Charter litigation and the advocacy of gays and lesbians is forcing Canadian lawmakers to deal with issues related to the regulation and support of domestic relationships, and in particular to consider how to extend legal recognition to same sex A legislative response would be preferable in terms of consistency, fairness and expense. There is a substantialfinancial and psychological burden placed on those who make individual Charter based claims, and, as recognized by theSupreme Court of Canada in M v. H,(2) the courts are not well structured as institutions for developing coherent legalregimes to deal with the myriad of issues that arise. The regulation and support of same sex relationships, and other domestic relationships, requires some combination ofmarriage, contract, and ascription. There may also be a role for the enactment of registered domestic partnership (RDP)legislation. This paper identifies and comments on some issues that lawmakers will need to address as they consideralternatives and respond to the challenge posed by M v H to extend the concept of "spouse." Until now, most legislators in Canada have displayed a marked reluctance to legally recognize same sex relationships, andthe responsibility for providing legal recognition to these relationships largely has fallen to the courts. Like others who havewritten in this area, I hope for a legislative response, but fear that politicians may be reluctant to deal with potentiallycontentious issues relating to the nature of the family. One may hope that if scholars, policy analysts, practitioners andconcerned citizens can help clarify and illuminate some of the issues that arise, and can explain the value of a legislativeresponse, politicians may be more likely to accept the challenge of providing for a fair and coherent legislative response forthe definition of "familial relationships." Advocates for gays and lesbians have powerful equity and social policy based claimsto hav...
