Domestic partnership

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Domestic partner)
Jump to: navigation, search
Image:Scale of justice 2.svg
Family law
Entering into marriage
Prenuptial agreement  · Marriage
Common-law marriage
Same-sex marriage
Legal states similar to marriage
Cohabitation  · Civil union
Domestic partnership
Registered partnership
Putative marriage
Dissolution of marriage
Annulment  · Divorce  · Alimony
Issues affecting children
Paternity  · Legitimacy  · Adoption
Legal guardian  · Ward
Emancipation of minors
Parental responsibility
Contact (including Visitation)
Residence in English law
Custody  · Child support
Areas of possible legal concern
Spousal abuse  · Child abuse
Child abduction
Adultery  · Bigamy  · Incest
Conflict of Laws Issues
Marriage  · Nullity  · Divorce
Legal recognition of
same-sex relationships
Same-sex marriage

Belgium
Canada
Netherlands

South Africa
Spain

Recognized in some regions
United States (MA)

International recognition

Aruba
Israel

Neth. Antilles
United States (NM, NY, RI)

Civil unions and
registered partnerships

Andorra
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary (1 Jan 09)
Iceland

Luxembourg
New Zealand
Norway
Slovenia
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay

Recognized in some regions

Argentina (C, R)
Australia (TAS, Sydney, Melbourne)
Brazil (RS)
Mexico (CO, DF)
United States (CA, CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, VT, WA; OR—delayed)

Unregistered co-habitation

Australia
Austria
Brazil
Colombia

Croatia
Israel
Portugal

Recognition debated

Argentina
Austria
Australia (ACT, VIC)
Brazil
Chile
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Estonia
Ecuador
Greece

Ireland
Italy
Jersey
Latvia
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Poland
Romania
Taiwan
United States
   (IA, IL, MD, NM, NY, RI)

Recognition granted,
same-sex marriage debated

France
Hungary
Iceland
New Zealand

Norway
Portugal
Sweden
United Kingdom

United States (CA, CT, DC, HI, ME, NH, NJ, OR—delayed, VT, WA)
See also

Same-sex marriage
Civil union
Registered partnership
Domestic partnership
Timeline of same-sex marriage
Listings by country

This box: view  talk  edit
LGBT Portal

A domestic partnership is a legal or personal relationship between individuals who live together and share a common domestic life but are not joined in a traditional marriage or in a civil union. However, in some jurisdictions, such as California, domestic partnership is in fact nearly equivalent to marriage, or to other legally recognized same-sex or different-sex unions. The terminology for such unions is still evolving, and the exact level of rights and responsibilities conferred by a domestic partnership varies widely from place to place.

Some legislatures have voluntarily established domestic partnership relations by statute instead of being ordered to do so by a court. Although some jurisdictions have instituted domestic partnerships as a way to recognize same-sex unions, domestic partnerships may involve either different-sex or same-sex couples.

In some legal jurisdictions, domestic partners who live together for an extended period of time but are not legally entitled to common-law marriage may be entitled to legal protection in the form of a domestic partnership. Some domestic partners may enter into domestic partnership agreements in order to agree contractually to issues involving property ownership, support obligations, and similar issues common to marriage. (See effects of marriage and palimony.)

One of the purposes of domestic partnership relation is to recognize the contribution of one partner to the property of the other. In the common law, devices such as the constructive trust are available to protect spouses in legal or common-law marriages. In civil law jurisdictions, such trusts are generally not available, prompting courts to find alternative ways to protect the partner who contributes to the other's property.

Contents

[edit] In the United States

[edit] Origin of term in law

In 1982, the term "domestic partner" was first used in a lawsuit filed by San Francisco Human Rights Commission employee Larry Brinkin. Mr. Brinkin, then an employee of Southern Pacific Railway, had recently suffered the loss of his partner of eleven years. When he was denied the three days of paid bereavement leave given to married employees, he filed suit with the assistance of the ACLU. Mr. Brinkin lost his case. Despite a great deal of evidence to the contrary, the judge agreed with his employer’s claim that there was no way to know if his relationship was legitimate.[1]

[edit] Origin of term in California municipalities

[edit] West Hollywood

The phrases domestic partner and domestic partnership were first used to describe living arrangements in 1985, according to The American Heritage Book of English Usage. In that year, West Hollywood city council member John Heilman successfully introduced domestic partner legislation for city residents and employees that was passed by the city council and created the first domestic partnership registry.

