Amy Nash-Kille spent 17 years concealing her family arrangement from colleagues, her graduate school adviser, even her hairdresser. She shares a household with two partners and four children in what she describes as the greatest blessing of her life. But secrecy felt necessary. After enduring more than a year of harassment at a Colorado suburb, she relocated her family to Portland, Oregon in 2011.
That changed in March when Portland became the largest US city to enact legal protections against discrimination for polyamorous people and multipartnered households. The ordinance shields them in housing, employment and public accommodation. For Nash-Kille, it represented profound relief. "The new law is helping to establish the inherent worth and dignity of people who have unusual family configurations when considered by society at large," she said.
Portland joins a growing network of cities extending civil rights to people in nontraditional romantic or family arrangements. West Hollywood, Olympia Washington, and eight communities across Massachusetts have now passed some form of legal recognition. The shift signals the emergence of a stigmatized population as a political constituency and challenges the legal primacy of the traditional nuclear family.
The numbers reveal why. In 1970, roughly two-thirds of Americans ages 25 to 49 lived with a spouse and at least one child. By 2020, that figure had collapsed to 37 percent, according to Pew Research Center data. The majority of Americans now live outside the traditional nuclear family structure.
Activists frame the effort differently than mainstream debates about marriage equality. Diana Adams, an attorney heading the Chosen Family Law Center who helped draft ordinances in Massachusetts, said the goal is not marriage for polyamorous people but "unbundling" rights and benefits locked into institutions favoring traditional relationships: taxes, health insurance, hospital visitation rights.
"I'd like to get the government out of the business of evaluating our personal relationships," Adams said.
Brett Chamberlin, executive director of the Oakland-based Organization for Polyamory and Ethical Non-monogamy, sees polyamorous people shifting from "lifestyle oddity" to organized movement. Efforts are already underway in Seattle, Eugene, Astoria and Hazel Park near Detroit. Chamberlin hopes momentum eventually reaches state and federal levels.
The polyamorous population, while uncounted officially, appears substantial. A 2016 study estimated more than one in five single adults engage in consensual nonmonogamy at some point. Current estimates place 4 to 5 percent of people in consensual nonmonogamous relationships. In an office of 100 people, Chamberlin noted, at least one person likely practices nonmonogamy. The question becomes whether the workplace feels safe enough to disclose it.
Sociologist Philip Cohen of the University of Maryland traced the shift to postwar America's "compulsory marriage system" of the 1950s and 60s, an anomalous period the baby boom generation quickly abandoned. "The norms are weakening or there's just less regulation of what people do," Cohen said. "And so the natural variation in what people want is being allowed to come out."
Greater visibility has not automatically brought acceptance. Open's 2024 survey found 60 percent of nonmonogamous individuals experienced stigma or discrimination when navigating healthcare, child custody or family relationships. Sociologist Elisabeth Sheff documented "significant judicial bias" against polyamorous people in custody disputes, with judges presuming inadequate parenting.
Skylar Cruz, a 33-year-old transgender programmer, joined a polyamorous relationship roughly a year ago when she and her six-year-partner added a trans woman. Portland's ordinance matters to her practical future. She and both partners are considering moving in together. "I feel like we're at a crossroads in a lot of our political values here in the US," Cruz said. "And we ultimately have to decide whether or not people are worth protecting for being different."
Momentum began quietly. In 2020, Somerville Massachusetts became the first city recognizing polyamorous rights through a domestic partner registry, later replicated in Cambridge and Arlington. The registry requires no residency and covers people in "relationships of mutual support, caring and commitment." Registered partners gain hospital visitation and limited rights, though not marriage benefits like immigration status or federal tax treatment.
The registry concept enables what Adams calls "chosen family," voluntary bonds people form with romantic or platonic partners. It could apply to situations like the Golden Girls, allowing unrelated older adults to participate in each other's medical decisions. Activists in Washington are pushing "Indigo's Law," proposed state legislation making it easier for unmarried people to grant chosen family control over remains and funeral arrangements, named after a Seattle transgender woman whose family overrode her fiancée's wishes after her death.
Political headwinds loom. Seattle's city council has not formally introduced a polyamory ordinance despite local advocacy, partly from concern about Trump administration backlash, according to Jessa Davis, newly hired executive director of Open. Portland and Olympia's ordinances drew conservative talk radio fire. "Olympia was easier because it is a relatively small city," Davis said. "Larger cities face more political pressure on the national level."
Yet Chamberlin noted polyamory spans the political spectrum. Conservative, white and older red-state residents engage in nonmonogamy. Owners of swingers clubs include Trump supporters. The stereotype of nonmonogamy as "liberal coastal elites with blue hair" misses reality. The real barrier remains the staggering complexity of family law touching mortgages, sick leave and dozens of areas that vary by state.
For Cruz, Portland's protections represent a beginning. "I've got probably 50, 60 years left," she said. "I want to ensure that not only are we not being discriminated against, but that we are moving towards being seen as more ordinary, more common, more accepted."
Author James Rodriguez: "These ordinances matter less as grand ideology and more as practical shelter for families already living this way, quietly and at considerable risk."
Comments