Discussion of ISA 2010, New Orleans (started by Eve Sandberg)
Dear FTGS People,
I cannot attend as someone with a same sex partner - see the Hirsch and Brown in the comments below and my own comments after theirs.
I would hope that some straight allies can take some appropriate action while there. Hence I open this discussion.
Eve
posted by Working Man's Ph.D. | 10:37 AM
15 Comments:
The APSA Debate - Letter
NOLA documents http://noladocs.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Harry Hirsch and Wendy Brown to the APSA Council, 3/19/2008
http://noladocs.blogspot.com/2008/04/harry-hirsch-and-wendy-brown-to-apsa.html
Dear Council colleagues:
Below please find our analysis of the conference siting issue and its impact on the Association's LGBT members. We appreciate that the draft circulated by Michael represents substantial thought and work related to meeting the competing concerns about APSA convention siting, triggered by the New Orleans issue. We have no wish to subvert this process, but rather to contribute to it. While we are respectful of the effort of the new draft policy to find a compromise on this question, in our view that proposal is overly complex and contains loopholes that permit the violation of basic tenets of equality, safety, and respect for all APSA members. We believe a simple, principled decision rule is available to us.
Many of our concerns echo those of the LGBT Status Committee.
Wendy Brown
Harry Hirsch
An LGBT political scientist has a partner, with whom she has executed a civil union in Vermont. Another couple, gay men, have married in Canada. A third has married in Massachusetts. None of the couples has executed a private contract, since they believe all relevant matters to be settled by their civil union or marriage, and since they see no reason why they should go to the trouble and expense of executing a private contract to enforce rights now granted them, by law, in their state or province.
The political scientist goes to New Orleans and is taken ill. His or her partner shows up at the hospital, and is told only immediate family members are allowed to see the patient or speak to the doctor.
Unlikely? Yes. Possible? Yes. Louisiana and several other states have not "merely" outlawed gay marriage; they have passed laws or made a part
of their state constitutions the provision that the state will not
recognize a same-sex relationship bearing any "incident" of marriage. As political scientists, we should recognize the seriousness and scope of these provisions, and recognize that they go significantly farther than most of the state constitutional amendments and statutes adopted in the
wake of the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts.
We want to be clear on this point. The problem on the table is not in
states that have said, "we will not perform same sex marriages." The
problem is in those states which have said "we will not perform same sex marriages, AND we will not recognize any relationship looking like a same sex marriage from another jurisdiction." Whether or not the hospital scenario (or its equivalent at a police station) has yet materialized, its possibility has made some LGBT members of the
profession feel they cannot safely travel to New Orleans in 2012.
Based on the plain wording of these legal provisions, this is a reasonable fear. Moreover, whether or not one approves of recent efforts to publicize the issue, those doing so have posed a fair question: If the year were 1959, would we hesitate to act if the issue were recently passed miscegenation laws, and our attention were drawn to the issue by even one or two political scientists married to someone of a different race?
The LGBT Status Committee first raised the issue of convention sites in the early and mid nineties; one of us (HH) was chair of the Committee during some of that time. During that discussion, Executive Director Cathy Rudder articulated a principle to which all parties agreed: Every member of the profession should feel safe attending the annual meeting.
Cathy also assured us that future siting decisions could and would be
made with this principle in mind.
We respectfully suggest that we stick to this principle. We do not yet know how the amendment to the Louisiana constitution--or any of these other laws and amendments--will be interpreted on the ground; it will take many years for legal test cases to arise and be litigated. We should not be willing to take a chance with the legal rights of our colleagues in the meantime, and we should not want the inevitable legal
test case to involve a political scientist caught in an traumatic incident.
While we recognize the complexity of siting decisions and the importance of helping the victims of Katrina, there are many other ways of accomplishing that goal. It is a false dichotomy to suggest that we face here a zero-sum choice of which minority group to support. And it is vital that we keep in mind that we are not being asked here to support a cause in any abstract sense; we are being asked to guarantee the safety of our colleagues.
