Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Marriage Equality and Activity Limitations Among Older Adults in Same-Sex Relationships

  • Published:
Sexuality Research and Social Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

In the USA, 37 states and the District of Columbia had legalized same-sex marriage (SSM) via court decision or legislation before the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges ruling legalized SSM nationwide.

Methods

With pooled cross-sections of 48,098 older adults with same-sex partners/spouses from the 2008–2019 American Community Survey and state-level policy data; we estimated the relationship between the right to marry and the presence of activity limitations. Using the 2013–2019 ACS, we also estimated the relationship between marital status itself and the presence of activity limitations.

Results

In a baseline model with demographic characteristics but without state or year fixed effects, the likelihood of activity limitations was statistically significantly lower in states where SSM had been legal for at least 5 years or where SSM had become legal at the state level relative to a state without SSM. In the presence of fixed effects, the likelihood of activity limitations was not statistically significantly associated with the duration or method of SSM policy, but men and women who were living with a same-sex spouse were less likely than their counterparts who were living with an unmarried same-sex partner to experience activity limitations.

Conclusions

Compared to their counterparts in states where SSM was not yet legal, adults living with same-sex partners/spouses were less likely to experience activity limitations if they lived in a state that had legalized SSM relatively early, but this relationship likely reflects unobservable factors that influenced both the policy environment and health of older sexual minorities. Older adults who were married to a same-sex spouse were less likely than those who cohabited with a same-sex partner to experience activity limitations, suggesting that marriage enhances health or that healthier adults are more likely to marry.

Policy Implications

Our findings suggest that favorable attitudes toward SSM, rather than the policy itself, enhance the health of older gays and lesbians. Because attitudes toward SSM can improve over time after court decisions or favorable legislation, both methods of change hold the promise of enhancing LGBTQ health.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Material

We used the 2008–2019 Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS) of the American Community Survey (ACS). The PUMS files consist of individual-level data from nationally representative samples of approximately 1.9 to 2.4 million households. We provided our data file as an electronic supplemental material.

Code Availability

Our R code is available upon request.

References

  • Anderson v. King County, 158 Wn.2d 1. (WA. Sup. Ct. 2006).

  • Bertrand, M., Duflo, E., & Mullainathan, S. (2004). How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(1), 249–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyrer, C. (2014). Pushback: The current wave of anti-homosexuality laws and impacts on health. PLOS Medicine, 11(6), e1001658.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Boertien, D., & Vignoli, D. (2019). Legalizing same-sex marriage matters for the subjective well-being of individuals in same-sex unions. Demography, 56(6), 2109–2121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, C. S., Eppink, S. T., Gonzales, G., & McKay, T. (2021). Effects of access to legal same-sex marriage on marriage and health. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 40(2), 376–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downing, J., & Cha, P. (2020). Same-sex marriage and gains in employer-sponsored insurance for US adults, 2008–2017. American Journal of Public Health, 110(4), 537–539.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Drabble, L. A., Mericle, A. A., Munroe, C., Wootton, A. R., Trocki, K. F., & Hughes, T. L. (2022). Examining perceived effects of same-sex marriage legalization among sexual minority women: Identifying demographic differences and factors related to alcohol use disorder, depression, and self-perceived health. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 19(3), 1285–1299.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Equality Act, H.R. 15; S. 5. (2021–2022). https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5

  • Freedman, V. A., & Martin, L. G. (1999). The role of education in explaining and forecasting trends in functional limitations among older Americans. Demography, 36(4), 461–473.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frost, D. M., Levahot, K., & Meyer, I. H. (2011). Minority stress and physical health among sexual minorities. Poster presented at: Annual Conference of the American Psychological Association; August 5, 2011; Washington, DC. Available at: http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Frost-Lehavot-Meyer-APA2011.pdf

  • Goldsen, J., Bryan, A. E., Kim, H. J., Muraco, A., Jen, S., & Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I. (2017). Who says I do: The changing context of marriage and health and quality of life for LGBT older adults. The Gerontologist, 57(suppl_1), S50-S62. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw174

  • Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, 440 Mass. 309. (Mass. Sup. Ct. 2003).

