We're Not Talking About Special Rights
J pointed me over to a post on Rosie O'Donnell's blog yesterday that I really felt the need to pass on. If you're not familiar with Rosie's blog, it's usually written in some sort of strange poetry that annoys me to death, so I don't typically go there. I was happy to see this entry was an article with real words and sentence structure, though.The article is the story of a woman, Lisa Pond, who had a sudden brain aneurysm and died when she and her family were on their way to take a cruise with Rosie's cruise company. However, as Lisa laid dying in the hospital, her children (who were minors and was the adpoted parent of) and partner were not allowed to see Lisa.
The social worker at the hospital told the family that they were in an anti-gay state, and they'd need to show the legal paperwork showing that Lisa's partner had the right to see her in the hospital and make medical decisions on her behalf. Luckily, the couple was well prepared and had the forms faxed over.
Unfortunately, the hospital still did not let Lisa's family see her until after she was unconcious and only being kept alive by life support. At this point, they were invited in to make decisions regarding donating Lisa's organs. Basically the hospital let the family in when it was in their best interest--not out of the kindness of their hearts.
So, Lisa died without being visited by her family. Without anyone by her side, and her family could do nothing about it. This is not the case that blood relatives of Lisa did not want her partner and children in the room. No one, except the hospital, was contesting the visitation.
Pretty amazing stuff. Surely a married couple would not have had such problems. For those of you that are still falling for the belief that gay rights are special rights--consider this story.
posted by Brady @ 8:41 AM
3 Comments:
Truly tragic!
I've said for some time that part of the problem we're facing when it comes to fighting for gay marriages is that most straight people don't really understand what legal protections are offered under marriage. And to be honest, I don't think those of us in the gay community do the best job at explaining it to them. We get so wrapped up in the rhetoric about "love knows no bounds" and responding to their "sanctity of marriage" rhetoric that the issues like the ones demonstrated by this case get lost in the shuffle, not to mention drowned out by the noise.
Click here for more information on brain aneurysms
Jarred- yeah, tragic and something a lot of us take for granted.
I'll admit I've fallen for the "you don't need marriage--that's what wills are for" line in the past." Too bad it takes something like this to make us realize what's right.
Post a Comment
<< Home