‘Death rights’ bills for same-sex couples pass House committee

By Andy Birkey
Friday, March 12, 2010 at 8:56 am
Minnesota Capitol. Photo: Wikipedia

Minnesota Capitol. Photo: Wikipedia

Three bills that would assist same-sex couples in the event of one partner’s death were passed by the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. Legislators recalled stories of couples who underwent hardships because of inequality in the law, while Tom Prichard of the Minnesota Family Council called the bills “discriminatory” and said they are “unfair to married couples.”

Rep. Frank Hornstein, DFL-Minneapolis, offered a bill that would allow equal access in personal asset distributions. If a couple in a domestic partnership hasn’t drawn up a will, the measure states, assets in the event one partner dies would go to the surviving individual, just as it would with married spouses.

Hornstein said he was inspired to help rectifiy the inequalities of the law after learning of the difficulties faced by a pair in his district.

“There’s a couple in my district, Jim and Duane, and Duane had medical issues he was dealing with and was hospitalized. And his partner could not see him, he didn’t have visitation rights in in the same way that a heterosexual couple would,” he told the committee. “And it really got me thinking about the inequality many of our neighbors and constantly face on a day to day basis.”

Ann Kaner-Roth of Project 515, a group working to educate Minnesotans about the inequalities in Minnesota law, explained the bill, saying, “Essentially the protections would allow the assets of someone who dies without a will in place to be distributed to their domestic partner.”

The bill passed the committee by a voice vote, as did a bill to allow a surviving domestic partner to sue for wrongful death. Rep. Steve Simon, DFL-St. Louis Park, said the bill is modeled after Minnesota’s Fortune 500 companies.

“The domestic partner definition in this bill, and in all these bills, was taken from some of the most esteemed Minnesota based fortune 500 companies,” he said. “Already our most trusted corporate citizens are way ahead of us on this. I know there are strong opinions on this, but I trust you will vote your conscience.”

A third bill, sponsored by Rep. Paul Thissen, DFL-St. Paul, and passed on Wednesday, addressed Hornstein’s concerns. It would allow domestic partners to share health data in certain situations with the same access that spouses and family members have. It would have allowed Duane’s doctors to alert Jim about Duane’s condition when he was hospitalized.

The main voice of oppposition to the bills was Tom Prichard of the Minnesota Family Council.

“Basically, what they are attempting to do is redefine marriage,” he said. “This is discriminatory… It’s also unfair to married couples because married couples have a legal status and legal obligations where as these individuals are getting the benefits without the responsibilities and fundamentally this is an effort to redefine marriage.”

Despite Prichard’s testimony, all three bills were passed and placed on the General Register. The House could vote on them as soon as next week.

Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter


Comments

5 Comments

Ambrose Charpentier
Comment posted March 12, 2010 @ 10:15 am

I’d like a bill to redefine Tom Prichard – as a leach and menace to society. He’s been using gay people as his meal ticket for decades. It’s time for that to stop. If MN-Indy has a slow day, it would be interesting to have a reporter snoop into Pritchard’s closet. I’ll bet there are a few surprising things in there.


JeffreyRO5
Comment posted March 12, 2010 @ 11:54 am

If Mr. Pritchard wants gay couples to have the same marriage responsibilities, then let them marry! This is a new one: “gay couples are getting the rights and privileges without the responsibility.” Well, if you really believe this, let them marry and be as miserable as the rest of us!


John
Comment posted March 12, 2010 @ 5:54 pm

Jeffrey, so true. I was just about to post almost exactly the same thing.

Laughable that they would try to label these bills discriminatory to regular married couples, when they are the ones against these same sex couples being married in the first place.

It is almost Monty Pythonesque in its circular logic.


Moya
Comment posted March 17, 2010 @ 5:58 pm

The Discriminatory actions and choices people make such as Tom Prichard, is the only thing infringing on my life. I am offended by his practice to push his religion and his choice of lifestyle on me.

It his choice to be a bigot. It is his choice to have to choose to live within the Cult he calls a congregation. NOT mine.


Jamichael Carson
Comment posted March 25, 2010 @ 12:07 am

Marriage was NEVER DEFINED! Get over yourself. Stop adding things in, and tell the truth.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.