The reality is even worse than the article makes it out to be. Get married while both are disabled and they will cut both your benefits, pay and medical, they will try to trick you into saying you are married or force common law marriage on you at every turn. It makes getting food stamps harder, it cuts the amount of care giving each person can get even if they have separate needs, and god forbid you need a new (to you) vehicle or place to live because you can’t save up enough to make that happen. It’s a nightmare where one clerk at a doctors office can put down spouse and ruin their lives and lead to one or both dying.
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
72 points (100.0% liked)
Disability and Accessibility
889 readers
1 users here now
All things disability and accessibility related, and advocacy for making those things better.
See also this community's sister subs Feminism, LGBTQ+, Neurodivergence, and POC.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Ugh I hate this. It's a huge problem and rooted in discriminatory attitudes.
One thing though, that's quite useful that it can at least be framed as a marriage equality issue over there.
Here in New Zealand, legislatively there is equality for people who don't even get married (common law/de facto couples automatically have the same legal status and rights as married couples, across the board).
The downside of that is that we have a similar situation only you just have to be seen as a couple for 2 years. Like this:
If you marry someone who is making even $40,000, that’s enough money for the government to say you married someone who can take care of you completely.
but without the marrying part. Social welfare just has to decide you're together (sometimes through horrifying ways like getting hold of your nudes). And, if you try to hide your relationship then your partner is legally jointly liable for fraud if you're caught.
It's like they don't want disabled people to be in relationships at all.
I also see it as a feminist issue since I have completely separate finances yet my SO is somehow supposed to be paying for me like I'm a pet or a child.
100% this. It fosters dependency and robs people with disabilities of their own decisions of what to do with their money.
I’m so glad that this is getting some attention. It’s truly a wild policy to have and it’s pretty hard to defend - I’m not sure if any talking point could sell the idea that it’s okay, even to the most old school fiscal conservatives. I don’t want to be too optimistic, but I think if it’s more widely known about (hopefully??) it might be actually likely to change relatively soon. And that would mean an immense improvement in dignity and quality of life for a lot of people. Tempering my hopes, but I do feel some hope.