Same-Sex: Forum: Lismore
National Inquiry into Discrimination against People in Same-Sex Relationships: Financial and Work-Related Entitlements and Benefits
WRITTEN NOTES
NOTES FROM LISMORE COMMUNITY FORUM 2 - 4pm (11 November 2006)
No audio files are available for this forum.
50 people attended the community forum at Lismore and discussed a range of issues.
The following is an overview of the comments made during the community forum.
These comments reflect the views of the participants in the forum, they do not necessarily represent the final conclusions of the Inquiry.
Aged care
One person commented that there is a perception that gay men are well off. However community forums with older gay men have shown that older gay men are in the lower/middle income bands of society. He also commented that aged care services do not meet the needs of aged gay men and that there are few residential options available for them. He stated that often older gay men lose contact with their community.
Another person stated that aged care is conservative and that same-sex relationships are considered a 'no-go' zone. The discrimination starts when the older same-sex couple start to engage with aged care services.
Education
One person spoke about the issue of discrimination against children of same-sex couples at school. She stated that this behaviour is ignored by teachers and teachers' often do not speak out against it.
Employment
A number of people spoke about the impact of Work Choices legislation on same-sex attracted people. It was argued that the legislation makes it easier to discriminate against same-sex attracted people. An example was given of a lesbian woman that had been sacked. She believed that she had been sacked because her employer did not like lesbians. However unfair dismissal laws are no longer applicable in her case.
Another person commented that because the federal government does not recognise same sex relationships, employers do not recognise them either.
General issues of discrimination
One person spoke about the discrimination she has experienced throughout her life. She said that she has endured pressure from family, has been demonized, mocked, taunted, sexually harassed and fired from jobs. She stated that lesbians are expected to be invisible and silent. She described the issues that lesbians face as a result of mainstream patriarchal attitudes, sexism and homophobia from straight feminists. She argued that the choice to be called a 'lesbian' should be respected.
A number of people stated that changing the definition of 'couple' will not create equality as men and women are not treated equally in our soceity. It is dangerous to ignore the reality that lesbians are discriminated against both based on gender and sexuality. Lesbians are more likely to be caring for children. Lesbians are less likely to benefit form work entitlements than gay men. In some ways lesbians benefit from the lack of recognition of same-sex couples.
Another person commented that discrimination against people same-sex couples is not limited to 'couples'. Single gay and lesbian people are also discriminated against and we should not forget this.
One person commented that the law needs to be changed so that those in the community who discriminate know that what they are doing is wrong. When there is not leadership from the government, gay and lesbian couples experience not just legislative discrimination but daily discrimination. The government should adopt more than a piecemeal approach to removing discrimination. The government needs to make a statement that in principle people in same-sex relationships are entitled to the same rights as those in opposite sex relationships.
A person also stated that there is no reason other than homophobia to not to treat same sex couples equally. And since state government systems recognise same-sex de facto relationships, the Commonwealth system should, at the very least, do the same thing.
Legal change is only the first step in removing discrimination. A number of people recommended that HREOC conduct community education campaigns so that the general community will better understand the issues that face same-sex couples. This should include an education campaign when the legislation is changed.
Immigration
A number of people spoke about their experiences with immigration.
One person described how they were questioned by immigration officials about the connection between himself and his partner. He stated that it is important to have something that validates their relationship so they do not have to face these questions.
One couple described their experiences with retirement visas. They have been together for 26 years. They are both American citizens, who reside full-time in Australia. One partner has a (temporary) resident retirement visa, which currently does not provide for permanent residency or citizenship. He doesn't fear deportation at this time. His visa is good till June 2009, when he expects that the Government will renew it. However, his younger same-sex partner did not qualify for his own retirement visa, and as a same-sex de facto, was not allowed to be included on his retirement visa. DIMA granted his partner a 4-year visitor visa, timed with his own visa, as a concession to try and fill in the gap left in the laws. There is no guarantee that the Government will renew his partner's visa in 2009, as his is such a rare class of visa. If this happens, he can live here full-time, but his long term life partner would not be able to live with him.
One person commented that gay men and lesbians experience great anxiety when going through immigration as a same-sex couple. Immigration does not understand same-sex relationships.
