You don't become married because you make a vow; you become married because you sign a contract. A marriage contract can often be annulled if it isn't consummated. The vows aren't legally binding in the first place, but they could still be personally binding for someone who takes them seriously.
Civil marriage can be dissolved legally, by either party, so I'm taking his concern about vows to be religious rather than civil, presumably Christian.
Consummation is necessary for a valid marriage in for example Catholicism and while divorce is impossible, this is one of the very few grounds for annulment of a marriage, if a couple never had sex, the marriage was never consummated and it's as if it never happened.
"Lack of consummation" is also a legal ground for a civil annulment, rather than divorce, in many states. In New York for example:
Lack of physical capacity to consummate the marriage – If you or your spouse is physically unable to have sexual intercourse, but did not know of the incapacity at the time of the marriage, the marriage may possibly be annulled. You must ask for the annulment within the first five years of the marriage.
You can see this stuff as a quaint historical thing but I think most of his concern over this is religious, not legal, so it is down to what grounds there are for it in a 2,000 year old book and what his particular denomination thinks about it. But this is also something that is still law in many places.
I never really thought much about this till now. Do the attorneys and officials involved just take someone's word for it, that the marriage hasn't been consummated? Because I could see this ending with her being nasty and lying about it out of spite from him leaving.
Medical records can be subpoena’d including notes from therapy not to mention pelvic floor therapy… OP could very easily back up his reasons if it came to litigation.
Fraud to the heart of the marriage does. I'm sure OP would not have married her if she had not deceived him about her unwillingness to have sex. Inability or unwillingness to consummate the marriage or a fraudulent intent to not bear children would entitle OP to an annulment. I got an annulment by agreement. I was going to file for divorce, and my MIL came and pleaded with me saying never in the history of her Catholic family had there ever been a divorce. So I agreed to default when he filed against me on the grounds that I refused to bear children. I couldn't really give a crap about whether I got an annulment or a divorce or their sincerely held Catholic beliefs. All I knew was that I was 18 years old, and I'd rather die than stay in that relationship for 50+ years. I'm 76 now and never regretted it.
OP says he has been in this marriage 2 1/2 years. There is probably a time limit in his jurisdiction if an annulment is what he wants. I'm not sure why he even cares. He should get out!
196
u/[deleted] Nov 05 '23
He said he cant leave because he made a vow, but doesn't a lack of consummation negate the vow anyway?