marriage

Jun 03 2026

Only 4 States Still Have “Alienation of Affection” Laws

Can an individual be sued for participating in an extramarital affair that then leads to the breakup of a marriage?

The answer is “yes” if the impacted party lives in one of four states: North Carolina, Mississippi, South Dakota and Hawaii.

Known as “alienation of affection,” “heart balm” or “homewrecker” laws, they find their origins in English common law dating back to the 17th and 18th centuries. They became commonplace in the United States by the 1800s and early 1900s.

While relatively rare, the occasional case in one of the four states will sometimes make headlines – as in a recent filing involving former U.S. Senator Kyrsten Sinema.

The one-time Arizona lawmaker is being sued by a North Carolina woman named Heather Ammel. Ms. Sinema has admitted to a sexual relationship with Matthew Ammel, Heather’s former husband. But she says they never engaged in sex in North Carolina, so the suit is invalid. The suit from Heather Ammel alleges the actions led to the breakup of their 14-year marriage.

The lawsuit also alleges that Matthew Ammel, who was on former Senator Sinema’s security detail at the time, was seduced by her and that the relationship began with her sending Ammel “romantic and lascivious” messages.

While the Ammels have since divorced, Heather Ammel is seeking $75,000 in damages from Sinema. In response, the former senator has filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the case, claiming North Carolina doesn’t have any legal authority over the situation as the sexual behavior never took place in North Carolina. The court has yet to render a decision.

Incidentally, while the House of Representatives passed a resolution banning members from having a sexual relationship with employees, the Senate doesn’t have the same such restrictions. However, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics does have a rule that prohibits “conflicts of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest.” Obviously, sexual relationships with subordinates inevitably lead to all kinds of egregious and damaging circumstances – including the breakup of marriages.

“Alienation of affection” laws began losing popularity in the early part of the 20th century for several reasons: a rise in blackmail and extortion, embarrassing litigation and concern that too many people were trying to monetize the collapse of a marriage.

Juries in North Carolina, where the law is still on the books, have been known to award tremendous judgments in cases where offense has been found. In 2011, Carol Puryear was awarded $30 million after another woman gave her husband her phone number at a funeral. Two other recent cases resulted in $8 million and $9 million payments.

The four states where such laws remain on the books recognize that marriage is a legally and contractually protected relationship. They are acknowledging that adultery causes considerable and devastating harm to all parties involved, especially children. While no amount of money can restore or repair the damage that sexual infidelity causes, the law provides some degree of relief to its victims.

Laws that deter, discourage and disincentivize adultery and the resulting breakup of families are a very good thing. Just because 46 states have moved away from “alienation of affection” laws is no reason why they couldn’t and shouldn’t reinstate them.

It is a conversation and debate worth having.

Mar 12 2026

How Elites Are Actively Celebrating Polycules, Polyamory and Throuples

The invention of new family forms never stops. It just continues.

It started in the 1960s and 70s with the separation of sex and babies from marriage, marriage from parenting with the expressive divorce, and the single-parent-by-choice revolution. That was followed through the 1980s and 90s with drastic rises in cohabitation. Then we had the radical redefinition of and de-sexing of the family with same-sex marriage.

Now it’s polyamory, throuples and polycules. And these new forms are going mainstream. Within days, The New York Times recently published two features highlighting the mainstreaming of polyamory.

For the uninitiated, polyamory is group pairings as the word literally implies: many loves. Of course, this is a perversion of that very important four-letter word. It is not love. It is agreed upon infidelity among multiple partners that often evolve in number.

The first Times article recently highlighting polyamory was published February 28 of this year, reporting on the growing legal recognition of this experimental relational form. They report, “A wave of recent local ordinances in large liberal bastions like Portland, Ore., … would confer the beginning of legal protections to polyamorous relationships.” But this ordinance is not the beginning.

The city council of Somerville, Mass., gave legal recognition to people in polyamory relationships in early 2023. One of those city councilpersons explained before their unanimous vote, “Everyone on the City Council knows someone who is polyamorous. This is Somerville.”

The Times noted that a recent polyamory initiative in Olympia, Washington, grew out of demands from queer activists. They quote Robert Vanderpool, an Olympia City Council member who explained, “We heard from people in our L.G.T.B.Q. community who wanted more protection, including people living polyamorously.”

Yes, many of us, years ago, warned that when you define male or female out of marriage and family, there is no reason to keep either to two adults. It’s how this works. We were called ridiculous. Of course we were not. It was obvious this was coming.

