Why US Laws Must Expand Beyond the Nuclear Family | Diana Adams | TED

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

Growing up in a working-class town in upstate New York,

我在紐約上州的工人階級小鎮長大，

I was taught to hope for a future with a husband and two kids.

我被教導的是要希望未來能有 老公和兩個孩子。你們呢？

How about you?

I saw women in my community marry as a path to economic security

我看到我社區中的女性，把婚姻

視為是通往經濟安全的路，

but often end up with discontent and even abuse instead.

但通常

最後卻會以不滿足，甚至家暴收場。

As I got older,

我長大之後，

I came to wonder and I ask you now:

我漸漸會納悶一件事， 現在讓我來問各位：

What is family?

家庭是什麼？

What do we want family to be?

我們希望家庭是什麼樣子的？

The nuclear family has been the basis for our cultural stories and our laws.

我們的文化故事及法律 一直是以核心家庭為基礎。

But only about half of US adults are married.

但僅有大約一半的美國成人是已婚。

Fewer every year.

且每年減少。

Forty percent of US adults don't live with a romantic partner at all.

40% 的美國成人完全沒有 和愛情伴侶住在一起。

As of 2013,

截至 2013 年，

less than half of US children had two married heterosexual parents

美國孩童當中只有不到一半

有兩位沒離過婚的異性父母。

in their first marriage.

The majority of us are not in a nuclear family with a spouse and kids.

我們大多數人

並不生活在有配偶 和孩子的核心家庭中。

Yet somehow,

但，不知怎麼地，我們把這大多數人

we treat this majority of people like social failures.

視為社會上的失敗者。

What’s worse:

更糟糕的是：

our laws treat unmarried people as lesser citizens.

我們的法律將未婚的人 視為次等公民。

Marriage comes with over 1,000 rights and benefits under federal law.

在聯邦法律下，婚姻附帶有 超過一千項權利和利益。

These include the ability to get your spouse citizenship,

包括可以為你的配偶取得公民權、

share health insurance, get better tax rates

共用健康保險、適用更好的稅率，

and inherit tax-free at death and more.

死亡的繼承可以免稅， 還有很多其他的。

Part of the winning argument for same-sex marriage

同性婚姻的論點能獲勝， 是因為它有一部分

was that we shouldn't deprive gay couples of all of these essential benefits.

提到我們不應剝奪

同性夫妻的所有這些基本福利。

But I ask you,

但我想問，

why should anyone be denied benefits because they're in a romantic relationship

為什麼只因某些人不贊同一個人的

愛情關係，這個人就無法得到福利？

of which some people disapprove?

Or because they're single.

或只因為這個人單身？

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Thank you.

謝謝。

Or because they're basing family

或者因為這個人的家庭 基礎並不是愛情關係，

on something other than a romantic relationship,

like co-parenting a child.

比如共同扶養一個孩子。

Our laws should move away from the idea that there's one ideal family form

我們的法律應該要改掉只有 一種理想家庭形式的想法，

and value all families as they exist.

重視所有存在的家庭。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

That's what I've dedicated my career to,

我的職涯就是投入在此，而今天，

and today, I'll share some of my visions

我會分享一些我的遠景，

for how we can change US laws to benefit all families,

希望我們能改變美國的法律， 讓所有家庭受惠；

but also how an expansive view of family

我也會說明為什麼 若能對家庭採更廣的觀點，

will strengthen all of your own relationships.

就能強化各位自己的關係。

For nearly 15 years with my law firm for LGBTQ and non-nuclear families,

近十五年來，我和我的 LGBTQ 及非核心家庭法律事務所

I've supported same sex couples.

一直在支持同性伴侶，

But also the many family forms beyond marriage,

以及婚姻以外的許多其他家庭形式，

like platonic partners who are raising a child together

比如柏拉圖式伴侶，

他們之間沒有愛情，但仍 一起養育孩子或共享財產。

or sharing finances without a romantic relationship.

