<p>@LasMa I understand what you’re saying, but this has less to do with what the law says (the law did reprimand the hospital, after all) and more to do with the hospital’s lack of respect and, like you said, discrimination.</p>
<p>Repede, I think you’re right, and that’s why this will eventually need to be fully settled at the Supreme Court someday. Until then, you can be married in one state and not married in another – but ONLY if you’re a gay couple. Seems like unequal treatment to me, and IMO the Court will eventually find that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ack, don’t edit your post after someone already responded. </p>
<p>My question was “Does a patient have a legal right to designate who he wants?” I don’t know the answer. I don’t know the law that well.</p>
<p>Eventually. </p>
<p>Someone will have to bring it up to them. </p>
<p>Until then…</p>
<p>So what was the hospital reprimanded for? Unnecessary force?</p>
<p>
Like I said, the patient should have the right to choose. The law should say that the patient has the right to choose, no matter what the relation is. Like I said, the hospital shouldn’t even get to ask what the relationship is. If you say that, “they’re married, so the hospital shouldn’t do this,” you’re saying that the hospital’s actions would have been justified if they were not married.
And, by the way, the law DID side with the patient. So this isn’t about what the law says at all. This is about individual discrimination.</p>
<p>Sorry, Repede, I didn’t see your response.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Almost positive that it’s only immediate family.</p>
<p>@red The law should determine who is allowed to visit up until a certain age. Once the potential patient reaches such an age, he/she should be allowed to adjust who would be allowed to visit, who would make decisions in an emergency, etc.</p>
<p>@Repede I think red was talking about what the ideal would be, not what the current law is</p>
<p>stressedout, yes, I see what you’re saying about the hospital simply going with the patient’s request, regardless of the legal status of the relationship. I guess this hospital just had a major gays-are-icky freakout.</p>
<p>Immediate family. </p>
<p>Pretty simple.</p>
<p>What does the law say now? Isn’t it legal spouse? What’s after that?</p>
<p>Talking about power of attorney.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Bingo. </p>
<p>My son should not to worry that he would be kept from his husband in an emergency. Nor should his parental rights be in question when the time comes for them to have a child. </p>
<p>This is so basic. I’m thrilled with the Supreme Court decisions but we have a ways to go still.</p>
<p>Repede, the only thing I can find it that the closest relative or friend makes the decisions. </p>
<p>I found a nice little PDF.
<a href=“http://www.rihlp.org/pubs/Your_life_your_choices.pdf[/url]”>The Rhode Island Health Literacy Project;
<p>Your next of kin will decide starting with your spouse.</p>
<p>That leaves a lot of legal wiggle room though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yup. I think the LGBTQA community is just now coming down from the high and starting to have the same sentiment.</p>
<p>
The LGB…what?</p>
<p>I thought there were only four letters. O.o</p>
<p>Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, Queer/Questioning, Ally.</p>
<p>I normally just say LGBT because the rights primarily affect them. However, when I talk about fighting, I try to include the last two because it’s not JUST LGBT people that are fighting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I believe you’re referring to a 2010 executive order by President Obama directing HHS to promulgate new rules to ensure hospital visitation rights by domestic partners (same sex or opposite sex) at all hospitals that accept Medicare or Medicaid–which is just about all of them. The new rules also allow visits by close friends, which had been an issue for many elderly patients who had grown dependent on a close friend for help with medical and daily living needs, only to find the friend was barred by restrictive hospital visitation policies limiting visits to “family members.”</p>
<p>Pretty interesting article … [Conservatives</a> brace for `marriage revolution’ ? CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs](<a href=“http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/28/conservatives-brace-for-themarriage-revolution/?hpt=hp_t1]Conservatives”>http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/28/conservatives-brace-for-themarriage-revolution/?hpt=hp_t1)</p>