Gov. Paterson has directed all state agencies to revise their policies and regulations to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. The governor's legal counsel instructed the agencies that gay couples married elsewhere "should be afforded the same recognition as any other legally performed union."
Source: New York Times
Read the article here.
Mombian has a post today regarding a recent Washington Post Article on same-sex divorces. The article highlights several areas where the law is unsettled and same-sex couples are at a disadvantage, such as:
Read the Mombian Post here and the Washington Post article here (free registration may be required).
Abbie E. Goldberg, Ph.D., as guest author, provides information on why it is important for you to participate in research if you are LGBT. Abbie writes:
When I started researching lesbian parenthood, about seven years ago, I quickly learned that I was entering a field in which any research that I produced had the capacity to be used for good or misinterpreted for evil. Studies that demonstrated the positive adjustment of children of lesbian and gay parents are cited repeatedly in courtrooms, as evidence as to why it is not fair to deny a parent custody on the basis of his or her sexual orientation (i.e., in divorce proceedings). At the same time, critics of gay/lesbian parenting have often argued that the flaws in these studies preclude us from drawing these conclusions. In response, we as researchers of LGBT parent-families have often had to carefully (and repeatedly) explain and defend our findings and research methodology. In addition, our critics have pushed us to improve the rigor of our research designs (for example, including larger numbers of participants in our studies, and seeking out more diverse participants for our studies), which is, ultimately a good thing: Better science and fewer flaws means that our findings are less vulnerable to hen-pecking.
Continue reading "Why Research Matters - a Perspective on LGBT Research" »
Mombian reports on a recent case involving a lesbian mom in Texas who may lose custody of her son to the sperm donor. When Tamila and her partner, Jennie, decided to have children, Jennie's uncle seemed like a good choice as donor. The child would have genetic links through both parents since Tamila would carry the child. While Tamila and Jennie were together, the arrangement worked out fine. However when they split, the situation deteriorated. Now, the donor is suing for custody and Tamila faces the prospect of spending only one weekend a month with her son. This case illustrates the need for consulting with an attorney before entering into a sperm donor arrangement.
Thanks to Mombian for the post.
Read more about the case here.
Technorati Tags: Alternative Family, Non-traditional Family, Nontraditional Family
In February 2007, Janice Langbehn's partner of 18 years, Lisa Marie Pond suffered an aneurysm while they were on vacation in Florida. At the hospital Janice was told that she would need a healthcare proxy before she could see her partner. "When I finally was allowed to see Lisa it was with a priest to perform her last rites."
If you don't have one, please consider a health care proxy and other estate planning documents. See the Estate Planning Category for more information.
Source for Post: Human Rights Campaign Foundation
In observance of National Foster Care month, the Human Rights
Campaign is featuring a story from a GLBT foster family in Austin. This
family provides a foster home for children who have endured
unimaginable neglect and abuse.
Holly Lindsey writes about their first child, a troubled 14 year old:
"Our first year together was filled with hours and hours of raging. The hurt and anger that poured from her ripped at our hearts. But we refused to give up on her even though everyone told us to let go. I won’t lie — it was a horrible year. But we survived it and are proud of all the steps — big and little — that she makes every day. She fights to survive and grow."
What courage and commitment! Just what these children need. As a court appointed special advocate (CASA), I work with children in foster care and applaud this family for their dedication to foster children.
Source for post: Human Rights Campaign
Technorati Tags: Non-traditional Family, Nontraditional Family
The Pension Protection Act of 2006 wasn't necessarily intended to benefit nontraditional families, but at least one aspect of the new law does just that. The Act allows a non-spouse beneficiary of a corporate sponsored retirement plan to rollover inherited plan assets to an "inherited IRA" and receive distributions based on their life expectancy. Under prior law, only spouses could make a direct rollover; other beneficiaries (partners, children, etc.) could be forced to withdraw the entire amount over a very short time frame resulting in higher income taxes for the beneficiary.
In order to take advantage of the new non-spouse beneficiary rules, contact your plan administrator to make your partner, child etc. a beneficiary of your retirement account. Upon your death, your new beneficiary will be allowed to rollover the proceeds to his or her own inherited IRA. The law is effective as of January 1, 2007.
The Act has other provisions that may benefit you and your family. For example non-spouse beneficiaries may now be eligible for hardship distribution rules that apply to certain qualifying medical and financial situations. The Act also allows certain older taxpayers to make direct transfers to a charity instead of having to withdraw the funds, pay taxes on them and then contribute them to charity.
To read more about the act, click here.
Technorati Tags: Alternative Family, Estate Planning, Nontraditional Family
New Jersey's recent court ruling was a big step, but according to Lambda Legal, it represents just a first step. They contend that "... a civil union is a separate, confusing legal idea that divides us from our friends and neighbors, rather than bringing us together as equals. We agree with Chief Justice Poritz, who wrote in her dissent, “Labels set people apart as surely as physical separation on a bus or in school facilities.”" (Source Lambda Legal email newsletter October 26, 2006)
Want to know more about the ruling and how it might affect you? Some common questions and answers are:
What does the decision mean?
The court ruled that same-sex couples and their families have a constitutional right to the same benefits as heterosexual families. It ordered New Jersey’s Legislature to pass legislation providing these benefits and protections to same-sex couples within 180 days.
When does the law go into effect?
The court’s decision is effective as of April 23, 2007. By that time, the state legislature must adopt legislation to provide equal benefits and protections to same-sex couples.
What about non-residents?
New Jersey does not have a residency requirement for marriage. The court ruled that it cannot be any more difficult to enter into a civil union than into a marriage. S,o out-of-state couples will be able go to New Jersey to marry or enter into a civil union, depending on how the state legislature proceeds. However, your marriage or civil union might not be recognized in your home state.
These questions and answers were adapted from the very helpful list on the Human Rights Campaign website.
If you are a New Jersey resident and want to find out what you can do, click here to contact your legislators.
Technorati Tags: Alternative Family, Civil Union, Non-traditional Family, Same-Sex Marriage
The New Jersey Supreme Court has just ruled that denying same-sex couples the right to marry is unconstitutional. The ruling directs the legislature to fix the inequality. The New Jersey legislature must act within 180 days.
From the decision:
Only rights that are deeply rooted in the traditions, history, and conscience of the people are deemed to be fundamental. Although we cannot find that a fundamental right to same-sex marriage exists in this State, the unequal dispensation of rights and benefits to committed same-sex partners can no longer be tolerated under our State Constitution. With this State’s legislative and judicial commitment to eradicating sexual orientation discrimination as our backdrop, we now hold that denying rights and benefits to committed same-sex couples that are statutorily given to their heterosexual counterparts violates the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1. To comply with this constitutional mandate, the Legislature must either amend the marriage statutes to include same-sex couples or create a parallel statutory structure, which will provide for, on equal terms, the rights and benefits enjoyed and burdens and obligations borne by married couples. We will not presume that a separate statutory scheme, which uses a title other than marriage, contravenes equal protection principles, so long as the rights and benefits of civil marriage are made equally available to same-sex couples. The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to same sex couples, whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process. (emphasis added)
Read more about it and download the opinion at Lambda Legal.
Technorati Tags: Alternative Family, Civil Union, Non-traditional Family, Same-Sex Marriage
This year, eight states have ballot measures to amend their constitutions to ban same sex marriage: Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin. When 11 states voted to ban same-sex marriage in 2004, the majority percentages in support were 60-70%. This year's measures have only slim majorities in support of the ban. Why? Most agree that the opponents of such bans have done a better job organizing and educating voters. Other reasons include voter focus on other issues such as Iraq and court cases upholding bans on same-sex marriage.
The issue is complicated in states like Colorado, which has two measures on the ballot. One would add a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and the other creates a legal structure of rights for same-sex couples in civil unions. Advocates of the civil union proposal maintain that its okay to define marriage as an institution for heterosexuals, but it is unfair to withhold legal rights from those in civil unions. Opponents say that view is a smokescreen.
Read more at the -The New York Times Online
Technorati Tags: Civil Union, Non-traditional Family, Same-Sex Marriage
