Tonight we said goodbye to a photograph

[FourScore]

Tonight we said goodbye to a photograph
by Brubs
Sun May 17, 2009 at 09:54:06 PM PDT

If you really don’t feel like maudlin or depressing diaries, steer clear from this one. I am getting drunk, and I am angry and heartbroken for my friend, so don’t expect much prose or coherence. It will be what it will be. I need this out of my system, so damn be to diary etiquette or protocol.

Tonight, surrounded by his family, my best friend Kenneth took his last assisted breaths in a hospital known for its “compassion and care” in the area. His family held his hands and whispered their loving goodbyes while the life slipped from his body and he went to his rest. A sudden heart attack claimed him.

But someone was conspicuously absent…

In the parking lot, Bob, his partner of 26 years, said goodbye to a photograph. It was a photograph of he and Kenneth on vacation celebrating their honeymoon 6 years ago after having been “married” in a ceremony that meant nothing more than symbolism to a society that was, at turns, benevolent about the whims of a few gay folk, yet smirking about his love for another person of the same sex. “Have your fake ceremonies, for what they are worth, but don’t get obnoxious and ask for anything actually bordering on legal or realistic.” society told them. But Kenneth & Bob took it, because validating it to one another was really what counted. But tonight, it ended up needing to mean so much more.

Bob carried that photograph in his wallet as a reminder of his relationship and what it meant to him. Tonight, he said goodbye to a smiling face in a picture because he had no legal right to be present to say goodbye to his loved one in person. So Bob sat in the parking lot in the passenger seat of my car and wondered the fate of the man he had given his love and life to. He held the only thing at that moment Kenneth’s family could not take away from him – that photograph.

The hospital, at the behest of Kenneth’s family, had banned Bob from Kenneth’s room, or seeing him in the hospital at all. 26 years treated as though they were mere passing acquaintances or work colleagues. Simply because Kenneth’s family could never accept their son’s orientation (NOT “lifestyle” as some refer to it).

Tonight, a nurse sympathetic to Bob’s situation and in violation of the hospital policies, came to the car window and delivered the news to Bob that Kenneth was gone. And Bob said his goodbyes and wishes of love and peace to a picture. A fucking photograph. Held to his chest as though he were holding his loved one in tears. Because that was all he had.

His partner is gone and his partner’s family took away the dignity that Bob had a right to as Kenneth’s lover, confidante, and lifemate to say goodbye. His husband. There, I said it. HUSBAND. WAS THAT SO SCARY YOU HOMOPHOBIC BIGOTS?????

To his family:

You took away Bob’s right to say his goodbyes because of your own misguided fears, but you can never take away his love or his memories. Your son deserved to hold his partner’s hand as he went away, knowing Bob loved him and was there to see him to the other side. You heartless bastards…I hate you right now. You may laugh at our relationships and dismiss them, but your God weeps for your ignorance and cruelty.

You will never take Bob’s devotion to Ken away from him…or the smiling photograph of he and Kenneth in happy times.

Ken, tonight, we say goodbye to your photograph. But we know you understand and forgive us.

You will be missed.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/18/732663/-Tonight-we-said-goodbye-to-a-photograph

[babylonsister]

1. This is so sad. Rec'd for more eyes. RIP, Kenneth.

:cry:

[xchrom]

2. recommend

[liberalmuse]

3. This is unacceptable.

It was good you were there for your friend, but I have to say, this is one of the worst things I've ever read. Oh my god. This is inhuman. :cry:

[blm]

4. KandR........and will keep working for change.

Peace to Bob.

[Hepburn]

5. K&R....

....:cry:

This has to change, it just has to. What happened to Bob is horrible. Just to maintain the fake picture of a relative not being gay, they destroyed another person at the saddest moment of his life. And, they let Kenneth die without being able to say "good-bye" to the person he loved and lived with for many, many years.

Cruel, so very cruel...just to maintain a fantasy in their sick homophobic minds that teh gay had never touched their family.

:puke:

[cali]

6. I can only weep over this travesty and

feel outrage and disgust toward Ken's vile pig "family".

[Frances]

7. So sorry

I hope that someday gay marriage will be legal all over the U.S. But that doesn't help with the pain you feel now. You have my sympathy.

I voted FOR gay marriage in CA. I even persuaded my ex Navy Pilot husband to do the same. I was so proud of him. (We vote absentee so I saw his ballot!) I hope gay marriage will eventually be the law here.

[glitch]

8. K & R nt

:cry:

[secondwind]

9. Kick!!

[beac]

10. Angry and weeping right along with you.

It's SICKENING that this is still allowed to go on. :mad: :cry:

[Raster]

11. Oh my god. Bless your hearts and rest in peace, Kenneth.

:grouphug:

[peace13]

12. People need to wake up!

In Ohio it doesn't matter if you are gay or straight, if you aren't married you have no rights in this type of situation. People voted against gays and themselves without even realizing it. In order to show those 'gays' they shot themselves in the foot. People are stupid.

I am so sorry for your loss. I am sorry for everyone in this situation.

[Lex]

13. Shows why gay folks don't look at marriage equality as an issue to be shelved

or decided (or not, as the case may be) state by state.

[Faygo Kid]

14. Very moving. There is work to be done.

This straight guy thanks you for posting this, and we will ALL work together for change.

[Jim Lane]

15. I try to find it in my heart to feel sorry for his bigoted, narrow-minded family

So far, no luck.

The family members are probably normal people, not evil, who have the misfortune of having been brainwashed by decades of cultural conditioning. Obviously, they know that Kenneth was gay. The knowledge causes them much unnecessary grief. If they had accepted the situation sensibly, it would have been better for Kenneth and better for Bob, but also better for all the family members. Therefore, they deserve our sympathy.

I'm afraid, however, that the sympathy will have to come from someone with more generosity of spirit than I can muster.

[cali]

22. no pity. they had none. not saying they're evil but they're cruelty

is vile.

[reggie the dog]

24. I disagree with you

The family members are vindictive assholes. They prevented their family member from passing his last moments with his partner of 26 years because they disliked that they were homosexual. Then they stayed by to spite him as he died and to keep the other "fag" away. Normal people have compassion and would never dream of keeping the partner (married or not, but in this case the husband) of their loved one away from them as they died in the hospital. Vindictive, close minded assholes. Normal people would have reactions like you and I in such a situation as we would LOVE OUR FAMILY MEMBERS FOR WHO THEY ARE!

[Divine Discontent]

143. imho - I believe the people connected to him by blood (I don't think they deserve 'family') will

answer to God for their sick sick actions.

[Bluenorthwest]

16. Just inhuman.

Such a sad story.

[Booster]

17. K&R So wrong in so many ways.

[Bunkie0913]

18. Sorry seems so small

To loose the one you love is horrible under any circumstances. To be willfully denied the chance to hold their hand should be criminal. Tell Bob we here at DU care and feel his pain.

[Vidar]

19. K&R.

[hunter]

20. Ken's "family" is not his family. Bob is his family.

The hospital let homophobic blood relatives into Ken's hospital room to inflict their vicious cruelty upon him and his partner one last time.

:cry:

[tosh]

21. Well said. nt.

[Ignis]

36. Love is thicker than blood.

:hug:

[truedelphi]

167. Oh that is a wonderful way of putting it. n/t

[reggie the dog]

25. the hospital is bound by a shitty law

at least the nurse came out and told Bob. The nurse has a heart.

[reggie the dog]

23. exactly why marriage should be open to all adults

not just all heterosexual adults. The family is pathetic. They punished their own family member. They knew he wanted Bob there and forbade Bob to spite their family member then stayed around to make sure Bob did not come into the room.

[LaurenG]

26. Oh my - thanks for posting this

:cry: my heart breaks...

[NorthCarolina]

27. K&R. Well written...if this doesn't tug your heartstrings then there is something seriously lacking

in your humanity. Sincere condolences to Bob, Kenneth's friends, and yes even his bigoted and hateful family. I took the liberty to post this on my Twitter account, I sincerely hope that I was not out of line in doing so, but this relays such an important message that I felt it should be seen by as many as possible.

[MADem]

28. What a horrible story. A cautionary tale, too.

In the interim between now and full equality, I think it's imperative for couples to see a lawyer and get an iron-clad power of attorney, and make sure that it's quite clear that "family" can't interfere or prevent a partner from being at the bedside of a sick or dying person.

[cboy4]

63. Excuse me, but why should they have had to give a fucking

nickel to anyone, let alone a lawyer, to guarantee a human right you got for the price of your marriage license?

And by the way, an "iron-clad power of attorney" does not guarantee shit at the hospital.

I mean, why the hell do you think gay people push for full marriage versus civil unions?

Jesus

[MADem]

77. They fucking SHOULDN'T.

DUH!!!! But if wishes were horses, then beggars would ride.

Equality is not here yet, from sea to shining sea--or haven't you noticed?

But if he had a power of attorney in his hand that said "I want the bearer of this document to make all my end of life decisions for me, AND NOT MY BLOOD RELATIVES" you can be damned sure that document WOULD mean shit. He would have been at the bedside, and HE would have made the decision to "allow" the family to grieve with him.

Don't treat me like I don't "get" the issue. I fucking GET it.

But you tell me--should people just give up, and not exercise any rights that they can, through the legal system, carve out for themselves, while they're WAITING for equality? That sure seems to be what you're suggesting. All or nothing, and oh, fuck me, to boot.

I say the more partners with powers of attorney at bedsides, the BETTER. People who are VISIBLE can't be ignored.

Jesus, indeed.

[libnnc]

64. the case in Miami proved that legal paperwork is worthless in a state that DOES NOT RECOGNIZE

ANY CIVIL UNION

You can be lawyered up to you eyeballs and still be denied access.

Shame that some DUers don't understand that. It ain't rocket science.

[MADem]

78. That's not true. If a person doesn't want their family to make end of life decisions,

they can have anyone--not necessarily a partner, it could be a friend, a neighbor, even a--gasp--LAWYER--act for them. They just need the appropriate paperwork, and that's a power of attorney. And civil unions don't even have to be involved. You don't even have to be gay--you could be a mean old hetero who hates your mother and father, and doesn't want them deciding your fate if you're very ill.

Shame that you don't understand that--it really isn't rocket science. You apparently think it is. You're wrong.

