Congrats to homosexuals and foreign spouses...

[ironlady]

According to a new Ministry of the Interior policy reported in the newspapers recently, a new, broader definition of "family" now allows you to actually *have* one...

Translated from the Minsheng Daily:

Ministry of the Interior Revises Definition
Single Parents and Homosexual Couples Count as Households


July 21, 2004
Minsheng Daily

The government's definition of what constitutes a family may embrace greater diversity by including single-parent households, households with only one person, households with foreign spouses, and even households of homosexual partners.

The Ministry of the Interior's draft family policy also sets out a related principle: Government agencies should consider the tax system to give families a greater assurance of economic security.

...

[to view the whole article, which I cannot seem to link to, go to
http://www.gio.gov.tw and click on Taiwan Headlines, then choose "Back Issues" and click on July 21.]

[david]

http://www.taiwanheadlines.gov.tw/20040 ... 721s1.html

Interesting - but I'm a bit unclear as to what it actually means. What family-related benefits do foreign spouses misss out on? We can already enter joint tax returns, so we're already part of the family aren't we? Does it mean that I can get my name (as more than a comment) on the household registration? Ahhhh my life would be complete

[kategelan]

I'd be very surprised if it means anything at all... especially for gays and foreign spouses!

It's just froth... for example, like the 'gay partnership rights' that the government and newspapers told us were supposed to be put in place under the new new Human Rights Law. That was on the same basis as the stuff in this 'news item' - the right to form a family and the definition of a family. They have made a new announcement every 18 months for the past four years or so. And the newspapers have faithfully trumpeted 'Taiwan first in Asia to have gay marriage' three times now that I can remember!

There are two possibilities:

EITHER
Most likely it is just more of the usual 'non-news' that the Taiwan papers are full of.

There is no proper policy making process here. But the English papers especially seem unable to point out that the 'Emperor has no clothes'!

It's all just Doctor Blah Blah-Blah of the Blah Blah Commission said 'Blah blah blah diversity blah blah blah modernity blah reform blah blah must be respected blah blah non-discrimination gender sexuality blah blah equality blah guarantee blah assist blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah!'
Don't make the mistake of believing that it means anything in Taiwan!

OR
If it means anything at all, I'd say they want to make people more legally responsible for maintaining members of their families (and ex-families)... like the obligation to support parents financially in PRC law. If it's the second possibility they will dress it up as progressive social policy to hide the fact that no one dares to raise taxes to provide decent public social services here.

AND
I notice that it's a 'policy' not a proposed law. And law over-rides policy (except when it relates to foreigners, it seems)!

Sorry, I seem to have become a tad cynical! I'll take my 'happy pills' and go and lie down now!