We therefore propose as our decision rule the following:
The APSA will not hold conferences in any state which, by law, refuses
to recognize a marriage or civil union legally recognized in another
jurisdiction.
Two alternatives have been suggested.
The first is to have the Association find and publicize gay-friendly medical venues in New Orleans (or in other cities similarly situated), a process, we are told, already begun by the APSA staff.
The idea that we could somehow assure that anyone needing medical care would be taken to those facilities, and only those facilities (or perhaps to gay-friendly police stations?) strains credulity to the
breaking point. Moreover, the very exercise of identifying such venues
is deeply offensive, and proof that we should not be meeting in these
cities; it is an admission that there is a problem, and a serious one.
Will we pass out medical-ID bracelets saying "take only to Tulane hospital"? Pink triangles on our convention badges, perhaps?
The second suggested alternative is for the Association to urge LGBT
members of the profession to execute private contracts and powers of attorney, designating their partners as next of kin. Apart from the extra expense involved for those already legally married or registered--an expense heterosexuals need not encounter--are we really willing to say to some of our colleagues, "well, if you are worried about your status in New Orleans, just be sure to carry identity papers
with you at all times"? That, in effect, is what we will be saying. We will also be assuming, on the basis of very little (other than visitors' bureaus PR), that local authorities will honor such documents, which the plain words of these state laws now strongly suggest they cannot.
Both of these alternatives signify second-class citizenship.
As our colleague Michael Goodhart cogently argues, our existing contract for New Orleans allows us to cancel the 2012 meeting (http://
http://www.du.edu/gsis/hrhw/roundtable/2008/01-2008/specialforum/goodhart-2008sf.html>www.du.edu/gsis/hrhw/roundtable/2008/01-2008/specialforum/
http://www.du.edu/gsis/hrhw/roundtable/2008/01-2008/specialforum/goodhart-2008sf.html>goodhart-2008sf.html
http://www.du.edu/gsis/hrhw/roundtable/2008/01-2008/specialforum/goodhart-2008sf.html>).
We urge the Council to adopt the obvious logic of his argument.
There are two additional factors to consider.
If we adopt the draft policy, we will not emerge from this morass; we will be forced to make finely-grained exceptions about different cities, on the basis of our fuzzy impressions of each city's reputation as "welcoming." And if we go to New Orleans in 2012, there will be a boycott, with all of the attendant publicity (as our email in the Fall from Association members clearly indicated). Such a boycott would
neither be good for the Association as an entity nor for individual
members. Worse, it has the potential to cast LGBT faculty in vulnerable and awkward positions within their departments and professional networks.
Link to Goodhart article from previous post - sorry for the technical error
http://www.du.edu/gsis/hrhw/roundtable/2008/01-2008/specialforum/goodhart-2008sf.html
My post to the APSA Debate:
Dear Friends/Colleagues,
I offered the following observations to a small group conversing on the list serve a week or so ago and was asked to place it on the board for general discussion. Here it is:
I have to tell you that I believe that attending a conference on a site in Louisiana is a real danger.
Thus, I will not be attending either the ISA convention in two years in New Orleans or the APSA annual conference should it be held in New Orleans in 2012.
For me, this is NOT symbolic politics; nor is up for discussion.
It is based on previous experience.
Although I am presently in a 17 year relationship, a few years prior to getting together with my current partner, I experienced the problems that come with a freak accident and no rights to legal access to a patient.
I had been in a relationship for about 2 1/2 years and my partner was in an automobile driving down the highway in Ohio. A truck veered over and smashed her car forcing it off the road. They had to cut open her smashed car to get her out and get her to a hospital in rural Ohio.
When I showed up I was told I was not a family member, they could give me zero information, and I had no rights to visit - only family members could visit intensive care. [She pulled through and went on to live a
healthy life.]
In the last year, I have had three friends fall and seriously hurt
themselves just by 1) going up and down steps (while sight seeing in
Berlin, Germany), 2) stepping on uneven pavement, 3) or losing their
balance. The results are hospitals stays and operations for a broken hip, a broken knee, and in the first case all four extremities are
broken as well some ribs.
I will not risk traveling to Louisiana so that if i have some unexpected accident I place my partner in the position of not having access to me. Or, if I have a serious accident of not being able to see my partner should I be critically ill.
This issue at hand is a real one. It is not one of "arguing fear" for
LGBT members of the APSA. Nor is it one of symbolic politics.
I will not go to New Orleans. I will not go to "educate" other people about the risks I am incurring. That will have to be the task of straight allies.
I can tell you that partners 1) not having access to one another, and
2) trying to negotiate the health care world -- is a nightmare that I want to avoid at any cost.
I am amazed that a professional organization would plan a convention knowing that a subgroup of its members cannot attend or else run the risk that their physical and mental well being may be comprised.
If this were affecting any other group, wouldn't We be active on
Their behalf?
In the past, our membership has boycotted sites where political
leverage was being requested.
THIS situation is not simply Political; it is a real life health and security issue. I simply won't risk it.
The APSA has decided that it does not care whether or not I can
attend its conference in safety.
As far as assisting those in New Orleans - I was active [enough to be written up in the county newspaper] in organizing our town's efforts to send supplies to hurricane victims and to continue after the initial efforts from a number of other people had ceased.
As Harry Hirsch has suggested we do now, I have already donated money to Dillard College, the historically black college that continues to need assistance in order to survive.
There is much we can do for New Orleans and its residents without
placing our selves in danger.
I will not be attending the APSA convention.
As the current Section Chair of the International Studies Association
(ISA) Feminist Theory and Gender Studies (FTGS), I raised this issue
at our business meeting the last week in March because we will need to do something when the ISA meets in New Orleans the year after next.
It is too late for the ISA to pull out. In this case, it is my hope that those straight allies who can travel to New Orleans will do something to contribute to political leverage when dealing with the Louisiana legislature. But I cannot attend.
The APSA, however, has YEARS in which it can still make alternative
arrangements and do the right thing.
From my perspective, anyone who thinks this is just a question of
strategy lacks the experience to know how horrible it is to be placed in this situation.
As section-chair elect for the conference in New Orleans in 2010, I think that it is important to think about what we do about this as a section and as individuals.
Members of APSA have been organizing a potential boycott of APSA 2012. Is this a tactic we feel would be effective/appropriate? Or is there a way that those members of the section who do feel safe attending ISA 2010 in New Orleans could organize to effectively communicate the message of the unacceptability of this choice?
I have been aware of the discussions regarding the APSA conference for a while and was surprised to find ISA largely silent on the topic (though I know the issue has been raised at the ISA governing council) - as a straight ally, who might attend the convention in New Orleans, I am wondering what exactly I might do to educate others (besides participating in the ongoing discussions at APSA/ISA about the choice in venues)??? It seems to me that a boycott - unless supported by a majority of the sections - will not produce significant awareness/ change in policy... something else is needed (maybe pink triangles for all - like the legend of the Danish action during WWII - http://www.snopes.com/history/govern/denmark.asp). This could be one way to get people 's attention to then involve them in a more substantive debate?!
If I attend ISA 2010 I'll be happy to work with others on any initiative in LGBT members support. If anybody is organizing this, please keep me in mind and contact me. catia
This seems like quite a dilemma. One thing to think about would be putting together (an) innovative panel(s) using technology to link up local activist/lgbt scholars/allies in New Orleans with lgbt and ally scholars who boycott and perhaps activists worldwide. Angela McCracken.
Hi
Although I am straight, my family is impacted very much by this problem. I would very much like to support initiatives that highlight this problem, if not do more.
I gather from the messages above that boycotting the conference would likely not be so effective - I would have otherwise happily done so. ISA is by no means more important than the safety and security of its members.
So then I wondered what actually would constitute some effective means of communicating opposition to these abuses of human rights.