[libnnc]

83. You are wrong. n/t

[MADem]

86. Come on, then--let's discuss it. Give us a link.

There are always ways around a legal problem that involves representation. If you don't want your family making end of life decisions, you don't have to endure that. If your problem is with a discriminatory law like the one they want to take place in VA in a few months, you get a third party in there to take care of business.

[libnnc]

88. OK since you know NC law, you provided ME with the link

that says with a POA I am 100% guaranteed access to my partner in an emergent situation at all hospitals (private AND public).

You tell me, since you know it all. We have all of them--POA and a Health care POA and Living Wills. I am not at all convinced that will protect either one of us in this state.

[MADem]

90. Oh, no no--you're the one who said I was wrong, now you prove it.

And don't play the hundred percent game with me either--a heterosexual couple could encounter difficulties which wouldn't make their rights "100 %" either. For example, no ID, or a different last name--prove you're the wife/husband.

You're backing away from your assertion that I'm wrong--unless you can provide me with links that back up your forceful "you're wrong" insistence.

[libnnc]

91. I'm not backing away from anything. You are wrong

You have always been wrong.

I've read your other posts on this topic and you have routinely played devil's advocate about marriage equality on this board.

You are wrong.

[MADem]

97. You don't want to discuss the topic, fine.

But cut out the 'asparagus casting' and either put up or shut up.

I never play "devil's advocate." I provide accurate links (links--like you're not offering) of current federal law--not opinions, not attitudes, flat-out links to existing law. You're shooting the messenger and substituting shitflinging for discussion. I can understand anger, I simply won't put up with it when you make ME the whipping boy because some other assholes are discriminatory. It's bullshit, what you are inferring.

And like I said--you don't wanna talk about it? Fine. I can dig it. You aren't coming across as very reasonable, anyway.

But you don't get away with telling me I'm wrong without backing your shit up.

Tell ya what, you have a nice day anyway. Your incivility doesn't make a dent in my pro-equality viewpoint.

[cboy4]

104. I don't understand how you -- a straight person, is arguing

with a bunch of gay people about an issue you can't possibly be personally involved with.

I can tell you there are married gay people and lawyers among the regulars who post here.

And I can tell you you're currently arguing with all of the above.

[Name removed]

105. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bluedawg12]

142. You are absolutely right - we know gay married couples who have endured such bigoted laws.

Until it became too much and they had to leave the State in question.

This in America? Depriving people of contractual rights?

[Baby Snooks]

163. What the law says...

What the law says and what the law does are two different things and reality is when a family member shows up and threatens a hospital, all the powers of attorneys and medical directives go out the window because the family has a legal relationship that cannot be "undone" by a piece of paper. That's why "wives" and "husbands" have the final say. They can even override the patient. And sometimes do.

It happens to heterosexuals. But they have a choice to marry or not to marry. Homosexuals do not have the choice. And of all the things "marriage equality" will convey, the right to have the final say is the most important. That and having "community property."

There are still judges who will void a will written by a homosexual leaving everything to a homosexual partner. Especially when they have died of AIDS and the family claims their son suffered from dementia when he wrote the will. Lesbians don't have to confront that. But they do have to confront the reality that in some states just the fact that there was a homosexual relationship at all is still sufficient basis for a will to be voided by a judge. It's not against the law to be a homosexual any more. But that doesn't mean they have the right to leave anything to anyone if their family objects. Higher courts can overrule a probate court. But it takes money. And often the surviving partner simply doesn't have it. And so the family takes all.

The real world. Not a nice place. Marriage equality will not convey civil rights. But it will convey the protections and rights conveyed to heterosexuals. The marriage certificate is the one piece of paper a family member cannot override. And cannot protest.

Heterosexuals really don't understand. And can become quite smarmy about their insistence that they do. You are not smarmy. But you still don't realize the reality. The reality that what the law says and what the law does are two different things. Especially for homosexuals.

[liberalhistorian]

152. I'm afraid the real problem is idealism.

Yes, it's true that POA's and similar legal documents theoretically provide protection in these circumstances and that they can be made ironclad. And yes, it's true that, theoretically and legally, they are supposed to work for everyone, hetero or gay. And yes, it's theoretically true that hospitals and doctors must legally honor these legally-binding agreements, no matter what the "family" may say or do. And yes, it's theoretically true that it shouldn't matter a damn what the hospital or the doctor or the family thinks, or even what society thinks and that's one of the things that legally-binding documents are supposed to take care of.

But theoretical and legal often clash with realism. It doesn't take long being in the legal field, as I am, to see that in action, not just in these kinds of situations, but in almost every situation. And hospitals are especially notorious for ignoring "ironclad" legal documents, including POA's, even if the protesting family member(s) haven't even seen the patient for a long time. They know that the affected partner, hetero or gay, often doesn't have the emotional energy to fight it legally or there may not even be time to do so in life-threatening situations. And while it can happen to both unmarried hetero (I refuse to use the term "straight", it implies that there's something "crooked" about, or wrong with, being gay) AND gay couples, and it often does happen to hetero couples, it far more often is true with gay couples, hospitals/medical personnel do what they want regardless of legal documents, especially if even one family member objects and even if that member is not close with the patient.

It's often hard for people to understand that, just because something is legal, even supposedly "ironclad", doesn't mean that those who ought to follow it WILL follow it the way they're supposed to.

I can't imagine being kept from my husband, or my husband being kept from me, his wife, during such a time and I think I'd go batshit nuts. And I can't imagine not being able to marry the one I love and care for simply due to societal and cultural bigotry and ignorance. This is a major reason why marriage equality is so important to me, even though it wouldn't directly affect me.

[bluedawg12]

135. Michigan : Amendments that ban same-sex marriage, civil unions, and other contracts

"Amendments that ban same-sex marriage, civil unions, and other contracts

Michigan 2004 59%<10> State Proposal - 04-2<54> To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.<55><56>"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defense_of_marriage_amendments_to_U.S._state_constitutions_by_type

[MADem]

148. That's a useful link.

Look at all that red. Way too much.

[bluedawg12]

131. MADem - you are wrong. cboy4 is right. The Marshall -Newman Ammendment.

http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/10/the_virginia_antigay_law.php

The Virginia Anti-Gay Law
Category: Gay Rights
Posted on: October 18, 2006 9:11 AM, by Ed Brayton

Notice I said anti-gay, not just anti-gay marriage, which is how its backers are trying to push it. But as David Boaz points out at the Cato blog, gay marriage is already against the law in Virginia and this amendment goes far beyond just banning gay marriage. The amendment says:

This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

This language is about as broad as such an amendment can get. It requires all government agencies to refuse to recognize any contractual arrangement that carries with it any right, benefit, obligation, quality or effect of a marriage. That could mean no recognition of the legality of private custody agreements, private inheritence or end-of-life medical arrangements, or even recognition by public hospitals of private insurance benefits given as part of a union contract with a private company.

Now, the advocates of such amendments will say, "Oh, you're so paranoid. We would never go after such things and you're just whipping up hysteria to get people to vote against this." The ADF said this just the other day. But that's a lie. In Michigan and Ohio, after claiming the same thing, religious right groups immediately started filing suits to get rid of such benefits after passing similar, though still less broad, amendments in those states. The Virginia language is even worse than those, even more open to such broad interpretations. Don't listen to them when they say this won't affect benefits for unmarried couples; they're lying. As soon as it passes, they'll flip positions and start filing suits to do exactly what they claim the amendment won't do.

Too Draconian and anti-American to ever pass? It passed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall-Newman_Amendment
The Marshall-Newman Amendment also referred to as the Virginia Marriage Amendment is an amendment to the Constitution of Virginia that defines marriage as solely between one man and one woman and bans recognition of any legal status "approximat the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage". <1> The amendment was ratified by 57% of the voters on November 7, 2006<2>.


Background
Virginia's amendment is alone in preventing the state from recognizing private contracts; South Carolina's amendment explicitly disavows such an aim.<3> Observers have pointed out that such language encompasses private contracts and medical directives.<4><5>

The text of the amendment states:

Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions. This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.


Criticism
The far-reaching nature of the Marshall-Newman Amendment intended to reinforce its "Marriage Affirmation Act has attracted criticism. Writing in The Washington Post, Jonathan Rauch argued that:

Virginia appears to abridge gay individuals' right to enter into private contracts with each other. On its face, the law could interfere with wills, medical directives, powers of attorney, child custody and property arrangements, even perhaps joint bank accounts. If a gay Californian was hit by a bus in Arlington, her medical power of attorney might be worthless there.<6>

[MADem]

146. Thank you for responding with citations.

I am aware of this--I was not aware, though, how absolutely ghastly the law is in VA. It's got to be unconstitutional. I don't see how VA can get away with disregarding the POAs of other states, without the other states "returning the favor," as it were.

Actions need to have consequences. VA should be made to feel the quid pro quo, for starters. Perhaps they'd not like it if any POA was disregarded from VA, because they deny reciprocal rights to some citizens of given states.

I see a big chunk of this discussion got deleted. Ah, well.

VA is due for a new governor. Who shows promise towards getting rid of this crap? Is McAuliffe saying the right things? Without the legislature, though, there's not much he can do. Wasn't some of this stuff shoved down Warner's throat, unwillingly?

[SheilaT]

174. What case in Miami?

Not all of us are immediately up to date on such a reference.

[Zenlitened]

184. Here's a link to the DU discussion about it last month:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=119230&mesg_id=119230

Based on an article from 365gay.com:

... (Janice) Langbehn and Lisa Pond had planned to take their three children on a family cruise. The Olympia, Washington couple had been together 18 years and with their children were looking forward to the holiday.

But just as they were about to depart on the cruise last year from Miami, Pond, a healthy 39-year-old, suddenly collapsed. She was rushed to Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami with Langbehn and the children following close behind.

Once Langbehn and the children arrived at the hospital, the hospital refused to accept information from her about Ponds’ medical history.

Langbehn says she was informed that she was in an anti-gay city and state, and she could expect to receive no information or acknowledgment as family.

A doctor finally spoke with Janice telling her that there was no chance of recovery.

Other than one five minute visit, which was orchestrated by a Catholic priest at Langbehn’s request, and despite the doctor’s acknowledgement that no medical reason existed to prevent visitation, neither she nor her children were allowed to see Pond until nearly eight hours after their arrival.

Soon after Pond’s death, Langbehn tried to get her death certificate in order to get life insurance and Social Security benefits for their children. She was denied both by the State of Florida and the Dade County Medical Examiner.