  • Hatzenbuehler, M. L. (2010). Social factors as determinants of mental health disparities in LGB populations: Implications for public policy. Social Issues and Policy Review, 4(1), 31–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatzenbuehler, M. L. (2014). Structural stigma and the health of lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(2), 127–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414523775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatzenbuehler, M. L., McLaughlin, K. A., Keyes, K. M., & Hasin, D. S. (2010). The impact of institutional discrimination on psychiatric disorders in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: A prospective study. American Journal of Public Health, 100(3), 452–459.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Dovidio, J. (2009). How does stigma “get under the skin”? The mediating role of emotion regulation. Psychological Science, 20(10), 1282–1289.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hatzenbuehler, M. L., O’Cleirigh, C., Grasso, C., Mayer, K., Safren, S., & Bradford, J. (2012). Effect of same-sex marriage laws on health care use and expenditures in sexual minority men: A quasi-natural experiment. American Journal of Public Health, 102(2), 285–291.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Health care quality: How does your state compare? Content last reviewed April 2018. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. https://www.ahrq.gov/data/infographics/state-compare-text.html

  • Herek, G. M., & Garnets, L. D. (2007). Sexual orientation and mental health. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 3, 353–375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hiedemann, B., & Brodoff, L. (2013). Increased risks of needing long-term care among older adults living with same-sex partners. American Journal of Public Health, 103(8), e27-e33. 103. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2013.301393

  • Kail, B. L., Acosta, K. L., & Wright, E. R. (2015). State-level marriage equality and the health of same-sex couples. American Journal of Public Health, 105(6), 1101–1105. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302589

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., & Newton, T. L. (2001). Marriage and health: His and hers. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 472.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Koball, H. L., Moiduddin, E., Henderson, J., Goesling, B., & Besculides, M. (2010). What do we know about the link between marriage and health? Journal of Family Issues, 31(8), 1019–1040.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreitzer, R. J., Hamilton, A. J., & Tolbert, C. J. (2014). Does policy adoption change opinions on minority rights? The effects of legalizing same-sex marriage. Political Research Quarterly, 67(4), 795–808. Accessed July 10, 2020. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24371952

  • Link, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2001). Conceptualizing stigma. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 363–385. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarrey, A. C., An, Y., Kitner-Triolo, M. H., Ferrucci, L., & Resnick, S. M. (2016). Sex differences in cognitive trajectories in clinically normal older adults. Psychology and Aging, 31(2), 166–175.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. (2021). Record-high 70% in US support same-sex marriage. Gallup News. Available at https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486/record-high-support-same-sex-marriage.aspx

  • Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674–697.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, I. H., Schwartz, S., & Frost, D. M. (2008). Social patterning of stress and coping: Does disadvantaged social statuses confer more stress and fewer coping resources? Social Science & Medicine, 67(3), 368–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munsey, C. (2010, October 1). Psychology’s case for same-sex marriage. Monitor on Psychology, 41(9). https://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/10/same-sex

  • Musick, K., & Bumpass, L. (2012). Reexamining the case for marriage: Union formation and changes in well-being. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74(1), 1–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (U.S. Sup. Ct. 2015).

  • Ofosu, E. K., Chambers, M. K., Chen, J. M., & Hehman, E. (2019). Same-sex marriage legalization associated with reduced implicit and explicit antigay bias. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(18), 8846–8851. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1806000116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogolsky, B. G., Monk, J. K., Rice, T. M., & Oswald, R. F. (2018). As the states turned: Implications of the changing legal context of same-sex marriage on well-being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(10), 3219–3238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518816883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksuzyan, A., Juel, K., Vaupel, J. W., & Christensen, K. (2008). Men: Good health and high mortality. Sex differences in health and aging. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, 20(2), 91–102.

