Growing up in a working-class town
in upstate New York,
I was taught to hope for a future
with a husband and two kids.
How about you?
I saw women in my community
marry as a path to economic security
but often end up with discontent
and even abuse instead.
As I got older,
I came to wonder and I ask you now:
What is family?
What do we want family to be?
The nuclear family has been the basis
for our cultural stories and our laws.
But only about half
of US adults are married.
Fewer every year.
Forty percent of US adults
don't live with a romantic partner at all.
As of 2013,
less than half of US children
had two married heterosexual parents
in their first marriage.
The majority of us are not in a nuclear
family with a spouse and kids.
Yet somehow,
we treat this majority of people
like social failures.
What’s worse:
our laws treat unmarried people
as lesser citizens.
Marriage comes with over 1,000 rights
and benefits under federal law.
These include the ability
to get your spouse citizenship,
share health insurance,
get better tax rates
and inherit tax-free at death and more.
Part of the winning argument
for same-sex marriage
was that we shouldn't deprive gay couples
of all of these essential benefits.
But I ask you,
why should anyone be denied benefits
because they're in a romantic relationship
of which some people disapprove?
Or because they're single.
(Applause)
Thank you.
Or because they're basing family
on something other
than a romantic relationship,
like co-parenting a child.
Our laws should move away from the idea
that there's one ideal family form
and value all families as they exist.
(Applause)
That's what I've dedicated my career to,
and today, I'll share some of my visions
for how we can change US laws
to benefit all families,
but also how an expansive view of family
will strengthen all
of your own relationships.
For nearly 15 years with my law firm
for LGBTQ and non-nuclear families,
I've supported same sex couples.
But also the many family
forms beyond marriage,
like platonic partners
who are raising a child together
or sharing finances
without a romantic relationship.
Or grandparents who are raising
their grandchildren.
Or a lesbian couple
co-parenting with a male friend.
Or polyamorous partners
who might be in a committed
relationship of three or four.
Within that legal advocacy,
I facilitate discussions to make sure
that everyone's intentions are aligned
and then help them design
their own family agreements.
With the non-profit
organization I founded,
Chosen Family Law Center,
I advocate for changes in US laws
to benefit this whole beautiful spectrum
of family constellations.
And it is my core belief
that no matter how you form family,
actively discussing
how we intend to live together
is the best thing we can do to strengthen
our own personal relationships.
So how did we end up with this current
US emphasis on nuclear family?
Most of us throughout history have lived
in large extended family networks
and 38 percent of the world
population does today.
The nuclear family is actually
a relatively new development.
It emerged in the industrial revolution
to support a working dad
and a homemaker mom.
It peaked in the 1950s and '60s,
but it hasn't been the most common
family form before or since.
Still, somehow, it's the basis
for our health insurance system.
How well is that working out?
And a reason for our lack
of affordable childcare in this country.
We still build and zone suburban homes
with this fictional family in mind.
In Western Europe, where I live,
and in many other countries,
states provide support
for citizens in need,
including parents who are home
with young children,
such as paid maternity leave
and financial support throughout
the childhood, if needed.
But in US law,
we make sure that financial safety net
happens between spouses
rather than between citizen and state.
US marriage is a social
welfare state of two.
I'd rather a different social
welfare state personally.
This leaves many people, especially women,
stuck in unhealthy relationships.
So at this point,
we can evaluate how same-sex partnership,
when we move into that movement
for same sex marriage,
there was really an emphasis
on whether we should be
pushing for gay marriage
so that gay people could get
the benefits of marriage,
or whether we should be working
to protect the rights of the unmarried.
And we can do both.
It's time now to protect
the rights of unmarried people
and other kinds of family constellations.
(Applause)
Because the reality is,
there's no evidence
that the nuclear family model
is actually the best one.
Research has consistently shown
that children need stability
of parental figures.
But from what I've consistently found,
it doesn't matter
if that stability is mom and dad,
two dads, mom and grandma
or three polyamorous partners.
So this is not only about justice.
This is about what's best for children.
If we really want that stability for kids,
we need to provide support for all
the kinds of families that kids are in,
rather than try and fail
to push people into a nuclear family model
with government benefits.
It's time to observe
what's not working and change course.
My definition of family
is people who are committed
to be there for each other,
no matter what.
This includes chosen family
regardless of biological relationship
or legal marriage.