Or grandparents who are raising their grandchildren.

或者祖父母養育孫子孫女。

Or a lesbian couple co-parenting with a male friend.

或者一對女同志 和男性友人共同養育孩子。

Or polyamorous partners

或者多重伴侶，可能和三、 四個人都有承諾的關係。

who might be in a committed relationship of three or four.

Within that legal advocacy,

在我的法律權責範圍內，

I facilitate discussions to make sure that everyone's intentions are aligned

我會協助討論，確保 每個人的意圖都一致，

and then help them design their own family agreements.

接著幫他們設計 他們的自己家庭協議。

With the non-profit organization I founded,

我成立的非營利組織叫做 「選擇家庭法律中心」，

Chosen Family Law Center,

I advocate for changes in US laws

透過它，我致力提倡改變美國法律，

to benefit this whole beautiful spectrum of family constellations.

讓包含各種家庭的 整個光譜都能受惠。

And it is my core belief that no matter how you form family,

而我的核心信念是： 不論你要如何形成家庭，

actively discussing how we intend to live together

主動討論我們打算如何共同生活

is the best thing we can do to strengthen our own personal relationships.

是我們能做的事情當中，對強化 我們的個人關係最有幫助的。

So how did we end up with this current US emphasis on nuclear family?

所以，美國為什麼會走到現在 著重核心家庭的這一步？

Most of us throughout history have lived in large extended family networks

在歷史上，大部分人都住在 大型的大家庭網路中，

and 38 percent of the world population does today.

現今，全世界還有 38% 的人是如此。

The nuclear family is actually a relatively new development.

核心家庭其實是相對 近期才發展出來的。

It emerged in the industrial revolution

核心家庭在工業革命時出現，

to support a working dad and a homemaker mom.

以支持養家的爸爸和持家的媽媽。

It peaked in the 1950s and '60s,

其高峰出現在五○及六○年代，

but it hasn't been the most common family form before or since.

但在高峰之前或之後， 它都不是最常見的家庭形式。

Still, somehow, it's the basis for our health insurance system.

基於某種理由，我們的健康 照護制度仍然以它為基礎。

How well is that working out?

結果如何？

And a reason for our lack of affordable childcare in this country.

它也是美國缺乏平價兒童 照管服務的一個原因。

We still build and zone suburban homes with this fictional family in mind.

我們在建造及劃分近郊住家時，

腦中想的仍然是這種虛構的家庭。

In Western Europe, where I live, and in many other countries,

在我居住的西歐

以及許多其他國家，

states provide support for citizens in need,

國家會協助有需要的公民， 包括在家帶小孩的父母，

including parents who are home with young children,

such as paid maternity leave

比如有薪產假，有必要時還可 提供整個童年的財務支援。

and financial support throughout the childhood, if needed.

But in US law,

但在美國法律中，

we make sure that financial safety net happens between spouses

我們會確保財務安全網 出現在配偶之間，

rather than between citizen and state.

而不是公民與國家之間。

US marriage is a social welfare state of two.

美國婚姻是兩人的社會福利國家。

I'd rather a different social welfare state personally.

我個人比較希望有 不同的社會福利國家。

This leaves many people, especially women,

這造成許多人，特別是女性，

stuck in unhealthy relationships.

被困在不健康的關係中。

So at this point,

所以，在這個時點，

we can evaluate how same-sex partnership,

我們可以評估同性伴侶關係如何，

when we move into that movement for same sex marriage,

當我們開始推動同性婚姻時，

there was really an emphasis

就有強調是否應該要 爭取同性戀婚姻，

on whether we should be pushing for gay marriage

so that gay people could get the benefits of marriage,

讓同性戀也能享有婚姻的福利，

or whether we should be working to protect the rights of the unmarried.

或者我們是否應該努力 保護未婚者的權利。

And we can do both.

兩者我們都可以做到。現在該是保護

It's time now to protect the rights of unmarried people

未婚者和其他各種 家庭的權利的時候了。

and other kinds of family constellations.

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Because the reality is, there's no evidence

因為現實是，沒有證據顯示 核心家庭模型是最好的模型。

that the nuclear family model is actually the best one.

Research has consistently shown

研究很一致地指出，

that children need stability of parental figures.

兒童需要父母形象的穩定感。

But from what I've consistently found,

但根據我很一致的發現，

it doesn't matter if that stability is mom and dad,

那種穩定度並不受限， 可以是媽媽和爸爸、

two dads, mom and grandma

兩個爸爸、

媽媽和外婆，或三重伴侶。

or three polyamorous partners.

So this is not only about justice.

所以重點不只是公不公平。

This is about what's best for children.

重點也是怎樣的孩子最好。

If we really want that stability for kids,

如果我們真心希望孩子 能得到那種穩定性，

we need to provide support for all the kinds of families that kids are in,

我們就得提供支持 給各種有孩子的家庭，

rather than try and fail

而不是很失敗地嘗試去

to push people into a nuclear family model with government benefits.

強迫大家進入 有政府福利的核心家庭模型。

It's time to observe what's not working and change course.

該是觀察什麼方式行不通 並改變方向的時候了。

My definition of family

我對家庭的定義，

is people who are committed to be there for each other,

就是承諾不論發生什麼事 都會陪伴在彼此身邊的人。

no matter what.

This includes chosen family

包括因選擇而組成的家庭，

regardless of biological relationship or legal marriage.

不見得要有生物學上的關係

或法定的婚姻。

Many Black families in the US have chosen aunties and uncles

在美國有許多黑人家庭 是選擇了姑姨伯叔，

with no blood relation,

沒有血緣關係，

but a decision to be family and a commitment to the children involved.

只是決定成為家人， 並對相關的孩子做出承諾。

Countless LGBTQ people create chosen family

無數 LGBTQ 族群的人

建立了選擇家庭， 因為他們被原生家庭排拒，

when they're rejected by their family of origin

or when wanting to create families that share their values.

或者想要建立價值觀相同的家庭。

I am one of those queer people to find home with chosen family.

我就是在選擇家庭中 找到家的酷兒之一。

I grew up in a Christian family in a small town,

我在小鎮中的基督教家庭裡長大，

the only child of wonderful older parents.

是獨生女，我的父母很好，較年長。

When I came out as bisexual,

當我以雙性戀身分出櫃，

then as polyamorous, then as gender non-binary,

接著承認多重戀愛 和非二元性別之後，

most of my blood relations and over 30 cousins stopped talking to me.

我大部分的血親及超過三十個 堂表親都不再跟我說話了。

That's pretty standard.

這很常見。

When I was a broke 20-something starting my law practice,

當我二十初頭，沒有錢 且剛開始做法律執業時，

I was diagnosed with cervical cancer.

我被診斷出子宮頸癌。

And realized that I'd been duped into buying a health insurance

接著發現我被欺騙，買到 不給付癌症的健康保險。

that didn't cover cancer.

I was in a desperate, life-threatening situation.

我的處境很絕望，且有生命危險。

And while my parents were loving,

雖然我父母很慈愛，卻無法 提供我實質的支持或解決方法。

they couldn't provide me with material support or problem-solving.

So I broke through my shame and my embarrassment

於是，我克服我對於 求助的羞恥感和尷尬，

about asking for help.

And I reached out to my communities of friends.

我向朋友群求助。

And I discovered that they were eager to more actively support one another.

我發現他們很願意 更主動地支持彼此。

They made a schedule,

他們做了一張排班表， 確保一定有人會來作菜、

so there was always someone there to cook, to clean,

清潔、

to make phone calls about my health coverage

打電話諮詢我的健康給付，

或者就只是在我悲傷恐懼地 哭泣時陪在我身邊。

or just sit with me while I cried in my grief and my fear.

When I won my appeal to receive coverage by the Cancer Services Medicaid program,

當我贏得上訴，拿到了癌症 服務醫療保險計畫的給付時，

the administrator called and said,

負責人員打電話跟我說：

"I don't know who you are, but a lot of people love you."

「我不知道你是誰， 但很多人愛你。」

(Applause)

（掌聲）

And then she said, "And I'd like them to stop calling my office now, please.

接著她說：「我希望他們別再 打電話到我辦公室了，拜託。

Let them know you got coverage, it's done.

請告訴他們你拿到給付了， 完成了，謝謝你。」

Thank you."

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

The chosen family who stepped up for me

為我站出來的選擇家庭

probably saved my life.

可能救了我一命。

But they wouldn't necessarily be able to visit me in the hospital

但他們不見得能到醫院看我，

or cross a border in a pandemic to be with me.

或在疫情時跨越邊界來陪我。

Because relationships beyond blood and beyond marriage

因為在血緣和婚姻之外的關係 通常都沒有那些權利。

often don't get those rights.

從那之後我一生的志向就是 改變那一點，我會做到的。

And since then, my life's work has been to change that and I will.

（掌聲及歡呼）

(Applause and cheers)

When we embrace the idea of chosen family,

當我們擁抱選擇家庭這個想法時，

our own free will is more important than biological connection.

我們的自由意志比 生物學上的連結更重要。

We can choose to create family relationships

我們可以選擇與人建立家人關係， 因為他們提供

with the people who provide us with the meaningful support

我們需要也應得的 有意義支持給我們。

that we need and deserve.

Same-sex parenting has also advanced the concept of family beyond biology,

同性養育子女也讓超越 生物學的家庭觀念更進一步，

because in a same sex couple,

因為，在同性伴侶中，

only one parent's providing the sperm or the egg.

只有一方提供精子或卵子。

In my family-building legal work with these families,

當我接下為他們建立 家庭的法律工作時，

I facilitate discussions to make sure that everyone's intentions are aligned

我會協助他們進行討論， 以確保大家的意圖都一致，

before designing that legal agreement.

然後才來設計法律協議。

For example,

舉例來說，

I’ll often work with a female same-sex couple

我的客戶常常會是 有女性同性伴侶的女性，

who has a male friend who wants to "help" them become parents.

她的男性友人想 「協助」她們成為家長。

So I'll facilitate discussions to make sure they're all clear

我會協助他們討論，確保大家 都清楚男方會是共同家長

on whether he's going to be a co-parent or a sperm donor

還是捐精者，

and design a legal agreement either way.

再根據是哪一種來設計協議。

Without that, I've seen too many situations of ambiguity.

我見過太多沒有這麼做 而導致模糊的情況。

Where mom calls him a dad when she needs childcare help

當媽媽需要他協助照顧 孩子時，會稱他為爸爸，

but a donor when it comes time to make a big decision

但當要做重要決策又不希望他 參與時，就會稱他為捐精者。

she doesn't want his input on.

He calls himself dad when the baby's adorable at the park,

帶可愛的寶寶去公園， 他會稱自己為爸爸，

but feels more like a donor when the school bill comes, you know?

學費帳單寄來時他又更像是捐精者，

你們懂嗎？

When we're designing our own families,

當我們設計自己的家庭時，

we need clear written agreements,

我們需要清楚的書面協議，

especially if children are involved.

特別是在有涉及孩子時。

Let's say I have two clients, Sharon and Bill,

比如，我有兩個客戶，雪倫和比爾，

best friends who are considering becoming co-parents.

他們是最好的朋友， 考慮要一起養育孩子。

Sharon's turned 40

雪倫剛滿四十歲，

and hasn't found the right man with whom to marry and have kids.

還沒找到適合婚姻生子的男人。

Neither has her gay bestie Bill,

她最好的同志友人比爾也一樣， 他自己負擔不起代孕的十萬美金。

who can’t afford the $100,000 surrogacy process by himself.

So they call each other their Plan B.

