The statute specifies that the course must be at least 4 hours long. House Bill 57 does not provide direction to local officials regarding the acceptable minimum duration of a course that would allow applicants to qualify for the discount. More importantly, the Florida statute clearly lists the qualified instructors who can provide the premarriage course. Each judicial circuit can designate other acceptable providers, and may establish a public roster of course providers in the area. The lack of specificity in House Bill 57 is concerning.
Government can have a role in helping to preserve families, and prepare individuals for family life.
If government chooses to do so, however, it must proceed in a manner that provides options to the individuals involved, and must respect the decision of the applicants to select a religious or secular counselor, provided that the counselor is qualified to perform the service. While the intent of House Bill 57 may be to provide options to the applicants, and lacks specific details in order to maximize options, I believe the bill leaves too much discretion to local officials to recognize, or fail to recognize, courses for selective reasons. Florida's law demonstrates that it is possible to craft legislation on this topic that provides clear direction and builds upon existing regulatory and religious structures, while preserving the options and respecting the rights of participants in the courses. House Bill 57 does not strike this balance. Although the bill offers only a small monetary incentive to promote premarriage education, it is well-intentioned.