The second recent piece from the Gray Lady, published March 4, was a splashy feature of a woman named Lindy West who “thought she couldn’t handle polyamory.” They explain, “She was wrong.” West married a man named Ahamefule Oluo in 2015 who fashionably goes by they/them pronouns. A woman named Roya Amirsoleymani is now their third partner.

As you can guess, it was West’s husband’s idea to “diversify” their relationship by hooking up with Roya as his new girlfriend. Lindy didn’t take it well, but she was forced to adjust. Liberal patriarchy at work.

The Free Press even observed, writing about Lindy’s unconventional home, “Say it with me now: open marriages never work.” They note Lindy “loves being treated like a child by the man she was supposed to grow old with – and the woman who has taken her place in his bed.” Women are never empowered by non-monogamy.

In 2024, The New York Times Magazine also did a splash on a similar, but different kind of new relationship configuration: polycules. The piece is entitled “Lessons From a 20-Person Polycule” with the subtitle “How they set boundaries, navigate jealousy, wingman their spouses and foster community.” A polycule is essentially a super-sized polyamorous relationship. More is better. The photo accompanying the article features at least eight men and women embracing romantically. They admit, “It’s difficult to describe a polycule.”

Katie, a member of this confab, honestly confesses, “The polycule is like this weird family.” Ann, another member, tells us they all make up a “chosen family.” She admits, “It works like complex kinship networks work — just a little kinkier,” adding, “It reflects radical queer values.” Katie explains there are more than 20 people in their polycule and age ranges from mid-20s to mid-40s. She confusingly explains:

There are self-identified males who identify as heteroflexible, heterosexual, bisexual. There’s a nonbinary person. Every femme-presenting person or woman identifies as queer. A lot of people are married and have primary partnerships. They’re coming to it from the opening of a monogamous relationship.

Yes, they are just making up new words and identities. But Nico explains the group is governed by “a bunch of queer women who say we’re not going to follow the rules.”

Some polycule’s boast including several children in their family experimentation. The Guardian even claims, incredulously, that such homes bring no harm to these children. We all know that is not true.

And then there are throuples. In mid-December, The Wall Street Journal broached the vexing problem in a handsome spread of how one upper-middle class Chicago throuple maneuvered decorating the $1.71 million home they share together.

Designing for a couple is tricky enough, but add a third partner, and it is like a high-stakes game of design Tetris. How one Chicago throuple pulled off a renovation that blended the trio’s three distinct design tastes. https://t.co/3i1udhqm5P
— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) December 17, 2025

David and Ryan were a couple, but they made room for Michael in their relationship after a few years as they all became sexually involved. They are certainly not unique as same-sex attracted men their experimentation. The Journal notes that real-estate agents “are noticing more throuples and polycules buying homes together.”

It is true. Once you open Pandora’s Box of creative relationship construction that get called a family, it is mind boggling where it can lead too. And we can expect to see more legacy press celebrate their creation.

Photo Credit: The New York Times

Mar 12 2026

Wives and Mothers Should Be the Stars of Women’s History Month

“Women’s History Month,” which dates to “Women’s History Week,” first established in 1978, is widely considered the first systematic, nationwide acknowledgment of the countless contributions females have made to shape and change the world.

Modern-day sensibilities make it difficult to understand how history could have so easily overlooked or underappreciated some women and their accomplishments for so long. It’s popular and even convenient to blame the gaps in appreciation on misogyny or an otherwise male-dominated culture. Both of those issues may bear some blame and offer part of the explanation, but it’s a lot more layered and involved than those two issues.

Strong women have been part of the fabric of America since the nation’s founding – and even prior to the American Revolution. They’ve been operating in plain sight, and their many successes are no secret.

The story is told about the founding of Jamestown in 1607. Men arrived first and went about taming the wilderness. Only without their wives or love interests on the scene, they weren’t overly motivated to get things done too quickly. Why rush? The work could wait. The sun would come up tomorrow.

It was only when the women arrived that the new civilization began to really take shape. Men were incentivized and inspired to work faster and longer and harder. Writing in his landmark book, “Men and Marriage,” George Gilder observed:

… Women transform male lust into love; channel male wanderlust into jobs, homes and families; link men to specific children; rear children into citizens; change hunters into fathers; divert male will to power into a drive to create. Women conceive the future that men tend to flee … The prime fact of life is the sexual superiority of women.

