Impact of DOMA on US Government Workers

Jan accepted an overseas assignment to do disease surveillance work for the federal government in Africa three years ago. Both Jan and Judy, her partner of fifteen years, knew ahead of time which expenses would not be covered for Judy. Judy had to pay her own travel expenses and insurance coverage to join Jan. Judy also had to reapply for a visa every six months to enable her to stay in the country as a foreign visitor. After two years, Judy became tired of this and flew to the US one year before Jan was scheduled to return.

Tom is an expert in communication. He and his partner, Tim, have been together for 20 years. He has wanted to take an overseas assignment for quite some time, but decided against it because he would not be able to bring Tim with him.

Sarah is an expert in substance abuse treatment and infectious disease prevention. She and her partner, Susan, have two young children. Sarah, like Tom, has decided against taking an overseas assignment because there would be no support or services for her family.

These three real scenarios (with the names changed) may or may not be representative of GLBT couples’ overseas experiences, but were the context for which I researched the federal government policies and procedures that follow. The scenarios reveal some of the impact of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) on GLBT federal employees who are coupled or who have children and on their opportunities to perform critically needed work overseas.

DOMA was passed by Congress in 1996 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton. DOMA formally defined “marriage” as a legal union only between one man and one woman and “spouse” as an opposite-sex married partner. Thus, unmarried partners, same-sex or otherwise, cannot be considered as married or spouses under US law. DOMA affects the opportunities for and issues faced by LGBT federal government employees in international job placements.

Typically for international placements, the federal government will pay for travel expenses, diplomatic passports, evacuation expenses, medical vaccinations, and family miscellaneous transfer allowances for married heterosexual spouses and their minor children. Spouses are also given preference for local-hire jobs at embassies, allowed access to embassy medical units, and permitted use of the diplomatic pouch for postal services.

The US Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 3 (3 FAM 1212) states that personnel programs for civil service and foreign service employees of the foreign affairs agencies (US Department of State, the US Agency for International Development--USAID, US Department of Commerce, the Foreign Service Corps of the US Department of Agriculture, and the Broadcasting Board of Governors) shall be administered without discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. As of the end of 2000 (and formalized in 2003), the State Department instituted a new policy (3 FAM 4180) for members of households (MOHs) of Foreign Service Employees of the State Department, USAID, and the Commerce Department that provides some benefits to accommodate same-sex partners, unmarried opposite-sex partners, and other family members at the discretion of individual ambassadors. These benefits are often limited to those that do not have a significant financial impact, such as providing access to embassy services/activities and assisting visa applications; they expressly do not allow inclusion of MOHs on travel orders or in emergency evacuation plans. On the other hand, travel expenses for pets, deemed necessary for employee morale, are covered.

Peace Corps explicitly prohibits the placement of Peace Corps volunteers as couples unless they are a man and a woman who are married. Staff, however, can and do live with same sex domestic partners overseas. There are Country Directors, APCDs, and other staff who live openly with their same sex partners. State Department policies do not specifically apply to Peace Corps employees or volunteers. However, once oversees, 3 FAM 4180 allows for unmarried partners to be included in the embassy community, which may allow access to some benefits. In some cases, the partners of Peace Corps staff may not be American citizens. This adds to the complexities of inconsistent policies. As with other federal agencies, the same sex partner is subject to the limitations and peculiarities of different situations, different countries, and the good or bad will of a local ambassador. Developing personal relationships with embassy staff may help improve the quality of life for same-sex partners.

DOMA affects not only LGBT federal employees and their families, but also the people of the foreign countries who will not receive the benefits of their work if they decide against foreign placement. Moreover, continued discrimination against LGBT families endangers our well-being in emergency situations and sends a message to the global community that we are not yet given the status of persons (or even of pets). DOMA imposes unequal treatment on unmarried partners and families of LGBT employees because of the inability of same-sex partners to legally marry to the satisfaction of the US government. However, some federal agencies have made efforts to accommodate unmarried partners and families to the extent allowed by current US law and local policies of the embassy in the foreign country.

Gays and Lesbians in Foreign Affairs Agencies (GLIFAA, www.glifaa.org ) represents LGBT persons in the Department of State, US Agency for International Development, Foreign Commercial Service, Foreign Agricultural Service, and other US government agencies. On its website (www.glifaa.org) are two relevant articles that provided background information for this article: Foreign Affairs Family Life for Gays and Lesbians. Federal Daily. June 22, 2004; and, Not Quite Family: ‘Members of Household’ at State. Foreign Service Journal. June 2004.

Suzanne Marks is LGB RPCV’s Southeast Representative. She can be contacted at lgbrpcv-news@lgbrpcv.org.