Is such a contract binding?

Question

I need help on a complicated matter. I know someone who is a submissive. He is legally married to a woman. However, he is her submissive and there is a contract between her and him stating that he will do her bidding and that should she tire of him, she can give him away to someone else. My question is : is such a contract depicting human subservience and with terms that indicate slavery (aka giving a person away) legal and binding despite the fact that it is between 2 adults? I question the validity of such a contract as it has to be against human rights and freedom in some form. Both parties in the contract are Americans.

For those who are legally trained, please help enlighten me. I am trying to find out if the submissive can be 'freed' from his contract and live his life on his own terms & be free as what America promised its citizens. Life has been extremely difficult for him & there has been threats in the past by the wife to give him away.

Answer 1

See above. The marriage is independent of the submissive agreement.

See also the 13th Amendment, which prohibits slavery or any form of involuntary servitude (except prison sentences imposed through due process). Also, the 13th Amendment is effective not just against government-imposed action but for private action as well.

Short answer, it's only as binding as the individuals choose to allow it to be. But given his psychological conditioning, he's not likely to make the choice to break it, even if a divorce does occur.

Answer 2

The idea of a D/s contract is to solidify a relationship based on those grounds, sort of like writing personal vows, and not to create a legal agreement. Therefore, in the context of the D/s contract, there are no legal rammifications regarding the contract. Obviously the marriage is a different matter as that is one that involves not only the husband and wife, but the state's involvement as well. (This is why the state can interact with married couples in the context of taxation, adoption rights, etc.)

Now, while I do state that there are no legal rammifications regarding nullifying the D/s contract, there will of course be the consequences within the marriage. There are several possible remedies. One is that both husband and wife put aside the contract and operate in a vanilla fashion. A second would involve the modification of the contract to eliminate the contentious points. However, what is also likely is procedings to terminate the marriage, which can come from either side, as there would certain to be animosity stemming from one or both parties.

However, I would like to point that something that isn't truly clear from the context. Has the husband been wanting to be free of the contract in the first place? From an outsider's point-of-view, it's easy to make a judgment, but perhaps he knew what he was getting into when he agreed to this contract aspect. Perhaps it is something that he uses to focus his efforts on his wife's happiness. Perhaps he might find the idea of being given away as fascinating. It's certainly fine that others care about his emotional well-being, but it's something that he himself is needed to be involved in.

One point that I might bring up is that it's possible that he did not know what he was getting into. If he is truly scared about the contract being taken to its literal extreme, then he would need to be made aware of the legal rights that he still has. Indeed, if he went into this contract believing that he surrendered some basic human right, then he might not have been competent to agree to the contract. (I can speak from personal experience on that point.)

In any case, the answer is that if he chooses to abandon his contract, there is no way to enforce it on legal grounds. Probably the best thing that can happen is that he have someone that he can relay if concerns (if any) and be assured that he is still a human being with basic rights that's afforded to everyone.

Hope that helps.

Answer 3

Legally speaking, the contract isn't legal. We abolished slavery many many years ago. That contract would be considered illegal and could and would not be upheld in a court of law. Not to mention possible charges against the wife and embarassment for the husband. She can not give him away to anyone. If he wants to leave he can leave. He can divorce her and move on with his life whenever he chooses. That's his given right as an American citizen. Why anyone would enter into such a contract to begin with is beyond me. But there is nothing legal or binding about that contract.

Answer 4

No, such a document of servitude is not binding in a court of law.

However, it is binding to the adults as long as they both honor the agreement. Think of it as a non-enforceable behavioral contract between the 2.

You said they are married. That IS a legally binding contract. For the woman to "give" the man away, that would require a divorce.

Answer 5

The fact that they are legally married has nothing to do with the other agreement. A legally married couple must be separated legally. The agreement between the two of them is not a legally binding contract and would never be upheld in court.

Answer 6

"Marriage is a permanent union between man and woman. Its consequences, nature and rules are governed by law AND NOT BY STIPULATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES" Family code Art. 1. Such a contract is not binding. There was even a lawyer who was suspended for noting a contract similar to that man's. I heard even more creative stories like a marriage contract authorizing a man to take another woman and the woman to take another man to bed. But all of them are dismissed with some lawyers disbarred.
You see, she can't lawfully force the man to take another woman. That is involuntary servitude and is illegal. You can't even force a man to live with a woman. Although, she can ask the court for damages but she can't force him.
Tell him he has no legality to worry about.

Answer 7

I agree with some of the answers, but I don't believe anyone answered the question squarely.

This "contract" is void (which means it cannot be enforced by law). It is void because it is illegal (described by some of the other answers). For example, a heroin drug dealer cannot enforce a contract with heroin drug users in a court of law because it is based on illegality.

If W tries to enforce this contract against H, her case would likely be dismissed by any attorney she consulted. If he wants out of the marriage, he can petition for divorce without fear of the "contract" being used against him.

Just for grins, can you attach a link to view the contract (removing the names)? Good luck to H.

Answer 8

whether he does take you to courtroom (which I incredibly doubt he ought to be blowing smoke and the provider words of settlement says that when an order is cancelled, there is not any legal binding), basically save a duplicate of each little thing. The emails you exchanged before the cancellation, the cancelled order, and the emails afterwards. The choose will then snigger in his face.

Answer 9

YES IT IS BECAUSE IT IS VOLUNTARY.

In the words of Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter:

"Equity is brutal, but we are merely enforcing agreements."

"Please identify the instrument I signed, Judge, which creates an attachment of equity jurisdiction between the HER and me."

Are you beginning to see why the Judge is prone to experience frustration and blurt out "the Constitution does not apply here!"?

Answer 10

He can get divorced. There is no slavery of any kind in America; not since the civil rights movement.