I suppose I really should mention...

[tcpip]

... that I suggested to caseopaya that we get a civil union in accordance with Victorian law.

She said yes.

(I "blame", in part, airiefairie's excellent proposal for ending state-sanctioned marriage in favour of civil unions for all, and beagl and kimeros for cutting a similar path. Thanks for the inspiration.)

Comments

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

My reading of the Relationships Act (2008) is that the benefits only accrue for registered de facto couples. i.e., in a civil union. I might be wrong there tho', I haven't read the Act in detail etc.

Not exactly the first priority in this decision ;)

[shadow-5tails.livejournal.com]

Oh, I wasn't trying to suggest that it was.

I was simply curious because it conflicted with the information we'd recently been given by accountants, estate lawyers and the like. I like to know when the information I'm basing my decisions on might be out-of-date.

Though when you respond to the (granted, smiley-faced and presumably less than serious) question "Do you have to get civilly united?" by giving only it as a reason, I trust you can see why one might think that it could be a significant consideration, if not the significant consideration? *smile*