  • Pienta, A. M., Hayward, M. D., & Jenkins, K. R. (2000). Health consequences of marriage for the retirement years. Journal of Family Issues, 21(5), 559–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Public Religion Research Institute. (2014). Public Religion Research Institute PRRI American’s Values Atlas. Retrieved from https://www.prri.org/press-release/prri-launches-the-american-values-atlas-charts-changing-religious-and-demographic-landscape-of-the-u-s/

  • Public Religion Research Institute. (2020). Public Religion Research Institute PRRI American’s Values Atlas. Retrieved from http://ava.prri.org/home#lgbt/2020/States/lgbt_ssm/m/US-KS,US-ND,US-NE,US-OK,US-TX

  • Raifman, J., Moscoe, E., Austin, S. B., & McConnell, M. (2017). Difference-in-differences analysis of the association between state same-sex marriage policies and adolescent suicide attempts. JAMA Pediatrics, 171(4), 350–356. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2016.4529

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Respect for Marriage Act, Pub. Law No: 117–228. (2022). https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ228/PLAW-117publ228.pdf

  • Rieker, P. P., & Bird, C. E. (2005). Rethinking gender differences in health: Why we need to integrate social and biological perspectives. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60(Special_Issue_2), S40-S47.

  • Riggle, E. D., Wickham, R. E., Rostosky, S. S., Rothblum, E. D., & Balsam, K. F. (2017). Impact of civil marriage recognition for long-term same-sex couples. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 14, 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-016-0243-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. A. (2021). Obesity-related health behaviors and stress among sexual minority women (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University). https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/10544

  • Summary of the General Accounting Office Reports on Section 3 of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://perma.cc/Z4Y5-MNQR

  • Taylor, D. M. (2020). The context and evolution of data collection for same-sex married couple households, Poster presented at the Annual Meetings of the Population Association of America.

  • Timeline of the Legalization of SSM in the U.S. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://guides.ll.georgetown.edu/c.php?g=592919&p=4182201

  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2020). 2008–2019 American Community Survey 1-year Public Use Microdata Samples [SAS Data file] Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/acs/www/methodology/sample-size-and-data-quality/. Accessed October 15, 2021.

  • Wight, R. G., LeBlanc, A. J., De Vries, B., & Detels, R. (2012). Stress and mental health among midlife and older gay-identified men. American Journal of Public Health, 102(3), 503–510.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, N., McMunn, A., Webb, E., & Stafford, M. (2019). Marriage and physical capability at mid to later life in England and the USA. PLoS ONE, 14(1), e0209388.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Zunzunegui, M. V., Alvarado, B. E., Béland, F., & Vissandjee, B. (2009). Explaining health differences between men and women in later life: A cross-city comparison in Latin America and the Caribbean. Social Science & Medicine, 68(2), 235–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Hiedemann received a Seattle University Summer Faculty Fellowship to support this work. The Albers School of Business and Economics and the Seattle University School of Law funded research assistants to support this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Seattle University School of Law, Seattle University, Seattle, WA, USA

    Lisa Brodoff

  2. Department of Economics, Albers School of Business and Economics, Seattle University, Seattle, WA, USA

    Bridget Hiedemann

  3. Univerisity of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA

    Yuqing Xue

Authors
  1. Lisa Brodoff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bridget Hiedemann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuqing Xue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the conceptualization and design of the study and the interpretation of findings. Xue prepared the data for analysis, computed descriptive statistics, and estimated the econometric models. Brodoff and Hiedemann drafted the paper, and all authors contributed to the editing process.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bridget Hiedemann.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

No protocol approval was necessary because the study used publicly available, anonymous data.

Consent to Participate

No protocol approval was necessary because the study used publicly available, anonymous data.

