PLURAL MARRIAGE

The Core Definition of Plural Marriage and Polygamy

Plural marriage, a term often used specifically within the context of the early and continuing practice of Mormon fundamentalist groups, refers primarily to **polygyny**, the marriage of one man to multiple women. While the broader sociological term for multiple marriage partners is polygamy, the term “plural marriage” carries significant historical and religious weight, distinguishing it from general forms of multiple partnering found globally. The practice is fundamentally different from **monogamy**, which is the legal and social standard throughout most of the Western world, including the United States. Psychologically, plural marriage involves highly complex kinship structures and requires stringent mechanisms for managing social and emotional resources among multiple adult partners and their shared children.

The fundamental mechanism underlying the success or failure of any plural marriage system is the equitable distribution of resources, both tangible (economic support, housing) and intangible (attention, emotional validation). In a polygynous setting, the husband often acts as the central hub of authority and resource allocation, making his ability to navigate complex emotional terrain paramount to family stability. From a psychological perspective, this structure inherently challenges standard attachment theories, as children and wives must often form strong attachments not only to the central husband but also to co-wives (often referred to as “sister wives”) who function as co-parents or emotional supports, creating an expansive, horizontal support network.

It is crucial to note that within the modern context of the United States, plural marriages are not legally recognized. Although the practice is more commonly associated with the U.S. state of Utah than in many other states due to its historical roots, the state, like all others, prohibits the issuance of multiple marriage licenses. Therefore, contemporary plural marriages exist as spiritual, religious, or social unions, requiring participants to navigate significant legal and societal boundaries, which often leads to community isolation and heightened internal reliance on the group structure for validation and support.

Historical Origins and the Development in Mormonism

The concept of plural marriage originated in the 19th century within the fledgling Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS). Historical records attribute the introduction of the practice to the church’s founder, **Joseph Smith**, who claimed to receive a divine revelation instructing the implementation of this “new and everlasting covenant” in the 1840s. This doctrine was initially practiced secretly, causing immense internal turmoil and external persecution for the early members of the faith. The theological justification centered on restoring practices from biblical patriarchs, believed to be necessary for the highest degree of exaltation in the afterlife.

The official public announcement of the practice in 1852 in Utah territory was a major catalyst for conflict with the United States government, contributing significantly to the social and political isolation of the early Mormon settlers. The dedication to this principle became a defining feature of the Mormon identity during the latter half of the 19th century, viewed by adherents as a testament of faith and obedience under duress. However, this practice led to decades of federal anti-polygamy legislation and legal challenges, ultimately threatening the statehood of Utah and the institutional survival of the church itself.

The institutional practice of plural marriage officially ceased following the 1890 Manifesto issued by LDS President Wilford Woodruff, who announced that the church would submit to U.S. law. However, not all members accepted this change. This led to a schism, where various groups separated from the main body of the church to continue practicing the doctrine, forming distinct communities known broadly as **Fundamentalist Mormonism**. These groups maintain the practice of plural marriage today, often residing in geographically isolated areas in the Intermountain West, perpetuating the original 19th-century social structure and theology despite intense legal scrutiny and social stigma.

A Practical Example: Navigating Family Structure

To illustrate the psychological dynamics of plural marriage, consider a hypothetical family unit consisting of a husband, three wives (Wife A, Wife B, and Wife C), and twelve children. This family operates as a single economic and social unit, often pooling resources and labor to meet the needs of the large household. The immediate challenge is moving from the idealized religious principle to the practical, day-to-day management of emotional equity and familial hierarchy, which demands a high degree of emotional regulation and structured communication.

The application of the plural marriage principle in this domestic setting requires specific behavioral adaptations from all parties. The husband must intentionally dedicate individual time and attention to each wife and their specific children, often following a highly formalized schedule to prevent feelings of neglect or favoritism. The wives, often referred to as sister wives, must negotiate their roles regarding household duties, shared parenting responsibilities, and decision-making authority over joint resources. This necessity for constant collaboration highlights the difference between plural marriage and serial monogamy, as the relationships are interwoven and permanent.

The process of maintaining internal harmony in such a complex structure can be broken down into specific psychological and sociological steps that must be consistently applied:

1. Establishing Clear Roles: The family defines specific domains of authority for each wife (e.g., Wife A manages education, Wife B manages finances, Wife C manages healthcare) to minimize conflict over territory.
2. Managing Jealousy and Envy: Wives utilize religious teachings and community reinforcement to reframe feelings of jealousy as spiritual challenges, employing **cognitive reappraisal** to maintain loyalty to the group structure over individual emotional preference.
3. Collective Child Rearing: All children are taught to view all adult women in the household as authoritative parental figures, significantly expanding their support network and shared emotional infrastructure.
4. Structured Communication: Formal family councils or meetings are held regularly to address grievances and logistical issues, preventing small conflicts from escalating into threats against the entire unit.