[edit] San Francisco

However, that was not the first domestic partner law in the United States. After the 1979 death of Harvey Milk in San Francisco, gay rights activist Tom Brougham came up with a definition of domestic partnership that is now universally used, and was designed to include everything about marriage except sexual orientation. According to Brougham, the definition was that the couple must be more than 18 years old and mentally competent to make a contract. Furthermore, his position was that Domestic partners must publicly declare the partnership and pledge to be responsible for each other.

In 1982, Brougham's definition was modified by Supervisor Harry Britt (a gay man appointed to replace Harvey Milk). Britt's version was adopted and passed by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, but Dianne Feinstein, mayor of San Francisco at the time, came under intense pressure from the Catholic Church and subsequently vetoed the bill. Not until 1989 was a domestic partnership law adopted in the city of San Francisco.[3]. As of December 2006, the city still offers a domestic partnership status separate from that offered by the state; city residents can apply for both.

[edit] Berkeley

In 1983 the City Council of Berkeley, California, under the leadership of Mayor Gus Newport, ordered their Human Relations and Welfare Commission to develop a domestic partnership proposal. The Commission appointed its Vice-Chair, Leland Traiman, a gay activist, to head the Domestic Partner Task Force and draft a policy. Working with Tom Brougham, members of the East Bay Lesbian/Gay Democratic Club, and attorney Matt Coles, the Domestic Partner Task Force drafted what has become the template for domestic partner/civil union policies around the world. The City of Berkeley's Human Relations and Welfare Commission held a public hearing early in 1984 on "Examining the Use of Marriage to Determine Benefits and Liabilities in Berkeley and the Alternatives." A policy was adopted by the Commission and presented to the City Council. A copy was sent to the Berkeley School Board. The City Council voted down the proposal, citing financial concerns. In August 1984, the Berkeley School Board enacted the policy by a 4 to 1 vote. The school board motion was made by Ethel Manheimer, a disabled lesbian.

In November 1984, all the city council members up for election who had voted against the policy lost reelection. Progressives from the Berkeley Citizens' Action (BCA) slate who replaced them had voiced strong support for a domestic partner policy. The East Bay Lesbian/Gay Democratic Club had worked hard to elect the BCA Slate. At the first meeting of the new City Council in December 1984, the Berkeley City Council, by a vote of 8 to 1, enacted a policy extending employee benefits to unmarried couples of any sex. The first couple to file for benefits under Berkeley's sex-neutral policy were activist and city employee Tom Brougham and his partner Barry Warren.

However, the City Council did not create a registry for domestic partners until 1991. October 11 of that year, 28 homosexual men & women couples and one heterosexual couple signed up. Tom and Barry were the first couple to put themselves on Berkeley's public registry of domestic partners. Leland Traiman and his partner, Stewart Blandón, were the third to do so. Also registering that day was the daughter of Loni Hancock, the then-mayor of Berkeley.

[edit] California, statewide

On September 4, 2003 the California legislature passed an expanded domestic partnership bill, extending nearly all the legal rights of married couples to people in same-sex partnerships. This effectively transformed California domestic partnerships into civil unions. Potentially serious legal issues arise from the conflict between state domestic partnership and same-sex-marriage laws, and the structure of U.S. Federal law, which, under the Defense of Marriage Act, explicitly does not extend Federal law recognition to those unions. This means that, for example, though they may essentially be "married" under the law of some states, partners would not be entitled to spousal "collateral" rights to Social Security and will not be treated as "spouses" for purposes of any Federal tax law.

The State of California has developed an Online Self-Help Center that provides resources and information to assist domestic partners in many areas, including filing domestic partnerships, dissolving domestic partnerships,parenting issues, tax issues, and more.

