Marriage, Civil Partnerships - The Disadvantages

Ambersky

Marriage like most things is sure to have advantages and disadvantages. Listening to some conversations within the LGBT community on Marriage Equality have made me a little uncomfortable because of the lack of any discussion on any disadvantages for anyone in either Marriage itself or on single people or cohabitants.

I have heard it said that Marriage tends to benefit those with money and or property but can actually be a disadvantage for those less well off and
I am also wondering why single people and co habitants are considered less deserving of tax breaks and the same financial protections as couples.

A recent event which happened as a result of people looking for LGBT couples to be treated equally by the state, really got me thinking.
A friend of mine had an operation and sometime after the surgery she was called into an office and asked about the nature of her relationship with the woman she shares a home.
Up until recently two women, or two men, sharing a home were assessed as two individuals and it was only male female cohabitants that were subjected to such scrutiny. Apparently the scrutiny can go much further than simply asking “ are you a couple”. I am appalled at the extent of the intrusion of the questions that are asked by social welfare. I dont want to make this OP too long but do have a look at the kinds of questions that are asked about cohabitants in the link below.

Do the couple share any of the following:-

Providing meals and shopping.
Cleaning and laundry.
Caring for each other and members of the household during illness.
Decorating, gardening, washing up.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/OperationalGuidelines/pages/cohabit.aspx

The questioning posed was a real dilemma for my friend but in the end she did say she was in a relationship.
First thing that happened was they lost both their medical cards and she was presented with a bill for her operation. Her lover/girlfriend/ partner ( I just don’t know what to say nowadays) got her medical card back and I think my friend might too. She has a part time job, has an on-going medical condition and owns no property or assets and they both share a rented house and are approaching or are at retirement age.
The two women up until now did not want to be financially dependent on one another; they have wanted to remain individuals within a relationship.
Maybe some of you would have liked to have the choice to live like that too.
This idea of remaining an individual is being seriously eroded by the dominant idealized model of the mutually dependent couple which seems to be enforceable in law.

The state in the case I am talking about has intervened in the life of my friend asking her about the nature of her relationship not to protect the individuals I believe, but in order to protect the Institution of Marriage and of Civil Partnership.
I think the state sees it in its interest to promote the Institution of Marriage and the Family and therefore artificially creates advantages for Married couples over Single people and people who are in relationships not sanctioned by the state.
It seems what is seen as wrong here, by the State, is that two individuals living together would collect more on social welfare payments, medical card entitlements etc. than two married or civil partnered people and instead of increasing the married/civil allowances they decreased the allowances of co habitants.
I may be wrong about all this as I have less experience than I am sure many of the posters here so if anyone can clarify matters or correct me please do.

Here is an article that talks about two court cases involving the rights of cohabitant couples

UNMARRIED parents who live together are being forced to pay more income tax than their married counterparts yet if they find themselves on benefits, they are treated like a married couple and have fewer individual entitlements.
based on the principle that married couples should not be treated less favourably than cohabiting couples. This was given a constitutional underpinning following the Supreme Court decision in Hyland v Minister for Social Welfare (1989) which ruled that it was unconstitutional for the total income a married couple received in social welfare benefits to be less than the couple would have received if they were unmarried and cohabiting".

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfkfmhsnaugb/rss2/

So while LGBT people struggle for equality and inclusion in Marriage and or Civil Partnership do any of the posters here have any words of warning for possible disadvantages that might not be initially obvious to those seeking inclusion.
Have any of you been through a separation for instance and were the laws governing separation helpful to you or did you consider them unfair or expensive or unworkable in any way.
Have you had any dealings with social welfare over cohabitation issues and what do you think about those laws

Stheno

To be honest it sounds like since civil in partnership came in social welfare are applying the rules they have always applied to heterosexual couples to LGBT couples?

No difference really.

Marriage/civil partnerships has a lot of advantages in terms of next of kin and taxation

Ambersky

I know that is the situation but as you can see in the newspaper article quoted heterosexual couples haven't been happy about cohabitation rules for some time. There are disadvantages as well as disadvantages for people. I hear lots about the advantages of partnership legislation and marriage I am asking about disadvantages or is my friend the only one who is at a loss.

I would imagine it is heterosexual welfare recipients and or seperated or divorced posters who would know most about this issue

Stheno

Ambersky wrote: »

I know that is the situation but as you can see in the newspaper article quoted heterosexual couples haven't been happy about cohabitation rules for some time. There are disadvantages as well as disadvantages for people. I hear lots about the advantages of partnership legislation and marriage I am asking about disadvantages or is my friend the only one who is at a loss.

Nope not just your friend, any heterosexual couple who are living together and find one or both of them claiming social welfare are assessed as a cohabiting couple.

It's a bizarre anomaly in how Social Welfare treat cohabiting couples versus how Revenue do. I believe it's due to the constitution placing a premium value on marriage, though not too sure.

Can't think of any disadvantages of marriage/civil partnership versus plain cohabiting, unless you are earning significantly more than your partner and end up shelling out maintenance if the relationship breaks down. Or potentially the father in a relationship where there are children, men in this country in failed relationships do tend to be treated less equally than women when it comes to child custody etc.

pwurple

Depends on your viewpoint and how cynical you are. If you want to prevent your partner from ever becoming the legal guardian of his own children with you, or having any rights to them, not getting married is by far the best way to achieve that.