Consent for Publication

No protocol approval was necessary because the study used publicly available, anonymous data.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

LGBT policy 50 state survey

State

Marriage: date of legalization

Marriage: method of legalization

Housing non-discrimination

Employment non-discrimination

Alabama

6/26/15

Courti

No

No

Alaska

10/12/14

Courtii

No

No

Arizona

10/17/14

Courtiii

No

No

Arkansas

6/26/15

Courtiv

No

No

California

6/26/13

Courtv

Yes (2000)vi

Yes (1992)vii

Colorado

10/17/14

Courtviii

Yes (2007)ix

Yes (2007)x

Connecticut

11/12/08

Courtxi

No

Yes (1991)xii

Delaware

7/1/13

Legislationxiii

Yes (2009)xiv

Yes (2009)xv

Florida

1/6/15

Courtxvi

No

No

Georgia

6/26/15

Courtxvii

No

No

Hawaii

12/2/13

Legislationxviii

Yes (2005)xix

Yes (1991)xx

Idaho

10/15/14

Courtxxi

No

No

Illinois

11/20/13

Legislationxxii

Yes (2006)xxiii

Yes (2006)xxiv

Indiana

9/4/14

Courtxxv

No

No

Iowa

4/3/09

Courtxxvi

Yes (2007)xxvii

Yes (2007)xxviii

Kansas

10/10/14

Courtxxix

No

No

Kentucky

6/26/15

Courtxxx

No

No

Louisiana

6/26/15

Courtxxxi

No

No

Maine

12/29/12

Legislationxxxii

Yes (2005)xxxiii

Yes (2005)xxxxiv

Maryland

1/1/13

Legislationxxxv

Yes (2001)xxxvi

Yes (2001)xxxvii

Massachusetts

5/7/04

Courtxxxviii

Yes (1989)xxxix

Yes (1989)xl

Michigan

6/26/15

Courtxli

No

No

Minnesota

7/1/13

Legislationxlii

Yes (1993)xliiii

Yes (1993)xliv

Mississippi

6/26/15

Courtxlv

No

No

Missouri

6/26/15

Courtxlvi

No

No

Montana

1/19/14

Courtxlvii

No

No

Nebraska

6/26/15

Courtxlviiii

No

No

Nevada

10/9/14

Courtxlix

Yes (2011)l

Yes (1999)li

New Hampshire

1/1/10

Legislationlii

Yes (1997)liii

Yes (1997)liv

New Jersey

10/22/13

Courtlv

Yes (1992)lvi

Yes (1992)lvii

New Mexico

12/19/13

Courtlviii

Yes (2003)lix

Yes (2003)lx

New York

7/24/11

Legislationlxi

Yes (2003)lxii

Yes (2002)lxiii

North Carolina

10/10/14

Courtlxiv

No

No

North Dakota

6/26/15

Courtlxv

No

No

Ohio

6/26/15

Courtlxvi

No

No

Oklahoma

10/6/14

Courtlxvii

No

No

Oregon

5/19/14

Courtlxviii

Yes (2007)lxix

Yes (2007)lxx

Pennsylvania

5/20/14

Courtlxxi

No

No

Rhode Island

7/1/11

Legislationlxxii

Yes (1995)lxxiii

Yes (1995)lxxiv

South Carolina

11/12/14

Courtlxxv

No

No

South Dakota

6/26/15

Courtlxxvi

No

No

Tennessee

6/26/15

Courtlxxvii

No

No

Texas

6/26/15

Courtlxxviii

No

No

Utah

10/6/14

Courtlxxix

Yes (2015)lxxx

Yes (2015)lxxxi

Vermont

9/1/09

Legislationlxxxii

Yes (1992)lxxxiii

Yes (1992)lxxxiv

Virginia

10/6/14

Courtlxxxv

No

No

Washington

12/6/12

Legislationlxxxvi

Yes (2006)lxxxvii

Yes (2006)lxxxviii

West Virginia

10/9/14

Courtlxxxix

No

No

Wisconsin

10/6/14

Courtxc

Yes (1982)xci

Yes (1982)xcii

Wyoming

10/17/14

Courtxcii

No

No

*DC

12/15/09

Legislativexciv

Yes (2009)xcv

Yes (1973)xcvi

  1. iObergefell v. Hodges, 135 S.Ct. 2584, 92 L.Ed.2d 609 (2015)
  2. iiHamby v. Parnell, 56 F. Supp. 3d. 1056 (D. Alaska, 2014)