Many Black families in the US
have chosen aunties and uncles
with no blood relation,
but a decision to be family
and a commitment to the children involved.
Countless LGBTQ people
create chosen family
when they're rejected
by their family of origin
or when wanting to create
families that share their values.
I am one of those queer people
to find home with chosen family.
I grew up in a Christian family
in a small town,
the only child of wonderful older parents.
When I came out as bisexual,
then as polyamorous,
then as gender non-binary,
most of my blood relations
and over 30 cousins stopped talking to me.
That's pretty standard.
When I was a broke 20-something
starting my law practice,
I was diagnosed with cervical cancer.
And realized that I'd been duped
into buying a health insurance
that didn't cover cancer.
I was in a desperate,
life-threatening situation.
And while my parents were loving,
they couldn't provide me
with material support or problem-solving.
So I broke through my shame
and my embarrassment
about asking for help.
And I reached out
to my communities of friends.
And I discovered that they were eager
to more actively support one another.
They made a schedule,
so there was always
someone there to cook, to clean,
to make phone calls
about my health coverage
or just sit with me while I cried
in my grief and my fear.
When I won my appeal to receive coverage
by the Cancer Services Medicaid program,
the administrator called and said,
"I don't know who you are,
but a lot of people love you."
(Applause)
And then she said, "And I'd like them
to stop calling my office now, please.
Let them know you got coverage, it's done.
Thank you."
(Laughter)
The chosen family who stepped up for me
probably saved my life.
But they wouldn't necessarily be able
to visit me in the hospital
or cross a border
in a pandemic to be with me.
Because relationships beyond blood
and beyond marriage
often don't get those rights.
And since then, my life's work
has been to change that and I will.
(Applause and cheers)
When we embrace the idea of chosen family,
our own free will is more important
than biological connection.
We can choose to create
family relationships
with the people who provide us
with the meaningful support
that we need and deserve.
Same-sex parenting has also advanced
the concept of family beyond biology,
because in a same sex couple,
only one parent's providing
the sperm or the egg.
In my family-building legal work
with these families,
I facilitate discussions to make sure
that everyone's intentions are aligned
before designing that legal agreement.
For example,
I’ll often work with a female
same-sex couple
who has a male friend
who wants to "help" them become parents.
So I'll facilitate discussions
to make sure they're all clear
on whether he's going to be
a co-parent or a sperm donor
and design a legal agreement either way.
Without that, I've seen
too many situations of ambiguity.
Where mom calls him a dad
when she needs childcare help
but a donor when it comes time
to make a big decision
she doesn't want his input on.
He calls himself dad
when the baby's adorable at the park,
but feels more like a donor
when the school bill comes, you know?
When we're designing our own families,
we need clear written agreements,
especially if children are involved.
Let's say I have two clients,
Sharon and Bill,
best friends who are considering
becoming co-parents.
Sharon's turned 40
and hasn't found the right man
with whom to marry and have kids.
Neither has her gay bestie Bill,
who can’t afford the $100,000
surrogacy process by himself.
So they call each other their Plan B.
I would facilitate discussions with them
about their parenting values,
their plans to share
finances for the child,
their ideal week of childcare split.
But the conversation
often gets more difficult
when I ask questions like,
"Are you willing to live in the same city
for the next 18 years
to each be near the child?"
We're used to the idea
of sacrificing for a spouse
and saying "no" to a dream job
in a different city
to stay close to each other.
But it's a shocking idea
to do that for your buddy.
But by becoming co-parenting partners,
they need to elevate their level
of commitment from friends
to platonic partners.
They need to consciously say “goodbye”
to a Prince Charming fantasy
and welcome and embrace a new reality
of a beautiful partnership
grounded in their long-term friendship
and agree that this co-parenting
relationship will come first.
I have found in my work
that these kinds of discussions
are much more powerful
for preventing future disputes
than any written contract can be.
We need to have these conversations.
Legal contracts are sometimes written
to avoid looking eye to eye
and coming to agreement.
But family contracts should only
be written after you've done that.
When I design relationships
for polyamorous triads of three
or quads of four,
I sometimes use existing legal structures
like trusts or LLCs,
that allow you to share
property and finances
without a question
as to your relationship.
So, for example, if I've got
a polyamorous triad
Ayesha, Susan and Linda,
I can set up an LLC for them
so that they can co-own
real estate properties,
pay taxes together,
purchase a common health insurance
and have clear
exit strategies if they wish.
