Values Question

[National Dialogue Moderator <moderator>]

Maureen's question really opens up a great discussion of who should be 
able to get family benefits and how they should be handled. I would 
argue that the entire issue of the economic unit needs to be 
reassessed, and that the answers may be different under something like 
the current system and under earnings sharing. In theory, I think 
"legally married or not" is a distinction which does not reflect the 
actual structure of family type economic units.

Strange situations can arise with unmarried couples and separated but 
not divorced couples.

Benefits for domestic partners is an important issue in employee 
benefit programs today, and more organizations are extending them.  I 
think conceptually there are many arguments for extending the same 
benefits to domestic partners as spouses, but there are also many 
practical issues, particularly in something like social security where 
the benefits are earned at over a long time and paid later.  Private 
business often treats same sex couples differently from opposite sex 
couples because they do not have the option to legally marry.

I would suggest we might want to rephrase Maureen's question to ask 
under what circumstances should a person be considered a family member 
for purposes of getting benefits.  

Under the current system of spouse benefits, I think it would be 
practical to extend family benefits to a domestic partner only with a 
fairly tight set of rules and declarations about who is a domestic 
partner.  This also gets complex because with common law marriage the 
same couple may be domestic partners in one state and married in 
another (without overt action on their part).  Also note that the 
current system requires 10 years of marriage for divorce benefits but 
only a short period of marriage for survivor benefits or spouse 
benefits while the couple is retired and married.  One of my big 
concerns is that people make decisions about marriage and divorce 
timing without understanding the implications for things like social 
security.

With earnings sharing, it would make sense to me to allow a declared 
partner on a year by year basis, but I think this might be an 
administrative nightmare.

Maureen, thank you for raising the question. My answer is yes, but I 
do not know how to make it work. I hope this issue will be discussed 
further.


Anna Rappaport