There is a group of people whose voice has not really been heard in the equal marriage debates in Britain.

Trans people who have managed to keep their marriages during transition are faced with an awful dilemma – whether to forego gender recognition and remain married, or whether to dissolve their marriage in order to gain gender recognition. There are no other marriages the state routinely says cannot continue. In fact the technical term for ending a marriage in this situation is annulment, which is effectively saying the marriage never happened.

True – such partnerships can be re-contracted as civil partnerships after gender recognition, but the process is seldom as smooth as promised, and the act of divorce is often emotionally traumatic.

Spouses’ pension rights often suffer as a result. Also some people object to the perceived link between civil partnerships and homosexuality – I’ve heard several wives of trans women say they don’t want to be labelled as lesbian. Bear in mind that the spouses have often stood by their trans partner despite social disapproval, and have often had a difficult journey of their own. It’s an evil way to repay them for their love and loyalty.

The governments’ proposals for equal marriage in England, Wales and Scotland provide a welcome relief for those trapped in that situation. No longer will trans people have to choose between gender recognition and retaining their marriage. For these people, the change in the law cannot come quickly enough. It is surprising that this situation has not been highlighted more in the mainstream media.

Yet there are still people who would be disadvantaged by the proposals as they currently stand. For example, those trans people who are currently in civil partnerships who would have to convert them into marriages before gender recognition. The exact process for this is not yet known, although the government is proposing a fee for the privilege. But some people want to keep their partnership status for moral reasons, equating marriage with ownership or religion, and these people are faced with exactly the same conundrum – gender recognition or maintain their partnership.

It is easy to think of situations where the constant change in marital status serves no real purpose. Imagine a couple where both are trans. They are in a civil partnership. One gains gender recognition, so their partnership has to be converted into a marriage. Then the other one gains gender recognition. They have no means under the current proposals of converting their new marriage back into a civil partnership.

What happens to existing marriage certificates is also unknown. Gender recognition allows for someone’s birth certificate to be re-issued. It is hoped that marriage certificates will also be amended, but what date should appear on this new certificate? Mind you, there is a related issue about changing the birth certificates of children born to a parent who later gains gender recognition.

There are also those who went through the marriage to civil partnership conversion because they saw no other alternative – maybe the trauma of having the wrong legal gender was too much, or they were missing out on pension provision. These people often say they’ve had their marriage stolen from them, and they want it back.

The proposals do allow the newer civil partnerships to be converted back into marriages – but often people in this situation want their original marriage date on their certificate, not the date of the civil partnership, which often doesn’t mean anything to them anyway. And it looks like the government will still expect them to pay – something which those who have been able to wait won’t have done. Effectively this is a double whammy for the people in that situation.

The whole area is a mess. And that’s before you start looking at the religious aspects of equal marriage. As someone closely involved with the equal marriage consultation once said, if you were designing a system for the 21st century, you wouldn’t start from here. But the efforts of former Equality Minister Lynne Featherstone in placing equal marriage squarely on the government’s agenda are to be applauded. It rights a massive injustice.

We need to ensure that the law doesn’t keep similar injustices in place.