The constitution of the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia allows customary and religious courts to adjudicate cases related to family and personal matters(when all parties consent to it). While this pluralistic approach presents alternative ways of solving marital disputes, it brings along with it a danger to societies with low level education and low access to information. This is specially concerning since once someone agrees(consents) to settle their matter in this alternative methods the decision is binding and the person can not take their case to the formal court anymore. While article 34(5) of the constitution makes consent a precondition for religious and customary laws to handle cases related to family and personal matters the legitimacy of the consent given by people with low access to legal information can be put to question. In order for consent to be valid it needs to be done with the person having full information on the issue they are making a decision on. The application of religious and customary laws to resolve marital disputes, particularly when consenting parties lack sufficient legal information undermines the validity of the given consent. This article aims to critically analyze the detrimental effects of allowing customary and religious laws to resolve marital disputes in light of the validity of the consent.