I had one of those uplifting email exchanges with authority. To summarise the 97 million message trail.

Why have you ticked the box marked WIDOWED

Because I am and no other box seemed to apply

But you weren’t married so you don’t fulfil that definition

In my books I am

Your form will be invalidated if you use it

We were a couple living together for over 20 years. We had a child who and we were formally registered as joint parents living together.

That’s not recognised by the Government

So which box should I use as the other boxes don’t apply

Clearly you should tick the OTHER box

Well that’s good to know…..

*******

Things do need to change. I remember talking to someone from the village. He had been partners with someone since the 70s. When his partner died a couple of years back he was denied much needed support as he was classed as being single. Single even after living together for over 40 years. 40 years of looking after each other.

In Britain (and many other countries) if you are not married, if a partner dies you are treated differently. Denied financial support. Penalised with additional tax claims. And even more hurtfully – denied the right to call yourself a widow and classed as being single.

That has to change.

101 thoughts on “Other”

  1. I couldn’t agree more.

    Having your relationship invalidated by politicians and bureaucrats who wouldn’t know commitment if it stared them in the face is a kick in the teeth you do not need when the bottom has just fallen out of your world 🖤🖤🖤

    Liked by 6 people

    Reply

      1. Right, I’ve made an executive decision: Even though I like what you reply to my comments, I won’t [Like] them, because it just draws you back to what you have written. To save you doing all that, take it from me I like them. If I don’t I will reply with a reason. Sometimes I will reply to the ones I like. I just don’t get the [Like] thing, it’s sort of like the game in school called “Tag” 🖐 and after all, no one is allowed to be touching outside of their bubble. Drats, double drats and triple drats for now I’m recalling those #### bubbles I saw yesterday. 🥴 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXKJolS9Atg

        Liked by 1 person

  4. On a different track, you know I do believe that cloud in this photo might be a UFO. 👽 Are they making contact in Yorkshire? “Beep boop bip bip beep” and another thing, why is it that when I wanted to find an Emoji of a robot I couldn’t, but now I can? 🤖 Oh the mysteries of life, the universe and everything! = 42

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  9. I have a difficult time with boxes too. The ex and I lived together 18 years before we went to an office building and got legally married. The reason we signed paperwork was because Younger Daughter wanted us to be “really married”. We considered ourselves married without a piece of paper, but it does vary but state and California isn’t a “common law” state.

    Now, I don’t know which box to tick because we never got legally divorced. We’re STILL married, though he left the state 12.5 years ago. I consider myself single, but “legally” I’m married🤷🏼‍♀️

    It’s all really silly and antiquated. Let people give “Partner” benefits without a bunch of paperwork. I don’t even see how it could be abused 🙄🤦🏼‍♀️

    💌💌💌

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

      1. Damn, incomplete comment, hit the wrong button, Sorry,
        A review is an informal audit. We passed the two previous with flying colours, but still they don’t trust us. The details they want are intrusive, and illegal under the Canada Health Privacy Act, but that is meaningless to them. They want signed proof of every medical trip we had to take over 40 kms from home stating there is nowhere closer to provide the same service. We live in the middle of nowhere, the closest hamlet is over 100 kms away. Most fairly simple medical services, over and above everyday complaints, are a minimum 300 kms. away. Some specialists are 450 kms away. Most good specialists are 800 kms away. This is the logistics of where we choose to live. Easily understandable, right! No, they want to know every time we had to travel over 40 kms with proof we actually attended. Do they think I just said I travelled for heart surgery but just skipped out on it, and took a vacation? They are assholes!
        There is more they demand, but you don’t need to hear it.
        I guess in England, if circumstances could be similar, I would not be able claim travel expenses for my common-law spouse even though there is no way we could travel these distances alone.
        You best start demanding they modernize laws written in 1066, or 1215. Single? I bet a lot of your politicians are single, marriage is a dying way of life.
        My main point, however, the government expects everyone to cheat, because each and every one of them cheats. But it’s just taking advantage of loopholes when they do it. How do they know the loopholes are there? They wrote the damn things in, on purpose. Why should they have to pay like us commoners!

        Liked by 1 person

      5. The wrong people run. Those who would do a good job are too smart to get involved in politics. It is a game for narcissists and wanna-be dictators, who excel at telling people how to live.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. One good thing about being disabled, maybe the ONLY good thing, is I don’t have to file taxes every year. All of my money comes from the Federal Government and its below the poverty line, so I’m off the hook.
        Good luck with the review. I don’t know if Canada’s version if the IRS is as scary as ours, but… yeah, Good Luck!!

        Liked by 1 person

      9. Like I tried to say, a review is a pre-audit, or a fake audit. If we pass, no audit. If they think we cheated, then the audit comes.
        As tar as filing taxes, we have to file every year, at least eventually. I took a few years off when I was temporarily homeless in the aughts, and when I started working again they would not look at my new returns until they had the old ones complete. That was rough.
        But even if we are below the poverty line, we still have to file for their records. We have to file, even after we are dead!
        Thanks for the good wishes

        Liked by 2 people

  14. I would think that Common Law would kick in. We have laws on the books, here, that recognize Common Law “marriages” without the actual governmental paperwork, thought I’m not sure which or how many states have them. Isn’t the UK big on Common Law?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  17. As Chairman of a charity seeking funding I was asked to state staff members’ marital status and sexual orientation and identity. Although I knew all the answers I refused to state them because they were an irrelevant invasion of privacy.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  18. In this country {NZ) since the late 1970s,, de facto {common law) marriages have had equal standing with registered marriages and civil unions. On occasions this comes as a surpprise when a couple splits up and one partner thought they were in a casual relationship only to discover the law has different ideas.

    Usually, on forms, a question on marital status will simply ask “Are you (or were you} married, in a civil union or a de facto relationship?”

    I don’t know how common it is in tbe UK, but here 2 out of 5 adults {including the Prime Minister) are in a de facto relationship.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. Interesting. Tax wise, it makes no difference here whether or not you are in a relationship. Each person is taxed individually regardless of marital status.

        My personal opinion is that the state should get out of the business of registering marriages or civil unions. In effect, that is what we have here. Relationships are recognised by their nature, not by being registered.

        Liked by 1 person

  21. Absolutely abhorrent! Do you still have to be a practising member of the Church of England to live in England? Obviously not, so why do you have to be married to be a widow, or widower? Absolutely asinine!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. Yes, they do. It’s also very in considerate but sadly it the… Well you know what I mean. Just pay it no more and you know what your relationship status is and no one can tell you anything different😊

        Liked by 1 person

  26. Oh wow!!! That is terrible!!!!!!!!! Gary – that is so upsetting.
    I have to register my results for covid tests twice a week – the government do not seem to allow a landline number as the way to contact someone – you need a mobile. Well…so I had to give them someone else’s number (Jack’s). It’s crazy. So Jack gets told if the government have anything to say to me – which I don’t really mind, but they should take my landline number, not my boyfriend’s mobile. It seems very inflexible and silly.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  27. Apparently, it wasn’t too long ago that Britain didn’t recognize Ms as a proper title. Women had to be either Miss or Mrs. Do they recognize common-law marriage at all there? (Commitment, shared dwelling and expenses, no certificate)

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

Leave a comment