所以他們稱彼此為自己的 B 計畫。

I would facilitate discussions with them about their parenting values,

我會協助他們討論 他們的教養價值觀、

他們打算如何為孩子做財務分配、

their plans to share finances for the child,

their ideal week of childcare split.

他們理想上要如何劃分 照顧孩子的時間。

But the conversation often gets more difficult

但當我問這樣的問題時， 談話通常會變得更困難：

when I ask questions like,

"Are you willing to live in the same city for the next 18 years

「你們是否願意接下來十八年都住

在同一個城市，留在孩子附近？」

to each be near the child?"

We're used to the idea of sacrificing for a spouse

我們很習慣這樣的想法： 為配偶做出犧牲，

and saying "no" to a dream job in a different city

拒絕在另一個城市的理想工作， 才能不和彼此分開。

to stay close to each other.

But it's a shocking idea to do that for your buddy.

但對象換成是死黨時， 這個想法卻挺嚇人。

But by becoming co-parenting partners,

但若要成為共同養育子女的伴侶，

they need to elevate their level of commitment from friends

他們得把承諾的層級從朋友拉高

to platonic partners.

到柏拉圖式伴侶。

They need to consciously say “goodbye” to a Prince Charming fantasy

他們得要有意識地 對白馬王子幻想說「再見」，

and welcome and embrace a new reality

歡迎並擁抱新的現實，

of a beautiful partnership grounded in their long-term friendship

也就是以他們的長期友情 為基礎的美麗伴侶關係，

and agree that this co-parenting relationship will come first.

且要同意把這種共同養育的 關係擺在第一優先。

I have found in my work

我在工作中發現，

that these kinds of discussions are much more powerful

這類討論

在預防未來爭議上的功效遠勝於

for preventing future disputes than any written contract can be.

任何書面協議。

We need to have these conversations.

我們必須要進行這種談話。

Legal contracts are sometimes written to avoid looking eye to eye

有時寫下法定契約是為了 避免看法不一致

and coming to agreement.

與達成共識。

But family contracts should only be written after you've done that.

但家庭協議應該是要在 達成共識之後再立約。

When I design relationships

當我為三人或四人的 多重關係設計關係時，

for polyamorous triads of three or quads of four,

I sometimes use existing legal structures

我有時會運用既有的法律結構，

like trusts or LLCs,

如信託或有限責任公司，

that allow you to share property and finances

讓你可以共享資產與資金， 而不需要問及你的關係。

without a question as to your relationship.

So, for example, if I've got a polyamorous triad

比如，如果我的客戶 是有多重關係的三個人，

Ayesha, Susan and Linda,

艾伊莎、蘇珊，和琳達，

I can set up an LLC for them

我可以為她們設立有限責任公司，

so that they can co-own real estate properties,

她們就可以共同擁有房地產，

pay taxes together,

一起納稅，

purchase a common health insurance

購買公用的健康保險，

and have clear exit strategies if they wish.

如果有人想離開， 也有清楚的退出策略。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

And if people trust each other enough

如果彼此的信任強到足以

to pool their financial fortune and want to pay taxes together,

共用財富，且想要一起納稅，

it shouldn't matter whether they're business partners,

那就不該限制他們， 不論他們是生意夥伴、手足、

siblings or romantic partners.

或愛情伴侶，所有 這些家庭都應該可行。

All of those families are valid.

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Thank you.

謝謝。

We should be able to choose legal partners

我們應該要能選擇法律上的伴侶，

beyond a single romantic partner, like a spouse.

不該只能採用單一的 愛情伴侶，如配偶。

Some people are doing that now,

有些人已經在做了，

and it's the trend for the future.

這是未來的趨勢。

Domestic partnerships have been used for 30 years by same-sex couples,

同居伴侶關係已經 被使用了三十年之久，

採用這種關係的包括同性伴侶、 最好的朋友，以及手足。

but also by best friends and siblings.

