In Ocean County there lives a woman named Laurel Hester. Laurel Hester, before she was ravaged by the cancer which will kill her in a few months, spent over half her life–23 years–as a law enforcement officer with the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office. She has appeared twice before the Ocean County freeholders, once in person and once via video because she is too weak to appear in person again, to beg them to authorize that the death benefit that she earned through over two decades of dedicated service to the people of Ocean County be awarded to her surviving spouse. If this were a civilized society, such a request would either be unnecessary or would be granted as a matter of routine. Unfortunately for Hester and her apouse, they are both women, and so the archaic and indefensible marriage laws of the state of New Jersey do not make this benefit automatic.
New Jersey state law, however, allows for individual counties to award this benefit. The only thing keeping Hester’s spouse from receiving the benefit under current law is the evil and heartless refusal of the freeholders to grant it. Hester, battling literally to the last days of her life, is going to her grave living in terror that her spouse, Stacie Andree, will lose the house the couple shares if she is not awarded the benefit. The total in question is $13,000.
There are not enough "fuck you"s in the world to do justice to the disgust that I’m feeling at the evil being perpetrated against this family. There are no words, none, nothing that anyone can say that can possibly justify the heinous despicable refusal on the parts of these worthless bigoted bastards to allow a dying woman the peace of knowing that her surviving spouse will at least have a home in which to grieve.
They are spouses? I was under the impression that same-sex unions were not on the books in New Jersey. It’s possible that the county is not permitted to override the regulations for people the law sees only as roommates.
That being said, I think it’s reprehensible that two people who are in a relationship that anyone would call “marriage” were the description gender-blind don’t get the same benefits under the law as any two other people in the same situation. Especially in the state that took such a progressive stance in Dale v. BSA.
If the freeholders are permitted to authorize the benefit for unmarried or common-law heterosexual couples, then simple human decency would demand than a simple affidavit signed by both partners should provide enough legal excuse for the freeholders to do the right thing. If the reason isn’t legal but “moral,” then shame on them.
For what it is worth, the Freeholders usually do the same thing to Hetero couples that are not married and only living together. My Sister and BIL are not a couple in the eyes of NJ. So it is not just an anti-gay thing.
They’re only called that in New Jersey, I believe. I grew up in Monmouth County, NJ, which has a county seat of Freehold, so until recently I thought it was just a Monmouth thing.
On the OP, I would just like to add my voice of disgust. I never did like those Ocean Countiers.
Is there precedent for awarding the benefits to a domestic partner? The article seemed to imply that, but it wasn’t really clear. If so then the award should be made, if not then the taxpayers should have a say, it’s their gov’t. and their money.
Your sister her partner have the option of entering into a legal marriage and have chosen not to do so, for whatever reason. Laurel and Stacie are barred by law from legally marrying in New Jersey. This benefit is one of the scraps that the state threw to same-sex couples instead of allowing them to marry, and the freeholders are preventing them from receiving even that scrap. It is an anti-gay thing, plain and simple.
Or, upon Preview, what little*bit said.
Other NJ counties have extended the benefit. Ocean County is the only one to date that has refused.
Laurel and Stacie are taxpayers. What say are they getting in it?
This is, IMO, the wrong approach to take. “Us against them” or a battle of conflicting interests just leads to acrimony.
This is, again IMO, exactly the right idea. The idea that one citizen is denied the opportunity and benefits of another is contrary to the ideals of the United States, and just plain wrong in my (still Catholic) eyes.
Otto, I have a couple of friends in Ocean County, NJ, including my best friend, who is gay. I forwarded your link to them. I’m sure they will follow up with these freeholders, if they haven’t already done so. Truly appalling and wrong and evil.
First, and this is in a completely non-confrontational manner, did they know about the regulations in place for where they lived? She worked there for 23 years, I just wonder if she knew the rules at all in that time.
Second, and this is kind of a side point, if she knew what the rules were, could she have gotten a life insurance policy naming Stacie as beneficiary? I don’t know how life insurance policies work, so I’m interested if anyone knows.
Third, and this really has nothing to do with the case here, how did they get to a position where $13k will lose the house? Does the DP work? Were there any savings? Was the mortgage seriously in default? It may well have been with the medical bills, but I have to suspect a county worker in NJ would have a pretty good medical plan. Especially after 23 years of service.
If it’s a move to bring DP benefit sharing for gays, good on them. I’m not personally against it. But if the cancer angle is being used to gain sympathy for some greater cause, that pisses me off.
But, again, I don’t know enough details from the cited article to really galvanize an opinion one way or the other. Just throwing out some questions and thoughts.
Following up, Duffer, in the same non-confrontational manner:
I don’t know the answer here, any more than you do. But if the death benefit (which is usually a part of health/retirement benefits as part of the fringe package for government workers) has generally been awarded to same-sex DPs, as **Otto indicates in post #11, she may have assumed (prior to going on cancer disability or retirement) that it would be extended to her and her DP.
No doubt. But that’s like saying that people with life savings aren’t entitled to social security. If it’s a benefit, it’s a benefit. Distinct from any supplemental voluntary thing one may choose whether to undertake. It’s up to the government to decide whether or not to extend a death benefit to its employees, of course. But it should be done fairly.
If the house is in Ms. Hester’s name, with an outstanding mortgage on it, that might just make sense: she can leave her equity to her DP, but it’d be up to the bank whether or not to allow her to assume the outstanding mortgage or to foreclose on it, and if DP doesn’t have income to make up the $13,000 or to pay it off, they might just opt to foreclose. (Although I wouldn’t be surprised to see a worst-case scenario being played up here, in point of fact. The fact that it could happen that way is bad enough.)
Chronic or long-term-fatal illnesses do have a way of eating up savings, running up bills, etc. I’d find it really insensitive to suggest that the plight of a couple with one partner dying of cancer is being “played” – fair is fair, and this illustrates that sometimes denying DP benefits is unfair, quite graphically to anyone who’s had family in such a situation.
But hetero marriage is that much stronger now because two people in love and in a committed long-term relationship can’t transfer earned and well-deserved benefits. You gotta look at the long-term effects.
Now to be serious and non-sarcastic, Virginia is on the verge of approving an amendment to the constitution that would cement this same non-rights to those in similar situations. And as a by product, probably restrict rights to non-married straight people too.
I’ve been keeping an eye on this one for awhile now, and all I keep wondering is if the outcome would be the same if McGreevey had stayed in the Governor’s chair?
I love my home county, but this does us a great disservice.
Can we be certain these County Freeholders are acting as “worthless bigoted bastards”? According to the NYT, their primary concern is that once they set the precedent of granting benefits (not just of the death variety) to the domestic partners of state employees, costs will skyrocket. According to Freeholder Kelly, the NJ law “domestic partnership law was unfair because it did not let siblings or other relatives not married to each other share benefits”. Can someone provide a past instance where Ocean County officials have provided benefits to non-married domestic partners? If they have, I’ll gladly label them hypocritical, evil, heartless homophobes.
More importantly, why hasn’t anyone (i.e. The NJ Gay Officers Action League) started a Laurel Hester / Stacie Andree charity fund? I see plenty of blogs and cries of outrage - but Googling provides no place for me and other people who sympatize with her cause to make a donation.
