify as female, look exactly like a female even when naked, but lack ovaries or a uterus (hence being sterile and not menstrating), the vagina may be shallower than normal, and this person would still have testes, but they’d remain in the abdomen. This person may be taller than the average woman. Is this person a man or a women? ---
**Author:** ![Kaio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/c68b51/32.png) [@Kaio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kaio)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/12 "2010-07-26T01:32:51Z")
Gah. No, it should not be required by law. How people handle their own private relationships are no one’s business but theirs. There’s no fraud, either, regardless whether she told him. She was female when she married him. Since the normal process is to get your name and sex legally changed upon reassignment surgery, she was also _legally_ female when she married him. What she was before their marriage isn’t relevant. I really hope someone points this out. The validity of her marriage shouldn’t rely on what she may or may not have said behind closed doors. ---
**Author:** ![Eonwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eonwe/32/240_2.png) [@Eonwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eonwe)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/13 "2010-07-26T01:38:55Z")
Of course not, and for the reasons **Sage Rat** mentions. It’s none of the government’s business. Deceiving your bride or groom is a bad moral policy, but in no way shape or form should it be illegal. As **Tanaqui** says, who knows what other random bits of information the government might require to be disclosed before two people can get married. ---
**Author:** ![Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eyebrows_0f_doom/32/3119_2.png) [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eyebrows_0f_Doom)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/14 "2010-07-26T01:40:03Z")
> [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > A transgender person marrying someone from the same sex is, by definition, a homosexual marriage. Ergo, the marriage is void ab initio. I thought that it was the exact opposite. That if you were born male, and had all the surgery to transition to female, legally you are now female and can have a legal marriage with a male. Does this vary state to state? ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/15 "2010-07-26T01:46:51Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > > [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > > > A transgender person marrying someone from the same sex is, by definition, a homosexual marriage. Ergo, the marriage is void ab initio. > > I thought that it was the exact opposite. That if you were born male, and had all the surgery to transition to female, legally you are now female and can have a legal marriage with a male. Does this vary state to state? not in Texas. Yes, it varies from state to state. ---
**Author:** ![Harriet\_the\_Spry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Harriet\_the\_Spry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harriet_the_Spry)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/16 "2010-07-26T01:52:09Z")
> [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > the OP posits not a requirement to get tested but a requirement to disclose if you’ve undergone gender reassignment. Surely one would know this. I was following this to sort of an extreme, in which you were entitled to know the chromosomal gender of the person you were marrying, or the state were trying to enforce a ban against same-chromosomal-gender marriages, or at least unwitting ones. Still, there are those cases of infants born with ambiguous genitalia who have surgery to make them more like one gender. They might not know about the surgery. My understanding is that a lot of people who get this surgery don’t see this so much as changing genders but clarifying their gender. And it’s more of a continuum than a binary thing. Sure, the vast majority of people are at one end or another, but pretty much the whole continuum seems to be populated. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/17 "2010-07-26T01:53:36Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > > [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > > > A transgender person marrying someone from the same sex is, by definition, a homosexual marriage. Ergo, the marriage is void ab initio. > > I thought that it was the exact opposite. That if you were born male, and had all the surgery to transition to female, legally you are now female and can have a legal marriage with a male. Does this vary state to state? Yes. Not all states recognize gender reassignment. Texas is one of those states. By Texas law, the widow in this case is still a man and the marriage was never valid, regardless of what the husband knew or didn’t know. In the eyes of Texas, it was two dudes who could not have been legally married. ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/18 "2010-07-26T01:57:32Z")
> [@Eonwe](#): > > Deceiving your bride or groom is a bad moral policy, but in no way shape or form should it be illegal. really now? putting aside the misnomer “illegal” you don’t think the state has any right in allowing victims of deceit a legal recourse? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/19 "2010-07-26T01:57:34Z")
> [@Harriet\_the\_Spry](#): > > > [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > > > the OP posits not a requirement to get tested but a requirement to disclose if you’ve undergone gender reassignment. Surely one would know this. > > I was following this to sort of an extreme, in which you were entitled to know the chromosomal gender of the person you were marrying, or the state were trying to enforce a ban against same-chromosomal-gender marriages, or at least unwitting ones. > > Still, there are those cases of infants born with ambiguous genitalia who have surgery to make them more like one gender. They might not know about the surgery. > > My understanding is that a lot of people who get this surgery don’t see this so much as changing genders but clarifying their gender. And it’s more of a continuum than a binary thing. Sure, the vast majority of people are at one end or another, but pretty much the whole continuum seems to be populated. It doesn’t matter how the person who has the surgery sees it, it only matters how the state sees it. Some states only recognize a person as being the gender they are recorded as having been born with and do not legally recognize surgery as changing that person’s sex. Right or wrong, this was not a legal marriage in Texas. Hey, it’s Texas. Why would anyone expect any different? ---
**Author:** ![Rumor\_Watkins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rumor\_Watkins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rumor_Watkins)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2010, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973/20 "2010-07-26T02:01:02Z")
> [@Harriet\_the\_Spry](#): > > > [@Rumor\_Watkins](#): > > > > the OP posits not a requirement to get tested but a requirement to disclose if you’ve undergone gender reassignment. Surely one would know this. > > I was following this to sort of an extreme, in which you were entitled to know the chromosomal gender of the person you were marrying, or the state were trying to enforce a ban against same-chromosomal-gender marriages, or at least unwitting ones. > > Still, there are those cases of infants born with ambiguous genitalia who have surgery to make them more like one gender. They might not know about the surgery. > > My understanding is that a lot of people who get this surgery don’t see this so much as changing genders but clarifying their gender. And it’s more of a continuum than a binary thing. Sure, the vast majority of people are at one end or another, but pretty much the whole continuum seems to be populated. except the law of statuses has to operate with binary things. for the truly oddball cases where the law hasn’t caught up to you yet, sometimes you just gotta deal with the fact that the law doesn’t incorporate that one-in-a-million case and take the cards you’ve been dealt. Like siamese twins - are they two separate people? (I actually don’t know this) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-marriage-licenses-have-a-requirement-to-disclose-gender-reassignment-by-either-party/547973.md?page=2)