Hospital Forces Lesbian to Die Alone; Judge Gives Stamp of Approval

[Triana]

HATEFUL. IMMORAL. IGNORANT. . . .

U.S. District Judge Adalberto Jordan dismissed a lawsuit yesterday, essentially finding that the Jackson Memorial Hospital was within its rights to leave a dying woman alone while denying her present and immediate family to visit her, be updated on her condition, or even to provide the hospital with medically necessary information.

Named in the now-dismissed suit were Jackson social worker Garnett Frederick and attending physicians Alois Zauner and Carlos Alberto Cruz, who made the decision not to allow Janice Langbehn, Lisa Pond’s partner, to have standard family access to information, even after receiving durable Power of Attorney and a Living Will naming Janice as legal guardian with authority to make end-of-life decisions.

MUCH MORE ...

http://blog.mattalgren.com/2009/09/hospital-forces-lesbian-to-die-alone/

[Neecy]

1. This is why we need marriage rights.

This couple did EVERYTHING that our current legal system allows: PoA, living will, the whole nine yards.

But they made the "mistake" of...going on vacation. Once they left their home in Washington State, Florida treated all of their carefully-crafted legal documents as so much trash.

This is a horrible case and the fact that the hospital got away with it infuriates me. This would NEVER have happened to a married couple.

[Cherchez la Femme]

39. But... but...

it's just a wish for a pony! :puke:


And BTW: FUCK Florida! Never will I spend one single dollar on vacation there, nor will I buy any Florida companies (company's?) products.

[roguevalley]

64. karma, its a bitch. I wouldn't want to be standing next to these

cowards when it comes.

[droidamus2]

104. Don't agree

I think it is wishful thinking to think the jackasses at this hospital would have treated these women any differently even if they had been married. They ignored the legal documents what makes you think that a marriage license would have been treated any differently. Now you may be right that at least when taken to court there may have been some ramifications for the hospital when they denied access. I support marriage rights for the GLBT community but you won't stop crap like this until you change peoples minds and hearts.

[Fearless]

112. At least if it did happen there would be grounds for a hefty lawsuit.

While money isn't a solace it is in the long term a means to keep hospitals and whatnot following the law.

[Ms. Toad]

133. As this court decision indicated, the hospital was not legally obligated

to honor the documents. It would have been legally obligated to honor their marriage. As the idiot judge in LA who refused to marry the interracial couple demonstrates, there will be people and entities which do not follow the law - but at least the couple in LA has legal recourse. That couple had none.

[NorthCarolina]

160. You stop it by passing laws against this type of discrimination by those with small minds. nt

[Zenlitened]

170. IMO, these sadists at the hospital were/are so brazen with their bigotry...

... precisely BECAUSE same-sex couples are marginalized, even denigrated, by existing law.

It's not their hearts and minds I'm interested at this point. It's their guts -- or lack thereof.

Change the law, and you begin to change the cultural climate, however slowly. But very early on in this process, I think many of these bigots will back down from their outright displays of hate.

They'll always be assholes, but their own natural cowardice will temper their hateful actions, if only we can begin treating all couples equally under the law.

[Hekate]

178. A very good point. Like other atrocities, only Federal law will change their alleged hearts & minds

There was a time when blacks were turned away from whites-only hospitals in some parts of the country, not just turned away at the school door.

Federal law. And the National Guard being called up by President Eisenhower for the schools.

LBJ in one of his more colorful statements said that when you have them by their balls their hearts and minds will follow.

Federal law. And biiiiiig fines.

Hekate

:argh:

[Nikki Stone1]

106. YES. And Marriage equality across the US.

!

[Taverner]

167. Exactly

Many folks don't understand this is what full and equal rights means

[paulsby]

2. that is truly disgusting

in a sense that i have rarely seen.

no compassion, and no common sense

[Zenlitened]

3. I don't even have words anymore.

:(

[Echo In Light]

4. Here's to hoping all involved in the decision come to awful, horrible fates

[Toasterlad]

13. +1

Karma, come quickly.

[Warpy]

5. This is a real nightmare

and it's horrible that it happened so quickly and during the day.

I say that because compassionate night nurses sneak life partners in after the suits and the bigots go home. I know because I've done it, putting my job on the line in the name of what was best for my patient.

At least her wishes regarding advance directives and organ donation were respected even if her life partner and her children were not.

[fascisthunter]

6. Let's turn the tables and prevent right wingers

from seeing their love ones in the hospital. I'm sure we could find an argument to support such an effort, all we have to do is translate and twist some part of their bible and then legislate that religious dogma.

The judge should lose his job.

[goclark]

168. K and R ~ this is crazy

Why isn't this all over my television!!!

[we can do it]

7. I Am Sick Sick SICK of This Shit

[rudy23]

8. Fucking activist judges.

Another term of projection from the right.

These assholes do more to directly hurt society than any liberal minded judge ever did.

[Warren DeMontague]

9. I'll second that: This is another reason why anything short of full equality- incl. marriage rights

is and should be unacceptable.

Too fucking bad if some fundy's nose gets out of joint at the thought of GLBT marriage. Time to grow the fuck up, already.

I stand with my GLBT brothers & sisters on this, 100%.

[PSzymeczek]

117. I'm a 56 YO straight woman,

and this angers me in places I can't even name. Why in hades shouldn't this couple have the same fucking rights I have?

[cliffordu]

10. What fucking century is this???

[redwitch]

81. Really, you have to wonder.

This news and the judge who refused to marry an interracial couple makes for a really sad week in America. 21st century sliding backwards in this country.

[Seldona]

110. For many of us, the 20th.

For people like this, they would rather have us go back to the Bronze Age. Fucking throwbacks.

[Toasterlad]

11. You're Right, Obama...We Don't Need Marriage.

:eyes:

So sick of being a second-class citizen in a third-world country.

[fascisthunter]

14. you are first class in my book

and as someone who is sick of this shit, I am determined to help you all in whatever means I can. We'll all change this together.

[Toasterlad]

63. .

:hug:

[CoffeeCat]

127. You are not a second-class citizen!

You are a first-rate, courageous person--dealing with people who are ignorant.

They have NOTHING to do with who you are!

And we will change this together---from a heterosexual, stay-at-home mom! :-)

[noiretextatique]

12. terrible decision

they had the proper legal documents and the hospital should have honored them. i hope her family appeals.

[Hepburn]

15. Holy shit....

...what was done was totally IMMORAl.

:grr:

[asdjrocky]

53. How do you impeach a judge?

Congress, right?

[Hepburn]

175. Depends on what jurisdiction...

...federal judge is Congress; State judge is through the state legislature ~~ generally.

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. Is there any chance of pursuing this on appeal?

If anyone else, other than a gay partner, had showed up with the proper documentation, would that person have been denied? Since when do one state's legal documents not have full authority in all states?

[sui generis]

21. the point should be that a durable power of attorney was not honored

the implication should have NOTHING to do with gayness or emotion and everything to do with liability. We're fighting this wrong. This sets a precedent for discretionarily dishonoring any power of attorney, and there are damages that should result from that.

She should have walked into that courtroom and not once mentioned she was gay or it was her partner, and let the defendants bring that up.

[RaleighNCDUer]

35. Absolutely. This does, in fact, strengthen the case for full equality,

because those measures which the anti-equality people say are sufficient are being applied unequally.

I have always supported full equality, though tactically I've endorsed making what gains are possible over self-destructing in all-or-nothing marriage drives; this, however, shows that the legal document approach (such as my sister and her partner use, as their marriage is not recognized by NC) can only be a step on the way to full equality - neither it, nor civil unions, can be the end game.

[xxqqqzme]

150. Exactly!

If this was a child/sibling of the patient w/ the same set of documents, I'm supposed to believe that request would also have been denied?

[JBear]

115. Since DOMA passed I think...

It clearly states that one state's contracts are not valid in others or to the US government for that matter.

Just over the border from us in fact, the state of Virginia tried to pass laws that specifically nullified living wills, power of attorney, and in fact any contract between same sex members of a "couple." To my knowledge they have yet to get that one to pass, but it was CLOSE!

:bounce:

[Ms. Toad]

134. Not quite - it is limited to recognition of same gender marriages

not recognition of contracts.

I don't know what the couple's powers of attorney said - but if they would have been valid between any unmarried couple they should have been recognized. The only legal basis for non-recognition of the power of attorney should have been that recognizing the contract required recognition of the marriage. Some are, unfortunately, written that way. My old will was written that way - we wanted to make clear that we deliberately intended to grant each other the rights on death that any member of a heterosexual couple would have had so we expressly described our relationship in marital terms. Under the marriage discrimination laws and amendments that language is poison. Any attempt to approximate a marriage can legally be ignored in most states.

[NorthCarolina]

161. Quite possibly, after the hospital and doctors are paid there might not be funds

for a legal appeal. I'm quite sure that the medical community WILL pursue payment from the life partner should the estate not be sufficient to cover it. Compassion is not mandatory, whereas payment is.

[Maru Kitteh]

17. Nothing less than full marriage rights will suffice.

[Betty Karlson]

30. Indeed.

We need to recognise marriage when we see it, not just when we like the wedding photos because they look so much like ours. Only today, I tried to blow off some frustration by adding a small essay to my journal on this matter. In case you care for it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=489931&mesg_id=489931

[Dogmudgeon]

18. Pond was an organ donor

Perhaps the GLBT community should revoke all organ donation directives and refuse to donate blood until these injustices are eliminated.

"If our lives are not good enough for you, then neither are our organs, nor is our blood."

The threat alone would set the medical community (among others) into a frenzy of pro-equality activity.

Something similar can, and ought, to be done with respect to health insurance: "You want my organs? Fine. Insure the body from which you will take them!"

The prospect of 5-20% of the population withholding their body parts, threatening the population at large with a reduction in transplant parts, will certainly change a few minds. Think of it as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molon_labe">Molon Labe for the oppressed.

--d!

[Toasterlad]

40. Gay Men Aren't Allowed to Donate Blood Anyway.

No doubt they're not interested in our organs either.

Bigoted straight people have absolutely no problem cutting off their noses to spite their faces, as long as it keeps teh gay firmly under foot.

[Dogmudgeon]

49. Is that still in force?

The last time I heard it discussed -- around 2000 -- everyone was allowed to donate, since they screened for all infections in the donated blood.

What have you heard about this?

--d!

[Toasterlad]

60. The Ban Has Existed Since 1983, And Has Never Been Lifted.

Men who have had sexual intercourse with another man since 1977 haven't honestly been allowed to donate blood since the ban was in place. Any man who answers "yes" to that question was - and is - banned from donating for life. Gay men (or, at least, those who are sexually active) were not legally able to donate in 2000 or at any other time since the ban was implemented.

There was a proposal submitted in 2006 to alter the policy to a 12-month ban following sexual activity, due to the improvements in HIV testing. The FDA rejected the proposal. It was reintroduced earlier this year, and was to be further reviewed later in the year. That's the last I heard.

I give blood every three months when we have a drive at work, and lie without batting an eye when that question comes up. I know my blood is safe because *I* am safe, and get tested regularly. More importantly, I know that the Red Cross will test my blood - like they do all blood - before it's used. Consequently, I refuse to allow people to die who I can save just because of some ignorant political bigotry.

My dignity is less important than someone's life, but I should STILL not have to sacrifice it in order to help someone else.

[dsc]

69. a question

Are you out at work, if so, your coworkers indulge your lie? I give blood off site from work since I don't like making them complicit in my lie and fear they may decide not to be complicit.

[Toasterlad]

72. I Am Out.

My coworkers are a very tolerant and supportive bunch. My company itself has a strict non-discrimination policy regarding sexual orientation. No one has treated my giving blood any differently than anyone else, and I don't expect that to change.

Sadly, out of a building of about 250 people, only around 35 of us give blood every drive.

[dsc]

73. For me with students it gets dicey

I probably would go ahead and give if it were only adults.

[Mojorabbit]

83. I have Multiple Sclerosis

and they don't want my blood either.

[Toasterlad]

105. There Is a Medical Reason They Don't Want Your Blood.

Are you honestly comparing your condition to the bigotry and discrimination that prompted the ban on gay men giving blood...a ban that was NEVER a true safeguard of the blood supply, and was only implemented to calm the public back when nobody knew the first thing about AIDS?

There is absolutely no reason why gay men should be prohibited from giving blood.

NONE.

[Mojorabbit]

182. There is no proven medical reason.

it is arbitrary. That is my point.

[JBear]

116. Last time I tried to donate,

the question was "are you a male who has had sex with another man since 1977." I quit trying after the England travel ban though. Having traveled to and spent more than 6 months in England during the BSE scare also disqualifies you.

:bounce:

[Ms. Toad]

137. you forgot the "even once" part of the question.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[Toasterlad]

78. So, As Long As Gay Men Neuter Themselves, They Can Give Blood?

Is that the policy you support?

[Sebastian Doyle]

114. Fred, I know you feel compelled to take the right wing/BlueBalled/DLC side of every argument

But that was way the fuck out of line, dude.

[donco6]

119. We can all get married, too.

As long as we marry the opposite sex.

[Ms. Toad]

136. Your organs are needed and welcomed.

There is a separate screening process for organs. Depending on your history at the time of your death, one or more may be rejected on a much less restricted basis (with respect to sexual history) than your blood. There are even some circumstances in which individuals with hepatitis or AIDS are allowed do donate (if someone with one of those illnesses needs an organ but is otherwise well enough, for example, to be able to make a transplant worth the risks associated with the procedure).

If you're curious, UNOS has the rules on their website (and I believe is currently soliciting input with regard to some amendments).

[FlaGranny]

I've forgotten exactly what they called it,

but there are some people needing organ transplants (the sickest ones) who are given the opportunity to accept organs from "high-risk" donors.. At least that is the case in one hospital in California.

[Ms. Toad]

162. Yes - under certain circumstances that is UNOS policy.

Certain conditions bar transplant, but there are other conditions that can be waived by the recipient so long as they are disclosed.

[FlaGranny]

143. Ignore - duplicate.

[Toasterlad]

146. Don't Worry, I'm a Donor

I was just speaking out of bitterness. I am a registered organ donor, and believe very strongly in donating your organs when you die.

[JoeyT]

149. I'm not sure that's still the case.

Even if it is, an awful lot of gay women, transgendered people, and straight folks would be more than happy to back you up.

[Ms. Toad]

135. Please don't - some of our children need organs.

My daughter will need a liver in a few years, and the wait will be long enough without my own community making her wait longer as part of a political battle.

[Toasterlad]

147. See Above. I Was Being Facetious.

I strongly believe that one of the most selfish things you can do is to NOT be an organ donor.

[Ms. Toad]

163. Unfortunately, I have encountered people on DU

who are seriously refusing to allow their organs to be used to make a political point. Glad you're not one of them.

[Toasterlad]

164. No, I Don't Think You Should Avoid Saving Lives Because of Bigotry

Boycotts of anti-gay businesses are one thing, but I'm not going to let some innocent person die because my government has discriminatory blood donation policies. And the same goes for organ donation.

[Bluenorthwest]

19. People need to know this is what they ask for when they

split hairs and speak about waiting. This is what they command to occur.

[QC]

20. This is not a pony.

See why we get so angry when people here persist in treating legal quality as bratty child's outrageous demand for the impossible?

[tbyg52]

89. Amen. nt

[create.peace]

22. No matter what the situation. I think a patient should be able to name

whomever they want as a family visitor. There are devout Catholics denied divorce, who have cohabited with another for years who could be denied, too. This transcends the marriage requirement, though I am completely supportive of marriage as a human right, for all. I am not married to my life partner, for financial reasons, we are a man and a woman. I am always afraid of being denied my place ultimately.

[deutsey]

23. What possible rationale could these heartless jerks have for denying this?

Sickening.

[closeupready]

24. Florida - helps to point that out.

No less disgusting, but makes the story less surprising.

[cwydro]

25. Oh of course,

because this would NEVER happen in any other state.

[QC]

26. True. They adore the homos everywhere else but Florida. n/t

[closeupready]

28. They just hate them more in Florida than they do in Texas or Utah.

n/t

[cwydro]

31. Uh no.

Just do a couple google searches and see how many states have had an issue like this.

California was one.

Why someone always has to throw a regional or state slur into every damn issue on DU is amazing to me.

But if it makes you feel good, you just keep right on.

Gays are persecuted in every state in this nation. Do a little reading and get educated.

[closeupready]

36. Yeah, but it happens more often in Florida. You can ignore this, if it suits you.

but it is true.

[QC]

38. I live in Florida, so I don't have to ignore anything.

I see abundant evidence every day of how backward this place is.

What I don't understand, though, is why people try to piggyback their pet regional issues onto every discussion here. What happened to this woman is monstrous, and you are trying to use it as a pretext for another regional hate-a-thon.

[closeupready]

41. I'm sorry. I didn't mean it that way.

Nothing personal, I'm just sick and tired, to be honest, of reading of all the near-lynchings and murders and harrassment of gay men in Florida. Sick to death. Personally, I'm about ready to let that state go.

[cwydro]

45. Once again, google gay hate crimes...

I see NY, Virginia, California just right off the bat. All regions nice and evenly represented, but that would ruin your little state-hate.

Matthew Shepard? Oh yeah, that was NOT Florida.

They do not just happen in Florida; so sick of this regionalism crap.

What perfect state do you live in?

[QC]

52. I'm sorry to jump on you, then.

The regional pile-ons here get to me. They seem counterproductive to me, and sometimes we seem to do little else here.

I really do appreciate your concern, and I feel it, as I live in one of the most conservative parts of the state, a beautiful but decidedly unenlightened area known at the Panhandle.

[cwydro]

42. Thank you QC.

Interesting the poster has no region listed in his profile.

[cwydro]

46. Prove it.

You cannot.

Go on with your region superiority. You obviously need something.

[closeupready]

54. Are you gay?

??

[cwydro]

181. Yes.

I am.

And have lived out of the closet for more than 30 years.

[closeupready]

27. More likely to happen in Florida than, say, Vermont or Massachusetts or Iowa, yes.

Correct.

[Sebastian Doyle]

107. That fucking figures.

I would have expected this kind of shit while Jeb was governor. One would think Charlie Crist would know better (even living in that reinforced steel closet of his) :puke:

[SPedigrees]

29. This is why all states should enact civil unions first, work on marriage next.

This could never have happened in my state during the last decade because of our civil union law. Now we have marriage equality, but the significant legal equality came with the civil union bill at the turn of the century. Even if (and it will never happen here) a prop 8 referendum destroyed our marriage statute, gays would retain their legal rights conferred upon them when Gov. Dean signed the CU bill into law.

[Ruby the Liberal]

43. At a bare mimimum!

This story just horrifies me.

[Toasterlad]

44. I'm Sure Those Women Thought It Could "Never Happen" With a Power of Attorney.

Civil unions won't mean jack to bigots, except to use them as an excuse to deny marrage. "What are you queers whining about now? You got civil unions! That's just as good a marriage!"

Meanwhile, the discrimination will remain.

[SPedigrees]

55. Well there have been no cases of anyone denied visiting rights by their partners here.

CUs do in fact confer all the rights that our married gay couples now have. Furthermore marriage equality passed smoothly here because the homophobic populace had time to get over their paranoia and adjust to legal partnerships in the gay community.

This would not be happening to this lady in FL if her state had a solid civil union law. And indeed CU legislation would probably have passed there easily.

[Toasterlad]

62. There Were No Cases of Anyone Denied Visiting Rights THAT YOU KNOW OF

Not all discrimination is reported. Not all bigotry makes the news. You could devote a 24 hours news channel to anti-gay bigotry, and still not scratch the surface of the horrendous intolerance in this country...ALL parts of this country.

And the idea that Florida would pass a civil union law is ludicrous. I assume you're not aware that Florida passed a constitutional ammendment banning both same-sex marriage AND civil unions in 2008?

Or did you mean that the state the COUPLE was from should have passed civil unions? I assume you're not aware that, thanks to DOMA, no state is required to acknowledge a civil union from another state?

There is only ONE way to assure that such an abominable situation does not happen again, and that's federal marriage for same-sex couples. Not domestic partnerships. Not civil unions. Fucking MARRIAGE.

Same as the "normal" people.

[SPedigrees]

67. No state is required to acknowledge CUs OR gay marriages from another state

unless DC enacted the bill being tossed around. That's not the issue. The point is that wills and powers of attorney are never safe from legal contention. The rights conferred by a civil union are (in the state where the CU took place.)

It may not be easy to get CU legislation passed in FL but it would certainly be less onerous than trying to pass marriage equality right now. The more states to pass domestic partnerships, the quicker it will catch on in other states.

I can tell you that no domestic partner or spouse has ever been denied visiting rights in my state. That would be completely illegal; it would hit the wires and it would be struck down by any judge in this state.

I'm not saying any of this is fair. I'm saying that the most expedient and sure route to equality and legal rights for all is to build a coalition of states with civil union law, let it become the norm and then go for legislation for each state to recognize other states' CUs. After that it would be fairly easy to enact marriage equality, remembering however that the word 'marriage' does not actually confer any additional legal rights other than the use of the word.

[Toasterlad]

70. What Worked In New England Is Not Necessarily Going to Work Elsewhere.

Given that Florida explicitly BANNED civil unions along with marriage, I don't know how you can come to the conclusion that passing civil unions there would be "less onerous".

Your bigot is not interested in words, although they claim to be. Look at Washington. The bigots there were not satisfied that same-sex couples may not marry there. They are actively fighting to end the state's domestic partnership laws.

The bigots don't care about marriage. They don't want ANY legal recognition for gay people. AT ALL.

The most expedient and sure route to equality and legal rigths for all is not "a coalition of states with civil union law." It is the Supreme Court ruling that denying marriage to same sex individuals is unconstitutional.

The states that have banned same-sex marriage - even if they have not also banned civil unions, as Florida did - are NOT going to pass civil union legislation.

They don't want ANY legal recognition for gay people.

Federal same-sex marriage is the only way to equality. And the only way to federal same-sex marriage is through the court. It's certainly not going to come from this President or this Congress.

[SPedigrees]

92. Well you can bite off your nose to spite your face if you wish.

You sound as intransigent as the bigots that you (rightfully) criticize.

What worked a decade ago in New England will work in Florida in another decade. All nationwide polls indicate that a majority of citizens under the age of 30 do not have the prejudices of the older generations, who are dying off. So marriage equality is coming. The question is how to hasten it.

[Toasterlad]

102. I Am Doing Nothing of the Kind

I'm speaking from a realistic point of view. The Supreme Court will allow America federal same-sex marriage long before the southern bigots deign to grant us our constitutional rights.

Frankly, I'm not willing to wait another decade. I've been waiting for equality all my life, and people much older than me have been waiting for it all THEIR lives, and many people who are long dead waited for it all THEIR lives. It's very sad that we can't get it with a democratic congress and president, but I'm confident that it will get pushed through the courts and the SC will make the right decision. They know equality is inevitable, and I think they'll want to be on the right side of history.

On a side note, I find the whole civil unions argument extremely distasteful. I know that you were not intending to be rude, so I am not angry with you. However, as a gay man, whenever someone suggests that gays should be happy for civil unions - or, indeed, any other such "progress" - infuriates me. Civil unions are nothing more than separate but equal. And the fact that otherwise reasonable people are presenting them as a compromise that we should be "grateful" for is mind-boggling. You don't "compromise" with bigotry. You call it what it is, and you call the people perpetrating it what THEY are. It sickens me that I'm being continually told to wait until the rest of this country "catches up". It horrifies and angers me that I have a president who says, "It's not for me to tell you to be patient", and then insists that we do just that. And it pisses me off that people talk about "baby steps" and claim that rejecting civil unions in favor of the fight for full equality is petulant and unrealistic.

I am not interested in appeasing bigots, which is ALL civil unions are designed to do. I am not interested in legitimizing my second-class status by accepting a legal condition that exists for my kind and not for others. I am not interested in drinking from a different water fountain, and I will not accept it.

That is not cutting off my nose to spite my face. That is refusing to knuckle under to oppression. There's a difference.

[Zenlitened]

121. .

:applause:

[SPedigrees]

126. I'm not suggesting you should be happy with civil unions.

I'm suggesting that civil unions are the quickest way to get what you do want. I have witnessed the sequence and I know first hand that even in a liberal state like Vermont it takes TIME for the homophobic lynch mob to settle down and get over themselves. Once the fervor dies down (and the local wedding industry recognizes the source of profit) marriage equality has few serious foes left standing. I've seen it happen.

I doubt there would ever have been a prop 8 if CA had followed VT's example and begun the sequence with civil unions. Even if prop 8 had come about later, those Californians with civil unions would now have their legal rights protected and not ever face the chilling circumstances of that poor woman in FL.

[Starry Messenger]

132. California has domestic partnerships.

They are basically "civil unions". Prop 8 happened anyway.

[Toasterlad]

148. Exactly. And They Had Them BEFORE They Had Marriage.

Despite what the poster from New England believes, civil unions are NOT a gateway to marriage.

[Starry Messenger]

157. Exactly.

And it's really awful the way some people imply that LGBT people need marriage with "training wheels" before the rest of the country gets comfortable with the idea of marriage equality. Plus, other states do not have to recognize these civil unions, so any rights those concede in one state can be totally void in other states, right?

[PSzymeczek]

118. Why the hell not? n/t

[Toasterlad]

159. Because People In New England Are More Liberal Than In Other Parts of The Country

It's pretty simple.

[Ms. Toad]

138. You are aware that the Florida constitution bars

recognition of civil unions between same gender couples - right?

[theHandpuppet]

101. You just don't get it, do you

The problem is a civil union in one state doesn't have to be recognized or honored in another. The couple who were denied their rights in Florida were from Washington. Had the couple been from Connecticut their civil union wouldn't have meant squat in Florida.

Marriage or nothing, by federal law. That's it, folks. No separate but equal, no second class status, no consolation prize. MARRIAGE to be recognized in all states!!!!!!!!!!!

[Hekate]

179. As of NOW I am done with saying that. It has to be federal, from the top down, like desegregation

Effing Florida. Leave it to them to show just how big the holes are in any cobbled-together legal protections that these women had. They did everything right to protect their family, and small minded bigots undid it in a moment, and were backed up by a small minded bigoted judge.

Those same hospital workers and that same judge may be more than willing to treat people of color the same way, but federal law forbids it and is backed up with hefty penalties. It is past time to do the same with marriage.

Marriage equality: two consenting adults, contract signed and sworn at the County Courthouse, recognized in all 50 states and US territories, religious ceremony of your choice a separate issue. And call it a marriage. I really used to think as you do, but this case has pushed me right over to the other side.

Hekate

[jemelanson]

32. This is beyond all reason and can only be called hateful.

The state of Florida and the city and what ever county that this hospital is in should be ashamed of themselves. The Judge should be disbarred and the hospital and the staff involved should be hit with a law suit that holds them responsible for their treatment of this Family. This is intolerable.

[LynneSin]

33. Wow, and I thought that judge who denied an interacial couple to marry was an ignorant nutjob...

this guy just topped him!

[EFerrari]

34. That woman should have been more patient.

:sarcasm:

[QC]

37. She should have just kept her sexuality a secret.

Then no one would ever have discriminated against her.

At least that's what I've heard on DU.

[NOLALady]

47. This is so wrong on so many levels.

[Soylent Brice]

48. welcome to America. the most free country in the world.

simply detestable.

[get the red out]

50. Decency?

Do people at that hospital think that the devil eats their souls the minute they show decency to this couple?

[myrna minx]

51. .

:cry:

[Blue State Blues]

56. WTF?! "even after receiving durable Power of Attorney and a Living Will"

hospital policy trumps power of attorney? huh?

[FlyingSquirrel]

57. I have a silly question

'cause I keep hearing about this kind of thing.

If someone is dying, why does that all of a sudden mean the hospital has all the rights and the person dying has none? What if the person were to ask for a discharge (if they were conscious)? The hospital could say "no"? Why do hospitals have any rights at all in regard to who gets to see a patient (except if the visitor is sick), as long as the patient wants to see them?

[donco6]

120. In this case, the patient was comatose.

Her legitimate powers of attorney were ignored, so the entitled person (her partner) couldn't make the decisions that should have been hers to make. In the absence of anyone to make decisions, the patient falls into limbo until a next-of-kin can be located. The hospital refused to even talk to the partner, so hours and hours went by, and then she died.

I think a concious, ambulatory person could make the decision you speak of.

[jgraz]

58. First do no harm

Where the fuck did these monsters get their medical training from? Liberty University?

[and-justice-for-all]

59. Get Power of attorney...nt

[Toasterlad]

61. They HAD a Power of Attorney.

They were on vacation. Janice had friends fax a durable Power of Attorney and a Living Will to the hospital.

They STILL wouldn't let her see Lisa.

And this judge just said the hospital acted correctly.

[Blue Diadem]

66. She was able to see her for only about 5 minutes sometime after the

hospital received the fax and also after Janice had said Lisa was an organ donor. Janice was with her during last rites, but she was only allowed the 5 minutes.

I read through the court papers at Janice's blog. I can't imagine what Janice and those children went through or how a hospital or the staff could be so heartless and cruel.

http://thelpkids.com/mtd-9-29-09/

[and-justice-for-all]

144. Time to file a suit...nt

[Zenlitened]

171. Great idea! I bet they wish they'd thought of that!

:crazy:

[Vinca]

65. That's not right.

It seems homophobia trumped basic human respect and kindness.

[Autumn]

68. Yes, marriage matters, and

damn those sorry bastards all to hell.

[Zenlitened]

71. Here are a few additional details, from Courthouse News:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2009/10/12/Judge_Says_Hospital_Can_Deny_Lesbian_Visitation.htm

... U.S. District Judge Adalberto Jordan ruled that the hospital staff was not legally bound to give Langbehn updates on Pond's condition or to let her visit Pond in intensive care.

In the judge's view, Langbehn had not been "denied the right to make any medical decision on behalf of Ms. Pond." Hospital staff consulted Langbehn about possible surgical options for Pond, the judge noted, and Langbehn herself admitted that she did not know what she would have done differently had she been given more details on her partner's condition.

The judge declined to impose a duty on hospital staff to provide updates to "third parties who would simply like to be kept informed." Jordan noted that trauma unit doctors can block visitor access to a patient in critical or terminal condition. These decisions are left to medical personnel, the judge said.

Though he acknowledged that the hospital staff had displayed a "lack of sensitivity" that caused Langbehn "needless distress," the judge ultimately dismissed the complaint.

"Unfortunately, no relief is available under Florida law for these failures," Jordan wrote.

[Zenlitened]

77. And also the press release from Lambda Legal:

http://www.lambdalegal.org/news/pr/xfl_20090929_fed-court-dismisses-lambda-legal-suit-jackson-memorial-hospital-langbehn-family.html

(Miami, FL, September 29, 2009) — The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida today rejected Lambda Legal's lawsuit filed against Jackson Memorial Hospital on behalf of Janice Langbehn, the Estate of Lisa Pond and their three adopted children who were kept apart by hospital staff for eight hours as Lisa slipped into a coma and died.

"The court's decision paints a tragically stark picture of how vulnerable same-sex couples and their families really are during times of crisis," said Beth Littrell, Staff Attorney in Lambda Legal's Southern Regional Office based in Atlanta. "We hope that because of Janice's courage to seek justice for her family in this case that more people better understand the costs of antigay discrimination. This should never happen to anyone."

(snip)

Today's ruling comes after the Public Health Trust of the Miami Dade County, the governing body of Jackson Memorial Hospital, filed a motion to dismiss the case. The court ruled that the hospital has neither an obligation to allow their patients' visitors nor any obligation whatsoever to provide their patients' families, healthcare surrogates, or visitors with access to patients in their trauma unit. The court has given the Langbehn-Pond family until October 16 to review the ruling and consider all legal options.

[lunatica]

74. And people wonder why the LGBT community is not quiescent

and making such a fuss!

I could scream! How anyone doesn't want to scream about this inhuman treatment and our courts upholding it is beyond me.

[Orsino]

75. Well, we couldn't save the woman's life...

...but we sure as hell were able to add to the family's misery.

[RedCappedBandit]

79. Must not be too hard to become a judge in florida, in light of recent events. nt

[SalmonChantedEvening]

80. Cruel & Inhuman.

How much hatred can one have in his heart before this is seen for what it is.

[demodonkey]

82. Read the story -- Disgusting Social Worker.

The hospital social worker in the story was unspeakably rude, and a cruel, heartless bigot.

Hospital social workers like this guy, IMO, are among the most useless lowlifes in our so-called "healthcare system"; maybe one step above health insurance officials (who many of them work for.)

My mother had a stroke in 2006 and I have spent much of the last three years fighting hard to get her the ongoing care and therapies that she needs (and has insurance for.) Most of my fighting has been against hospital and "skilled facility" social workers, who always seem to side with whatever is cheapest and easiest for their facility and the insurance company. The final kicker was when a hospital social worker blatantly (and criminally, I might add) lied about my mother on a sworn document (court action still pending so I can't and won't say more.)

After what happened to my own family I will never, ever, EVER respect or trust another hospital social worker. This story about this poor family in FL only cements my decision.

Sorry if anyone who reads this is a social worker and is offended, but you should clean up your profession and police your own. People who lie under oath and treat family members of dying people like dirt have NO business calling themselves human beings, let alone professionals.

[LiberalFighter]

172. Based on what you are saying this person is not a true social worker.

The person is an employee of the hospital and therefore has a conflict of interest. Any interest by the hospital trumps any interest of the patient.

[demodonkey]

184. Every "social worker" who harassed my family was apparently licensed by the state, AND...

...employed by the hospital or nursing home. Including the so-called "patient ombudsman" who at one hospital was ALSO the SAME person who made the discharge decisions.

The system is totally screwed and as I said I will NEVER, EVER EVER again trust a social worker. And again if the offends any member of that "profession" clean your house up and police your own because I have lived through hell (and am still doing so) thanks to "social workers".

[laughingliberal]

84. Horrible! I saw so much of this during the worst of the AIDS epidemic in Houston

I worked 2 years doing home infusions under the Ryan White grant. This was the last 2 years before 2 breakthrough medications hit the market. Navigating the prejudice in the system as well as some of the families was inhumane.

[bertman]

85. This is so disgusting, degrading, and dehumanizing. I am so sad for that family, and

so sickened by the hatred and indifference in our nation to our gay brothers and sisters.

[TexasObserver]

86. This is outrageous.

[Mari333]

87. FULL MARRIAGE RIGHTS

would have kept this from happening. full equality for lgbt citizens.
until then, this will happen.

send this article to these 2 chickenshit dem senators.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=390598&mesg_id=390598

[quakerboy]

88. WTF

Who cares what their personal relationship is. If Janice had a durable POA and a living will naming her guardian, there is no excuse for barring her from the process. WTF. That cannot be legal in any way

[arthritisR_US]

90. HATEFUL. IMMORAL. IGNORANT. . . . you nailed it, this says it all!

This shit has got to stop and those simple minded people will certainly come to know karma, and it can be a bitch! :mad:

[WyoHiker]

91. BOYCOTT ALL THINGS FLORIDIAN

until their legislature does the right thing in a strong way.

I'm in. Anyone else coming along?

[G_j]

93. truly cruel, sociopathic, actually.. nt

[JerseygirlCT]

94. Wow

The levels of hate some people have... To deny a dying person her nearest and dearest - for no reason whatsoever.

[Locrian]

95. What would Jesus do?

>>. Wow The levels of hate some people have... To deny a dying person her nearest and dearest - for no reason whatsoever.


Totally agree. What would Jesus do?

[JerseygirlCT]

96. Welcome her partner, and sit with them both

through that rough time, undoubtedly.

You wouldn't think that particular act of charity and compassion would have been so hard for some mere humans though.

[enki23]

103. WWJD? Send them to burn in hell forever, according to christian scriptures

And centuries of christian doctrine. But jesus is a only a fictitious asshole. The really real asshole was right there in the hospital, being a disgusting bigot and telling himself he was doing the right thing in jesus's disgusting name.

Our problem is too much fucking Jesus, and not enough fucking empathy. Not the other way around.

[Sebastian Doyle]

111. The problem isn't Jesus

The problem is a bunch of assholes who obviously never read one word of His teachings, calling themselves "Christians".

Which is about as accurate as Max Baucus calling himself a "Democrat".

[MessiahRp]

139. I call most modern day Christians, "The Cult of Self Justification"

Since their religion has zero to do with Christ and everything to do with defending their usually self serving beliefs from criticism.

Rp

[Doc Martin]

152. Exactly!

[Prophet 451]

154. The Cultus Americanus

'cos they're ALWAYS insanely nationalist as well.

[winyanstaz]

174. I think we need to start calling them Satanists...

Because that's whos work they are doing and who's ways they are following.
They are full of hate and lies..to hell with them.
This is a terrible thing to do to any human being.

[Hekate]

180. You are mistaking Jesus the Wandering Rebbe with Supply Side Jesus and Inquisition Jesus.

Although not my path, I think that WWJD reference was to put us more in mind of the wandering rebbe. He had not one word to say about gays or lesbians.

Just something to keep in mind.

Hekate

>snip<
When reading the Bible tonight, I came upon the following passages where Christ condemned homosexuality:

See also:

And here:

By the way, here is what Jesus said about wealth:

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Filed under "Things That Make You Go Hmmm...."
>snip<
http://federalism.typepad.com/crime_federalism/2008/05/jesus-quotes-ab.html

[Prophet 451]

153. Which Jesus?

The one asshole fundies believe in or the one that I think actually lived and taught about two thousand years ago?

The former would condemn them both to hell, probably while screaming about tax cuts.

The latter would invite her family in, pull up chairs and try to comfort everyone as best he could.

[bridgit]

97. Disgusting

[indepat]

98. F'ing outrages followed by other f'ing outrages

:grr:

[MessiahRp]

99. Holy fuck I am PISSED after reading this.

Just complete and utter bullshit. My heart goes out to Janice. Just fucking disgusting.

Rp

[bl968]

100. Another option

She should file a lawsuit challenging the defense of marriage act. She was clearly injured by the law and can make the case that DOMA's erosion of the Full Faith and Credit clause of the U.S. Constitution is unconstitutional.

Article IV

Section 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

Under this article her documents were legally valid in all 50 states. DOMA stepped in the middle and said well we know the Constitution said this, but we don't want it to, instead we say that it is up to the individual states. Well Shall means it's not optional. Doma was basically an end run around the constitution, but the only way to challenge it is to prove you were damaged by the act. We can use this to get DOMA declared Unconstitutional.

Good can come out of the bad.

[Ms. Toad]

141. I would urge waiting - so as not to create bad Supreme Court law.

But that ship has already sailed. I am not confident that the current set of justices will honor stare decisis - but it looks as if we will find out. here is at least one (perhaps more) case working its way to the Supreme Court that will decide the question.

[elshiva]

108. EVIL!

:cry:

[bullwinkle428]

109. I hope this fucking disgrace of a legal action will open people's eyes!

However, it's probably just going to cue the marching moron brigade here, with their plaintive cries of "the government just needs to get out of the marriage business"... :mad:

[omega minimo]

113. It will -- and then some of the replies in this thread will shut them right back up again.

[donheld]

122. This is maddening and very sad

[earcandle]

123. This is so ugly. I cannpt believe people can be so cruel. Hope they find like karma for their deed

[lonestarnot]

124. So some homophobes are going to get away with disallowing someone who loves

another person that has been pronounced with the grim prognosis of limited time left here on earth? We are leaving it to these cruel homophobes to keep them apart because they are using time management to run out the clock with the advent of this poor woman's death, how are they getting away with this? Just WTF :wtf:

[WillyT]

125. A Judicial Ghoul Protecting All His Fellow Ghouls...

FUCK this pisses me off!!!

:argh:

[Initech]

128. God damn shit like this pisses me off. There's a lot of evil people in this world.

[sakabatou]

129. That's bullshit!

So tired of the LGBT people not having full rights.

[David Zephyr]

130. Fuck this!

Goddamnit that pisses me off.

[Solly Mack]

131. K&R

[BobTheSubgenius]

140. I don't know whether I'm more angry or sad.

What a disgrace. What's even worse is that there are some who are feeling anything from self-righteousness to smug satisfaction over this.

I honestly wonder sometimes how we got this way and whether ours is a species worth saving.

[PatSeg]

142. What a sad story

What an ignorant bunch of insensitive bigots these people are. They wouldn't even let the children in to say goodbye? Because they were "too young" or because they were adopted by a gay couple? Everyone dies eventually and one would think that they would want to be treated with more compassion when they or a family members passes on.

[Lerkfish]

145. "first do no harm"

someone needs to be reminded of the Hyppocratic oath.

this is without conscience. Even if they disagree with the partner's right to be there, what about the PATIENT's right to have them there?

there will be a special place in hell for these people.

[Doc Martin]

151. Partner produced her powers of attorney

Social worker told her that the only way she could see her partner was to produce legal documents like medical power of attorney. She had those docs faxed to the hospital within an hour! Did they sit on a fax machine? Were they ignored?

[Stumbler]

155. It's what Jesus would do...

I think we all remember that passage: "And the wretched lesbian came upon Jesus, asking for aide, and responding, Jesus spake: 'Eww, get away and die alone homo!'" I think it's in Exodus or Leviticus somewhere...

[AllyCat]

156. This is very sad. I know it happens, but I'm not sure why. The hospital where I work

would never do this. We consider anyone the person considers family to be present for anything. The only time that changes, is when there are too many people to make something safe. It is not unusual to have 10 people (or more) present for a birth.

Why do they do this? What does the hospital gain from doing this?

I'm so sorry this has happened. To her and countless others. We need marriage equality.

[GreenPartyVoter]

158. ONe of the many reasons why gays should be allowed to assert their full civil rights and be married.

[goclark]

165. This is absolutely insane~ put that judge in jail

and do not allow his family to ever visit him during his 99 years to Life sentence!

:evil:

This case should go up to the Supreme Court!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

166. yeah, clearly we dont need marriage. nt

[Arugula Latte]

169. ...

[winyanstaz]

173. Sirs!!! Have you no shame?

Why do we allow this to continue?
The right wants the government to stay out of their businesses and churches...yet they want the right to dictate peoples sex lives, how their family must be and even how they die.
To hell with them.

[byronius]

176. What a pathetic judge. What awful people these are. No moral compass whatsoever.

[caseymoz]

177. Sick.

Unfortunately, I think the struggle for marriage rights is going to last throughout the century.

[niyad]

183. and this disgusting excuse for a judge was appointed by clinton.

as a straight woman, I am outraged beyond words by this travesty of justice, and heartsick about what couples are going through all around this supposedly free and democratic society. what the hell century do these cretins think this is?