  3. iiiConnolly v. Jeanes, 73 F.Supp.3d 1094 (D.Ariz., 2014); Majors v. Horne, 14 F. Supp. 3d 1313 (D. Ariz., 2014)
  4. ivObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  5. vUnited States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675, 186 L.Ed.2d 808 (2013)
  6. viCal. Gov’t Code § 12,955; § 12,921 (2000) (gender identity added in 2004)
  7. viiCal. Gov’t Code § 12,921; § 12,920 (1992)
  8. viiiBrinkman v. Long, Nos. 13-Cv-32572, 14-CV-30731, 2014 WL 3408024 (Colo. Dist. Ct. 2014)
  9. ixColo. Rev. Stat. § 24–34-502 (2007)
  10. xColo. Rev. Stat. § 24–34-402 (2007)
  11. xiKerrigan v. Commissioner of Pub. Health, 957 A.2d 407, 289 Conn. 135 (2008)
  12. xiiCt. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 46a-60 (2011) (gender identity or expression); § 46a-81c (sexual orientation) (1991)
  13. xiiiDEL. CODE ANN. tit. 13, § 101 (2013); H.R. 75, 147th Gen. Assemb., 1st Sess. (2013)
  14. xivDel. Code Ann. tit. 6, § 4603 (2009) (Gender identity added in 2013)
  15. xvDel Code Ann. tit. 19 § 711 (2009) (gender identity added in 2013)
  16. xviPareto v. Ruvin, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 899a (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. 2014) (declaring Florida’s same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional in a suit filed by several same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses in Miami–Dade County), appeal docketed sub nom. State v. Pareto, No. 3D14–1816; Huntsman v. Heavilin, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 916a (Fla. 16th Cir. Ct. 2014) (declaring Florida’s same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional in a suit filed by a same-sex couple who was denied a marriage license in Monroe County), appeal docketed sub nom. State v. Huntsman, No. 3D14–1783
  17. xviiObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  18. xviiiHAW. REV. STAT. § 573–1 (1987), repealed by 1987 Haw. Laws ch 46 § 4; Hawaii Marriage Equality Act of 2013, S. Res. 1, 27th Leg. 2d Spec. Sess. (2013)
  19. xixHaw. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 515–3 (2005)
  20. xxHaw. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 378–2 (1991) (added gender identity or expression in 2011)
  21. xxiLatta v. Otter, 771 F.3d 456 (C.A.9 (Idaho), 2014)
  22. xxii750 ILL. COMP. STAT. 5/213.1 (2014), repealed by P.A. 98–597, § 10; S. Res. 10, 98th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Ill. 2013)
  23. xxiiiIllinois Const., Art. I, § 17 (sexual orientation added in 2006)
  24. xxivIll. Stat. Ch. 775 § 5/1–102 (2006)
  25. xxvBaskin v. Bogan, 766 F.3d 648, (7th Cir. 2014), cert. denied, 2014 WL 4425162 (2014)
  26. xxviVarnum v. Brien, 763 N.W.2d 862 (Iowa 2009)
  27. xxviiIowa Code § 216.8 and 8A (2007)
  28. xxviiiIowa Code § 216.6(1)(a); § 216.6A(2)(a) (2007)
  29. xxixState ex rel. Schmidt v. Moriarty, 2014 Kan. LEXIS 570 (2014)
  30. xxxObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  31. xxxiObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  32. xxxiiME. REV. STAT. tit. 19-A, § 650-A (2012), I.B. 3, § 1, adopted at election Nov. 6, 2012
