Date: December 4th, 2008 10:41 pm (UTC)From: [identity profile] damiancugley.livejournal.com
I thought it was odd to end with a solution with person_1 and person_2 fields again. Here’s my suggestion for fully generalized civil unions. First, decree that such a household needs to have a name, agreed by the parties. In conventional marriage in the English-speaking world, the husband’s surname is used, but once you have a rolling union of polyams you may decide to choose a separate name for the marriage itself. Then things are simple enough: there’s a table union_members with a union_id, person_id, plus dates joined and left. This can admittedly represent zero- and one-person unions, but either you ban them at a higher level of business logic, or you accept that a person living on their own or as a sole parent is a marriage of one in some ways—and a zero-member union might be the legal husk of a marriage where all the members have left but the children or other legal obligations live on.

This is horribly similar to a made-up society in an sf story I never wrote.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

tinyjo: (Default)
Emptied of expectation. Relax.

June 2020

S M T W T F S
 1 23456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated January 17th, 2026 02:33 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit