The Foreign Service Journal, May 2009

M A Y 2 0 0 9 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 13 substandard coverage, and is im- mensely frustrating. Career sacrifices are a fact of life for all Foreign Service dependents, of course, but the hardships are magni- fied for same-sex partners, as employ- ment opportunities overseas are considerably more restricted. Desig- nated only as a Member of Household, my partner does not benefit from the bilateral work agreements that mission spouses can often use to work on the local economy. On top of that, the deck is deliberately stacked against MOHs because of a policy of giving preference to American-citizen family members and U.S. veteran candidates for mission employment. In the case of my previous assign- ment in South Africa, for example, very few positions within the mission opened up that didn’t require either a security clearance (disqualifying non- U.S. citizens) or local language skills (disqualifying non-natives). The few that did pop up were immediately snatched up by American-citizen fam- ily members under the preference provisions. We were fortunate that after about eight months the stars aligned, and my partner became the last man standing for an embassy position. But the final kick in the teeth was that even though Daniel met all criteria to qualify as “not ordinarily resident” (and therefore eligible for the U.S. compensation plan), he had to accept being hired under the Foreign Serv- ice National compensation plan — which in developing countries like South Africa is significantly different. So the job paid much worse and didn’t accrue time in government service for retirement purposes. The reasons given were that he did not have a U.S. bank account (a po- tentially fixable situation) or a Social Security number (not fixable, and for inexplicable reasons a U.S. Taxpayer Identification Number does not sat- isfy that requirement). Navigating host-country visa regu- lations is another major hassle during every transfer. Significant research has to go into each bid to ensure that there are no surprises relating to Daniel’s ability to reside with me at post. So far, we have not had to resort to declaring him as my domestic servant, though that is a common, if degrading, work- around. And, of course, my partner agrees to reside overseas without the benefit of the immunities or privileges that are routine for everyone else’s family members. The immunities issue can be a real concern in countries that are unstable, corrupt or hostile to the U.S. govern- ment. And the lack of privileges results in numerous financial hits that we have to absorb. For example, I was only en- titled to purchase one vehicle under diplomatic privileges in South Africa because I was considered officially “single.” The car I had to buy for Daniel (believe me, you cannot func- tion without a second vehicle there) was subject to all local taxes and duties, and was not permitted to have diplo- matic plates. While I recognize that all Foreign Service families encounter difficulties and sacrifices living overseas, the problems are greatly magnified for officers with same-sex partners. The lack of FSI long-term language train- ing, for example, means that most postings overseas are unappealing for Daniel (and therefore for me). With- out language skills, it is much more difficult to navigate in an alien envi- ronment, making one uncompetitive for any type of work. So Much for “Family-Friendly” Setting aside all the unfair addi- tional financial burdens and hassles that Foreign Service personnel with same-sex partners endure, there is the added stress that such limitations place on our lives and careers. It makes maintaining viable long-term relation- ships that much more difficult. All the Foreign Service mentors I have ever known have emphasized the importance of a Washington tour for promotion into the senior ranks. But my ability to do a domestic assignment comes at a huge, deal-breaking cost to our family. My partner is a hard worker, but he doesn’t hold a U.S. passport or professional qualifications that would get him an employment-based U.S. visa. Yes, he could be authorized to re- main in the U.S. under tourist status for my entire time there, or on a stu- dent visa (although that’s yet another major expense and, for many people, not of interest or value). But that means no second income and a part- ner who is climbing the walls, with his professional life on hold for several years. And even this option disappears upon retirement. Where are we sup- posed to live then, if he’s not allowed to reside in the United States? Similarly, service in a place like Iraq is both noble and a potentially valuable strategy for career advancement (not to mention the significant financial in- centives). It provides a linked assign- ment to a preferred onward posting and favorable consideration by promo- tion boards, and goes a long way to- ward establishing a corridor reputation as a team player. For singles, the logistics of an Iraq tour are relatively straightforward. For families, the department has come up with all kinds of benefits and al- S P E A K I N G O U T