Family Pride’s Blog

It’s no surprise to LGBTQ parents that the insurance industry discriminates against them and their families. From marriage and partner recogniction to legal parent status and children’s access to health benefits, there are any number of obvious ways that insurance excludes LGBTQ people and their kids.

But rather than just thinking about how the insurance industry discriminates and excludes, I think it’s helpful to take it a step further, to truly wrap our brains around what’s going on:

The benefits packages that insurance companies provide not only discriminate and exclude, they define what specific illnesses, procedures, treatments, and, yes, even families are worth encouraging and supporting.

My package, for instance, includes funds for childbirth classes and support and education programs for expectant mothers, but says nothing of preparing parents who are adopting children, even infants who will be in their care from the first moments of life. The first thing to note here is that insurance companies often apply the term “medically necessary” as a rationale for providing benefits or not. In my reading, there’s nothing “medically necessary” about parent education classes for anyone, really. If parent education classes were “medically necessary,” why wouldn’t my insurance also cover home care assistance for chronically ill people, such as providing funds to hire someone to assistance in daily tasks like dressing, cleaning and feeding oneself. My insurance covers home care assistance for things like physical therapy, administration of drugs and other at home “treatments,” but not day-to-day personal care tasks, things that can vastly improve one’s quality of life and can be excessively difficult to do when debilitated by illness.

Elsewhere in my package there’s funding for gym memberships and nutrition counseling–also, in the strictest sense, not “medically necessary.” So what’s going on here? If insurance is willing to subsidize preventive care and health maintenance, which would include classes to educate new parents on how to best care for their kids, why not apply that rationale equally?

Whether insurance companies intend this or not, their current support of one type of parent (mothers who give birth) over others privileges one type of family over others. Why should lesbian moms or gay dads, for instance, not receieve benefits for parent education classes when they pay their premiums, as well? For that matter, why should any prospective parent who is not a pregnant woman be excluded from these benefits? If the health and well-being of the children is primary purpose behind a parent education benefit, why not equally care for all children?

This is just one of the many questions we must ask the insurance industry, which so greatly shapes our lives through our health. Anyone reading this post who feels categorically discriminated against or excluded from their insurance coverage should think not only about how they’re excluded but who is included and why. What groups and kinds of people are held up over others? Who receives benefits, who has coverage? None of this is black and white and all of it can change.

If you want to take action, assess your benefits package and see if you and your family are inappropriately excluded. You may not be able to get your provider to cover your partner without legal marriage, but you may make waves around things like parent education class benefits and other, less “political” subjects.

As the Jena 6 controversy continues, the president of the Human Rights Campaign traveled to Jena, Louisiana to speak at a rally. His powerful and touching words speak to the many intersections in our fight for equality:

My name is Joe Solmonese and I represent the largest gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender organization in the country. Am I am here — we are all here from the Human Rights Campaign — because this injustice cannot stand.

We are here because we know about bigotry. We know about hate. We know the pain in high school of standing apart. Of being taunted. Of standing up, only too often, to be shut down.

I am here — we are here — because you have stood with us. Because all of us know that one injustice against any of us is an injustice against all of us.

And I am here because I remember. I remember James Byrd. James was a gentle soul, a special soul. Someone who struggled his whole life with challenges, but was filled with love and was deeply loved in Jasper, Texas.

But James Byrd — at 49 — was savagely beaten, then chained to a pickup truck and literally dragged to his death. He was brutally murdered because he was black.

And then something really profound happened. Remember when George Bush was governor of Texas? Well, Governor Bush had a hate crimes bill on his desk. There was a lot of pressure to sign the bill because of what they did to James Byrd. So, George Bush said he’d sign that bill, but they had to take the gays out.

And here’s what happened. Stella Byrd, who has just buried her beaten, broken, gentle James said, If some of us are left out, then all of us are. Valuing one life and not valuing another is not right. And the Byrd family said No. They said No. And they walked away.

So, I stand here today with solidarity. I stand here for social justice. I stand here to free those young men. To say this will not stand. It cannot stand. I stand here for the Jena 6. I stand here today for James Byrd.

We will not forget. We will never walk away.

Thank you very much.

We couldn’t have said it better ourselves. An injustice to one is an injustice to all.

Jason Kuznicki is a researcher at a public policy organization.  He and his partner have been together for nine years and have been married under Canadian law for four.  The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of his employer. Read more from Jason at positiveliberty.com.

This week the Maryland Court of Appeals — the state’s highest court — ruled against recognizing same-sex marriages.  The mood at our house was pretty dismal the night of the decision.  Had the Court ruled the other way, the marriage Scott and I celebrated in Canada in 2003 would almost certainly be valid today.

It didn’t help that the Court decided by a single vote.  Changing the mind of even one person would have made the difference — a difference that will define who we are to our neighbors, our families, and our children, perhaps for the rest of our lives.

