Times Colonist

Family Law Act unfair to people living in poverty

- STEPHEN PORTMAN Stephen Portman is the advocacy lead for the Together Against Poverty Society.

With St. Valentine’s Day upon us and the last sitting of this legislatur­e opening with a throne speech on the day of hearts, it is worth considerin­g how lawmakers have seen fit to ensure that people living in poverty have to love differentl­y than those who do not.

For most, falling in love and deciding to move in together is a decision that is entered into freely. You get to know a person you like — maybe love. You find an apartment and start building a shared life together.

Over time, financial and social dependence tends to grow, and after 24 months of living in a “marriage-like” relationsh­ip, the Family Law Act begins to apply to your happy cohabitati­on. You are now effectivel­y spouses, with all the legal and social implicatio­ns that apply.

If you are poor, the process is quite different. In B.C., if the government is satisfied that a relationsh­ip demonstrat­es (1) financial dependence or interdepen­dence, and (2) social and familial interdepen­dence consistent with a marriage-like relationsh­ip, it can determine two individual­s to be spouses and cut back income supports after only three months. That’s a period eight times shorter than the rest of us get to decide how we want to share our lives.

This heavily accelerate­d process allows for far less individual freedom for both partners and creates a level of dependence that can result in real harm. The impact that this class-based legal distinctio­n inflicts on the less fortunate and marginaliz­ed people of B.C. (predominan­tly female citizens and their children) is chilling.

Take the story of Sarah, a single mother who was evicted from her home this past September. Sarah is out of work, as she is recovering from a motor-vehicle crash that severely restricted her basic mobility. She is also being treated for symptoms of posttrauma­tic stress disorder stemming from a traumatic childhood that she is only now starting to come to terms with.

Because of this, she has been forced to leave an affordable apartment in which she has happily raised her child for the past two years.

Sarah’s monthly provincial income assistance totals $877. With this amount she must cover rent, food, clothing and other life essentials. With a vacancy rate in Victoria that is nearly non-existent and some of the least affordable housing in Canada to choose from, Sarah has had little option but to move in with her exboyfrien­d, Larry.

They are no longer romantical­ly involved, but it was the only available option. Not a good option — the only option.

Three months after moving into Larry’s one-bedroom apartment, the government sent her a letter requesting Larry’s financial informatio­n, as her file was to be updated. Larry had to report his monthly income from his job as a cashier, where he makes $1,500 a month.

As Larry and Sarah are sharing a one-bedroom apartment and all associated bills, the B.C. government determines them to be in a marriage-like relationsh­ip. Sarah now has no income of her own, and she and her daughter are forced into dependence on Larry’s already low monthly income to survive.

Larry must now support three people on his very humble wage. This is the last thing Sarah wanted, and her loss of independen­ce has made her even more vulnerable. Needless to say, the household becomes tense and this undesirabl­e situation gets worse.

There are thousands of Sarahs in B.C. — women who are forced to become rapidly dependent upon an ex-spouse or a new boyfriend and, as a result, become far less able to exercise independen­ce. The unfortunat­e result is that when subjected to this power imbalance, which can include violence, women are less able to leave.

When the Family Law Act came in to force, it was widely touted for alleviatin­g the risk of domestic violence. The same standard should no doubt apply across economic-class divides.

Chilling also is the level of government­al inaction on this matter — especially given the relative ease, administra­tively and financiall­y, of allowing people in poverty the same legal deference afforded to the more economical­ly secure. It is well past time for the definition­s of spouse that applies to people in poverty to be the same that everyone else lives by.

West Coast LEAF, a women’s equality organizati­on, submitted a detailed proposal to the provincial government, complete with the evidence needed to make these changes, and the draft legislatio­n to get it done. All that is needed is the political will and a pen stroke.

As legislator­s and lovers alike take out a pen to write sentiments to a loved one this Valentine’s Day, let them also think about Sarah and her daughter. This Valentine’s Day should be the last that they have to live as victims of this unjust law.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada