Friday January 26, 2007 SGN.org |
 |
Volume 35 Issue 04 |
 |
|
Monday, Jul 07, 2008
|
 |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||
|
Strong testifies at Senate partnership |
||
.jpg) |
||
| Strong testifies at Senate partnership | ||
|
"Those stories should be the reason that this Legislature rushes this bill right out of here," said Sen. Ed Murray. by Robert Raketty - SGN Staff Writer The Senate Committee on Government Operations and Elections heard emotional testimony on Thursday, January 25, during a standing room only hearing on Senate Bill 5336, which would extend certain rights and privileges under law once only reserved for married couples. The bills primary Senate sponsor, State Senator Ed Murray, D-Seattle, says the bill is needed to protect same-sex couples and senior citizens from undue hardship. "Michael [Shiosaki] and I wish that after fifteen years together that we would be here to ask you to allow us to marry, but until that discussion on marriage occurs -- in the not too distant future - we, like thousands of Gay and Lesbian families across this state, need protection now," Murray told members of the committee with his partner by his side. "One day nature will take its course and one of us will be seriously ill and hospitalized. This legislation would protect us in our right to visit each other. One day, one of us will die and this legislation will protect our right for the surviving partner to bury the other. "In 1998, this Legislature stood in the doorway of justice and blocked our right to marriage equality. I ask the Legislature this year not to stand in the same door and deny us the right to care for each other." In a narrow 5-4 decision last July, the Washington state Supreme Court had ruled to uphold the state's Defense of Marriage Act, which bars same-sex couples from access to marriage. The state's highest court overruled two lower courts, which had concluded that the law was unconstitutional. Washington State's five openly Gay legislators sought to rectify the inequity by introducing domestic partner legislation and a bill to legalize marriage for same-sex couples in both the State House of Representatives and Senate. SB 5336 and its House companion, HB 1351, would allow a person to visit a partner in the hospital, make medical decisions for an incapacitated partner, make funeral arrangements, and attain inheritance rights in the absence of a will. Senior citizens over the age of 62 and in an unmarried heterosexual relationship would also qualify. During the hearing, Charlene Strong recounted her experience after the death of her partner of 10 years for members of the committee. During a storm on December 14, Katheryn Fleming drowned in the flooded basement of the home the two shared in the Madison Valley neighborhood of Seattle. Strong said she almost lost her life trying to save Fleming, who had gone down into the basement to save audio equipment she used to narrate audio books. "When I arrived at Harborview Medical Center, I was denied access to Kathryn; to be by her side as she lay dying. A family member had to be called in Alexandria, Virginia, to allow me to be in that room with her," said Strong. "As the minutes ticked by, I kept wondering 'What if she dies without me holding her hand. What if she dies without knowing that I told her I love her or took off her wedding ring. "After I was allowed access, I was treated like any other married person by the medical staff at Harborview and, for that, I will always be forever grateful. I was able to tell Kate how beautiful she was and how dearly I loved her as she lay dying. I was able to take her wedding ring off and tell her that I would take good care of it. I know wear it around my neck with a K that I gave her at her 40 birthday party." However, Strong says she was still denied the opportunity to make decisions about organ donation. "After going through the most awful possible thing that I could have gone through in my life and almost dying myself, I was then denied the access and the ability to tell them they were allowed to take Kate's retinas. A family member was again contacted," she said. At the funeral home, Strong again faced significant hardships. "I went to the funeral home and I asked Kathryn's mother if she would like to accompany me for support," she said. "When I got to there, the funeral director did not even shake my hand. He didn't offer me any condolences. He looked directly at Mrs. Fleming, Kate's mother, and directed all of his questions [at her]. When I asked him to direct his questions to me, that I would be making all of the funeral arrangements, he wouldn't even look at me. He slid the cremation request over to Mrs. Fleming. At that point, I left the room and someone else came in and took care of things. "After suffering one of the greatest losses of my life of one of the greatest loves of my life - of one of the most beautiful people I have had the chance to be with for 10 years - I suffered the indignities of not being able to make those decisions." Barbara Steele and her partner, Beth Reis, had been plaintiffs in the landmark marriage case and provided testimony at the hearing. "We would be lying if we said that passing this domestic partnership bill in the Legislature would thrill us. We were plaintiffs in the [marriage equality] case and we have been taking care of one another as spouses for nearly 30 years. We think we deserve first-class citizenship and full equality under the law," said Steele. "In fact, we think that our marrying would strengthen the institution. That said, we believe that a domestic partnership is far better than nothing. It is a safety net that the state of Washington aught to provide to its people - at least as a step on the road to justice." "Beth and I are blessed; we have been able to afford to buy our rights. We were able to afford a lawyer to draw up durable powers of attorney so that each us could give informed consent for the other one's healthcare if we needed to. But, stopping at home or a safe deposit box to get those papers as we race to the emergency room would be emotionally impossible. "We are also blessed in another way. Our adult children love and respect the both of us - so does Beth's brother. If one of us was hospitalized, the family wouldn't question or wouldn't hesitate for second to not let the other one to be at their side. Not everyone is so lucky. "Without this bill, your cousin in Kokomo -- who you haven't seen in 25 years -- can come and decide that the person who you've nursed through chemo for the last two years shouldn't get to hold your hand while they are dying. We think everyone should get to decide who should be there holding their hand as they pass." Reis agreed. "And, when they do die, not only does that distant cousin get to override their wishes regarding organ donation or what to do with their remains, but they can't automatically pass down their home to their beloved; the person with whom they may have spent decades making that house a home," she said. "Again, we are fortunate. We could afford to pay for wills, not everyone can. Please don't let people lose their homes or their life savings just because they couldn't afford wills. It's a travesty. You can rectify it." Lynn Grotsky also spoke in favor of the domestic partnership legislation. She and her partner have two children, ages 16 and 19. "I am surprised by how similar our stories are," she said, before telling her own story about her partner's miscarriage of their first child and the subsequent treatment they received from the hospital's staff. "About 20 years ago, we had a two year legal battle here in Washington to allow our children to legally have two moms. And here we are - almost two decades later - still fighting for some simple basic rights." State Rep. Joe McDermott, D-Seattle, who watched the hearing, said he was moved by the personal stories. "Charlene Strong's story about losing her partner last month and having issues at both the hospital and the funeral home demonstrates the very immediate circumstances where we need these protections," he said. "I think Beth and Barbara's story about their long life together and everything they have done - the way they have looked out for each other, each others families, and built a home together - demonstrate what kind of long range investment we have in our relationships and how much they need the protection that this bill begins to provide." Murray said he hopes the stories are equally powerful to his fellow legislators. "Those stories should speak for themselves. Those stories should be the reason that this Legislature rushes this bill right out of here," he told the Seattle Gay New following the hearing. Committee members also heard testimony from a variety of groups who opposed the legislation for religious and ideological reasons. "[T]he homosexual agenda has advanced so [much] that homosexuality is taught as normal in our schools, homosexuals have certain benefits in certain areas of our culture and their agenda is continuing," said Bob Higley, director of legislation for the Positive Christian Agenda. "Please consider this bill as you consider your own children and grandchildren as they are taught that homosexuality is normal. It is not. We are men and women and men and women have children. There children have children, which cause grandchildren. And, I have some. This is not a good bill for the people of the state of Washington and I encourage you to consider carefully where we are headed." Several opponents also testified that the bill was discriminatory, because it applied only to same-sex couples and senior citizens. "The Washington State Catholic Conference has taken a keen interest in this bill," said Auxiliary Bishop of the Catholic Archdiocese of Seattle Joseph Tyson. "The title suggests that it protects individuals in domestic partnerships by granting certain rights and benefits. It may in fact do this, but it also undermines and unjustly discriminates against a wide swath of peoples in our state. This bill grants to domestic partners a package of rights that it fails to grant to many other kinds of relationships that exist beyond the state's legal definition of marriage. "The Washington State Catholic Conference supports the benefits offered by this bill, but we ask the bill be amended to extend the benefits to other adults. As a church, we uphold the human dignity of every person. Washington State's definition of marriage as between a man and a woman supports a wide web that includes not only the spouses, but children and the immediate family. Yet, this wider web of social need is ignored by this bill. "As it stands, SB 5336 is too narrow in its focus. This bill simultaneously ignores the plight of the widest number of people in need of benefits here in Washington State and erodes our state's understanding for the one support they do have; namely the sanctity of marriage and the glue of social support that families can be in times of dire need." Jeff Kemp of Families Northwest was concerned about the impact of domestic partnership legislation on the institution of marriage. "Domestic partnerships have a problem because they water down the commitment to marriage," he warned. "There will be people suing for that right -- in the heterosexual community -- eventually, so that they can get the benefits but not make the commitments of the lifelong responsibilities for each other or for their children." Equal Rights Washington's Advocacy Director, Josh Friedes, said he doesn't buy the arguments made by the opponents of the domestic partnership bill. "The arguments used by the opponents were contradictory and, frankly, often ridiculous," he said. "On the one hand, they argued that extending domestic partnerships to Gays and Lesbians would be discriminatory by creating a class [of people]. That argument was effectively knocked down when Senator [Adam] Kline and one testifier simply asked, 'Well, why then not give Gays and Lesbians the right to marry'." Friedes said he was satisfied by the turnout of the region's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community at the hearing. "It was exciting to see so many people on such short notice in the room with 'I support DP' stickers," he said. "We made a very strong showing and I am hopeful that people will continue to contact their legislators and let them know that they support the domestic partnership bill because real families are in crisis today." The House Judiciary Committee will hold its hearing on the legislation on Wednesday, January 31, at 1:30 p.m. in House Hearing Room A. "I think we just had a very good hearing in the Senate. We will have a hearing next week on the House version of the bill," said McDermott. "I feel we will make a strong case and look forward to getting this out of committee and on to the floor of the entire House." State Rep. Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, is a member of the Judiciary Committee. He said if the bill makes it out of committee, then he is confident it will pass the House. "I think we are in pretty good shape in the House," he said. "I have spoken with a majority of my colleagues and I feel quite confident that we are going to be able to pass this out of the House." In all, 56 legislators in the House and 21 in the Senate are sponsoring the domestic partnership bill. Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown and House Speaker Frank Chopp have both said they support the domestic partnership measure. It is believed Governor Christine Gregoire would sign the bill should it appear on her desk. The proposed legislation will be a key focus of a series of events, entitled "Vow to Take a Stand," to take place around the state in early February and a lobby day in Olympia on February 26. Both events are being co-sponsored by ERW. Last month, New Jersey joined Connecticut and Vermont in granting civil unions to same-sex couples. Currently, Massachusetts is the only state to allow such couples to marry. California has domestic partnerships that bestow the same rights as marriage. |
||
 |
||
|
|
||
International Readers read the SGN in Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, Spanish |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 post your own information on Seattle Gay Blog |
|
 |
copyright Seattle Gay News - DigitalTeamWorks 2006