(Applause)
And if people trust each other enough
to pool their financial fortune
and want to pay taxes together,
it shouldn't matter
whether they're business partners,
siblings or romantic partners.
All of those families are valid.
(Applause)
Thank you.
We should be able to choose legal partners
beyond a single romantic
partner, like a spouse.
Some people are doing that now,
and it's the trend for the future.
Domestic partnerships have been used
for 30 years by same-sex couples,
but also by best friends and siblings.
Doing so, as domestic partners,
allows you to share your health insurance
to visit each other in the hospital
and across borders
in a pandemic, like spouses.
But unlike spouses, you don't become
a social welfare state of two,
which can be a good thing.
I had a client who had
a severely disabled sister.
By becoming domestic partners,
she was able to put her sister
on her excellent
health insurance coverage.
Why would a sister be any less worthy
of that than a boyfriend?
Right?
Thank you.
(Applause)
We've built on that history.
In 2020, my organization
helped pass the first laws
for multi-partner domestic partnership,
which have passed
in several cities and counting.
This means that three
or four polyamorous partners
could become domestic partners
or two or more platonic co-parents
or any two, three or four people
who want to become
each other's legal partners.
When relationships
have legal status like this,
it reduces discrimination and promotes
social acceptance and awareness,
as we saw in the same-sex
partnership movement.
Still, we hope this year to pass
the first family status
nondiscrimination laws
at city levels across the United States,
which means that you
can't be discriminated against,
you can't be fired from your job
or denied housing
because of your family configuration.
(Applause)
In future,
I propose that we move from these
city-level domestic partnerships
to state-level multi-partner
domestic partnerships
and then federal recognition,
as we did with same-sex marriage.
And if we really want
to value families as they exist
rather than incentivize marriage,
I also suggest that we separate out
some of the legal perks of marriage
so that single people and other kinds
of families get these benefits
without an evaluation of whether
they're in a romantic relationship
that passes muster.
And marriage should not be the gateway
to social and economic privilege anymore.
That time is done.
And marriages will be stronger
when we do that.
Do you know anyone who got married
faster than they should have
for health insurance or citizenship?
Because I know too many,
and I’m a divorce lawyer.
(Laughter)
As a divorce lawyer,
relationships last longer
when we marry for better reasons
than government perks.
So, many of you may be married
and may not think that these issues
have personal relevance for you.
But I ask you to reflect.
Could your relationship be stronger
if you adopted a more
expansive view of family?
Marriage and partnership
are not one-size-fits-all.
Every couple in partnership benefits
from actively deciding how they want
to co-create together
in terms of co-parenting, shared finances,
your household
and your definition of monogamy.
For example,
is there any hidden expectation
that you have with your partner
that would benefit from being
spoken out loud and confirmed?
I bet there is.
Or is there any aspect of partnership
that you participate in
just because everyone does it,
like sleeping in the same bed
or only vacationing together,
that just isn't really working
for your partnership?
When we expect any one relationship
in our lives to meet most of our needs,
we may be putting too much pressure
on that relationship.
And whether it's your romantic partner,
your parent, your adult child,
your relationship may be stronger
if you also strengthen
other connections in your lives
and find other ways to get
some of your own needs met.
(Applause)
My husband does not want
to help me process.
I have other people for that in my life.
So ...
I think it's worthwhile to question,
no matter what kind of family
configuration you're in,
whether you could be part of a movement
for greater interconnectedness
beyond our romantic relationships
and beyond the walls of our home.
Your family and your community
will be stronger when you do.
Is there a long-term friend
that you could reach out to
with whom you'd like to be better in touch
and suggest a regular date
for a special time together?
Could you create a childcare cooperative
with other parents in your community?
Is there a single parent
or elderly person in your life
whose home you could spend more time in?
At some point in a long life,
you too will need support.
And it benefits you
to practice asking for support now
and actively caring
for people in community
who may one day care for you.
A baby whose diaper you change
may one day change yours.
(Audience murmurs and laughs)
Sorry.
It's the beautiful reciprocity
of human relationship.
And in my vision for the future,
while we work together
to redefine family in law,
we can all redefine family
in our own culture and lives.
There may even be a close friend
to whom you get the courage to ask:
Do you want to make family with me?
Thank you.
(Applause)