Adelaide woman Abby Brothers has been with her partner for 15 years, since they were both teenagers.
The pair have grown up together, navigated the highs and lows of young adulthood, and survived the grueling schedule of his fly-in-fly-out (FIFO) work in the mines.
But, at 30 years old, Brothers says they are stuck in a state of forced limbo, unable to take the next step of a long-term relationship: moving in together.
READ MORE: Neil wants pokies machines to play 'losing sounds'. Here's why
For Brothers, who lives with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (also known as chronic fatigue syndrome), POTS, and endometriosis, moving into a shared home would mean the immediate loss of her Disability Support Pension (DSP).
"We've been together 15 years and we can't progress anything – live together, get married – without me losing my financial independence," Brothers said.
"That option has been taken out of my hands if I want to remain a little bit independent. Being able to buy my own medications or pay for my own appointments without having to ask someone is a big thing."
Brothers is one of thousands of welfare support recipients who are calling for an end to the partner income test in a new online campaign.
Under the social security rule, Centrelink will cut or end welfare payments if a recipient moves in with a romantic partner whose earnings meet a certain threshold.
If a recipient's combined income with their partner goes over $380 their payments are cut 50 cents for every dollar.
Critics say the "archaic rule" is trapping people, particularly disabled Australians, in poverty, or in some cases, unsafe domestic situations.
A '1950s mentality' in a 2026 economy
The Partner Income Test was formally introduced in Australia through the Social Services Consolidation Act in 1947, which is based on the "breadwinner model" and assumes a partner will – and should – provide for their significant other.
The government's argument for maintaining the test is that the Australian welfare system is "means-tested and needs-based" with the "unit of assessment" remaining the couple rather than the individual.
But advocates argue this "1950s way of thinking" ignores the reality of the modern cost-of-living crisis and the specific needs of the disabled.
Brothers, who currently lives with her parents, receives roughly $1100 a fortnight through the DSP.
She says much of this allowance is swallowed by costly medications not covered by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS).
"My personal cost of living is higher than other people's because of medical expenses," she said.
"If me and my partner lived together on only his income, my requirements are more than someone else's.
"Also, there are not many single-income households anymore because you just can't afford it."
In Newcastle, Elle, 30, faces a similar dilemma. Living with complex PTSD, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and chronic migraines, she has navigated the strain the income test puts on relationships firsthand.
"The government just assumes a partner is going to provide for you. They're under no legal obligation to do so," Elle, who asked for her surname to be withheld, said.
"It's something that is always at the back of my mind when dating. It puts a lot of people at risk, particularly women and First Nations people."
The campaign for change
Elle has now launched the End Partner Income Testing campaign, joining forces with Sophia Redjeb, who last year led a parliamentary petition and Change.org petition signed by more than 25,000 Australians calling for the test to be scrapped.
A national survey launched as part of the campaign earlier this month had already seen over 500 people share stories of financial entrapment and hindered independence, Redjeb said.
"The response has been overwhelming," Redjeb said.
"The data is already showing that the PIT is acting as a trap. It forces total financial dependence and creates dangerous barriers for those in domestic violence situations."
The campaign also follows calls from People with Disability Australia to scrap the income test for people on the DSP.
'Blatant discrimination'
The Greens party is backing the push to abolish the partner income test.
Greens Senator Penny Allman-Payne, the party's spokesperson for older people and disability, said the policy was "blatant discrimination."
"It's disgusting that in 2026 the government thinks this is an acceptable way to treat disabled people, who are already more likely to experience intimate partner violence," Senator Allman-Payne said.
"Nobody should be forced to choose between love and survival."
However, the federal government appears unmoved. When questioned on the issue by Allman-Payne in parliament in December 2025, Minister for Women Katy Gallagher signalled Labor had no intention to overhaul the rule.
"I think it's been a longstanding feature of the social security system, and I'm not aware of any plans to change that," Senator Gallagher told the chamber.
A Department of Social Services spokesperson told nine.com.au partner income testing applied to all social security payments and was based on the principle that couples are able to pool resources and share living costs, like rent and power bills.
"A person can be excluded from partner income testing in cases of hardship, abuse or family and domestic violence," the spokesperson said.
"This enables a higher single rate to be paid, and means they are protected from partner income testing rules."
Brothers said, to her and many others, that "longstanding feature" felt more like a life sentence.
"Being unwell is an independent situation," she said.
"The rule is outdated and it needs to be reviewed quite badly. You shouldn't have to choose between the person you love and the money you need to survive."
If you or someone you know is impacted by sexual assault, domestic or family violence, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or visit 1800RESPECT.org.au.
NEVER MISS A STORY: Get your breaking news and exclusive stories first by following us across all platforms.