  33. xxxiiiMe. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 4581-A (2005)
  34. xxxivMe. Rev. Stat. § 4572 (2005)
  35. xxxvMD CODE ANN., FAM. LAW § 2–201 (2013), amended by 2012 Md. Laws Ch. 2 (H.B. 438); Civil Marriage Protection Act, H.R. 438, 2012 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (2012)
  36. xxxviMd. STATE GOVERNMENT Code Ann. § 20–705 (2001) (gender identity added in 2014)
  37. xxxviiMd. Code., St. Gov’t. § 20–606 (2001)
  38. xxxviiiGoodridge v. Department of Public Health, 440 Mass. 309, 798 N.E.2d 941 (2003)
  39. xxxixMass. Ann. Laws ch. 151B, § 4 (1989)
  40. xlMass. Ann. Laws ch. 151B, § 4 (1989) (gender identity added in 2011)
  41. xliObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  42. xliiCh. 74, 2013 Minn. Laws
  43. xliiiMinn. Stat. Ann. § 363A.09 (1993)
  44. xlivMinn. Stat. Ann. § 363A.08 (1993)
  45. xlvObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  46. xlviObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  47. xlviiRolando v. Fox, 23 F. Supp. 3d 1227 (D. Mont., 2014)
  48. xlviiiObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  49. xlixSevcik v. Sandoval, 911 F. Supp. 2d 996 (D. Nev., 2012), aff’d. sub nom. Baskin, 766 F.3d 648, cert. denied sub nora. Walker v. Wolf, 135 S. Ct. 316, 190 L.Ed.2d 142 (2014), stay denied sub nom. Otter, 135 S. Ct. 345
  50. lNev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 118.100 (2011)
  51. liNev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 613.330 (1999) (gender identity or expression added in 2011)
  52. liiN.H. REV. STAT. ANN. § 457:1-a; Legalizing Same Sex Marriage, H.R. 436, 2009 Gen. Assemb
  53. liiiN.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 354-A:10 (1997)
  54. livN.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 354-A:6 (1997)
  55. lvGarden State Equal. v. Dow, No. MER-L-1729–11., 2012 WL 540608 (N.J.Super.L. 2012) stay denied, 79 A.3d 1036 (2013)
  56. lviN.J. Stat. § 10:5–9.1 (1992)
  57. lviiN.J. Stat. § 10:5–4 (1992) (gender identity or expression added in 2006)
  58. lviiiGriego v. Oliver, 316 P.3d 865 (N.M., 2013)
  59. lixN.M. Stat. Ann. § 28–1-7, G. (2003)
  60. lxN.M. Stat. Ann. § 28–1-7 (2003)
  61. lxiN.Y. DOM. REL. LAW ANN. § 10-a (McKinney 2011); A.B. 8354, 234th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (2011)
  62. lxiiNY CLS Exec § 296 (2003)
  63. lxiiiNY CLS Exec, Art. 15 § 296 (2002)
  64. lxivGeneral Synod of the United Church of Christ v. Cooper, No.3:14-CV-213, 2014 WL 3939331 (W.D.N.C., 2014), motion to intervene denied sub nom. General Synod of the United Church of Christ v. Resinger, 12 F.Supp.3d 790 (W.D.N.C. 2014)
  65. lxvObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  66. lxviObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  67. lxviiBishop v. United States ex rel. Holder, 962 F. Supp. 2d 1252 (N.D. Okla., 2014), aff’d, stay granted sub nom. Bishop v. Smith, 760 F.3d 1070 (C.A. 10 (Okla.) 2014)
  68. lxviiiGeiger v. Kitzhaber, 994 F. Supp. 2d 1128 (D. Or., 2014)
  69. lxixOr. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 659A.421 (2007)
