Erez Aloni (2011-2013 Center for Reproductive Rights-Columbia Law School Fellow) published in today's HuffPo (here)
an op-ed entitled "The Future of Our Relationships." He writes about
anticipated Scottish legislation would permit same-sex
marriage in that country. Scotland currenly permits civil partnerships for same-sex couples (and only same-sex couples). Here's an excerpt from the piece:
With Scotland's recent decision to legalize same-sex marriage, it may
possibly remove the option of civil partnership, as Norway, Vermont,
and Connecticut did. However, Scotland could decide to mimic France,
which offers its citizens a menu of options for the legal recognition
of relationships. No longer are the choices limited to marriage or
informal cohabitation — all or nothing. Rather, couples can choose to
marry, or, instead, to register their partnerships with the state and
gain the benefit of state and third-party recognition of their union
while avoiding some of the obligations and loaded symbolic baggage
that come with marriage.
Think about it this way: civil union — or state registration — could be
the perfect solution for people in a trial cohabitation period, for
the elderly who prefer to avoid a new marriage, and for those who want
to eschew matrimony for whatever reason. What is more, the state could
set up civil partnerships (as Belgium has, for instance) benefiting
other dyadic relationships — friends, relatives, or caregivers. Under
this system, you could design your legal commitment to suit your
relationship ties while avoiding awkward societal, familial, and legal
hassles.
Aloni makes two important points. First, there's no reason that civil partnership must be organized around sexual choices. (In other words, "civil partnership" could be available to two elderly sisters who live together and share all expenses, for example.) Second, from a legislative perspective, a jurisdiction could offer intended partners a choice between civil unions and marriage. In other words, each couple could make a decision about the level of legal benefits and burdens they wish to import as "default terms" of their relationship.
Aloni develops these arguments more fully in Registering Relationships (download available here), forthcoming in the Tulane Law Review. I think it is a very good piece.
In the District of Columbia there are both married and domestic partners. This has led to drafting issues in Illinois where the parentage presumption law is being rewritten.