The lawsuit alleges negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Link to full story:
http://www.365gay.com/news/court-asked-to-reject-bid-to-dismiss-lesbians-case-against-fla-hospital

[Starry Messenger]

66. That isn't at all effective 100% of the time

and in several states laws have been passed nullifying even those slim protections.

http://indianalawblog.com/archives/2004/06/law_major_rever.html

Sunday, June 20, 2004
Law - Major Reversal in Gay Rights Looms in Virginia

"Major Reversal in Gay Rights Looms in Virginia: A bill that becomes law in July could dissolve contracts, such as wills, leases and child-custody arrangements, between same-sex couples." That is the headline to this story today in the Sunday LA Times. The report begins:

RICHMOND, Va. � When it comes to adapting state laws to reflect social change � such as women's suffrage, school desegregation and gay rights � Virginia has always been a laggard.

Still, many here were stunned by the recent passage of a bill that would end all contractual rights between same-sex partners.

Critics say the law � which takes effect July 1 and reaffirms the state's ban on gay and lesbian marriage � could negate powers of attorney, wills, leases, child-custody arrangements, joint bank accounts and health insurance granted by companies that recognize domestic partnerships.

Henry F. Fradella, a law professor at the College of New Jersey who tracks gay-rights issues, said: "Nothing so homophobic has ever been enacted into law in this nation's history." The Washington Post called the bill "jaw-dropping," saying it violated "norms of basic fairness and decency." Gay rights groups termed it discriminatory.

According to this June 13th column in the Washington Post:

The act -- really an amendment to an earlier law -- was passed in April, over Gov. Mark R. Warner's objections, and it takes effect July 1. It says, "A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges and obligations of marriage is prohibited." It goes on to add that any such union, contract or arrangement entered into in any other state, "and any contractual rights created thereby," are "void and unenforceable in Virginia."

When gay marriage came up, Virginia was among the first states to preemptively ban it, in 1997. Moreover, Virginia is the only state to forbid even private companies, unless self-insured, from extending health insurance benefits to unmarried couples. That provision affects cohabiting straights but works a far greater hardship on gay couples, who cannot marry.

Those steps, however, impinge on the power of third parties (corporations and the government) to recognize gay couples. In the Marriage Affirmation Act, Virginia appears to abridge gay individuals' right to enter into private contracts with each other. On its face, the law could interfere with wills, medical directives, powers of attorney, child custody and property arrangements, even perhaps joint bank accounts. If a gay Californian was hit by a bus in Arlington, her medical power of attorney might be worthless there. "Sorry," the hospital might have to say to her frantic partner, "your contract means nothing here. Now leave before we call security."

Some of the law's sponsors have denied intending such a draconian result, and courts may interpret the text's vague and peculiar language more narrowly. Nonetheless, the law as written is a threat to all Virginians and indeed to all Americans, gay and straight alike.

[MADem]

80. That law cannot and will not stand. In the interim, I'd get a power of attorney

made up for my attorney, if I were in a domestic partnership arrangement in VA, and have my attorney make the decisions, using attorney-client guidance provided to him or her. Let 'em try to "prove" anything in that circumstance without violating attorney-client privilege.

I'm guessing that thing gets challenged the day it takes effect.

Further, if VA is not going to recognize CA or other state contracts, then CA and other states should return the favor. That would, pun intended, queer that effort pretty quick, I should imagine.

[Starry Messenger]

89. It was put into effect a few years ago.

That article is dated 2004.

And what you are proposing is very expensive. Those that can should (and do) take care to protect their interests, I'm sure. However, in many cases it is not proving to be effective and Virginia is not the only state with these laws. And for people who cannot afford attorneys the process is prohibitive and so is suing people.

I would hope California wouldn't play games with people's lives like that.

[MADem]

95. I agree it's expensive, and I agree people should not "have" to go through that crap.

I look at things as they are, though, and try to develop mitigation strategies to employ while working for optimal resolution -- it's in my DNA to do this. Are there legal aid agencies that assist gays who aren't rich to shield themselves from at least some of this discrimination?

Virginia is such a neanderthal state in so many respects. It took them decades to give women the right to vote after everyone else did. There was Loving v. VA. They do so many dumbass things...some of this crap takes the cake.

They're due for a new governor in short order. Time for a change.

[Starry Messenger]

109. I don't think Virginia is the only state that has this problem.

I know you are trying to help but I think most people who are gay are usually acquainted with their legal options, or the lack thereof. For example there are stories surfacing on blogs now of couples who were married in California before the Prop 8 ban who are now having to look into DP if their legal marriages are annulled by Ken Starr and his band of meddlers.

http://news.lavenderliberal.com/2009/05/13/once-again-proof-that-domestic-partnerships-and-civil-unions-are-not-as-good-as-marriage/
Here is a good article about this subject.

Stories like the OP can only be (mostly) prevented by full-legal rights of marriage. I mean, what can we really say to Bob now? "Sorry Bob. You'll know better next time." For me, stories like this just make me want to push harder for full recognition of marriage equality.

[MADem]

116. I cannot argue with anything you've said.

And again, my goal isn't to offer an "alternative," simply to offer a simple, small mitigator. In the OP, if the guy had had his documents with him, he might have been able to get to his partner's bedside in time (as was explained to me by the poster later in the thread--the documents were too far away, across town).

A lot of people think they need the will, all of the associated documents, but really, all they need is a basic POA that says "If I am hospitalized, I want Fill In The Blank to make all decisions regarding my care and who may visit my bedside. I specifically do not want this authority delegated to my mother/father, etc. ." A hospital will step back and catch their breath--in most jurisdictions--if they even think about denying the bearer of the document...Virginia, perhaps, excepted. The hospital lawyer will get a case of ice cold balls, worrying about litigation.


It's simply a stopgap I'm offering--sort of like putting a first aid kit in your car trunk. It's not going to solve the sucking chest wound problem, but it will handle that nasty gash.

I don't, for a minute, think the push for equality should slow for a second or stop. I think what's happening in NH is wonderful. I hear NY is next up to bat. I'd like to see RI round out New England (not sure if anything is happening there). I think PA will be tough, and so will some other states, but one by one I am, absent Congressional action--which I do not expect, to be sadly frank, this Presidential term--glad to see movement and want to see MUCH more. Iowa shocked me--I thought they'd be more toward the back of the line. The fact that they blew the doors off and did the right thing tells me that there's momentum at last, and I'd like to see other states capitalizing on it.

[Jamastiene]

141. But...

Do you wish that va is not going to recognize ca or other state contracts then ca and other states should return the favor that would pun intended queer that effort pretty quick you should imagine?

[MADem]

147. If VA will not recognize the POAs of some citizens of MA, for example,

then MA should not recognize ANY POA from VA.

If VA citizens feel the consequences of their hate legislation when they travel, perhaps they'll be motivated to do what NORMAL states do, and recognize legal paperwork from other commonwealths and states.

If I go to NH with a POA, NH will recognize it. If I go to Maine, same deal. If I go to VA with a POA issued so I could take responsibility for my friend, and the stupid hospital "thinks" I'm gay, they can deny it? Screw that--they need to have every single one of their citizens feel the discrimination if they leave their state.

I think that might work.

Do you understand what I mean?

[iris27]

122. OMG this is appalling. How could this stand up to any real legal challenge?

On its face it would seem to require that no such contract could be made between any two people of the same sex - so no, say, making a son the POA for his father, or a female cousin written into a woman's will...? Utterly bizarre and wide-open for exploitation.

[FreeState]

71. MADem please read the update of the story available at the OP link

"UPDATE: I am sorry for a hit and run diary. In the cold light of day, nursing a hangover and finally having the tears come, I admit to being a bit shamed by this rant. I don’t know why I posted it outside of needing some release, but I do know that I am not at all surprised by the compassion shown here. This why we call ourselves a community.

Some people have mentioned legal papers as a form of protection from this sort of thing. Yes, I agree wholeheartedly, as did Bob and Kenneth because they had them drawn up. But what happened last night revealed a chink in the armour regarding that form of “protection”. Bob did not have access to those papers, because he was with me and not at home. Long story, but Kenneth spent each Sunday afternoon with his family, but Bob was not welcome there, so he would spend it with my partner and myself. Kenneth tried, right or wrong, to straddle two divergent worlds – the one of his family and the futile need for their acceptance, and the one he created for himself with his husband and his friends. Kenneth’s sister was the one who called Bob to let Bob know that Kenneth was in the hospital, and for that we are grateful. There was no time, nor presence of mind under the circumstances, to race across Phoenix (a sprawling place for those who know) to get a piece of paper to wave in front of some administrator so Bob could be afforded his legal rights. It would have been too late anyway. It isn’t the hospital’s fault either. They are not there to referee family issues, simply to offer care. I am not angry with them, and I am certain Bob isn’t either.

---

While legal papers are a good idea they are not ideal nor do they ever guarantee anything.

[MADem]

75. Let me go from the profound to the pedestrian, to illustrate this issue.

I hope people who need to read it, read it, because it might help. This is an anecdote about powers of attorney.

A power of attorney can fit on a page, two, tops.

In order for a military family member to cash a check at a military disbursing facility--and this is a common event overseas--they had to get a power of attorney that authorized them to cash the check against the military member's "good credit" in essence. That way, if the wife or husband bounced a check, the military could dock the pay of the servicemember.

Way too often, the spouses would forget their powers of attorney, and they'd be screwed, and cry, and whine, but there'd be no check cashing without it--they'd have to go home and get it. Eventually the services came up with a system where they had copies of the things on file and a computer system with the names of couples with POAs on file in it, but every now and again the computer would go down. The smart spouses had a copy of that power of attorney folded up and stuffed in a wallet or purse. This was a "just in case" copy and also worked if they travelled to another base where their names weren't in the local database.

Now, I am by no means suggesting that this "solves" the problem. Not at all. But if that poor guy only had a power of attorney folded up in his wallet, or a certified copy shoved in his car glove box, he might have been able to say goodbye to something a bit more solid than a photo.

And screw those family members--if they didn't want to see the guy, THEY could have left the room. All the partner would have to do is threaten, quietly, but firmly to sue, sue, sue--both the hospital AND the family--and he could do that with that piece of paper in his hand. They would have backed down, I believe.

What jerks those family members were. I still can't understand the heartlessness. May their lives be dull and empty, the basstids.

[bluedawg12]

94. This is putting a band aide on a festering wound. The same thing happened in Fla.

To two gay women, they had three adopted children together sanctioned by Oregon law and all of their legal paperwork was in order including POA.

Some hate filled people in a hospital in Florida denied the partner and kids final visitation with the dying 39 year woman and mother of three.

We wrote about this and discussed this similar tragedy on DU GLBT recently.

We cannot patch together a personal paper trail of legal documents that even come close to full civil rights in the United States as American citizens.


THAT is the fierce ugliness of bigotry. :grr:

[noiretextatique]

96. honestly, that could happen even if marriage was legal

there still may be some hate-filled asshole who would deny someone's legal right. i hope they are suing the hospital because that's the only way these folks will learn.

[bluedawg12]

101. Married partner rights have primacy over next of kin. Recall Schiavo.

There is a lawsuit pending on that case in Florida.

If I recall the words to the grieving family in Florida were something along the lines of, "Florida is not a gay rights State."

They didn't even bother to sugar coat their blatant bigotry.

[noiretextatique]

187. my point exactly

legal rights meant nothing to those bigots. a lawsuit will clarify things for them.

[MADem]

100. I am not offering this as a solution or even a semi-permanent fix.

I realize it won't work in every situation.

I am offering it as a stopgap, a temporary measure, a piece of paper stuffed in a drafty wall, nothing more.

I simply think that while equality is sought via the legislative methodologies, the more people who are out there, at the bedsides of their loved ones, waving their damn POAs and saying "We're not leaving," that can only bring more attention to the whole situation. People who hide or give up, or who go away with their head hanging don't get noticed. People who stand up and demand what their POA grants them do -- and that's good for the equality movement across the board. The more people who see, firsthand, how discrimination affects people and the hoops they have to jump through, why, that's a good thing. With knowledge and understanding comes empathy. With empathy comes change.

[bluedawg12]

107. MADem- "while equality is sought via the legislative methodologies" Is it?

We understand about legal documents.

You are correct, for many people but for these stories on DU, they would think that marriage equality was about parties and frivolity.

It is important that we get the word out and that we stand together on this as progressives.

"...more people who are out there, at the bedsides of their loved ones, waving their damn POAs and saying "We're not leaving,"

That sounds nice, but should bereaved and broken hearted people be asked to force a call to hospital security? No.

We are American citizens and we demand our full equal rights under the law.

What is missing is not that the gays are not doing enough, not going to their lawyers, not there "at the bedsides of their loved ones, waving their damn POAs and saying "We're not leaving."

That is not what is missing.

[MADem]

119. Let me be clear. I don't think anyone should be forced to be the poster child for

this or any issue. But the fact of the matter is, someone has to be the Rosa Parks. Someone has to sit their ass down and say "I'm not moving to the back of the bus. I am an American citizen and I demand my full equal rights under the law."

If it's someone like poor Bob in this story, or LT Choi, or whomever, then America can put a face to the reality. They can look, and see their child, their brother, their uncle, their cousins, in those faces. And like I said, with empathy comes change. You rarely make progress if you can't put names and faces to these issues, and make them real.

I wish I had the magic wand that would magically create federally mandated equality. I don't have such a thing. Neither does anyone else. This effort is advanced through the efforts of people who are willing to stand up and "demand"--and sometimes they have to put themselves out there, at great personal risk, often as not. These people are heroes, like Rosa. IMO.

[bluedawg12]

129. Yes, these people are heroes. Equality was a campaign pledge.

Equality--I am not even talking about DOMA or DADT just at this one moment-- just visitation rights which was a campaign pledge. Surely by now, there is a face, or many faces on inequality, if people care to stop, listen and support justice.

http://glaadblog.org/tag/janice-langbehn/

October 3, 2008

Biden - Palin Debate

Biden responded:

Absolutely. Do I support granting same-sex benefits? Absolutely positively. Look, in an Obama-Biden administration, there will be absolutely no distinction from a constitutional standpoint or a legal standpoint between a same-sex and a heterosexual couple.

The fact of the matter is that under the Constitution we should be granted—same-sex couples should be able to have visitation rights in the hospitals, joint ownership of property, life insurance policies, et cetera. That’s only fair.

It’s what the Constitution calls for. And so we do support it. We do support making sure that committed couples in a same-sex marriage are guaranteed the same constitutional benefits as it relates to their property rights, their rights of visitation, their rights to insurance, their rights of ownership as heterosexual couples do.”

http://glaadblog.org/tag/janice-langbehn/
"...Janice wrote about their experience in the Advocate. Janice described the precautions she and Lisa had taken, expecting to be protected in a situation like the one they found themselves in:

We took every precaution, including signing advanced directives and durable powers of attorney. We tucked them away in our files in case my condition should worsen, but being denied access to my partner in the hospital? This was backward—this should not be happening.

Their legal documents did not help Janice and her children when they found themselves in the hospital, unable to see Lisa as she died.

Charlene Strong faced a similar struggle when her partner of 10 years, Kate Fleming, was trapped in the couple’s Seattle home during a flood in 2006. Fleming was rushed to the hospital and eventually died. GLAAD worked closely with Charlene as she shared her story with the media. She also penned a piece for the Advocate describing the struggle she faced at the hospital due to the lack of legal recognition of her and Kate’s partnership:

A social worker prevented me from entering the emergency room, telling me that Washington State did not recognize same-sex partners as next of kin. Kate and I had yet to procure all the legal documents to establish our medical authority for each other; therefore, as if I were a stranger, I had to get the permission of one of Kate’s family members to be near her and to make decisions for her care.

Charlene also made a documentary about her experience, “For My Wife.”

She shared her story with the Washington State legislature and helped ensure passage of the state’s Domestic Partnership Registration Bill.

No one is putting a face to the story? No one has been an advocate? An activist?

So, gays should, at the most vulnerable moment in life, when a loved one is dying, "sit their ass down and say 'I'm not moving to the back of the bus. I am an American citizen and I demand my full equal rights under the law?'"

Really?

So no one is doing anything?

That is inaccurate and untrue.


Gays and allies have stood up and are standing up today for justice.

Gays and allies continue to stand up and speak up on behalf and those of others who have gone before and will continue to go right on after facing injustice.

Like Lt. Choi.

Like Matt Shepherd

Like we discussed here on DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=119230&mesg_id=119230

Like this couple, whom we discussed:

http://www.365gay.com/news/court-asked-to-reject-bid-to-dismiss-lesbians-case-against-fla-hospital/

Court asked to reject bid to dismiss lesbian’s case against Fla. hospital
By 365gay Newscenter Staff

(Miami, Florida) Attorneys for a woman denied access to her dying partner are asking a federal judge to reject a motion by Jackson Memorial Hospital to have a lawsuit against the facility dismissed and to allow the case to proceed to trial.

The suit was filed by Lambda Legal, which is representing Janice Langbehn.

Langbehn and Lisa Pond had planned to take their three children on a family cruise. The Olympia, Washington couple had been together 18 years and with their children were looking forward to the holiday.

But just as they were about to depart on the cruise last year from Miami, Pond, a healthy 39-year-old, suddenly collapsed. She was rushed to Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami with Langbehn and the children following close behind.

Once Langbehn and the children arrived at the hospital, the hospital refused to accept information from her about Ponds’s medical history.

Langbehn says she was informed that she was in an anti-gay city and state, and she could expect to receive no information or acknowledgment as family.

A doctor finally spoke with Janice telling her that there was no chance of recovery.

Other than one five minute visit, which was orchestrated by a Catholic priest at Langbehn’s request, and despite the doctor’s acknowledgement that no medical reason existed to prevent visitation, neither she nor her children were allowed to see Pond until nearly eight hours after their arrival.

Soon after Pond’’s death, Langbehn tried to get her death certificate in order to get life insurance and Social Security benefits for their children. She was denied both by the State of Florida and the Dade County Medical Examiner.

The lawsuit alleges negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The Public Health Trust of Miami Dade County, which runs Jackson Memorial Hospital, denies wrongdoing.

The hospital claims that it has no obligation to allow their patients’ visitors nor any obligation whatsoever to their patients’ families, healthcare surrogates, and visitors.

The Public Trust has asked the court to dismiss the case. A hearing was held Friday in federal court in Miami.

“We are here today to ensure that families get the respect they deserve at Jackson Memorial Hospital and to prevent Janice’s tragedy from happening to anyone else,” said Lambda attorney Beth Littrell.

Look at the recent anti- hate crimes legislation:

http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php?AID=21110

Analysis

While gay-rights advocates applauded the outcome, they also had cause for concern from analysis of the vote and their implications for the future.

One assumption has been that increasing Democratic margins in Congress would translate into stronger support for pro-gay legislation. While the total “yeas” did edge up from 237 to 249 over the two years between consideration, that did not match the net Democratic gain of 21 seats in the House in the 2008 election.

Republican opposition dropped from 166 to 158; at the same time their support dropped at an even greater rate, from 25 to 18. The later was due to retirement and defeat of moderates.

Democratic opposition to the legislation came almost exclusively from the South, which represented 14 of the 17 “nay” votes. Five of those were freshman representatives. It is difficult to find a white Democratic Representative from the South who voted for the bill. It appears that on gay issues, a combination of race and region trump party affiliation.

What is happening is that much of the Democrats gains are coming at the expense of moderate Republicans, with little net gain for the gay community.

That is likely to become even more apparent as Congress moves beyond “pro-gay” legislation such as hate crimes, which is a relatively easy vote, to increasingly controversial issues such as employment protection, the military, and ultimately marriage.

And whatever happened to the Military Enhancement Readiness ACT to repeal DADT?

Never came to the floor for a vote as scheduled for this April, again.

http://www.hrc.org/laws_and_elections/5659.htm

The Military Readiness Enhancement Act
H.R. 1283

The Problem
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Pursue, Don’t Harass” (DADT) – the current policy prohibiting lesbians and gays from serving openly in the U.S. Armed Forces – is the only law in the country that requires people to be dishonest about their personal lives or be fired, possibly even imprisoned. This discriminatory policy hurts military readiness and national security while putting American soldiers fighting overseas at risk.

