Right. The friend who drove me to the hospital was offered a bed, without any questions. The nurse brought the pillows and blanket.
I could name anyone I wanted to have access to my medical information. I was also given a “living will” type document where I could name any competent adult to make decisions for me had it become necessary.
Depends. If it were “all else being equal, children in these relationships have slightly (though statistically significantly) worse outcomes” I’d be willing to overlook that in the interests of justice. At most, I’d argue for something like what WhyNot suggested, exploring what, in particular, is reponsible for this effect and how we can counteract or minimize it.
If it were “there is a 90 percent chance kids raised by same-sex parents will grow up to take meth, beat their spouses, and take 12 items through the express lane” I’d – well, initially I’d be skptical, because that’s so wildly at odds with the data available so far, but if that were overcome I’d acknowledge that, yes, that’s a reason to prevent allowing same-sex couples from raising children (though I still might not be against letting them marry).
That too; we have deteremined that the overall societal benefits of allowing divorce outweigh the negative effects for the children of these former relationships, while (to an extent and on an ad hoc basis) making resources available to lessen those negative effects. (Though it’s a slightly different situation, in that I suspect that even if children of divorced parents do have worse outcomes, their outcomes are better than those same children would have if their parents wanted – or needed – to divorce but couldn’t.)
I think that’s a different thread
That’s for female-female couples. Two men get “mmariage.”
Why was he arrested, then? It sounds like he was arrested because the brother asked him to leave, and a fight ensued. I am not sure why the domestic partner of the patient, who had Power of Attorney, and that the patient wanted to stay, would be the one asked to leave. I would think the brother is the extraneous one in the hospital room; he should have been escorted out. He refused to leave, physically resisting the security guards who were trying to remove him from his husband’s side, and then he was arrested. Looking at some articles available online, the daughter said that Gorley was holding onto the railing and the police began “karate-chopping” at his hands to make him let go. He was fined for disorderly conduct and trespassing.
So I would say that he was arrested for refusing(to the point of physical resistance) to leave his partner’s side when the guards tried to remove him, at least according to the articles I saw.
If my husband were in the hospital and events went down like that, yeah, I would fight being removed from his bedside as well.
Congrats!
I would have said “co-parents”
cornopean, if you are still around, it is the tendency of lesbians to have children that led me to favoring same-sex marriage, before it became legal.
My son had a friend in school with two moms. At some point, they split up. And I realized that child would have had many more rights had her parents been married. She would have had a right to ongoing support from both of them.
Sperm is cheap. Women are going to hatch babies, whether or not they are married to men. Unless you want to force every fecund woman to marry a man, and forbids divorce, and police bedrooms, there will be children in situations other than bio-mom-married-to-bio-dad. Those children are better-off if we encourage their parents (by which I mean the adults rearing them) to marry.
You just answered your own question. He was arrested for disorderly conduct and trespassing.
Trespassing - because he refused to leave his husband’s side when the hospital told him to leave. Disorderly conduct, because he got into a fight with his husband’s brother about whether or not he had the right to be there, and also physically resisting being removed. How is that *not *getting arrested for not leaving his husband’s side?
Pretty much. Generally, refusing to leave another’s property when asked to do so IS trespassing.
Again, getting into a fight is, by definition, disorderly conduct, the reason is not relevant. The fight could have been over the color of the other dude’s tie, and it would still be disorderly conduct.
Yes, but these charges were unjust (whether or not they were within the letter of the law) and demonstrate the need for marriage to protect the individuals within such couples – just as removing the spouse of a patient because they were different races would have been unjust before such relationships were legal.
Isn’t justice supposed to be blind? Getting into fights is disorderly, regardless of the excuse for doing so.
More to the point, if the nurse had looked up their information and/or taken their relationship to be a “real” marriage, she would have kicked out the brother, and should have done so long before it got to that point. She saw them arguing in the hallway several times and told them to cool it. That’s when one of them should have been escorted out, and it should not have been the spouse/partner/POA and pt’s choice of visitor.
Again, how is that not getting arrested for refusing to leave his husband’s bedside? He was asked to leave, he refused, and he was arrested for trespassing. Because he refused to leave.
How do you know that they didn’t escort out the person who was being disorderly?
Again, “his husband’s bedside” is not a defense. Refusing to leave is the violation.
Again, you said that’s not why he was arrested. I maintain that it was. No, he wasn’t CHARGED with it, because I doubt that’s an offense that’s listed. But it was why he was charged.
Ok, then please provide a cite.
By accounts of at least one (admittedly biased) eyewitness they were both being disorderly. Or perhaps neither - the daughter indicates that the brother said to the patient “I won’t let him make decisions for you” and Roger said, no, I will make decisions and you need to leave. that’s when the nurse decided Roger was to be ejected from the room. Perhaps, in the (alleged) kerfuffle, with both individuals (maybe) being disorderly, they should have removed the one who had no real legal right to be there. Or, they could have listened to the patient, who requested his husband stay. They could have easily confirmed who had the power of attorney in this case.
Seriously, you are at your spouse’s bedside, their sibling picks a fight with you, you assert your right to be there - and *you *get thrown out. You, who has the legal right to make decisions on behalf of the patient, are escorted out, while the sibling, who has NONE, can stay- over your spouse’s stated wishes.
You don’t see anything WRONG with that situation?
Do you have any evidence that he was arrested/fined for anything other than what he was charged with?
I’m sorry, what?
You yourself agreed that he was charged with trespassing for refusing to leave. That’s what trespassing in this case means.
Refusing to leave = trespassing. He was fined for trespassing. Because he refused to leave. Perhaps I am missing some nuance here. Please enlighten me.
If refusing to leave = trespassing, then how is the “why” of the trespassing arrest not the refusal to leave?
Here is the account of the daughter, who was there.
Beyond that, I don’t even know what you want in terms of a cite.
So why was he arrested?
I asked earlier. Please don’t say “trespassing and disorderly conduct.” I am not asking what he was charged with. I am asking *why *he was arrested - what actions of his lead to the arrest for trespassing?
Perhaps we are talking past each other. The “why” has nothing to do with the charges, and you seem to think it does. Is that your position?