Lack of recognition as a family
One person described how it is very upsetting that her family has no legal recognition. She stated that it is hard to be 'out' in the world that does not want or accept her family. It makes her feel as though her family is invalidated. This has a high emotional cost on her family and children.
Legal Issues
A number of people discussed the impact that changes to the laws will have on people. Amendments to federal legislation will have a different impact on different people. Fro example, there will be a different impact on lower income earners and gay men and lesbian women will be impacted on differently.
Medicare
One person stated that as same-sex couples with children are not recognised as a family they cannot be registered as a family under the Medicare safety net. This has a financial impact on the family and as a result impacts on their children.
Parenting
One person described how she is the lesbian mother of both a biological and non-biological child. However as a non-biological parent she has no rights. She explained that she finds it difficult having to continually explain herself and her relationship to the non-biological child. She stated that she has to continually 'out' herself. She commented that she is 'sick' of educating the rest of the world about same-sex families.
Another person spoke about the lack of legal recognition for the non-biological mother. As a result she sought parenting orders; however this incurs additional legal costs. She stated that initially parenting orders were not available in region. She and her partner, with the support of the local legal centre, fought for this to be available and you can now get these orders in Lismore. However they will need to get legal advice and orders again for their newborn child. This will incur additional costs.
Recognition of relationships
Many people spoke about relationship recognition.
One person commented that the name given to a relationship does matter. Names have an effect on the things that happen to us in our lives. It is about having something that is tangible. It is important to have a term that people can understand and respect. If the Marriage Act is identified as discriminatory then this means that the name given to a relationship matters. Same-sex couples should have their relationships identified by a name that is equal to that of marriage.
Another person believed that if financial and work related discrimination is removed, this will inevitably lead to greater legitimisation of sexual and emotional preferences and orientation. This will mean greater acceptance of gay men and lesbians in society.
One person commented that we need to take a broom through all legislation and make it positively equal.
Another couple spoke of their experiences in Barcelona when the Marriage Act was amended to recognise same-sex relationships. They said that it was extraordinary to see same-sex attracted people hand in hand in the streets. It was a very positive experience. They stated that they did not want to be treated in a special category and that the issue of marriage needs to be re-considered.
One person stated that if the Prime Minister is interested in removing discrimination then the Marriage Act should be changed. Relationship recognition is a major step in addressing discrimination.
Social Security
One person commented that if her relationship was recognised then she would not be eligible for the Disability Services Pension. This would have a serious financial impact on her life.
A number of people believed that social security laws are retrograde for heterosexual couples as well. It was stated that heterosexual couples are disadvantaged as they are considered as a 'couple' and not as an 'individual'. The gay and lesbian community want the same rights as heterosexual people but some of these rights are limiting and prevent autonomy in relationships for everyone.
Another couple spoke about their experiences in trying to claim their non-biological children as dependents.
One person spoke about his experiences when he moved out of home. He applied to Centrelink for benefits. He told Centrelink he was gay and lived in a conservative religious family. Centrelink stated that was not a good enough reason to qualify for that benefit.
Another person commented that the categories under the Social Security Act are not relevant to gay and lesbian relationships.
Superannuation
One person stated that his partner named him as the beneficiary for his superannuation. He put in a claim for the superannuation payment after his partner died. He was told it was up to the discretion of the trustees as to whether he would be given the superannuation payment. His partner had not been in contact with his biological family for 10 years. The trustees decided that his biological family were more worthy of the benefit.
Another person stated that seven years into her relationship she changed the beneficiary of her superannuation to her partner. She then received a letter from the superannuation fund stating that the trustee can deny benefits to her partner despite the nomination. She stated that after 24 years of paying taxes and many years paying superannuation she feels she should have a say as to what happens to her money when she dies.
One person commented that his superannuation fund advised him to make sure the name of his partner appears as his beneficiary in his will.
Veterans' Affairs
One person spoke about his partner who is a Vietnam veteran and suffers a medical condition. He applied for a Gold Card and his application was denied. He called Veterans affairs to inquire about the letter of denial he was told that same-sex relationships are not recognised. He said that his partner has served his country like any other military person yet he is now unable to have entitlements like any other veteran.
Another person described how when his partner died, the defence services returned his body to the biological family. This was because their relationship was not recognised.