As a family looking to adopt, we face some wide-ranging consequences.  Some of these may not be known for months or years.  But they need to be documented, and I will be writing a series of blog posts that will show just what this decision is costing us.  All of the well-meaning people out there need to know our side of the story.

They need to know.  Why?  So that they will stop electing politicians who demonize gays and gay families.  So that they will push their representatives to support marriage equality rather than indifference or demeaning half-measures like civil unions.  And they need to know so that our children can have the same legal protections that the children of straight couples enjoy.

The religious right talks a lot about preserving the sanctity of heterosexual marriage.  Sanctity is great, but we have to remember its very real human costs.  If preserving the sanctity of heterosexual marriage means hurting or even breaking up some families, then is it really worth the cost?  (Since when does the government dole out “sanctity”?  And since when does sanctity require hurting people?) Maybe as a society we’ll decide that all this is right and appropriate. But we at least ought to know the price we are paying.

In this series, I’m going to document all of the time, money, inconvenience, and loss of dignity that the Court has imposed on us.

I’m going to keep the receipts.  I’m going to do the math:  Adding up the extra taxes, the fees, the money spent on lawyers.  The vacation days that we’ll spend reading the fine print, lest someone take our children away.  And at the end of this journey — wherever we end up — I’m going to give an account of just how much this precious sanctity has cost our family.

It’s worth pointing out that relatively few of these costs are government benefits that would otherwise come out of taxpayers’ pockets.  For example, a second-parent adoption is a complex legal process that may end up costing us a lot — but it will also end up costing the taxpayers, too.  Conservatives often say they don’t want to see taxpayers subsidizing relationships that they consider immoral.

Fine:  Let us get married.  This cost, among many others, will disappear.

There is another cost, too, one that will be harder to document.

There is a quietly gripping passage in Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid’s Tale in which a young married couple has just learned of the new law putting the husband in charge of all property.

It doesn’t matter, the husband tells the wife.  He insists that it won’t change anything.  The wife, though, knows better.  The law is a living embodiment of a set of values.  The law is a teacher, and it works a subtle but often decisive influence on the public.

The woman who learns that she can no longer own property on an equal footing with her husband may hold the new law in contempt.  But the woman’s daughter may grow up in a different world.  That’s what the law can do.

For gays, the law has taught some harsh lessons over the years:  We are deviants, perverts, and criminals.  We shouldn’t be around children.  We shouldn’t be treated as family.  Sometimes, we shouldn’t even be treated as humans.

Straight and gay alike, we’ve absorbed these lessons, and it’s a tribute to our cultural and intellectual independence, to our stubbornness and our willingness to think for ourselves, that we are even having a debate about same-sex marriage today.  The law is a teacher, but as students, we can choose to think for ourselves.

The law taught us all a harsh lesson this week.  I thank my straight friends who assure us that it doesn’t matter, and that they think of us as married anyway.  But I’m still saving my receipts.

I’m excited to share this cross-post with you, thanks to our friend Dana Rudolph of Mombian.com. 

The New York Times reported today on the Evesham, New Jersey School District’s decision to uphold a ban on the film That’s a Family, because of its inclusion of children with same-sex parents. (See my post on the matter.)

The Times tries to remain a neutral reporter, offering opinions both for and against showing such subject matter (depictions of same-sex families, not sex education) to children of elementary-school age. The big point they overlook, however, is that there are children of same-sex families already in preschools and elementary school classrooms. These kids know about same-sex families from birth—or at least from the point they can say “Mommy and Mama” or “Daddy and Papa.” This blows the whole “third grade is too early” argument out of the water.

When schools ban films and books showing same-sex families, they also make our children feel like oddballs and outcasts. No one would think of showing an educational film today that didn’t include racial diversity, and for good reason. Same principle should apply here. This isn’t a matter of teaching children about some distant community. This is about teaching children to respect others who may be sitting right next to them, sharing a juice box.

Furthermore, as I wrote a couple of weeks ago for Bay Windows (and have said before), “it is ridiculous to imagine notifying parents every time a child from an LGBT family wants to share family photos during show and tell or write an essay about going on an R Family cruise.”

They can ban curriculum items (films, books, etc.) that depict same-sex families, or have parents “opt out” of scheduled discussions, but to fully expunge us from the classroom, they’ll have to expel our children or limit their freedom to talk about their own families. And with most schools desperate for parent volunteers, do they really want to tell our children they can’t bring both parents to the school potluck? I make a darn good lasagna and my partner makes a mean batch of oatmeal cookies.

The Family Pride Family Poetry Contest finalists are up! Click here to vote for your favorite poem. Here’s a sample of what you’ll find:

Leaves, leaves drift and flutter
piles and piles among the gutter
red, orange, yellow and green
arrange themselves for the autumn scene
some fall off and finally drop
their friends make room for their landing spot
when you walk, look to see
watch where you step, we’re a family

If there’s one thing you do today, you should watch this video. It’s currently making the rounds online.

