A new form of marriage is creeping into the United States and it may become an option for Ohio residents.

This new type of matrimony, called covenant marriage, makes entrance and exit of a marriage more difficult than standard wedlock and is currently legislated in Louisiana, Arizona and Arkansas. Created in a Presbyterian church in Baton Rouge in 1997, the choice of covenant marriage has become a discussion in 20 states.

Three social scientists — Dr. Laura Sanchez of Bowling Green State University, Steven Nock of the University of Virginia and James Wright of the University of Central Florida have been studying covenant marriages and will be ending their 5-year study this summer.

According to an article by the researchers, “Covenant marriage is part of an ongoing debate about the meanings of marriage and the actions, if any, that legislatures should take to reduce high rates of divorce…”

Overall, covenant marriages differ from standard marriage in some ways. First, when a couple chooses covenant marriage, they must sign an affidavit saying that the two have had counseling prior to the wedding, Wright said.

Also, the couple must be aware and agree on the justified reasons for a divorce under the laws of a covenant marriage. These justifications for divorce include and are fairly limited to adultery, physical or sexual abuse, a felony conviction or abandonment of family.

Finally, in exiting a marriage, the couple must show proof of marriage counseling and the divorce must be fault based for the divorce to be legal.

“Technically, the couple is compelled by the state to stay together,” Wright said. “Not liking each other anymore is simply not an option that constitutes a divorce.”

Two-thirds of the couples that have decided on covenant marriages thus far have strong ties to their religion, Nock said.

“They aren’t always the hardcore evangelistic types,” Nock said. “The other one-third of those who choose covenant marriage simply have morals in which they believe in strong marriage.” Within the study, the social scientists considered three different group’s opinions, Sanchez said. Those three groups included couples who had chosen the covenant form of marriage, feminists and low-income women.

“We were interested in the first covenant marriage takers because they lobbied for it,” Sanchez said. “The women from the National Organization of Women were chosen because they lobbied against the law. The low-income women were chosen because a lot of our public policy debates are about trying to get low-income people to get married…and so it would be interesting to ask their point of view about strengthening marriage in America.”

The second group, the feminists, had very contrasting beliefs in reference to covenant marriage and even marriage in general, Wright said.

“For better or for worse, feminists like to maximize choices for women,” Wright said. “They feel marriage puts legal constraints on women in relationships.”

“Women get hurt in our culture by our legal system and by the men who vowed to love them, whether you have fault divorce or no-fault divorce,” one of the feminists interviewed said.

The third group, low-income women, had a mixed view because they were able to step back and look at the bigger picture of covenant marriage, Nock said.

“People who are not middle- class or above it do not see the economic factors of marriage like lower-class people do,” Nock said. “The low-income women expressed that love and affection can fade, but if the marriage is still supportive for the family and children, the marriage is successful.”

The low-income women felt covenant marriage was an option for women, and while they could see the good parts of it, did not advocate wholeheartedly, according to the article by the researchers.

“In some ways covenant marriage will work, and it’s good, but in some ways, I think if it’s not in your heart, no matter what a piece of paper says, it’s not going to do any good,” one low-income woman in the study said.

Ohio Representative Bob Latta said the key factor in covenant marriage is that it is a choice. A bill was proposed in 1997, but was never passed through the committee, Latta said.

“A formal bill about covenant marriage has not yet been re-introduced,” Latta said. “But it’s something that is permissive, not mandatory.”

Latta said that om looking at the make-up of Ohio’s legislature he feels that covenant marriage could be a possibility in Ohio’s future.

Wright said the study of covenant marriages has been and will continue to be interesting for him to observe.

“I think it will be interesting to see over five years if those couples who are covenantly married are any less violent, any more loving, or any more unlikely to get divorced,” Wright said.