Doing so, as domestic partners, allows you to share your health insurance

採用同居伴侶關係，讓你們可以

共享健康保險、

to visit each other in the hospital

到醫院探望彼此，

and across borders in a pandemic, like spouses.

並在疫情期間跨越邊界，

就像配偶一樣。

But unlike spouses, you don't become a social welfare state of two,

但，不同的是你們不會成為兩人的 社會福利國家，那可能是好事。

which can be a good thing.

I had a client who had a severely disabled sister.

我有一位客戶的姐妹有嚴重的殘疾，

By becoming domestic partners,

她們成為同居伴侶，

she was able to put her sister

她有很好的健康保險給付， 就能分享給她的姐妹使用。

on her excellent health insurance coverage.

Why would a sister be any less worthy of that than a boyfriend?

為什麼姐妹的價值會不如男朋友？

Right?

對吧？

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

We've built on that history.

我們以那段歷史為基礎。

In 2020, my organization helped pass the first laws

2020 年，我的組織協助通過了最早的

多重伴侶的同居伴侶關係法，

for multi-partner domestic partnership,

which have passed in several cities and counting.

在許多城市都通過了，還會有更多。

This means that three or four polyamorous partners

這就表示，

三人或四人的多重伴侶 可以成為同居伴侶，

could become domestic partners

or two or more platonic co-parents

或兩位以上的柏拉圖式共同父母，

or any two, three or four people

或想要成為彼此法律伴侶的 任何兩個、三個、四個人。

who want to become each other's legal partners.

When relationships have legal status like this,

當關係能夠有這樣的法律地位時，

it reduces discrimination and promotes social acceptance and awareness,

就能減少歧視， 促進社會接納和意識，

正如我們在同性伴侶關係 運動中所看見的。

as we saw in the same-sex partnership movement.

Still, we hope this year to pass

我們仍然希望今年能讓

the first family status nondiscrimination laws

美國各地的城市 通過家庭地位反歧視法。

at city levels across the United States,

which means that you can't be discriminated against,

通過就表示你不會因為

you can't be fired from your job or denied housing

你的家庭結構而被歧視、 被僱主解僱，或被拒絕居住。

because of your family configuration.

(Applause)

（掌聲）

In future,

在未來，

I propose that we move from these city-level domestic partnerships

我提議我們要從這些 城市層級的同居關係再走向

to state-level multi-partner domestic partnerships

國家層級的多重伴侶同居伴侶關係，

and then federal recognition,

接著是取得聯邦認可， 就像同性婚姻的進程一樣。

as we did with same-sex marriage.

And if we really want to value families as they exist

如果我們真心想要重視 現存的各種家庭，

rather than incentivize marriage,

而非鼓勵婚姻，

I also suggest that we separate out some of the legal perks of marriage

我也建議我們要把一些 婚姻的法定補助切割開來，

so that single people and other kinds of families get these benefits

讓單身的人和其他類型的家庭 能取得這些福利，

without an evaluation of whether they're in a romantic relationship

不需要評估他們是否有 合格的愛情關係。

that passes muster.

And marriage should not be the gateway to social and economic privilege anymore.

婚姻不該繼續扮演通往 社會及經濟特權的入口。

That time is done.

那段時期已過。

And marriages will be stronger when we do that.

當我們這麼做，婚姻會更強大。

Do you know anyone who got married faster than they should have

你有認識任何為了健康保險 或公民權而提早結婚的人嗎？

for health insurance or citizenship?

因為我認識太多這種人， 且我是個離婚律師。

Because I know too many, and I’m a divorce lawyer.

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

As a divorce lawyer, relationships last longer

身為離婚律師，我認為 出於比政府補助

when we marry for better reasons than government perks.

更好的理由而結婚，關係會更持久。

So, many of you may be married

在座許多人

and may not think that these issues have personal relevance for you.

可能已婚，也許不認為這些議題 對你有什麼個人的重要性。

But I ask you to reflect.

但我請你們反思一下。

Could your relationship be stronger

若你對家庭採用更廣泛的觀點，

if you adopted a more expansive view of family?

