UPDATED 9th April
The Tory party will offer a new Tax Break for Married couples and civil partnerships in a bid to support stable relationships. The tax reform will be modest, so if one parent stays at home, they’ll be able to transfer some of their tax allowance to their working spouse. The trouble is – this doesn’t support marriage, it supports a certain type of marriage – one that is out of touch with modern relationships and makes for unhappy couples. If it actually succeeds in changing behaviour, it could increase separation and divorce.
In the 1950′s, 60′s and to some extent the 70′s, the ideal of fixed gender roles had a social approval that made it the basis of an accepted standard contract for couples – mum would stay at home, look after the children, cook the food and clean the house. In exchange, the dad would go out to work and earn the money. That’s what was expected and accepted, despite the unhappiness it often created.
Women have roundly rejected this ideal in modern times where 70% of mothers work at least some of the time and we all agree that girls should have a broad vista open to them in their life – the idea they should be restricted to the home is anathema to modern women and the men who love them – women can, want to and should be able to participate in any aspect of public life and not be restricted to the private realm of home and children. Men are changing too – more and more now yearn for a life beyond the workplace – a real relationship with their children. There’s been a huge increase in the amount of time and effort – and aspiration – of men in being involved in raising their children. No one ever said on their deathbed “I wish I spent more time at the office”.
The trouble with the Tory proposals is that they only benefit couples who have taken the decision to hold to the traditional old school division of labour – one parent works, the other stays at home – and they seem to think that this is what defines MARRIAGE. Wrong. Marriage is a publicly committed relationship, not a 1950′s conception of the domestic gender division of labour. To benefit from the Tory’s tax proposal, if you’re a woman, you’ll be a housewife, if you’re a man, a wage slave.
The Tories are interested in the stability of marriages – for the benefit of children – and fair play to this – it’s a laudable aim – children thrive within stable relationships. But the stability of a marriage has become more and more dependent on the satisfaction of the partners in the relationship. When society held to a strict gender division of labour and divorce was frowned upon, marriage stability didn’t depend on how satisfied each partner was – couples would stay together, often even if they were incredibly unhappy.
Not any more – without enduring satisfaction in marriage, there is a strong likelihood of the marriage falling apart – people don’t really put up with abusive, unhappy, dysfunctional, loveless relationships any more. So any policy that is going to increase the stability of marriage had better have a positive effect on marital satisfaction, non?
So what happens if couples organise their lives to take advantage of the Tory’s tax proposals? One parent (usually the chap) has to take responsibility for all the earning, so inevitably plunges himself ever deeper into his career and has to carry the weight of responsibility for providing financially for the family. The other (usually the lady) will become a professional child carer / houseworker / cook – staff to the home and kitchen.
In other words, their lives will diverge almost completely – the man will have very little experience or understanding of what his partner’s life is like, and vice versa. They will experience very little of each others’ stresses, joys, frustrations etc. They will begin to lead almost completely separate lives.
It’s going to be very hard to develop sustain empathy in the relationship – which might be pretty high on the list of factors that are going to fuel marital satisfaction. Dad won’t be able to relate to mum’s experience of being at home with the children all day, and she won’t be able to understand the pressures on him at work. Isolated mums and workaholic dads. Great. Not.
If a ‘marriage’ policy is going to be successful, it has to be focussed on making relationships better – and that includes the opportunity to share the tasks and responsibilities of family life around. Just as men and women share the workplace, so they are increasingly sharing the parenting – and all the signs are that this is what young marrying couples aspire to. Children benefit in all sorts of ways from having strong relationships with both parents instead of just one. It’s good for children and adults – and good for their relationships.
So it’s important to acknowledge that the Tory’s proposals don’t actually support marriage, they just support a certain vision of marriage – one that’s been rejected as unfeasible and undesirable and probably leads to unhappy couples. If the policy actually works in changing people’s behaviour, I think it’ll lead to less empathy in relationship, more isolated partners, and I reckon, ultimately higher levels of separation.
A common criticism of Tory policy focus is that a financial incentive is unlikely to lead to people into forming or staying in marriages and that it just won’t change behaviour (good point). Let’s hope so – if it does result in couples making the choices the Tories want to see, it could lead to a rise in separation and divorce.
Law of unintended consequences, and all that.
