Consanguineous. There's a word I've been looking for. (I thought it was at my sister's place.)

If you are married, you have not chosen your de facto co-recipient - you have chosen your de jure one, surely.

You were correct in inferring that I was referring to the fact that people who do not have partners are often disadvantaged.

In this country it is also true that common-law partners may receive many of the benefits of married ones - eventually. The waiting times are usually longer. It's also true that they must share some of the drawbacks - usually sooner. The law defines a de facto relationship as "a relationship between two adult persons who live together as a couple and who are not married to one another or related by family". (For this reason I know people who make their girlfriends pay rent.)

You may recall that a few years back I supported a lawsuit to overturn legislation restricting fertility treatment to women in infertile relationships. (Ironically, the first baby to result was born to a married couple - the husband was HIV positive but not infertile.)

I do like your ideas though. I don't suppose there's any chance of getting you elected?