The Partner Test: How Being in a Relationship Can Be a Welfare Recipient's Worst Nightmare

It’s Anti-Poverty Week, and the Antipoverty Centre (@antipovertycent) is publishing people’s experiences of Australia’s welfare system. In today’s post, Robert (@Human432524) discusses the impact on his life of the problematic link between a person’s relationship status and access to income support, and some of the risks of that link. Robert is a disabled former welfare recipient and anti-poverty advocate passionate about agitating for reform of the welfare system. His blog Poverty 101: A Beginner's Guide documents some of his experiences on it. Currently searching for a stable income to support himself and help him maintain his health, he aspires to be a writer or teacher. His hobbies are literature, research, meditation, language learning and coffee drinking.

In a recent X discussion, one user unhelpfully offered the explanation that poverty was “self-inflicted”. I can remember the moment I ruined my life. I was sitting in front of my laptop filling in a tedious Mod P form, trying my best to answer questions about my partner. It was all I could do not to throw the laptop out the window. 

I was simply doing my duty of declaring a de facto relationship to Centrelink while on JobSeeker. The income from this payment dried up immediately. I only had my casual work to fall back on. 

The only problem is, I’m disabled. I have Fibromyalgia, which is characterised by chronic pain, exhaustion, brain fog, post exertional malaise and executive dysfunction. In layman’s terms, it wrecks me - sometimes I have to ration showers; loading a dishwasher can feel like scaling a mountain; I can struggle to follow a simple conversation; two-minute YouTube videos can challenge my attention span. Managing this disability is like a full-time job; and if my life is too busy or stressful, forget it. There’s only so much I can work before my condition flares - roughly, two days a week ok, three days a week no. I’ll let you imagine what kind of life this leaves you if poorly managed - spoiler: none at all. 

Now to cover my basic expenses, I have to work three days a week. Over time, this debilitates me. I crawl into bed after work, then climb out again when it’s time to go back to work again. With the single rate of JobSeeker without Partner Testing, I could just scrape by if I did two days a week. With Partner Testing, I have to destroy myself to survive. 

Yes, yes, I’ve done all the things as best as I can to get better - often religiously. I don’t drink or smoke, I eat healthy, I do the prescribed exercise, I try to keep good sleep hygiene, I’ve talked to a specialist and lots of doctors, and so on. But three days a week hammers me. 

When I went back to two days a week, my condition improved significantly. My psychologist told me the difference was like night and day. 

But then why don’t I just financially depend on my partner to cover me? Whoever wrote the Social Security Act of 1991 apparently thought with Partner Testing, you can just mooch off your partner like a child, so you’re less deserving of the support that’s cut from you. Centrelink seemingly implies as much. The thinking harks back to another decade when unmarried women found a partner to provide for them, so government could wind back the support. They euphemistically call this “income pooling”. They also think expenses are less for each member of a couple than if they were single - a proposition many modern couples find ridiculous. 

After losing my financial independence - thanks, Centrelink! - I had to have the humiliating conversation with my partner. Bear in mind she is a temporary migrant; she pays a lot of tax (25% from memory) and has her own financial obligations; she is hopelessly overworked owing to her visa and sponsor; her hourly wage is less than mine; and she is fragile after particularly stressful shifts, sometimes going to her room and crying. The conversation went about as smoothly as you might expect. There are, understandably, limits to her generosity and it’s heartbreaking that I have had to test them. 

As a result, I have pushed myself hard to avoid the agony of soliciting financial support from her. I don’t want a conversation that ends in tears.

An ABC News article mentions a disabled woman who chose not to get married for fear of losing her pension. Another, a couple who wondered if they would be better off separated. 

In a previous relationship, the Partner Test immediately led to heated arguments as my then-partner told me how welfare was bad for me. Someone I follow on X told me it ruined his marriage of 25 years.

It’s dangerous. There’s no legal obligation for your partner to provide for you when Centrelink flicks you off. I mean, for crying out loud, not every person is thrilled to find out they have to pay a living allowance to their partner, especially if they’re not rich. It can create a power imbalance that increases the risk of domestic violence - with financial dependence along with added financial stress. Once that situation develops, you have to show Centrelink that this abuse exists to get an exemption.

And the most ridiculous part about this is, even once someone’s Job Seeker is cut off, they’re still given mutual obligations requiring them to do the compliance activities set by their Employment Service Provider. Centrelink kept asking me, like some kind of sick joke, for my partner’s earnings each fortnight. Ok then, no income this fortnight for you! (I ended up not reporting and got cut off.)

I’ve been told by countless people that I should get the disability pension for my disability. Well now, my partner’s income automatically disqualifies me - great!

When I first sat down to write this article, I immediately felt the urge to scream in a pillow. I feel about the same now.

Dear reader, if you can find it in you, please write to your local MP asking them to remove this revolting welfare restriction.

Content moderator: Antipoverty Centre