With COVID-19, home can be the hazard

For a long time now, many of us working in the field of social and health policy have applied a gender-based analysis (GBA) to understand the differential impacts a policy or program can have on women compared to men.

The GBA is supposed to be standard practice in most federal departments and many provincial governments. Since the early 2000s, more people are also trying to apply what’s called an intersectional analysis to their work so the differences in impact, value or harm based on race, ethnicity, ability and so on can be addressed.

This includes economic impacts as well.

Sometimes changes that look positive have a negative effect. Sometimes changes that look like they are simplifying issues make them more complicated.

Let’s look at the baby bonus. For years it arrived in the name of the mother of the children for whom the benefit would be used. For many women, it was often the only cheque they had ever seen with their name on it.

I remember Ann Bell, the first president of the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women telling me that she often asked women what was the biggest change they had seen for women in this province. The answer that came back was the baby bonus.

The money came monthly. The mother could save it up to buy school clothes, Christmas or birthday presents, school books etc. Fast forward to the end of the 20th century and the baby bonus was changed to the Child Tax Benefit.

While the federal government of the day increased the amount, it was dependent on families filing tax returns.

The principle behind it was those who needed it most got a nice chunk each tax year instead of monthly payments, and those who needed it least didn’t have to go through the rigamarole of getting it clawed back via increased tax bills.

The catch is twofold: you have to file a tax return to get it and it would most likely come back to the income earner (usually but not always men). Gone was the monthly cheque and gone was the economic power it accorded women, limited as it was.

On the face of it, many similar changes look great on paper. The theory is that everyone is treated equally. However, as we know, all too often being treated equally assumes we all have the same starting positions, when that is simply not the case.

Looking at COVID-19 responses requires a similar intersectional lens.

Don’t get me wrong: the speed at which the federal government moved to introduce its emergency benefits is astounding. Even now, eligibility rules are evolving to meet the input of new information, such as how the gig economy affects income.

This is good practice and demonstrates that ongoing analysis is necessary if we are to support those in need effectively. At the provincial level, we have seen how the government has adapted to support front line workers and health care providers, to recognize the impact on children and students, to highlight the needs of seniors in our communities, and to respond to issues of food security.

And yet, we are still missing the gender-based analysis that will bring attention to the needs of women living with intimate partner violence. Those on the front line in shelters and those providing public education and advocacy have been speaking out but there has been little if anything said about the issue in daily briefings.

We need an institutional response, both in services and also in messages.

If the premier can speak to children about the Easter Bunny not being able to bring chocolate to every home, he can speak more often to the issue of violence in the home, where children are now more likely to witness it because everyone is staying in.

Living under stress — financially, mentally, physically — because of COVID-19 is no excuse for engaging in violent behaviour.

We know intimate partner violence is about the need for control. COVID-19 has exacerbated those controlling needs but our systems, community, health, justice, and even cabinet have to respond.

These are uncharted waters, and COVID-19 has prompted us to reconsider how we live, work, recreate and connect. We also need to reconsider how we look after one another.