Last week, President Trump recognized the celebration of March’s “Women’s History Month” by issuing a letter. He wrote:

For 250 years — from the diligence of Betsy Ross, the faith of Katharine Drexel, and the courage of Amelia Earhart to the ingenuity of Annie Oakley, the selflessness of Clara Barton, and the timeless integrity of Harper Lee—strong women have brought our Nation to countless new heights and moments of triumph. To this day, across every industry, women are champions of success, trailblazers in their fields, and models in their homes. Whether they serve our Nation as service members, government leaders, entrepreneurs, or mothers, every devoted woman guides our Nation’s strength, prosperity, and way of life.

Every president since Jimmy Carter has acknowledged March’s special designation. Lots of other groups have likewise amplified the celebration. It seems there is no debate any longer about women’s contributions – but who highlights whom quite obviously reflects a person’s values, principles and priorities.

One of the main reasons that popular history seemed to ignore the contributions of women for so long was because of a narrow appreciation of what makes for a great woman – especially its exclusion of considering just how much wives and mothers contribute to society.

It’s true that women have been deeply involved in historic movements – from abolition to suffrage to civil rights – but they’ve accomplished far more than that.

Few people may recognize the name William Ross Wallace, a 19^th-century lawyer and teacher who eventually became a poet. Just as the Civil War was winding down and a divided America was pulling itself together, he had a burden to write something that would emphasize the importance of mothers. He wanted to stress the oversized role the family would play in Reconstruction. After all, as goes the character of a country’s citizens, so goes the country.

So Wallace penned these famous words, which were part of a longer poem:

Blessings on the hand of women!
Angels guard its strength and grace;
In the palace, cottage, hovel,
Oh, no matter where the place…
The hand that rocks the cradle is the hand that rules the world.

It’s that last line everyone knows – and everyone intuitively knows is true, but it so often goes unacknowledged.

Any proper and thorough celebration of “Women’s History Month” must first and foremost recognize the unprecedented contributions of wives and mothers. History doesn’t often record the tiring days and long nights of mothers, or the tears shed over prodigals who run away from home and break a parent’s heart. We don’t hear the prayers, but the Lord does. History doesn’t always see the reunion or the resolution of the problems.

But when it comes to problems, the mother is almost always in the middle of helping find the solution.

Women’s History Month often seems to highlight the grand accomplishment – but the greatness of women is often found in their humility. The headlines feature inventions and cultural advancements forged by females – but what about the hardworking homeschooling mother whose toil is just enough to help a child with special needs advance to the next grade?

Without wonderful mothers, Women’s History Month would be a shell of what it is.

Photo credit: Shutterstock

Jan 27 2026

New Family Study Shows Importance of Married Parenting

It has long been established, since the deeply important 1966 Coleman Report on childhood education in America, that family form and parents’ levels of involvement in raising their children are paramount in boosting child well-being and thriving. As the Coleman Report found and explained, “Studies of school achievement have consistently shown that variations in family background account for far more variation in school achievement than do variations in school characteristics.”

More recently, scholars have found the same thing. William Jeynes, professor of education at California State University – Long Beach, explains from his own research that the educational achievement gap between white, African American and Latino students “totally disappeared” when minority students have a vibrant personal faith and come from a married home where the child is biologically related to mother and father. He explains this is true even after adjusting forindividual socioeconomic status.

Jeynes explains,

The family elements that were most strongly associated with a reduction in the achievement gap were coming from a two-biological-parent family and high levels of parental involvement. These are interrelated: when two parents are present, this maximizes the frequency and quality of parental involvement.

He adds another important benefit: serious faith. He explains,

In addition to family structure, a student’s faith also has a significant impact on his or her academic performance. Regularly attending church, or another house of worship, and defining oneself as being a very religious person yielded the most significant reductions in the achievement gap.

He asserts, “Numerous research studies have concluded that family factors are far more salient than school factors in influencing achievement.” This was true in the 1960s, and remains true today.

New research on social mobility from a non-partisan research think-tank in Washington D.C., the Archbridge Institute, adds to the finding that family formation and close parental involvement boost child well-being. Archbridge defines social mobility as “the opportunity to better oneself and those around them,” evidenced in climbing the socio-economic ladder and earning more than one’s parents.

These scholars explain that there are artificial and natural barriers to one’s social mobility. “Artificial barriers are imposed by an external authority and usually affect a class of people.” Natural barriers are different. They “occur naturally without any external imposition and typically exist at the individual level” the report states.

The artificial barriers they highlight in a person’s youth are “educational quality, minimum wage” and any “marriage penalty [policy] hindering family formation.” The natural barriers are “out of wedlock births, lack of parental engagement [and], lack of unsupervised playtime.”

