Posted on 04/18/2010 11:45:31 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Some Christian leaders have expressed support for President Obama’s order to extend hospital visitation and health care decision rights of same-sex couples.
The leaders agree with the president that patients, whatever their sexual orientation, need their love ones by their sides and have a right to choose who they want to make medical decisions on their behalf.
Focus on the Family Senior Vice President Tom Minnery said in a statement Friday that the Christian pro-family group supports the principle in Obama’s Presidential Memorandum regarding hospital visitation.
Likewise, several evangelical leaders voiced support for ensuring gays and lesbians access to their loved ones during times of emergency and distress.
“To have access to loved ones in all conditions of life is something evangelicals see as compassionate and just,” said Richard Cizik, president of the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good.
Pastor Joel Hunter of Northland, A Church Distributed in Orlando, said the directive brings “much-needed humanity” to the way patients are treated.
“As a pastor, I have witnessed the deep and heart-felt needs people experience, particularly in times of grave illness,” said Hunter. “In these moments, every person deserves the strength and support that being surrounded by loved ones brings.”
In a Presidential Memorandum, President Obama on Thursday directed the Department of Health and Human Services to work to ensure the rights of patients to designate visitors and decision makers. The memorandum highlighted that current hospital visitation policies have “uniquely affected” gay and lesbian Americans who are often barred from their partner.
Hospital policies generally allow only visitors related by blood or marriage to visit a seriously injured or ill patient.
While Christian groups say they do not have a problem with extending visitation rights to same-sex couples, some question President Obama’s agenda.
FOTF said it wonders why patient-sensitive hospital policies required a Presidential Memorandum. The conservative pro-family group is concerned that the directive, though innocuous itself, is part of a larger effort to undermine marriage and the Defense of Marriage Act.
“Although it seems the White House released this Presidential Memorandum to, at least in part, promote a political agenda, the fact remains the document demonstrates that marriage does not have to be redefined in order for people to see their loved ones in the hospital,” said Minnery.
Family Research Council also said that while it does not object to the visitation rights it believes the directive is part of the president’s broader effort to appease his gay constituency and undermine the institution of marriage.
Besides gays and lesbians, the new rule would also apply to widows and widowers as well as members of religious orders.
The new policy will affect hospitals that receive Medicare or Medicaid funding, which is nearly all the medical institutions in the country.
I think the patient or next of kin or whatever should decide on who can visit. Its none of the governments business.
If I want my best fishing buddy to visit that should be okay too. If they want their best fisting.... lol
Yes, as soon as the Gay Lover enters the hospital and says “I’m here to visit my life partner, etc.” The hospital should get their name and address and send them the hospital bills.
Am i to understand that this gives greater freedom to homosexuals than heterosexuals as regards who may visit?
>>Yes, as soon as the Gay Lover enters the hospital and says “I’m here to visit my life partner, etc.” The hospital should get their name and address and send them the hospital bills
**
The patient probably did.
They had that right before. It's called a power of attorney. All Bam did was make aberrant behavior more mainstream.
Need to ping this one out, too.
You hit the nail on the head. 0kaka and mrs 0kaka said that they would be the best friends sexual perverts ever had when he got elected. And by gum, so they are!
“I think the patient or next of kin or whatever should decide on who can visit. Its none of the governments business.”
Couldn’t agree more!!
You bet!
You have a point. Personally I don’t think it’s my business regarding who does what to whom and it’s certainly not the government’s business but a Christian organization should have their rights respected. Visiting restrictions are more severe in critical care units.
What if’s:
The hospital accepts government funding and virtually all hospitals do.
The patient is taken to the hospital in an emergency situation and had no say where he/she is being treated. Should the hospital still have the right to tell them their significant other can or can’t visit? What if they’re dying and want to say goodbye to their partner?
Believe me, there will be documentation to cover these situations. An Advanced Healthcare Directive will be signed and in that patient’s chart in order for their “partner” to make health care decisions. As a nurse, all I really care about is whether those forms have been signed, not who their designee is. We Christians know that homosexuality is wrong, but as a human, why would I deny a person to have visiting hours with whomever they consider their “loved one”. Studies show that clients who have support tend to have better outcomes. And I want a good outcome for my patient.
Yes I agree. They have rights. But if a patient wants his friends to visit, possibly for the last time, it might be a good idea just not to ask what kind of friends they are.
I have no problem with them being allowed and have a right to visit. However, if they are claiming the equivalent to a relative or spouse status, they should get the same treatment ala billing as the rest do when they go to collections.
How can it apply to widows and widowers?
I went with my husband and several other family members to visit my day old great nephew. I asked my sister in law whether we had too many visiters in the room (6) and she works in that hospital and she just laughed and said, not if we don’t tell anyone. Well my niece’s nurse was in and out several times and she didn’t care.
‘I think the patient or next of kin or whatever should decide on who can visit. Its none of the governments business.”
The hospital should also have a say since they have liability but otherwise I agree with you.
OK, I get where your coming from now.
How about a ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy? You just say who you wish to have in the room and not why or have to give details. Why does the gov’t even need to stick their noses in it?
People have always been able to decide who can visit them and who cannot. Also, if it’s a case of a “partner” (I hate that term; it makes all business partners look like gays!), then they should write medical directives or name the other as their medical executors.
If the sick or injured person were straight, nobody of the opposite sex could just walk in off the street and ask to visit or even make decisions for that person, regardless of the personal relationship claimed. The same is true of gays, and there was no discrimination being practiced here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.