DP policy abuses in question

Current DP policy may be subject to change

Due to perceived abuses in Oberlin's current student Domestic Partnership (DP) policy, concerned students and Manager of Housing and Dining Assignments Sandra Hougland authored proposals that would tighten the policy.

Under Hougland's proposal, which was voted down by the Student Life Committee (SLC) at its May 10 meeting, students would have had to require more documentation of their relationship together. At a meeting held May 7 students who felt Hougland's proposal was too strict drafted their own proposal, one which Hougland said she likes better than her own.

The general feeling among staff, Dean of Student Life and Services Charlene Cole-Newkirk said, is that Hougland's proposal is too strict. Also, members of the Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns Committee (LGBCC) voiced concern about the proposal to the SLC. But the issue is one that will be discussed next fall, Cole-Newkirk said.

The DP policy currently allows student to live off-campus with roommates of the same gender. The spirit of the policy allows students to enter into marriage-like relationships with people of the same gender, but many heterosexual students use it as a means to obtain off-campus and off-board living status.

The DP policy also stipulates that domestic partners be 18 years old and have a strong emotional attachment to each other that is similar to a marriage commitment.

Hougland said the College loses about $300,000 to students who have off-board and off-campus housing privileges due to DP exemption. Most of the money lost, Hougland said, is through the off-board privileges granted.

Right now, Hougland said, 88 students have DP, while there are only four married students. "That's probably not where Oberlin students are," Hougland said, in reference to the number of students with domestic partnerships.

But students are also interested in tightening the DP policy. Senior Mike Murphy said he is angry that students will say they are involved in a same-sex relationship to obtain off-board and off-campus privileges. "This is one of the most appalling things I have ever experienced at Oberlin a place that is supposed to regard gays and lesbians with respect," Murphy said.

The student proposal suggests that off-board privileges be revoked for both student married couples and student couples holding a domestic partnership within the college. Only students with partners who are not College students and students who are granted off-board status because of class rank would receive off-board status. Under the student proposal, off-campus status would not be revoked, since most of the money wasted stems from off-board exemption.

The student proposal was sent to the LGBCC, Director of Residential Life Deb McNish, Hougland and Cole-Newkirk. Erin Marks, LGB intern at MRC said she felt people liked the proposal. "We're dealing with a difficult situation," Marks said. "The College is losing a lot of money. I've heard people say this is a mature way to deal with the situation, especially when queer students felt threatened by it."

Cole-Newkirk said of the proposal, "It's a good starting point for talking."

If implemented, Marks said, the student proposal would not go into effect until next spring because students have already left school with expectations about their board status for next year.

Murphy said, "We came to the conclusion that if it's a campus problem there needs to be a campus solution. Until that happens the entire campus needs to be the one to bear the burden."

Hougland's proposal would have required that in addition to signing an affidavit, as dictated by the current DP policy, students provide two of the following four items: durable power of attorney, a living will, life insurance naming the partner as beneficiary and proof of having lived together for six months.

Marks said, "[The documents the proposal calls for] would be almost impossible for any student to get on short notice."

Dean of Student Life and Services Charlene Cole-Newkirk said, "Requiring life insurance, legal documentation - traditionally students may not have those things."

Marks and Murphy said students felt Hougland's proposal punished the lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) community for abuses that are not its fault.

"Hougland's policy forced gays and lesbians to be the ones to bear the burden of the problem by making it harder to take advantage of the policy," Murphy said.

Murphy said, "Hougland's gone out of her way to come up with a way to make DP work … I'm pleased with her not doing the easiest thing at the expense of the community."

Marks said, "We hate to see the College lose money, we hate to see the abuse. We want to come up with a way to help the situation as soon as possible."