In a write-up of their report for the Institute for Family Studies, the Archbridge team clarifies, “While education, entrepreneurship, and the rule of law remain critical pillars of … mobility metrics, family factors constitute the first stage where opportunity can either take root or begin to wither.” They add, “The home sets the trajectory for developing cognitive skills, character traits, and the soft skills associated with long-term flourishing.”

They find it true that “healthy family structures shape a child’s potential for mobility, and at the same time, the surrounding public policy environment can either support or impede opportunities for parents to promote a bright future for their children.” These natural and artificial factors must work in tandem to make sure children have the best opportunities. Thus, these scholars remind us, “While mitigating natural barriers remains the responsibility of parents, the removal of artificial barriers to family stability are the responsibility of each citizen.” This is why knowledge of and engagement in public policy is everyone’s civic duty. Focus on the Family offers help to families.

This Archbridge report examined which states and regions in the United States provide the most ideal environments for social mobility. They found that Utah provided the best environment and Louisiana had the worst for social mobility. The South and Mid-Atlantic regions offered the worst opportunities, and the Western Mountain and Upper Mid-Plains states offered the best opportunities.

This is simply more research documenting the previously established essential role that marriage, family structure, and daily mother/father involvement in the lives of their children has on elevating important measures of child well-being.

Related Articles and Resources

Are Men or Women More Likely to Be Married?

New Research Shows Married Families Matter More Than Ever

Why You Should Care About the Growing Positive Power of Marriage

Important New Research on How Married Parents Improve Child Well-Being

Research Shows Marriage Boosts Well Being

New Research Shows Marriage and Fatherhood Regulate Male Sexual Energy

New Research: Marriage Still Provides Major Happiness Premium

Cohabitation Still Harmful – Even as Stigma Disappears

Don’t Believe the Modern Myth. Marriage Remains Good for Women

Don’t Believe the Modern Myth. Marriage Remains Good for Men.

Yes, Married Mothers Really Are Happier Than Unmarried and Childless Women

Marriage and the Public Good: A New Manifesto of Policy Proposals

Jan 20 2026

Research Shows Marriage Changes People for the Better in Newlywed Years

Research has long shown that marriage adjusts men and women’s personalities for the better through marriage. But a groundbreaking longitudinal study published in the journal Developmental Psychology demonstrates how this happens in strong ways in the first two years of marriage. It also shows how these changes affect long-term marital satisfaction. It is the first such study to examine this important dynamic in early marriage.

These researchers, working collaboratively from the University of Georgia and UCLA, explain their “findings indicate that newlywed spouses’ personalities undergo meaningful changes during the newlywed years and these changes are associated with changes in spouses’ marital satisfaction.”

They also found that these personality benefits happened within marriage, but not during the cohabiting years for those couples who had cohabited prior to marriage. This indicates that the relationally clarifying experience of marriage has an impact on how husbands and wives change and adjust that the relationally ambiguous experience of cohabitation does not provide.

These researchers found that husbands, in the first 18 months of marriage, demonstrated “significant declines in extraversion” meaning they settled down into their marital relationship, focusing on their wife and marriage. This is supported by earlier research by Nobel prize winning scholar George Akerlof who concludes, “There is no question that there is a very large difference in behavior between single and married men.” He adds that “men settle down when they get married” and “if they fail to get married, they fail to settle down.”

Husbands were also shown to demonstrate “a significant increase in conscientiousness” thus becoming more wife-focused, responsible, organized and dependable.

Wives also demonstrated “significant declines in neuroticism” which is clinical language for reductions in anxiety, depression, hostility, self-consciousness, impulsiveness and vulnerability to stress.

These positive changes existed for husbands and wives regardless of age, length of premarital relationship or other baseline differences.

A negative was that these researchers also found that “agreeableness” of husbands and wives declined on average, noting this as “a more maladaptive change” and that “this surprising finding is inconsistent with previous research.” They assume this could be due to adjustments in the transitional nature of marriage, going from a single and courtship posture into an established marriage life negotiation of having to consider the needs and particular desires of a spouse. They hypothesize that agreeableness would increase as the couple adjusts to one another in their married life together.

The study authors conclude, “Taken together, these findings indicate that newlywed spouses’ personalities undergo meaningful changes during the newlywed years and these changes are associated with changes in spouses’ marital satisfaction.”

A heightened sense of conscientiousness in husbands and lowered presence of anxiety in wives translated into greater marital satisfaction for the couple in the long run.

This research shows that marriage is indeed different than cohabitation in that it transforms the husband and wife in notable ways. Marriage clarifies the nature of the relationship through its solemn vows, binding legal status and public celebration before the bride and groom’s family and friends. It is helpful to observe its transformative power through good social science.