The concept of common-law marriage is archaic, and the
state no longer should recognize it. If couples want to claim they are
legally married, they should get a license.
A bill approved by a Senate subcommittee last week would do away with
recognizing common-law marriages. Supporters contend the law needs to be
changed because of the difficulty in distributing assets when a
common-law spouse dies.
Fewer than a dozen states continue to recognize common-law marriages,
and some, including Oklahoma and Utah, also have been trying to end the
practice. South Carolina has been trying, off and on, for years to drop
the recognition of common-law marriages.
A common-law marriage, as it now applies in South Carolina, is little
more than a legalistic designation whose significance becomes important
only when one of the alleged spouses dies and property has to be
distributed. And the only time a common-law marriage officially exists
is when a judge says so.
Common-law marriages are especially problematic in situations where a
spouse dies leaving the other spouse with a child who is a minor. The
state must provide the child with legal representation to contest the
estate with the surviving parent.
Common-law marriages also are a problem when a worker dies on a job
leaving a surviving partner who attempts to claim workers' compensation
benefits. It's up to the survivors to prove they lived together and
intended to marry -- and often it is difficult to determine who is
telling the truth.
If the Legislature does end recognition of common-law marriages, it
would allow a grace period, recognizing common-law marriages until Jan.
1, 2008. The measure also would waive marriage license fees for those
who couldn't afford them but are in common-law relationships.
That may not provoke every common-law couple to tie the knot. But it
certainly would untangle many a legal knot for the state.
