Why We Need a National Marriage Database

An article by Jerry Markon and Jamie Stockwell appeared in the The Washington Post today about Sham Marriages in Arlington County Virginia as well as other jurisdictions in Northern Virginia. According to Markon and Stockwell's article: Law-enforcement officials said the scheme took advantage of marriage laws they called lax in Virginia compared with those of the rest of the Washington region. Couples can apply for and be granted a license within minutes -- and can get married the same day. Yesterday, at the Arlington clerk's office, for example, a young couple, arm in arm, applied for a marriage license. Ten minutes later, a clerk asked them to raise their right hands and handed them a license. A sign nearby said: "Marriage licenses are $30 cash only. No checks, debit or credit cards."

Each state and the District of Columbia have laws for applying for a marriage license. A legal marriage provides benefits to both parties and is a legal, binding contract. Marriage licenses were not issued in the United States until the mid-1800s. In 1923, the Federal Government passed the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act. It was not until 1929 that every state had marriage license laws conforming to Federal standards. For the first time, every marriage in order to be legally recognized by the Federal Government had to be licensed.

Getting a marriage license is easy. In my home state of Virginia, the couple does not even have to be a resident of the state, there is no waiting period, and only some Virginia counties require a copy of a divorce decree if either of the applicants were married previously. You just have to show them your driver's license, pay $30 (cash), and you've got a license. The next day you could go to another county with another applicant and receive another marriage license.

This happens because there is no system in place to check to see if the applicants are married in another county much less another state. The proof of a prior marriage could be a divorce decree from two or three marriages back. The unsuspecting bride or groom wouldn't realize that there was a previous marriage that had not ended in divorce. Or depending on what was told to the other party, the appliciant could claim they had never been married. Getting away with multiple, fraudulent marriages in our country is a snap.

This system worked when it was first initiated because most people lived in rural communities where everyone knew one another, and punishment for bigamy was much more severe. Also most marriages at that time were religious unions and recorded in the family Bible.

Our archaic system is failing in our transitional, wireless-based society of today. Moreover, Internet dating sites have given many of these predators a whole new supply. Our fragile system is taken advantage of by serial bigamists sociopaths and con artists. Also fraudulent sham marriages, many that are bigamous, have become common among illegal aliens needing a green card and a path to citizenship.

A centralized National Marriage Database is desperately needed in this country. I urge you to sign Donna Layne Roberts' petition.

Comments

[A Facebook User]

Hey Guys, I have been lately searching for some marriage records information and found this website http://www.everify.com/marriage/. I think here you can find an info you need.

[Williams, Jan P. (Copple-)]

Seeking specialized employment and attorney referrals, due to
problems caused by unenforced bigamy laws in TEXAS.
While the state "officially" recognizes both licensed and common-law marriage, it is impossible to obtain evidence because banks, tax preparation offices, and other businesses have failed to provide customers w/ pre-printed forms to declare a paperless marriage requiring the unemployed female to obtain a signature and permission from the abusing male and his girlfriend which in essence is a confession to criminal conduct -- thus man-made hell for the innocent first wife. Urgently require a licensed attorney referral.

[texanrose]

As always, it is mostly men who protest too much over the Petition and us as a victims. There are some good honest men that have signed the petition, and they are great. What the general public don't seem to understand is this crime affects not just the victim but tons of others whom the predator came in contact with. I have yet to see a woman say it would intrude on their privacy. The Social Security System tracks every step we make and we don't take issue with it. Interesting. They know where we had lived, what jobs we have had. SO do you think another database is invading your privacy? It is for protection plain and simple. Apparently Martin doesn't live in Florida, or Texas or Nevada. Like it or not everyone in the United States has a file the government has access too. Believe me if they wanted to they will know every little detail in your life. The President is even using details in the name of terrorism. So please don't assume we have privacy, we just have some areas that are more private than other countries. We need this database, the Social Security is already there, all we need is a constructive reliable way of finding a 'needle in the haystack.'

[Martin]

We need fewer databases tracking us, no matter what the motivation may be for setting them up. I for one have no interest in the government being able to track any part of my personal life, ESPECIALLY my marriage. I'm not a bigamist, just someone who thinks that legislation and new rules are not the answer to any of our problems.

[Fighter]

As always, Sandra - clearly stated & succinctly said. Clear & to the point with a wonderful personal example. This should be common sense yet people have knee-jerk bad reactions to this.... until THEY are victimized themselves.