In this touching, un-edited clip, the Republican mayor of San Diego announces that he supports marriage equality. He says that he can’t look his lesbian daughter or gay staffers in the face and tell them that their love is unequal.

Watch the clip and let us know what you think.

Are you sad or mad every time you see ads, commercials, or general images of “family” and there are no lgbt families in sight? Well, we found an amazing opportunity to visually showcase our families!

Snapfish.com is looking for photos to complete a project called - America at Home project - the largest collaborative photo project ever attempted.

Join some of the best photographers in the world who are taking photos of particular topics relating to the rituals, events and emotions of Home. Each day you will receive an assignment (see web site) and will be invited to join the clicks heard ’round the nation. You will submit your photos of the people, places and things that best describe what Home means to you and perhaps have one selected for inclusion in the America at Home book and exhibition.

Opportunities like these, give us the chance to change hearts and minds by simply seeing us as “normal,” or “equal” to the traditional concept of a mom and dad equaling family. We are just as loving, supportive, silly, fun, boring, etc. as our non-lgbt counterparts. So snap away and help us continue to shift the paradigm and share the love!

Click here to learn more about the project. It’s online activism made easy.

The road to equality sure has its ups and downs, but the secret is not to dwell on either. So long as we stay on message, hold our heads up high and keep fighting the good fight, we’ll continue to make progress and learn from the challenges we encounter.

Having said that, it sure has been a rough week. Tuesday marked a 4 - 3 split decision from Maryland’s Court of Appeals, reversing a lower court decision and upholding the state law barring gay and lesbian couples from marrying.

The majority opinion said that while the court agrees that marriage is a fundamental right, it says there is no fundamental right to marry someone of the same sex.

Then, to add insult to injury, Gov. Schwarzenegger “terminated” the California marriage bill for the second time in a row. The bill would have granted gays and lesbians marriage rights in California, and was overwhelmingly approved in the state’s legislature.

The only thing that would change his mind, he said Monday, is if voters overturned Proposition 22 which was passed by the electorate in 2000 to stop gay marriage, but which courts have ruled only applies to marriages performed out of state.

“It would be wrong for the people to vote for something and for me to then overturn it,” Schwarzenegger told reporters at a news conference.

As cheesy Terminator puns flood my mind, all I can think is, “Arnold, we’ll be back….”

For a quick, doable action - sign Equality California’s 2007 Marriage Petition. Why? According to Equality California:

Because California lawmakers have once again made history by passing AB 43, the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act. For the second time, the Legislature has passed a bill, authored by Assemblymember Mark Leno and sponsored by EQCA, granting same-sex couples the choice to marry.

In 2005, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the marriage bill, and now we have a second chance to urge him to support fairness and equality for all Californians. We have a second chance to let the governor know that we aren’t going anywhere – and that our numbers are growing.

Even if you’re not from the Golden State, let’s send a message of strength in numbers to Gov. Schwarzenegger! Sign the petition today!

As we know from the feedback we got on the Rainbow Report Card, a lot of LGBTQ parents out there are generally pleased with the school environments their kids are in. Oftentimes these parents find it hard to get energized around pushing for specific LGBTQ inclusive policies at their schools because the schools are already doing a decent job of including our families. It’s an understandable dilemma. You don’t want to rock the boat because the boat—right now, at least—is moving along pretty well.

Or is it?

The problem with generally good schools without specific policies that protect our families is that, in the event that there ever is a serious problem or incident, you, the parent, may have little to no legal ground to stand on, should you need to take the issue to the police or courts. A school with a fantastically inclusive principal may unknowingly hire a homophobic teacher, who sometime during the year tells the kids that “married mom and dad couples” are the only real kind of parents in the world. Catastrophe! So you go to the principal, normally an ally, and for a number of reasons—she/he is worried about backlash from the school board, a local teachers union, etc.—she/he gives you the cold shoulder. All of a sudden the great school you thought your children were in no longer seems so great. Where do you turn?

If you’d started earlier, before the homophobic incident, working with the administration to put their good behavior toward LGBTQ families on paper—writing and implementing nondiscrimination & anti-harassment policies, curricular changes to include our families, etc.—you’d be able to show the principal that her or his inaction was against school policy and potentially illegal.

No one wants to imagine a time in which this conversation would take place. But it’s better to plan ahead than be caught unawares. Think of protective school policies like life insurance—invest in it now so it’s there for you later.

To find out more about protecting the children of LGBTQ parents in schools, fill out the Rainbow Report Card, an interactive, personalized online tool that gives doable recommendations to parents and allies on how to make schools safe and inclusive of all loving families.