After love, inevitability
Probably it was inevitable, but still, it seems kind of quick. Not six months into the era of gay marriage in Massachusetts, the first divorce filings by gay and lesbian couples have unceremoniously landed in local probate courts.
Some of those same marriages that began with shouts of joy and heartfelt vows on city hall steps across the state are ending with no fanfare -- and no small amount of handwringing by local officials, at least one of whom believes the divorce filings have exposed a fundamental flaw in marriage law.
Probate courts are forging ahead, able if not necessarily ready. In the first case in Suffolk County, a divorce petition jointly submitted by two gay men, the word "wife" is repeatedly crossed out with "husband" scrawled in its place.
"That's something that the Supreme Judicial Court has the responsibility to change," Richard Iannella, Suffolk register of probate, said somewhat sheepishly.
Love may be a many-splendored thing, but it's often a temporary thing as well. The divorces reveal less about gay marriage than about the human condition. People fall in love, they fall out of love, and a bad marriage can be the loneliest place on earth.
In that first Suffolk County case, a 33-year-old religious educator who lives in Allston filed for divorce from a 39-year-old professor from Washington, D.C. The two of them married in Gloucester on May 22, just days after they were legally allowed. The divorce papers were received on Tuesday.
Their names were part of the filing, but the decision here is to leave them out of print. The two men only did something that millions of heterosexuals have done before them. They came to their senses -- I mean, they concluded that they should no longer be married.
"Our interests have grown in different directions," the two of them wrote on the filing. "Prior to our separation, differences in personality affected our well-being."
So the professor continues to live in the Washington condominium, which will remain jointly owned until the two agree on a sale. He'll also take custody of their three cats, though with a catch.
"In recognition of the emotional hardship of such relinquishment, [the professor] agrees to give [the religious educator] the right of free and unrestricted visitation access," the court papers read. The professor "further agrees to provide [the religious educator] with any periodic updates, photographs, or health-related information."
Sounds like these guys deserve each other, but maybe that's just the lone voice of a biased dog lover.
Iannella says "these cases will be treated the same as any other." But he adds a worrisome twist. Under his reading of the law, any couple living out-of-state at the time of their divorce is required by Massachusetts statute to seek the divorce in the closest jurisdiction. But other states will refuse to recognize gay marriage, meaning they won't grant a divorce.
Because one party lived in Washington, Iannella sought a judge's guidance before pushing ahead with the filing. The judge accepted jurisdiction, but in other cases it may not be so clear.
In the first Middlesex County case, a 38-year-old Somerville woman who lists her occupation as "cleaning business" filed for divorce from a 27-year-old student on Dec. 2, citing "cruel and abusive treatment. The two had been married for less than three months.
"This is a case taking the natural course through the court," said Middlesex Register John Buonomo.
Someone once said that if you invite a romantic to a wedding, what they see is a glorious bond between two loving people, a union that transcends either half of the couple. Invite a divorce lawyer, and what is seen is a future business opportunity.
When reality trumps perception, gays really aren't much different than anyone else.
Brian McGrory is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at mcgrory@globe.com