你的關係有沒有可能會更穩固？

Marriage and partnership are not one-size-fits-all.

婚姻和伴侶關係並不是 適用所有人的「均碼」。

Every couple in partnership benefits

每一對伴侶關係中的伴侶

都能受惠於主動決定

from actively deciding how they want to co-create together

他們想要如何共同進行

in terms of co-parenting, shared finances,

合作養育子女、分擔財富、

your household

創立家庭，

and your definition of monogamy.

以及對伴侶制的定義。

For example,

舉例來說，

is there any hidden expectation that you have with your partner

你對你的伴侶是否有 任何期許，你卻沒有說出來，

that would benefit from being spoken out loud and confirmed?

如果能攤開來講並確認 就會很有幫助？

I bet there is.

我敢說一定有。

Or is there any aspect of partnership that you participate in

或，你為了伴侶關係做某件事 是否是因為大家都這樣做？

just because everyone does it,

like sleeping in the same bed or only vacationing together,

比如同床共眠或一起渡假，

但在你的伴侶關係中其實行不通？

that just isn't really working for your partnership?

When we expect any one relationship in our lives to meet most of our needs,

如果我們期望人生中的一段關係 能夠滿足我們大部分的需求，

we may be putting too much pressure on that relationship.

我們可能會給那段關係太大的壓力。

And whether it's your romantic partner, your parent, your adult child,

不論對象是你的戀人、父母、

已成年的孩子，

your relationship may be stronger

你都可以讓關係更穩固，

if you also strengthen other connections in your lives

做法是去強化你人生中的其他連結，

and find other ways to get some of your own needs met.

並找其他方式來滿足 你自己的一些需求。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

My husband does not want to help me process.

我先生不想協助我處理。

I have other people for that in my life.

這方面我可以找其他人幫我。

So ...

所以……

I think it's worthwhile to question,

我認為，去問這些問題是值得的，

no matter what kind of family configuration you're in,

不論你身處在什麼樣的家庭結構中，

whether you could be part of a movement for greater interconnectedness

不論你是否能參與運動， 推動將相互連結

beyond our romantic relationships and beyond the walls of our home.

擴大到愛情關係之外，

到家庭的牆壁之外。

Your family and your community will be stronger when you do.

當你這麼做，你的家庭 和你的社區都會變得更強大。

Is there a long-term friend that you could reach out to

有沒有一個長期的朋友， 你可以和這個人溝通，

with whom you'd like to be better in touch

你會希望保持聯絡，

and suggest a regular date for a special time together?

且會建議定期一起去做些什麼事？

Could you create a childcare cooperative with other parents in your community?

你能否在你的社區內和其他父母 建立一個兒童照管合作社？

Is there a single parent or elderly person in your life

你人生中是否有個單親父母或長者， 你能在這個人的家裡待比較久？

whose home you could spend more time in?

At some point in a long life,

在漫漫人生中的某個時點，

you too will need support.

你也會需要支援。

And it benefits you to practice asking for support now

現在就練習求助，會對你有益，

and actively caring for people in community

也別忘了要主動照顧社區中的人， 有一天他們可能也會照顧你。

who may one day care for you.

A baby whose diaper you change may one day change yours.

你今天幫一個寶寶換尿布， 將來可能是他幫你換。

(Audience murmurs and laughs)

（觀眾低語和發出笑聲）

Sorry.

抱歉。

It's the beautiful reciprocity of human relationship.

那是人類關係的美麗互惠。

And in my vision for the future,

在我對未來的遠景中，

while we work together to redefine family in law,

我們一同努力重新定義 家庭在法律中的意義，

we can all redefine family in our own culture and lives.

同時也可以重新定義家庭 在我們的文化中和生活中的意義。

There may even be a close friend to whom you get the courage to ask:

也許，你還會有勇氣 問一個親密的友人：

Do you want to make family with me?

你想和我組成家庭嗎？

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）