Monday, February 9, 2009

When It Comes Down to It

This story is in no way about couples relying on the government for sanctification of interpersonal human commitment.

It's about a woman being kept from being physically near her spouse.

Staffers at Jackson Memorial Hospital
advised [Janice] Langbehn that she could not see [her partner, Lisa Marie] Pond earlier because the hospital's visitation policy in cases of emergency was limited to immediate family and spouses -- not partners.

Even with power of attorney and legal guardianship, Langbehn was refused access because of Florida's non-recognition of their marriage.

What would have allowed her in? Not the support of her family. Not the sincerity of her commitment. Not all the best intentions of those who argue that a couple's vows need no help from the state. This is a gate that the state controls. And the state needs to open it.


Casey said...

Good point. Sometimes I should probably just let pathos have its way with me instead of demanding more logos, shouldn't I?

fenhopper said...

tho the opposite might be true. here's a case where you seemed (to me) to be implying that there is no need to think logically about this because the human issue would be untouched by legislation.

and my point was that some practical approach is needed because we see the effect on both the values and the tasks of citizens.

Casey said...

Right... I thought that's what I meant. Something like "straight man's privilege" is at work here: I get to imagine that love need not be beholden to the gov't... but only 'cause I'm hetero.

The Ridger, FCD said...

Yes. "Just a piece of paper" - but only to those who can get it.