Psychological Dynamics within Plural Families

The psychological experience of individuals within plural families is multifaceted, often characterized by a heightened sense of community belonging coupled with unique stressors related to societal non-acceptance. Research suggests that while children often benefit from expanded social support and reduced individual parental burden, they may also face challenges related to identity integration, particularly when reconciling their deeply held family beliefs with the pervasive monogamous norms of the outside world. This often necessitates a form of social compartmentalization, where family life must be strictly segregated from public life.

A key area of psychological study involves the emotional management required of the co-wives. The ability to manage and suppress feelings of jealousy is critical for the maintenance of the structure. Many practitioners rely on **cognitive dissonance** reduction, where the conflict between cultural norms (monogamy) and religious mandate (plural marriage) is resolved by elevating the spiritual value of the practice, thereby diminishing the validity of negative emotions or external criticism. This reinforcement of group identity and shared spiritual purpose acts as a powerful stabilizing force against internal emotional challenges.

Furthermore, the power dynamics within the family unit are important psychological determinants. Because the husband holds the theological and often the economic power, the wives frequently develop intense, collaborative relationships with one another. These sister-wife bonds can become sources of profound emotional intimacy and stability, often acting as a buffer against potential isolation or abuse. However, when the structure is dysfunctional, the risks of emotional neglect, competition, and hierarchical abuse are also intensified due to the closed nature and lack of external regulation common in isolated fundamentalist groups.

Significance and Impact

The study of plural marriage holds significant importance for the field of psychology, particularly in understanding the plasticity of human kinship structures and the mechanisms by which high-demand religious groups enforce conformity and social cohesion. Plural families provide unique case studies for examining alternative family systems, challenging the assumption that the nuclear, monogamous family is the sole optimal structure for human development. By analyzing these communities, researchers can gain insights into resource sharing, communal parenting models, and the psychological impact of living under intense religious and social mandates.

In contemporary applications, the principles derived from studying plural marriage communities inform several broader areas of psychological and sociological inquiry. For family therapists, understanding the complex, multi-layered dynamics of non-traditional family structures is crucial for providing culturally competent care, especially when working with individuals transitioning out of these communities. Furthermore, the analysis of these groups contributes to the study of social behavior, specifically how minority groups maintain strong cultural identity and shared belief systems in the face of overwhelming external opposition and legal non-recognition.

The impact extends to legal and ethical discussions regarding religious freedom and child welfare. Because plural marriage is associated with certain historical instances of abuse or exploitation, especially in isolated sects of Fundamentalist Mormonism, the study of these communities is vital for developing effective protective mechanisms. Psychologists and social workers must distinguish between stable, functional plural families and high-control, potentially abusive cultic structures, ensuring that interventions are tailored and based on behavioral evidence rather than simply on the form of the marriage itself.

Related Concepts and Broader Contexts

Plural marriage is situated within the broader anthropological category of **polygamy**, which encompasses both polygyny (one man, multiple wives) and polyandry (one woman, multiple husbands). While plural marriage is overwhelmingly polygynous, its historical and cultural ties differentiate it significantly from other forms of communal or group marriage found globally. Its primary psychological counterpoint is **monogamy**, and studies comparing outcomes often focus on the differences in attachment, sibling rivalry, and resource competition between the two structures.

The study of plural marriage falls primarily under the purview of **Social Psychology**, specifically focusing on group dynamics, social norms, and the psychology of religion. It also heavily overlaps with **Family Psychology** and the **Sociology of Religion**. Key related concepts include **kinship theory**, which maps the relationships and obligations within the expanded family unit, and **social identity theory**, which explains how members derive self-worth and meaning from their membership in the often marginalized plural community.

One crucial psychological concept frequently applied is **cognitive dissonance**. Individuals raised in or converting to plural marriage must reconcile the dissonance between the mainstream cultural narrative that deems their family structure abnormal or illegal, and the core spiritual belief that views it as the highest form of family organization. The resolution of this dissonance, usually achieved through communal reinforcement and theological justification, illustrates the profound power of ideological belief in shaping psychological reality and maintaining behavioral adherence to challenging social norms.