  70. lxxOr. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 659A.030; § 659A.006 (2007)
  71. lxxiWhitewood v. Wolf, 992 F. Supp. 2d 410 (M.D. PA., 2014)
  72. lxxiiH. Substitute R. 5015, 2013 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (2013) (enacted)
  73. lxxiiiR.I. Gen. Laws § 37–1 (1995) (gender expression added in 2001)
  74. lxxivR.I. Gen. Laws § 28–5-7 (1995) (transgender people added in 2001)
  75. lxxvBradacs v. Haley, Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-02351-JMC, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142240 (D.S.C. 2014)
  76. lxxviObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  77. lxxviiObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  78. lxxviiiObergefell, 135 S.Ct. 2584
  79. lxxixKitchen v. Herbert, 961 F. Supp. 2d 1181 (D. Utah, 2013), stay denied, No. 2:13-CV-217, 2013 WL 6834634 (D. Utah, 2013), aff’d, 755 F.3d 1193 (2014), stay lifted, No. 13–4178, 2014 WL 4960471 (C.A.10 2014)
  80. lxxxUtah Code Ann. § 57–21-5 (2015)
  81. lxxxiUtah Code Ann. § 34A-5–106 (2015)
  82. lxxxiiVt. Stat. Ann., tit. 15; Baker v. Vermont, 744 A.2d 864, 170 Vt. 194 (Vt., 1999) (Civil Unions)
  83. lxxxiiiVt. Stat. Ann. tit. 9 § 4503 (1992) (gender identity added in 2007)
  84. lxxxivVt. Stat. Ann. tit. 21 § 495 (1992) (gender identity added in 2007)
  85. lxxxvBostic v. Rainey, Not Reported in F.Supp.3d, 2014 WL 10022686 (2014) aff’d, 760 F.3d 352 (2014), cert. denied, McQuigg v. Bostic, 135 S.Ct. 31, 190 L.Ed.2d 140 (2014)
  86. lxxxviEngrossed Substitute S. Res. 6239, 62nd Leg.,2012 Reg. Sess. (2012) (Ref 74 was passed by voters which approved the passage of the bill); WASH. REV. CODE § 26.04.010; 2012 Wash. Leg. Serv. Ch. 3 (S.S.B. 6239)
  87. lxxxviiWash. Rev. Code Ann. § 49.60.222 through 49.60.350; Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 49.60.030 (2006)
  88. lxxxviiiWash. Rev. Code Ann. § 49.60.030 (2006)
  89. lxxxixBostic v. Rainey, 970 F. Supp. 2d 456 (E.D.Va.), affd sub nom. Bostic v. Schaefer, 760 F.3d 352 (C.A.4 (Va.) 2014), cert. denied sub nom. McQuigg, 135 S. Ct. 314
  90. xcWolf v. Walker, 986 F. Supp. 2d 982 (W.D.Wis., 2014), affid sub nom. Baskin v. Bogan, 766 F.3d 648, (7th Cir. 2014), cert. denied sub nom. Walker, 135 S. Ct. 316 (2014)
  91. xciWis. Stat. Ann. § 106.50; Wis. Admin. Code DWD § 220.01 (1982)
  92. xciiWis. Stat. Ann. § 111.31 (1982)
  93. xciiiGuzzo v. Mead, No. 14-CV-200-SWS, 2014 WL 5317797 (2014)
  94. xcivDC CODE § 46–401 (2009) Equal access to marriage
  95. xcvD.C. Code § 2–1402.21 (2009)
  96. xcviD.C. Code § 2–1402.11; D.C. Code § 2–1401; D.C. Code § 1–2512 (1973) (gender identity added in 2006)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Brodoff, L., Hiedemann, B. & Xue, Y. Marriage Equality and Activity Limitations Among Older Adults in Same-Sex Relationships. Sex Res Soc Policy (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-024-00936-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-024-00936-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation