Preventing Same-Sex Couples Hospital Visitation Rights

[Strappie]

I have seen and heard it all now.. This is so disgusting it makes me want to throw up.


Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker to Prevent Same-Sex Couples Hospital Visitation Rights
May. 17 2011 - 1:29 pm | 10,397 views | 0 recommendations | 3 comments

scott walker Via Doug Mataconis, who describes Walker’s actions as “despicably cruel” we get this news out of Wisconsin:

Madison – Gov. Scott Walker believes a new law that gives gay couples hospital visitation rights violates the state constitution and has asked a judge to allow the state to stop defending it.

Democrats who controlled the Legislature in 2009 changed the law so that same-sex couples could sign up for domestic partnership registries with county clerks to secure some – but not all – of the rights afforded married couples.

Wisconsin Family Action sued last year in Dane County circuit court, arguing that the registries violated a 2006 amendment to the state constitution that bans gay marriage and any arrangement that is substantially similar.

Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen refused to defend the lawsuit, saying he agreed the new law violated the state constitution. Then-Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, hired Madison attorney Lester Pines to defend the state.

Walker, a Republican, replaced Doyle in January and fired Pines in March. On Friday, Walker filed a motion to stop defending the case.

Doug asks, “Is the GOP hatred for gays so pervasive that they could really be this cold and heartless?” To which I can only answer: yes, apparently it is, at least when we’re talking about the GOP in Scott Walker’s Wisconsin.

Walker is literally going out of his way to prevent two people in a loving, committed relationship from visiting one another at the hospital. In other words, at what is quite likely a couple’s darkest hour, Scott Walker wants to impose legal restrictions barring two people from being with one another. Imagine that your wife or your husband was in the hospital and you were legally prohibited from visiting them. Is this the role we want our government to play in our lives?

And Republicans pretend they are the party of limited government. What terrific frauds. What a ludicrous illusion they have cast about themselves. Somehow the media and the American electorate keeps falling for the same trick. Liberty for me but not for thee. Low taxes and a government bent on preventing even this small shred of basic, human decency.

(Image via Daylife)

Here is the link if you care to see it....

http://blogs.forbes.com/erikkain/201...tation-rights/

[Strappie]

This guy is out of his damn mind. He is really making a name for himself in WI. This isn't all that he is trying to do.

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Strappie

This guy is out of his damn mind. He is really making a name for himself in WI. This isn't all that he is trying to do.

I know your mad as hell Strappie, he will be recalled when they can, not until next year unfortunately. He will be recalled just like the other republicans who voted to deny workers rights. I know sometimes it's impossible to be patient, but we must be, and in the mean time keep protesting.

[Jess]

This is no different than VA's ATTY GNL and Gov trying to claim unconstitutionality ( is that a word) for different laws that have been passed recently. Some things I may even agree should be more local, but for me those things tend to be more budget oriented and not human rights oriented. I will always see ALL human rights issues as Federal and not up to localities.

[tiggs]

Originally Posted by Corkey

I know your mad as hell Strappie, he will be recalled when they can, not until next year unfortunately. He will be recalled just like the other republicans who voted to deny workers rights. I know sometimes it's impossible to be patient, but we must be, and in the mean time keep protesting.

There may be some good news on the horizen a little sooner than thought. I am currently in Montreal Quebec for a National Union convention and strange as it may seem this fine fellow was a topic of conversation from one of our guest speakers. Mrs. Stephanie Blommingdale, who is the Sectretary Treasurer of the Wisconsin state AFL-CIO. The cry from the workers in Wisconsin is so loud right now and the unions have been pushed so far that at todays convention she stated the unions are planning to launch a recall next month on the 14th. So please take heart there and hope that this ummmm individual may be out before he can do any more damage.

[Toughy]

I believe the Health Care Reform Act (ObamaCare) requires any hospital that receives federal dollars to allow same-sex partner visitation rights and they must honor same-sex medical power of attorney documents.

This bunch of state and federal tea party nitwits that were elected are gonna be in for a big surprise come recall and 2012 election time. They certainly have no fucking idea how government actually works.

[Kobi]

Wow, this guy is a male Sarah Palin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Walker_(politician)

Tho, I must say, in the back of my perverted brain, situations like this always make me think.....closet case.

[Corkey]

http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2011/09/.../#.TmfUmRwUEiJ

New guidelines from HHS

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Corkey

http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2011/09/.../#.TmfUmRwUEiJ

New guidelines from HHS

"Existing CoPs protect the rights of hospital patients to have representatives who can act on their behalf, however HHS updated the guidance for these rules to emphasize that hospitals should give deference to patients’ wishes concerning their representatives, whether expressed in writing, orally, or through other evidence, unless prohibited by state law."

This part sounds like a loophole to me. Maybe I'm wrong. But the wording sounds like if a state has a law (or gets one passed) then all bets are off and the gay partner cannot act on behalf of his or her hospitalized partner. I guess he or she can still visit their partner.

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

"Existing CoPs protect the rights of hospital patients to have representatives who can act on their behalf, however HHS updated the guidance for these rules to emphasize that hospitals should give deference to patients’ wishes concerning their representatives, whether expressed in writing, orally, or through other evidence, unless prohibited by state law."

This part sounds like a loophole to me. Maybe I'm wrong. But the wording sounds like if a state has a law (or gets one passed) then all bets are off and the gay partner cannot act on behalf of his or her hospitalized partner. I guess he or she can still visit their partner.

Unless one has prior documentation of power of attorney and a living will, I live in a state such as you describe.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Corkey

Unless one has prior documentation of power of attorney and a living will, I live in a state such as you describe.

So the quote from the HHS updated guidelines that say if there is a state law then hospitals do not have to give deference to patient's wishes concerning their representatives, whether expressed in writing, orally or through other evidence does not extend to documentation of power of attorney and a living will? Are not these things expressed in writing, orally or through other evidence? I guess I get nervous when i see wording that appears cryptic. If it's open to interpretation, if it's even remotely ambiguous, i fear the religious right will be all over it. It appears a loophole big enough to have a tea party in.

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

So the quote from the HHS updated guidelines that say if there is a state law then hospitals do not have to give deference to patient's wishes concerning their representatives, whether expressed in writing, orally or through other evidence does not extend to documentation of power of attorney and a living will? Are not these things expressed in writing, orally or through other evidence? I guess I get nervous when i see wording that appears cryptic. If it's open to interpretation, if it's even remotely ambiguous, i fear the religious right will be all over it. It appears a loophole big enough to have a tea party in.

I know, but yes, if one has the documentation it must take precedent as to what the hospital wants. We've never had an issue with our hospital and it's a catholic one.