What is the Military Readiness Enhancement Act?
The Military Readiness Enhancement Act (MREA) ends this discriminatory and unworkable law and replaces DADT with a policy of non-discrimination. MREA repeals 10 U.S.C. 654, the military’s DADT law that requires servicemembers to neither engage in nor disclose a propensity to engage in homosexual acts. MREA adds a new section to Chapter 37 of 10 U.S.C. that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Readiness_Enhancement_Act

The Military Readiness Enhancement Act
The 2005 bill had 122 cosponsors and the 2007 bill had 149 cosponsors. They were both referred to the House Committee on Armed Services and the Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Personnel but failed to advance. The 2009 bill has 140 cosponsors as of May 2009, and was referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.

Supporters of the repeal want Congress to eliminate the policy with the 2010 defense authorization bill in April 2009.<1>

If you are an ally, then, stand up with us. Help us fight for human rights. Demand our elected Democratic representatives deal with the myriad of injustices.

[MADem]

144. Look at your cites. This stuff, except for the quotes from the debates

(and we know about pandering--telling people how one FEELS doesn't necessarily mean that the candidate will DO anything about it) aren't making it onto GOOD MORNING AMERICA or the CBS EVENING NEWS or the MOVIE OF THE WEEK. That's not the fault of the activists--it's the fault of the media. They're deciding, without any real knowledge, what they "think" people want to hear.

With the possible exception of the Matthew Shepherd story, and of course the resurrected MILK and the Twinkie Defense, hate crimes just aren't sticking in the public consciousness. Nor are hospital injustices like the horrible one you described. I really doubt that if you stopped a hundred people on the streets of any random town in the USA and asked them "Who was Lisa Pond?" that a single one could answer the question. People should know who she is, but I'm betting most don't. It would probably look like a segment of JAYWALKING on the Leno show.

When suburban America thinks "gay" they used to think "Will and Grace." Now they think, "Aww, ELLEN!!!" But gee--Ellen seems so happy, now, doesn't she? (Do I need to pull out the sarcasm icon for you to understand that I don't mean that?).

And I'll tell you, when I said "Ah, committee--the kiss of death" about HR 1283 (after being told it was "the answer"--a sure thing), I got a beat down for telling the truth about it. Committee is never a good thing, unless there's a whipper in there moving the thing along (and it also helps to have a friend in the Pentagon who calls the legislative aides and makes sure that their principal --the legislator-- is briefed up and ready to do battle for the piece of the pie you are responsible for shoving through). No one wants their bill to wind up in committee without someone hovering over it--it IS the kiss of death, and it's designed to be that. It is the way that the Congress pretends to do shit when they aren't doing anything. And unless there's someone on the HASC or SASC that cares, that's probably going to stay low-pri for the third go-round, as the hearings concentrate on where all those pallets of cash being shipped over to the sandy places are winding up, and what we're getting for our money.

And when I compared the abolitionist states to the equality states, I was accused of going off topic--but it actually was the southern states that were "shitty" in regard to both slavery and equality. As you, too, have noted.

What can we do? How can we move the ball forward? Do "Jersey Girls" style lobbying? That was pretty effective, actually--they were polite and determined, and didn't take no for an answer. I honestly think that if some famous producer/director (Oprah with her BIG SHOW to flog the thing, or someone who would be willing to do the VIEW, LARRY KING and and all the shill your product shows) came out with a movie about Lisa Pond (and it's a movie that writes itself) , or someone else that got fucked over, that starred someone super famous, that would do what a million phone calls, a thousand marches, and a hundred bloggers could not do.

This is a visual, inattentive and very PERSONAL society. If it's not them, or their cousin, their uncle, their friend, who are affected, they just don't give a shit. Empathy is in short supply.

I really think MILK helped, in ways that marches, letters to the editor, and thoughtful efforts at discussion could not. People won't listen or feel unless there's a story attached.

I wish these matters DID get more attention from the Brian Williamses and the Katie Courics, but I guess it takes George Clooney or Meryl Streep "starring as" to get this stuff off the blogs, that, despite lots of page views, are "preach to the choir" efforts, and on the tee vee sets of the many, many people who don't pay attention and remain completely unaware.

[aikoaiko]

29. That was very moving.

Love conquers all --- eventually discriminating legal practices too.

[biermeister]

30. I am sorry for your loss.

It's hard to believe that things like this still happen.

[rms013]

31. Who is Kenneth's Family?

I found this extremely upsetting and wondered what qualifies one as family. Is it family who decides to exclude someone from providing comfort at your last moments so they may provide their own self serving version? I don't care who or what my family member wanted to be with them, this is their life, not mine, and I would abide by their wishes. I find it to be un-Christian, immoral and downright selfish for Kenneth's family to step in after 26 years (because they can) and dictate some self serving decree of out of sight out of mind (but not out of heart) on Kenneth's life long partner.

There is not enough shame in the world to place on Kenneth's "family". My heart goes out to Bob and to Kenneth.

[Kindigger]

46. I'm asking the same thing

What is 'family'? People that you only see once a year at Christmas?

I know it's nowhere near the same, but my ex-husband died of a heart attack in his sleep when he was 42. We were together 14 years, and he'd been remarried for 7. I'd never even met his new wife, but we held each other and cried at the funeral.

Then I went to the reception after the service where I was dragged outside by the hood of my coat, into the snow by his younger brother, kicked repeatedly, and told I didn't belong at THEIR family event.

[Hepburn]

49. OMG....I am so sorry that happened to you.

When my late husband passed on, I asked that his first wife sit with the us in the family area. She was the mother of his first children and he still held her in high respect. They just simply did not belong married to each other beause their personalities were so opposite. I would have dishonored him if I had done anything less.

:hug:

[Beam Me Up]

32. Here is what the opposite experience looks like:

My partner of many years, David, died of a brain tumor the day after Valentine's Day, 1997. David had been diagnosed with the tumor only a few days before and although Drs scheduled surgery, I believe the truth of the matter is that the tumor was inoperable but we were not told that. About twenty four hours earlier, David had gone into a comma from which he was never to return.

David was estranged from most of his immediate family, especially his father and two of his siblings; his mother had passed away years earlier. He was on very good terms, however, with his youngest brother who also happened to be an attorney. As soon as David was diagnosed and while he was still relatively cogent, his brother met with David and I and formalized all the papers necessary to not only make me the executor of his estate but to give me, his partner, full power of attorney, including a living will and medical power of attorney. We discussed this in great detail. David did not want to be kept on life support should the worst occur and he made this very clear to both his brother and I.

During these few days, David also REFUSED to see any other members of his family, all of whom lived out of state. The two other siblings quickly came to town and I met with both of them. They already knew of David's decision and both requested to see him. I told them, this was not MY decision, it was David's and I would respect that decision. However, they both asked me to speak with David on their behalf, which I agreed to do. David eventually agreed to see his sister but steadfastly refused to see his other brother and made it clear he did not want to see his father, either.

All during this time David's siblings were VERY supportive of ME although I had only met the younger brother previously. They all recognized the difficult and painful situation I was in and respected that David had put me in charge of decision making regarding his health. They made every effort to support me AS A MEMBER OF THEIR FAMILY although, other than these recent signed documents, I had no LEGAL rights. What I had from these family members was RESPECT because David and I had been loving partners for so many years.

After David went into comma the brain damage resulting from the tumor became so severe that he was put on life-support. It was at this point that I allowed David's other brother to see David. Although even this was against David's wishes (he had said he did not want to be in the same room with him), I felt I could no longer justify sustaining David's own hatred of this man who was grief stricken, no matter how "justified" David had felt himself to be in holding this position. When the time came to remove David from life support -- his body was alive and strong but his brain was for all practical purposes "dead" -- the family (myself included) were counseled by the attending nurse who specialized in this particular kind of procedure. She did an exceptional job of explaining precisely what she was doing, what we could expect, and did so with the utmost sensitively. All four of us surrounded David with love and tears as the required tests were done to show that the machinery was all that was keeping David alive and as that machinery was disconnected and he was allowed to die. It was, without doubt, one of the most powerful experiences of my life. And the amazing thing was the support I received from David's family even though he had long rejected most of them. They said unequivocally that I was in control. They recognized that I was David's lover and that we had a relationship that was every bit as respectable and sacred as their own marriages. They gave me verbal support, hugs, and treated me as a member of a family in a time of grief and crisis. Even his father, who I had never met and did not meet until after David's passing -- and who was a fundamentalist Christian -- greeted me with open arms, compassion and respect. His first words to me were this: "I'm sure you've heard a lot about me from David. I hope you'll forgive me for saying that perhaps not all of it was true. I certainly have my faults and my limitations but I want to be clear that I always loved david and never rejected him because he was gay. I have lost a son and you have lost a partner and I hope we can both respect one another's grief."

I am so VERY thankful that I was given this kind of support from David's family. I have heard MANY horror stories of the exact opposite -- the OP being one example. I share my story to show what these situations CAN and SHOULD look like -- a family coming together in grief, not being held apart by prejudice.

Thank you for reading.

[pacalo]

45. That must have been really hard on you, but you handled it beautifully.

You showed bravery, generosity, & poise in meeting & dealing with David's estranged family. David would have been proud of you; you did everything right -- & that includes allowing David's brother in to see him for the last time.

:hug:

[Mad_Dem_X]

47. Thank you for sharing that. n/t

[MADem]

82. What a powerful story, and a heart-wrenching experience for you.

I am so glad the family didn't make a horrible situation more difficult. The fact that you were all able to grieve together is pretty profound, as well.

[FourScore]

121. Okay. Now I'm crying again. Thank you so much for posting this.

:hug:

[QueenOfCalifornia]

189. I am deeply moved by your story.

This should be its own OP.

Strongly suggest you copy, paste and post this as a stand alone original post.

hugs to you and David's family.

[Rhythm]

33. This happens every day in our supposedly 'free' country... (ty FourScore... you made me cry here)

Because GLBT relationships are not treated equally under the law, horrible things like this happen every day to some family somewhere in America. This is the heart of why MARRIAGE EQUALITY is so damned important. If GLBT's shared equal marriage rights, this shit wouldn't happen.

These are just three examples, and two of them are people i've known most of my life.

The same could happen to my family if something unfortunate should happen to me, because although Lyric's family is open and accepting (and has practically adopted me), my relatives back in NC are backward fundie conservatives who would behave no better than the worst stories we have heard, even though Lyric and i have lived and loved together for the last 10 years.

_______________

Bob and Kenneth, after 26 years, were denied spending their final moments together by homobigoted relatives, and laws that silently gave THEM the power over Kenneth's life. I hope Kenneth's parents burn in the hell they put their son through. I have no pity for them. They didn't really 'know' the person they lost, or if they did, they didn't care.

_______________

My friend Owen lost his lifemate Dan last year, after a string of chronic health issues. Dan's homo-hating, gawd-and-country redneck family claimed Dan's body, didn't tell Owen anything about the funeral, and even edited the photos and such for the memorial service to 'lose' the 11 years of Dan's life that he had shared with Owen. The anniversary of Dan's passing was a couple of days ago, and it killed me to talk to Owen and hear the anguish in that burly bear's voice.

________________

In August 2007, my friend Jree was rushed to the hospital after a supposedly routine checkup revealed the need for a quad bypass operation. Paula (Jree's partner of 30 years) obligatorily informed Jree's mom in Missouri that she was going in for the procedure. Jree's mom flew to DC from the family farm, basically took over everything, and then when Jree didn't recover from the surgery, took her back to be buried in Missouri. Paula and their third roommate/best friend Riz got a one-sentence 'honorable mention' in the obit. Jree's mom left all of Jree's stuff there at the apartment, though, because she had no idea what might be of any real value (Jree was a sculptor of some renown, but to her mother, it all looked like junk). Paula is still working through the grieving process, but after 30 years, then just 'gone'... how do you put your life back together?

[winyanstaz]

34. I am saddened for you and the families grief, but not happy with what they did...

Perhaps instead of trying to change the law to include gay relationships, we could amend it that everyone should have a list of who they wish to be allowed to be present and who not.
I say this because there are many types of relationships and to deny someone the presence of their best friend is also not right.
We should be allowed to have whom we wish around us at this time and not have it left up to hospital rules and families only..that may not want to include the very people that mean the most to the dying soul.
I had to recommend this thread as this is an issue we need to deal with on so many levels.
My advice for now is to keep very busy and the more people you can help the better. It was only by plunging into being very active and caring for others that I was able to continue on after losing my darling ten year old grandson, my beloved cat companion of 18 years and my dearly beloved husband..all within a couple of years.

[alarimer]

177. This is a good idea, at least until there is full marriage equality.

And it needs to be a federal law that hospitals have NO SAY in who visits or does not. Now, that does not stop families from being assholes but at least the hospital cannot determine who gets in to see patients.

Enforcing it may well be another matter.

[Stephanie]

35. Health Care Proxy, Power of Attorney, Last Will & Testament

Wouldn't those documents have over-ridden the family's rights? Not sure, just asking. That is a horrendous situation and it shouldn't happen to anyone else.

[MountainLaurel]

70. Not always

If you note the post about Virginia above, the legislature has basically nullified any contracts between persons of the same sex.

[Ms. Toad]

154. It actually hasn't.

Any contract that is not a marriage contract is still valid. Since durable powers of attorney for health care (for example) are not restricted to the marriage relationship the amendment does not nullify them.

What the amendment does is nullify contracts that attempt recreate the marriage relationship. Good legal counsel will draft the documents in a way that it is clear that the contract (if it is a contract) is based on consideration other than a marital relationship; that the contract is not an attempt to create a marriage-like relationship. Other legal documents should be written "merely" put into place rights the grantor could legally grant to anyone - not just to a legally recognized spouse.

(A group I am affiliated with has a large GLBT contingent that will be going to Virginia this summer for the second time since the amendment has passed and we have consulted local legal counsel in advance of the trip both times to make sure our members are protected; plus I have spent a fair amount of time in this field of law since I have a personal interest in it.)

Does that guarantee that everyone we encounter will follow the law - no. Does it mean we should have to create these additional legal documents for ourselves - no. It just means that the amendment did not nullify any grant of rights I have granted to my spouse that I could have granted to ANY OTHER PERSON - it only nullifies a grant of rights to my same gender spouse that I am only legally permitted to grant to an opposite gender spouse.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

37. K&R for my many friends and their husbands/wives.

They and we all deserve better than this.

Kenneth and Bob, your experience is not for nothing... You are contributing to the swell of compassion demanding action to end this cruelty.

[grantcart]

38. this video link was on the daily kos thread - very moving

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/mental-health-break-12.html

[pacalo]

39. How utterly cruel that this family disregarded 26 years of love.

In the parking lot, Bob, his partner of 26 years, said goodbye to a photograph.

This diary really brings home why the law should recognize the legal rights of gays. If all men are created equal, then why isn't marriage readily available to all couples -- why the hell are we voting whether to allow equal rights?

This family's heartless denial is going to leave a hole in Bob's heart forever, & for that, I'm terribly sorry. But it's the law that enabled this family to be cruel & it needs to be changed to consider Bob's & Ken's rights, too.

Rest in peace, Ken, & a :hug: to Bob.

:cry:

[Mnemosyne]

40. Rest in peace, Kenneth. And my heart cries for Bob.

:cry:

[Kindigger]

41. good god

:cry:

[4_TN_TITANS]

42. THIS is the kind of thing

I would like to see on 60 minutes or an evening news documentary. I'm sure this was in direct conflict with the wishes of the deceased.

[nini]

43. I just can't wrap my mind about this kind of stuff.

That 'family' decided to slap not only Bob's face but their own son as he slipped away. They sit there and tell Ken they love him yet use that one final moment to deny him the one person he made his life with.


God.. I hate shit like this :cry:

[Mad_Dem_X]

44. My heart goes out to Bob and all those

in similar situations - denied the right to be at their loved one's side when they pass. It's so goddamned unfair. Words cannot express the sorrow and fucking anger I feel right now.

[Starry Messenger]

48. I'm trying not to cry at work.

This is so heartbreaking. What a disgusting family.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

50. I knew a long-term gay couple in Portland

where one partner died, and his relatives came in and removed every bit of the deceased partner's personal property, and the surviving partner couldn't do anything about it, especially not in his grief-stricken state. They even tried unsuccessfully to take things that the couple had bought together, and I'm sure it frustrated the hell out of them that the house was in both the men's names, or else they would have kicked the surviving partner out.

[snake in the grass]

51. Truly heartbreaking.

It's bad enough to lose someone so dear. The family's behavior adds additional scars. I sometimes wish there were a Hell for these people to go to.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

53. I'm still Hoping there is

how very sad.

[The Doctor.]

52. Dear God, may you show all the compassion to Ken's family

that Ken's family showed Bob.

These people are so ignorant of the pain they cause because of their own fears.

They would visit such pain and desolation on so many merely for the crime of being different.

[Wednesdays]

54. K&R

:kick:

[whopis01]

55. I watched the same thing happen to a friend of mine

He and his partner had been together for years. They had been part of my wedding and we had been part of their wedding (not a state-licensed wedding of course, but one nonetheless). Frank died unexpectedly. They had made the mistake of not putting everything in joint title and within days of the funeral, his parents were taking the house and the car away from his partner of years. Obviously they never saw them as partners or could imagine that they loved each other like any other couple would. Of course, it could have been somewhat preventable if they went through certain legal procedures that NO heterosexual couple ever has to worry about dealing with. How anybody can act in such a horrible way towards someone at a time like that is unbelievable to me.

You and Bob said goodbye to Ken, not just his photograph. I am certain that once he was free of his body that his first stop was the backseat of your car.

[Lugnut]

56. That's heartbreaking and so unfair.

RIP Kenneth. I'm so sorry, Bob. :(

I can't think of one kind word to say about Kenneth's family.

[Mira]

57. Very very angry tears ! K&R

[cboy4]

58. Beyond heartbreaking.

K&R

[Faygo Kid]

59. If I could recommend this 100 times, I would do so. And I say that as an old, straight male.

The older I get, the more I get fierce about this issue.

[Parker CA]

106. +500, albeit coming from a young, straight male.

[roguevalley]

60. unbelievable. this is awful. I am so sorry.

[myrna minx]

61. .

:cry:

[libnnc]

62. kick

too sad and angry to say anything further--might get TSed.

[sallylou666]

65. Unfair to require another legal document

A medical power of attorney gives a partner the power to make decisions. The problem here is that straight married spouses and next of kin do not need a medical power of attorney because law confers the rights automatically. Why should gay partners need to execute a document, which requires extra time and expense, when others do not? Why make gay partners jump through an extra hoop? Gay people may not realize that they need this document or may think that it's unnecessary when they are young and healthy. When a serious illness strikes a younger gay couple, they may be unprepared. That's when tragedy strikes. To me, it's entirely a matter of fairness. The solution is easy--give married gay couples that same rights as straight married couples automatically without making them execute legal documents. It's also a matter of respect--treating humans fairly.

[Withywindle]

67. crying.

this, that lesbian couple in Florida....this just keeps happening, and it never should in a civilized country.

I'm beyond furious at these cruel, hateful people who deny loved ones their goodbyes...how could they? Rot in hell.

I'm also furious at people who minimize the hate and discrimination LGBT people face and act like equality is some kind of trivial issue. They allow this to happen.

[Ohio Joe]

68. Damn that makes me angry

I can't even put it into words... that two people in love are not allowed to be together to say goodbye when death is at hand... grrrr

RIP Kenneth

[sandyj999]

69. This is so very sad and so very wrong.

In the late 70's I worked with two women who were partners. One of them had a stroke and the other was not allowed to even see her. I would have hoped in those 30 years things would have improved but I guess as long as there are bigots it will never improve.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

72. I worked for Shanti in San Francisco

from 1987 to 1989. I was a volunteer lawyer, writing wills for AIDS patients, going to court to fight landlords who tried to evict men who were HIV-positive, contacting families that their son, brother, cousin was dying.

I can't tell you the number of times I saw this scenario played out. Over and over, partners, longtime companions, the very ones who should have been beside the dying man were barred and shunned, made invisible, by the families, by the hospitals (who had no choice), and, occasionally, by the police (who behaved better than anyone when a call like this came in - a lot of the cops were gay).

Twenty years on, and nothing has changed.

There is no word for the rage I feel......................

[Mythsaje]

111. One of the coolest cops I ever met

was on the SFPD. Decent, young Asian-American guy who sat there at the desk looking over the holding cell bs-ing with the lot of us until we were released on OR. We had him laughing so hard he almost fell out of his chair. Don't know if he was gay or straight, but he was cool.