[edit] District of Columbia

Washington, D.C., has recognized domestic partnerships since 1992. However, Congress prohibited the District from spending any local funds to implement the law. The prohibition was lifted in the federal appropriations act for the District for the 2002 fiscal year. Domestic partnership in the District is open to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. All couples registered as domestic partners are entitled to the same rights as family members to visit their domestic partners in the hospital and to make decisions concerning the treatment of a domestic partner’s remains after the partner’s death. The measure also grants District of Columbia government employees rights to a number of benefits. Domestic partners are eligible for health care insurance coverage, can use annual leave or unpaid leave for the birth or adoption of a dependent child or to care for a domestic partner or a partner's dependents, and can make funeral arrangements for a deceased partner. The Domestic Partnership Equality Amendment Act of 2006, D.C. Law 16-79, came into effect on April 4, 2006. This act provides that in almost all cases a domestic partner will have the same rights as a spouse regarding inheritance, probate, guardianship, and other rights traditionally accorded to spouses [2].

[edit] Maine

In April, 2004 the legislature passed a domestic partnership bill. The law, which provides same-sex individuals with inheritance rights over their partners' property and guardianship over their deceased partner, went into effect on July 30, 2004 [3].

[edit] Oregon

The governor of Oregon, Ted Kulongoski, signed a domestic partnership bill bill into law on May 9th, 2007. Called the Oregon Family Fairness Act, the law would provide several major rights to same-sex couples that were previously only given to married couples, including the ability to file jointly on insurance forms, hospital visitation rights, and rights relating to the deceased partner. The law has since been delayed by the federal Court[citation needed] [4].

[edit] Washington

In the state of Washington, Governor Christine Gregoire signed into law legislation allowing limited domestic partnership on April 21, 2007. The law, which took effect July 22, 2007, permits same-sex couples (as well as heterosexual couples when one individual is at least age 62) to register in a domestic partnership registry that allows couples hospital visitation rights, the ability to authorize autopsies and organ donations, and inheritance rights when there is no will.[5] This follows the 1998 passage of a bill by the Washington State legislature that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman; this legislation was upheld by the Washington State Supreme Court in 2006.[6] Washington State Senate Report

[edit] Other states

Wikinews has related news:
Interview with gay marriage movement founder Evan Wolfson

Civil unions in Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Vermont offer civil unions equivalent to marriage in all but the title, while only the state of Massachusetts offers full marriage rights to same-sex couples.

Failed Attempts: After passing both houses of the General Assembly, a referendum on domestic partnerships came before Colorado voters in November 2006, but was defeated, while the constitutional same-sex marriage ban passed during the same election.

[edit] In Europe

Portugal, Hungary and Croatia have domestic partnerships, whereas most other nations in Europe recognize some form of civil unions, also called a registered partnership, or civil partnership for same-sex partners, which afford rights similar to marriage to LGBT couples.

In Hungary domestic partnership in the form of unregistered cohabitation offers a limited set of rights compared to marriage (more in the field of health and pension; but no inheritance), although a growing number of Hungarian couples, both opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples choose this kind of partnership instead of marriage. The Registration partnership law was passed by pailament, as part of the introduction of the new Civil Code, which the lesislation will come into affect from 01/01/2009[citation needed]. Some politicians of SZDSZ and MSZP argue for the introduction of marriage for same-sex couples.

[edit] In Oceania

[edit] Australia

In Australia, all states and territories, plus the cities of Melbourne and Sydney, now offer "Unregistered co-habitation" or registered partnerships (called significant relationships in Tasmania) to both same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples. Nevertheless, as of January 2008, the Australian Commonwealth government still discriminates against same-sex couples in 58 statutes and provisions, and bans the recognition at a national level of all same-sex marriages[citation needed].

For an in-depth look at discrimination against same-sex couples under Australian federal law, see the Same-sex Entitlements Report 2006 by the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission at [15]

[edit] See also

[edit] New Zealand

Since 2005, New Zealand has offered civil unions for all couples, whether same-sex or different-sex. The rights and responsibilities conferred by New Zealand civil unions are nearly identical to those of marriage, with the major exception that civil union couples are not allowed to adopt children jointly.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

Close relationships

Affinity Attachment BondingCasualCohabitation Compersion ConcubinageCourtshipDivorceDower, dowry and bride priceFriendshipFamilyHusbandInfatuationIntimacyJealousyLimerenceLoveMarriageMonogamyNonmonogamy Office romance PassionPartnerPederastyPolygamy Platonic love Psychology of monogamyRelationship abuseRomanceSexualitySeparationWeddingWidowhoodWife

v  d  e

[edit] See also

bg:Съвместно съжителство

es:Pareja de hecho pt:União de facto

Views
Personal tools

Toolbox