Public Policy Update:

In an effort to connect with and learn from mothers around the world, we are pleased to offer our readers an interview with Beverley Smith, a Canadian mother and activist.

Bev Smith was a secondary school teacher in the Canadian provinces of Alberta and Ontario until the birth of her first child in 1975. After deciding to stay home with her child, she discovered that there were significant tax penalties for single-income couples. Bev began writing to all levels of the Canadian government about these disparities but with mixed results. In May 1997, she took the issue higher: Bev filed an official complaint with the Commission on the Status of Women at the United Nations charging that Canada discriminates against homemakers in its tax, divorce and child care laws.

Ms. Smith ran for Parliament as an Independent in Canada's November 2000 election. While she did not expect to win (which she did not), she wanted to make sure the concerns of single-income families were part of the campaign. Bev and her husband have four children. She remained at home with them until the youngest turned eighteen, whereupon she returned to full-time teaching. What are the challenges facing Canadian at-home parents?

As in the U.S., public policy is influenced by misleading statistics about working parents. Even if you only earn $1 a year, you are technically a "working mom." In this two-category system, this places women who work part-time or in a home-based business in the "working" category, although they may think of themselves as moms at home. Given the inflation of the number of "working moms" by such a definition, daycare lobbyists then say there is a crying need for more daycare. One can see that this assumption is flawed. Canadian laws are based on this assumption, and assume that all mothers who earn money do it outside the home and that they need daycare.

Currently there is a tax penalty if a couple has anything less than two full-time incomes. If a two-parent family of four brings in $50,000, they are taxed differently depending on how many people earned that money. If two people earn it, the tax is $2,429; but if one person earns it, the tax is $4,995. Canada does not allow income-splitting or income-sharing. It's every man-and woman-for him- or herself.

Canada is the only G7 country to have NO recognition of the costs of raising children. You can fill out your entire tax form without being allowed to mention you have children. The tax breaks that do exist for families with children are for child-rearing expenses and are only for those families who use daycare or nannies. Those who use this care are able to deduct much of their costs, not because they have a child, but as a business expense. The child is seen as an obstacle to earning money - almost like an expense incurred. I was offended that the state took sides at all in how to raise kids. I believe it is a matter of choice.

Are there particular advantages to being an at-home parent in Canada?

We do have free health care. That is a huge plus. We also, of course, tend to think our country is pretty good since it has a reputation as an international peacemaker and peacekeeper. We hope our children are less likely to have to go to war.

What led you to file a complaint with the United Nations?

When I wrote letters to my member of Parliament to ask why the situation was not fairer for women to make a free choice about how to spend their lives, share income and raise kids, I got form-letter replies basically explaining present policy. I went higher, complaining to our human rights commission, to women's groups, to the media. I joined several women's groups (Mothers Are Women, Kids First) and worked with others.

In 1997 I made a formal complaint to the Division for the Advancement of Women at the United Nations. I listed a number of policies that are unfair to women who choose to stay at home with their children, such as homemakers not being eligible for pensions and not being allowed to claim childcare expenses to reduce tax liability.

The UN accepted my complaint, and it was assigned to a working group that did not rule on specific instances of discrimination but instead simply noted what was going on internationally. For my complaint, I needed international support. Endeavour Forum of Australia supported me immediately, noting a similar problem there. The World Movement of Mothers in France, Belgium's European Federation for Women Working in the Home, and UNICA, a large umbrella group for women in Italy, all helped me. International media picked up the story. I also kept Mothers At Home informed of what I was doing, and they were also very encouraging.

Canada replied to my complaint in 1999, having asked for a year's extension to study the case. We got a leaked copy of their reply, and it denied all claims of discrimination! This was of course what I had expected. They simply repeated the blatant policies that had offended me—that women needed to have incentives to be in the paid labor force and needed to be discouraged from being home, dependent on men. Their defense continued to define useful work as only that which is done for money.

The UN released its report in late March 1999. The UN working group found "legal systems discriminating, an absence of women in decision-making, and a high incidence of women and children in poverty." I was elated.

What was the response of the Canadian government to the UN report?

A vote was held in our House of Commons "to remove the tax discrimination against the single-income family." All parties of the opposition supported this motion. Only the Liberal party, the majority in power, voted against it, but their majority defeated it.

Polls around the country over the next few months supported my view, and the media was very interested in the issues. I met with our minister of finance, and he agreed to call a tax subcommittee to hear proposals. This tax subcommittee did recommend a uni versal tax break for all people raising children. However our latest budget has not yet given that, or fixed the problem.

What is your vision concerning the traditional unpaid labor of women?

I suggest that internationally we recognize the essential unpaid labor that is performed daily. Our economies depend on unpaid labor as one-third of our gross national product.

We must enable those who take care of others at home to get pension status, the tax breaks other receive, and their work must be counted in official tallies as "work" even if it's unpaid. Not only does this work save the state money because it does not have to hire professionals to do these jobs, but it benefits the nation by making it a caring society, not one just out for money.

What can we in the U.S. learn from your experiences?

This is an international movement. What you can learn from us is that we are struggling up here, along with a few other groups around the world, to make a fairer situation for women and children. The U.S. could lead the way.

What have you learned from your experiences?

My four kids are the joy of my life. They are in studies of law, medicine, philosophy and journalism. I am very proud of them, and when I look back and ask myself if I chose wisely, I know that for my own situation, I did. But at a heavy cost. Lack of salary and pension for many years will be a sacrifice that can't be caught up--ever.

In many families, the stress of being poor and home with small kids is equal to the stress of being away from the kids while earning an income. It is a lose-lose decision, and we need tax policies that make it win-win. We do that by equally valuing all kids and all parenting styles and letting people choose what best matches their needs.

Bev Smith’s website is www.telusplanet.net/public/bvgsmith.