[applegrove]

73. Very sad.

[orleans]

74. oh my god....

heartbreaking
infuriating

[derby378]

76. My advice to Bob: crash the funeral

You have the right to be there. Take some friends with you to hold the ushers at bay. :mad:

[Number23]

79. Red'd. FourScore, thank you for posting

[DollyM]

81. Not to lesson the impact of this but they also do this to unmarried partners . . .

My mother and my "step dad" had lived together 15 years but never married. She took care of him through cancer, stroke, congestive heart failure and many, many dr visits, tests, hospital stays, etc. Yet when he was dying, she had no right to be in the room with him because she was not married to him or was his blood relative. Even though he own children only showed up like vultures when he was down to his final hours and they couldn't have been bothered all the previous years. My mother got nothing after he died and didn't fight for anything even though she had cared for him unselfishly all those years. She was too afraid of his family battling her so she was not even included in his will.
I don't know what the answer is but this whole premise of legal marriage being the only qualifier in this situation, needs to be changed.

(I wanted to add that the reason they never married is that my mother was 62 years old at the time they met and he moved in with her. His health crashed soon after that he had massive medical bills. If they would have married she would have lost the social security from my birth father as well as having his medical bills to contend with long after he was gone. So, we also need to straighten out the cost of medical care so people are not put in a situation of having to choose between the legal benefits of marriage and losing everything you own due to a spouse's medical bills.)

[proteus_lives]

98. After 15 years, wouldn't they have a common-law marriage?

[Mythsaje]

114. Only a couple of states recognize Common Law marriages anymore...

I think it was four or five at last count.

[proteus_lives]

145. Really?

I thought virtually all states had them. Learn something everyday I guess.

[Zenlitened]

117. Common-law marriage is a state-by-state thing.

But your hunch is generally correct: In some states, a man and a woman who live together long enough can basically be 'declared' married by the state... whether they wanted to get hitched or not!

:wow:

[Ms. Toad]

155. Most require that the couple hold themselves to be married

and are considered by others to be married. There is often a time period involved, but not always. All require that the couple be eligible to marry under the state marriage laws.

There are only a few that are recognizing new common law marriages - although any marriage that pre-dated the statute is still recognized. In Ohio through around 1991 there was no set period for living together - as long as held yourselves out to be married, and were considered by others to be married, a mere overnight could establish a marriage. Once married, it is as valid as any other marriage - so if you were married at common law in Ohio in 1992, unless you got a statutory (i.e. court) divorce, you are still married.

[Number23]

123. You're right. Common law and "de facto" marriages don't enjoy full privileges

or protection either. What happened to your mother is terrible and all too common.

[Tim01]

84. Not right. Not at all.

[malaise]

85. So what exactly did his partner's family prove?

So do those nasty, mean-spirited, unconscionable haters believe they obliterated his love for his partner by keeping Bob away from him.
Shakes head in disbelief!!!

[marlakay]

87. This is so wrong...some day things will change.

Everyone deserves the same rights no matter who you are. Who first made these hospital rules anyways? and why does it take gay marriage to change them? Marriage or not you should be able to have who you want by your dying bedside.

[eppur_se_muova]

92. Mean people suck. Too bad the official policy is on their side.

Sometimes it seems that's all official policies are for. :(

[noiretextatique]

93. people can be such uncaring assholes

i feel the most sorry for Kenneth...and of course for Bob too. but i can't imagine being denied the right to see the person i love when i am dying. luckily, i already have an advanced medical directive. i have seen this happen to too many people :cry:

[proteus_lives]

99. K/R. So sad.

[ooglymoogly]

102. KR in tears....may the gods rest these poor souls. nt

[JitterbugPerfume]

103. so unbelivably sad

someday it will change , and our decendants will wonder at our lack of compassion.

[momdogz]

108. I'm a nurse at a hospital that would have let Bob be with his partner AND

would have fought for his rights with the family and brought him kleenex and tea and let him climb in bed with him and DAMN I would have risked losing my job in that hospital to get Bob in there.

It really hurts to know that something so preventable and stupid stupid stupid caused so much pain!

[FourScore]

120. Welcome to DU, momdogz.

After reading your response, my first instinct was reply with "I love you." But that might seem a little wierd. Then when I saw that you just started posting here, I decided maybe I ought to just welcome you.

But I still love what you wrote.

[momdogz]

125. thanks for the welcome - and

I'll take the love too :pals: ....I've been with a lot of people and their loved ones when they passed. It's all about love.
It's wonderful that you were there with Bob, in a horrible situation.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

188. Your post made me weep

because you are a good person and you are correct.

This thread has me in tears.

Peace to Bob and all of Kenneth's friends who accepted him and loved him and brought him happiness.

This was preventable -

Welcome to DU momdogz

[Zenlitened]

112. Incredibly sad, incredibly cruel.

Reminds of that Florida case from last month. Here's the link to that DU discussion:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=119230&mesg_id=119230

These are not stories about proper paperwork, IMO.

It's about societal attitudes that empower and energize bigotry.

As long as same-sex couples are marginalized as "different," "not-quite," "other" etc. -- until marriage fairness is the law of the land, in other words, and the standard by which we measure decency -- they will be vulnerable to exactly this kind of tragedy.

[Mythsaje]

113. Ignorance and casual cruelty are as evil as deliberate malignancy...

The end result is much the same.

I'm so sorry this happened.

[DainBramaged]

115. That hurt. May both Ken and Bob find their peace.

Thank you.

:hug: :cry:

[OHDEM]

118. So sad.

:cry:

The injustice of it is overwhelming. His partner couldn't be there and may very well not inherit property they shared, yet the family that didn't accept him as he was is there.

It's just not right.

[democrank]

124. "Ignorance and cruelty" indeed.

Rest in peace, Kenneth.

[mike_c]

126. damn it....

:cry:

[Taverner]

127. RIP Kenneth

.. .

[keepthemhonest]

128. how painful NT

[HCE SuiGeneris]

130. I weep for this world.

How can we be so cruel and indifferent?

It's enough to crush one's spirit...

[Xipe Totec]

132. with my deepest regrets.

The Weeping Gardner

I want to be
the weeping gardner
of the grounds you occupy,
and compost so early,
my soulmate.

In the rain to feed the garden snails,
organ of my voiceless pain,
surrendering your heart as food,
to the disheartened roses,
such pain clumps in my chest,
breathing is agony.

A hard fist, an icy blow,
an axe strike, homicidal and unseen,
a brutal push tumbled you.

There is no wider chasm than my wound,
I cry to misfortune and her companions,
I feel your death, more than my life.

Death took flight early,
and early came the dawn of morn,
and early it spills upon the ground.

I do not forgive death for loving you,
or forgive life for its distraction,
or forgive the ground,
or forgive oblivion.

With my hands I raise a storm,
of stones, bolts and strident axes,
thirsting and hungering for catastrophe.

With bare teeth I want to dig the ground,
and move the dirt part by part,
in dry and furious bites.

I want to mine the earth until I find you,
to kiss your noble skull,
unbind your body and return you,
to my garden and my fig tree.

Your soul that was,
so effortlessly gentle,
will flutter bird-like,
among the tall flowery trelises,
and will return at the murmur
of the iron gates,
where lovers meet.

You will lighten the shadow of my brow,
and your blood will flow through my garden.
Competing with the bees for a girl,
your velvet heart will summon forth,
a crop of snowy almond blossoms.
But my jealous voice will call you
away from the almond trees,
to the winged souls of the roses.
For we have much to talk about,
my soulmate,
my companion.

- Miguel Hernández

[AwakeAtLast]

133. Such a sad story all around, but made sadder by the thoughtless "family"

When you are a true family you make sure that all are appreciated and loved, no matter what. How families can do these things to each other, especially in a time of stress and grief, is baffling.

My heart goes out to Bob. :hug:

[JackDragna]

134. I only hope Bob takes comfort in loving..

..and in being loved, even if in the end, bigotry ruled the hour. May we soon have a world in which this type of intolerance is just as reviled as racism.

[bertman]

136. Thank you for posting this. It makes me sad and angry.

Ken's "family" belies the meaning of the word.

[lonestarnot]

137. Just how fucked up are we anyway! Pretty fucked up it appears!

Bastards!

[lavenderdiva]

138. your story made me weep

and got me so angry. I'm so sorry that this happened to your friend, and to many others too, I suspect. I am so sorry for Bob, and also for Ken. That Ken couldn't have the one person who meant more to him, and provided support to him all those years is incomprehensible.

[donheld]

139. God-damn them all to hell

Bob, we got your back.

[armyowalgreens]

140. K&R choking back man tears. This is such bullshit!

I don't get it! I don't fucking understand how anyone could be so cruel to another human being that did nothing more than love his husband.

How can this happen!?!

[Ken Burch]

149. that family is evil. They had no right to deny this man his place at the bedside.

Jesus will be kicking their asses someday!

[Norrin Radd]

150. kr

[rasputin1952]

151. Sad...so sad...

Love transcends all else...it cannot be denied in the heart; but it can be denied at the door.

[underseasurveyor]

153. Oh sweet dearest Bob

How my heart hurts for him and for Kenneth too for he had to pass without his love by his side.

I can't comprehend the cold cruelty, selfishness and heartlessness of Kenneth's family.

That breaks my heart:-(

[countmyvote4real]

156. My sleeves are so wet right now.

Thank you for sharing. It shows so clearly how hate is the denial of love.

[Kitty Herder]

157. Shit. Now I'm crying like a baby. This is so wrong.

This story illustrates why equal marriage rights are so important. To those who think that having the right legal documents can solve the problem, read the addendum to the diary:

UPDATE: I am sorry for a hit and run diary. In the cold light of day, nursing a hangover and finally having the tears come, I admit to being a bit shamed by this rant. I don’t know why I posted it outside of needing some release, but I do know that I am not at all surprised by the compassion shown here. This why we call ourselves a community.

