By Leah Elison
The House Judiciary Committee favorably passed an amended version of a bill Friday that aims to lower divorce rates in Utah by introducing a new type of marriage.
Covenant marriage, as defined in House Bill 213, would require couples to attend marital counseling before getting married or divorced, to disclose any information that may jeopardize the marriage and to wait longer before getting a divorce.
Although it has nothing to do with Latter-day Saint temple marriages, couples married in an LDS temple can choose to have their marriage legally considered a covenant marriage.
'What covenant marriage does, essentially, is institute a type of marriage that people can enter into that will strengthen and deepen the institution of marriage,' said bill sponsor Rep. Douglas Aagard, R-Kaysville.
The committee amended the bill to remove a $20 fee for choosing a covenant marriage, allowing clerks to set their own fees, and to add a requirement for couples to receive financial advice as a part of pre-marital counseling.
'It is more difficult to start a covenant marriage; you have to jump over more hurdles,' said Alan Hawkins, BYU professor of family life. 'That justifies the higher hurdles for exiting a marriage if the marriage does not work.'
Nationally, 30 to 40 percent of first marriages end in divorce, he said, and Utah''s percentages are similar.
Hawkins said he believes the bill will reduce the Utah divorce rate long-term, although an immediate change may not occur.
Covenant marriages are already used in many states, including Arkansas, Arizona and Louisiana.
During public comment, no one spoke in opposition to the bill, but some expressed concerns that licensing for a covenant marriage would cost more than for regular marriages.
'I think charging you more to do the right thing sends the wrong message,' said Gayle Ruzicka, president of the Utah Eagle Forum. 'I''d rather say give them a $20 discount for saving their marriage.'
When the committee asked why the fee was included, Hawkins said it was 'an unfortunate pragmatism' that Louisiana had to adopt so its county clerks would agree to offer the option of a covenant marriage to couples.
Rep. Chad Bennion, R-Murray, proposed an amendment to remove the fee for couples choosing a covenant marriage but not for married couples choosing to convert their marriage to a covenant marriage.
He said it was reasonable to charge a fee for couples converting to a covenant marriage because of the added paperwork, but an initial covenant marriage required no increase in the amount of work county clerks would have to do.
Rep. Katherine Bryson, R-Orem, disagreed.
'We are adding significant amount of time,' she said. 'We don''t want to make it burdensome.'
An additional $20 fee is not too much to ask for the additional service county clerks would be required to do, she said.
Rep. J. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, opposed the bill for different reasons.
'This is probably the most important decision they make in their lives,' Adams said. 'I would hate to think that $20 would make a difference.'
Concerns were resolved when Adams said county clerks could set their own fees and the committee approved the amendment.
The second amendment, proposed by Rep. Eric Hutchings, R-Salt Lake, added a requirement for couples to get financial guidance as part of their pre-marital counseling.
'We can''t skip around the fact that financial issues are the number one reason for divorce,' Hutchings said. 'I strongly suggest that we add that in.'
The only opposition came from Rep. Ben Ferry, R-Corinne, who said he did not think it was a good idea to require people who have no background in financial planning to give advice to couples.
'I don''t know that would be a problem,' Aagard said. 'Not every marriage counselor is a certified financial consultant, but I think they intuitively understand a lot of the financial obligations tied to a marriage.'
The amendment passed unanimously.