Some people have mentioned legal papers as a form of protection from this sort of thing. Yes, I agree wholeheartedly, as did Bob and Kenneth because they had them drawn up. But what happened last night revealed a chink in the armour regarding that form of “protection”. Bob did not have access to those papers, because he was with me and not at home. Long story, but Kenneth spent each Sunday afternoon with his family, but Bob was not welcome there, so he would spend it with my partner and myself. Kenneth tried, right or wrong, to straddle two divergent worlds – the one of his family and the futile need for their acceptance, and the one he created for himself with his husband and his friends. Kenneth’s sister was the one who called Bob to let Bob know that Kenneth was in the hospital, and for that we are grateful. There was no time, nor presence of mind under the circumstances, to race across Phoenix (a sprawling place for those who know) to get a piece of paper to wave in front of some administrator so Bob could be afforded his legal rights. It would have been too late anyway. It isn’t the hospital’s fault either. They are not there to referee family issues, simply to offer care. I am not angry with them, and I am certain Bob isn’t either. ...


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/5/18/732663/-Tonight-we-said-goodbye-to-a-photograph

[bluestateguy]

158. Disgusting

I hope the deceased had an airtight will beforehand, otherwise I would not be surprised if this "family" takes everything for themselves.

The thing is that most Americans fully support the right of partner hospital visitation, as well as other legal rights of marriage, but we are still at a point where the words "gay" and "marriage" give people the heebie jeebies. I confident that we will move beyond that kind of thinking (especially as more elderly homophobes croak and die), but it will be too late for these two men.

[Baby Snooks]

164. The will won't matter...

Probate judges don't respect wills written by "unmarried" partners leaving their estates to the other partner. Heterosexual or homosexual. That happened to a friend of mine. Her mother-in-law claimed her son was under the influence of drugs. She not only disinherited my friend but her own grandson whom she considered, and I quote, a bastard. What she stated in court. They had a common law marriage recognized by social security. But not by a probate court.

Life is fair. Unfortunately it's filled with schmucks.

[mb7588a]

159. Fuck them.

Fuck them and their grief. They don't deserve to grieve. Terrible thing to say, but nowhere near as terrible as the pain that they put their son and his partner through for so long.

[MoonlitwingsX]

160. Wow..

This is quite possibly the absolute most worst thing I can ever picture a couple to go through.. I've had nightmares like with my own partner. And its images like this that will always keep me fighting fiercely against disgusting bigots like this. Nobody.. NOBODY.. *NOBODY!!!* should ever deal with this kind of fucking pain.

If something like this ever happened to me, I'm not sure I could ever, ever forgive the family.

[complain jane]

161. So sorry to hear this. Hugs.

[FlyingSquirrel]

162. You must someday find the strength to forgive his family.

Not for them, but for you. My thoughts are with you and Kenneth.

:hug:

[Baby Snooks]

165. Why?

I have never understood this "Judeo-Christian" principle of forgiveness. It is an invitation for the person you forgive to do it again. If not to you, to someone else.

[FlyingSquirrel]

166. They don't need to know he's forgiven them.

Although if he truly is able to forgive them, he would not mind their knowing it. Forgiving someone is not equivalent to saying that what they did is ok, and I don't really think that forgiveness necessarily makes someone think that the wrong they committed was not wrong. I don't see a really strong correlation there - in fact the more someone tries to prove to another person that what they did was wrong, the more that person is likely to defend and strengthen their belief that they were right. It's human nature. Also - think about the times you've been in a dispute with someone, and later decided to end the feud and make peace with the other person - even if you still believed they were in the wrong. How often did they then look inward and decide to apologize?

Also it's not a Judeo-Christian principle for me. It's more of an internal peace principle. Would Kenneth want his partner to spend the rest of his life mourning him and holding on to resentment and/or hatred for his misguided family? That's impossible to know but I suspect the answer is "no".

Anyway, if you're really interested in understanding why I think forgiveness is important, I'll leave you with a couple of quotes - I consider forgiveness to be letting go of resentment or anger.

"Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned."
-- Buddha

"Resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die." -- Malach McCourt

"For every minute you are angry you lose 60 seconds of happiness." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"To carry a grudge is like being stung to death by one bee." -- William H. Watson ;-)

"He who angers you conquers you." -- Elizabeth Kenny

[Baby Snooks]

168. I can let go of anger and resentment and still not forgive...

I like something someone said years ago after she picked up a paper and found that her lover/partner/"don't want to be married but still love only you" of 17 years was involved with someone else. Who he then married.

"It's not a matter of forgiveness, it's a matter of simply not wanting him in my life ever again."

No offense but Buddhists have begun to wear on me as well. Although I do believe in the void called "nirvana" which is where everyone I tell to go to hell really goes. Into the void.

I have no words to express my horror every time I hear about someone being denied the right to spend their last moments with someone they love. I resent it. It angers me. Always will. I am human. I feel.

These people do not feel. They are incapable of feeling. And I would tell them to rot in hell if I had the chance. And then send them to the void. Where they belong. They and their "piety of prejudice."

I have no patience any more for people who believe some are "less than others" and believe so while professing to believe in a god who made some less than others.

I am child of a lesser god I suppose. My god would never make anyone less than another.

[undergroundnomore]

169. Why Are People So Against Love?

I know I've said this before but my nephew is Gay. He is bright. He is big hearted. He is generous. And YES HE's GAY. He is entitled to love. Entitled to live. Entitled to celebrate with the person he chooses to love. He is entitled to share the pains that life deals us with the person he loves.

My heart goes out to this man who has lost the partner he has loved for years. I just can't wrap my head around a family turning their back on a person who has brought their loved one joy and happiness. The family's refusal to acknowledge the most important relationship in his life speaks volumes. It speaks of an extremely conditional, selfish, twisted kind of love which is an adulteration of the word love. After all love is never selfish.

My family longs for the day that the rest of America gets up to speed on "Gay Marriage" and stops using the term Gay in front of the word marriage. We should just recognize these unions as marriage and not marriage with a twist. It is after all the union of two people. It is the acknowledgement that two people LOVE each other and pledge to be together through all life throws their way.

btw my nephew lives in Virginia, which as Bluedawg12 says has this barbaric clause to say about the love between two people:

Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions. This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

[Baby Snooks]

179. "Virginia is for Lovers"

That was the motto of their "public relations campaign" about 20 years ago. May still be. The problem was, and may still be, that the lovers needed to be married. They had some very old, old laws on the books. Their sodomy law was "equal opportunity" as well. No cohabitation, missionary style sex, women who didn't wear bras, as I recall, could be cited for public lewdness. It was definitely not the place for homosexuals simply because it was not the place for heterosexuals.

[Ken Burch]

191. Of course, until the "Loving v. Virginia" case it was

"Virginia is for White, Straight, Married Lovers"
(The printing costs on the bumperstickers musta been a bitch).

[urgk]

170. I just read an op-ed piece that reframed the issue of "gay rights."

The premise was essentially that no law "gives" gay couples the right to marry. Any law with that intent, serves to stop states from un-Constitutionally taking rights away from a person because they are gay.

"This brings us to the real question of gay marriage and of what just happened in Iowa. The question was not whether gay marriage should be "legalized." It's whether we have the constitutional right to prohibit people from doing it."

I don't know if the argument is legally tenable (if there are any constitutional scholars out there, I'd love to hear what you have to say about it), but the op-ed is a surprisingly good read from a small(ish) southern paper and an interesting way to re-frame the debate.

http://savannahnow.com/node/702376

[Zenlitened]

186. Good essay. Thanks for posting.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Lithos]

171. Sad in so many ways

My thoughts and feelings go to Bob and to their friends.

L-

[Omaha Steve]

172. K&R!

[a la izquierda]

173. Heartbreakingly sad.

How many gay couples go through this? One is too many! I thank the gods every day and my mom and her partner's families have compassion and realize that their love is real, regardless of their biology. My mom knows that nobody will ever prevent her partner from being there at her last moments. The offending party would have the rest of his/her life to deal with me if anyone ever tried that nonsense. My mom has said on many occasions that she is happy to have such a reliable, level-headed oldest daughter, who will make sure her wishes are honored.

People like Kenneth's family make me want to puke. I hate the way humanity (and I use that term loosely) treats its brethren.

[totodeinhere]

175. What kind of monsters would stop Kenneth's partner from being there?

This was so wrong. Of course, the law should have allowed him to be there whether the family allowed it or not, but that doesn't change the fact that the family bears their share of the blame for this heartless act.

[Baby Snooks]

181. What kind?

A bunch of god-fearing, Bible-thumping Christians. And no doubt they were busy praying over him. Asking god to forgive him of his sin.

I worked in hospice for many years. With AIDS patients in the 1980s. One night I was told the parents of a young man had instructed the hospital that "those people" were not to come near him. Parents who were nowhere to be found. And suddenly showed up at the hospital. To save him. "Those people" were volunteers from an AIDS organization. Gay, straight and everything in between. All were "those people."

They assumed anyone who was there to comfort their son was homosexual. It was an eye-opener for the volunteers and the hospital. And all around the country, parents who had thrown their sons out on the streets were showing up out of nowhere. Bibles in hand. There only to save their sons from the fires of hell. May they all rot for eternity in those fires.

And it wasn't just Christians. There were some from the Jewish community who backed a quarantine. Doctors no less. The Muslims weren't much better. Even today, some believe AIDS is a curse of god cast upon homosexuals and those who have embraced homosexuals. "Says so in the Bible." Unfortunately, it does indeed.

Children of the lesser god learn to avoid the children of the greater god. The mean-old-man-in-the-sky god of Abraham.

[bigtree]

176. .

[QueenOfCalifornia]

178. If Bob reads this

my heart breaks for you and your loss.

I have no words except to say that how you have been treated is unacceptable.

You should have been by Kenneth's side as you were for so many years. That is what kenneth would have wanted and his needs were denied as were yours. His family are sad, miserable, little and mean.

Peace to you Bob.

:pals:

[connecticut yankee]

180. how sad

and the family claimed they "loved" him?

[NikolaC]

182. K&R

That is beyond heart breaking. My heart goes out to Bob for the loss of his spouse. I cannot imagine being purposely kept from the one you love as they are dying.

[Cass]

183. This is unacceptable in our society. It is cruel and it is wrong and it needs to stop.

There is no excuse for this whatsoever.

My deepest condolences to Bob. No one should be treated like this and it makes me so very sad to know that he and Kenneth were treated so badly at a time when they needed love and compassion the most.

[derby378]

185. Bob, I'm begging ya - CRASH THE FUNERAL

Walk in, say farewell to Kenneth, and leave the family to stew. And bring some friends to hold the ushers at bay.

[Faygo Kid]

190. Too late. Fight for the future. Kenneth is gone.

We need to change the world, and I include my sorry old straight ass in that mix.