I wondered if it would be possible if the FTGS, as well as in cooperation with other sections if possible, would be interested in sponsoring panels on this issue - and bombard the conference with such panels, as much as possible. As well as poster presentations. Alternatively, if it is not possible to explicitly have panels that address this (and there is no question it is possible to angle panel topics towards these issues - this is a state, national, and global issue, a health issue, a security issue, a rights issue, an economic issue, you name it), what about FTGS asking members to address this issue in their papers in some way in other panels, so that the issue is raised everywhere FTGS and any other supporting people are presenting . . . . Just an idea. Will continue to think about more.
Granted there are larger political and ethical issues at play, but in terms of hospital visitation, there
are clear provisions under Louisiana law to allow any ISA attendee to designate visitors during hospital stays in New Orleans. While same sex couples who have a civil union or marriage from another jurisdiction may be offended if they need to execute another legal document, as a practical matter this places them in the same status as same sex couples from jurisdictions without same sex marriage or unmarried heterosexual couples.
See Title 40, Louisiana Code:
RS40§2005. Hospital visitation
A. Any person eighteen years or older may designate those individuals who will not be denied access to visit him during any stay in any hospital, nursing home, or other health care facility within the state of Louisiana.
B. Nothing contained herein shall prohibit hospitals, nursing homes, or other health care facilities from restricting visits to standard designated hours, from restricting visits as the patient's medical condition may require, or from enforcing an injunction barring an individual from entering the premises.
Acts 1995, No. 1200, §1, eff. June 29, 1995.
FYI,
While New Orleans has become the target of political discussion inside the APSA, you should not get the impression that the legal status of GBLT partners in Louisiana is substantially different from many other places in the US. For example, according to the Human Rights Campaign, the legal regime in Nevada is similar.
Nevada Healthcare Laws
Nevada law does not allow a partner to make decisions on behalf of his or her incapacitated same-sex partner. § 449.626.
An adult may designate his or her partner to make medical decisions on his or her behalf by executing a durable medical power of attorney. § 449-810. To be valid, the declarant’s signature on the power of attorney must be acknowledged before a notary public or witnessed by two adult witnesses who know the principal personally. § 449-840.
Citation: Withholding or Withdrawal of Life-Sustaining Treatment (Based on the Uniform Rights of the Terminally Ill Act (1989)): Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 449.540 to 449.690 and Durable Attorney for Health Care: Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 449-800 to 449-860
from Human Rights Campaign
I don't think anyone should feel less comfortable about a trip to New Orleans than they would about a trip to Las Vegas. In either case, a medical power of attorney would be advisable.
As for whether Louisiana courts would recognize such a power of attorney, the fact that Louisiana courts have upheld the City of New Orleans' domestic partnership benefits despite amendments to the state consitution, suggests that fears about the interpretation of the state constitution are exaggerated.
Can we have a section panel/forum at the upcoming conference in New York to educate people about this issue?
I have had some experience with protest at ISA as the co-organizer of the first (only?) protest at an ISA convention (2003 Portland to challenge the lack of attention to the imminent US attack on Iraq).
What a great opportunity to do some activism from now until the 2010 conference!
There is an option of the section hosting an alternative conference (for people who will not travel to New Orleans and their allies) for 2010 in a place that is known for its support for the GLBT community: Burlington VT.
I am currently based across the lake from Burlington and would be happy to check with the universities and colleges around town.
Was the issue brought to the ISA Governing Council?
Simona
Unfortunately, the section is not an independent legal entity (we are a part of ISA) - the upshot of that is that, even if we had our own money to host a conference (which we don't, really), we wouldn't be able to negotiate _as FTGS_ with hotels, conference sites, etc.
I ran into this problem when, as 2009-2010 president of ISA-West, I briefly considered holding it across the Mississippi state border from ISA at the same time. Not so much.
That doesn't mean "we" couldn't hold a conference, it just means we couldn't do it as the feminist theory and gender studies section of ISA, and none of ISA's support mechanisms or bargaining power would be available to us.
1。那混合物是更缓慢的 ... 但是 Lexus 的即将到来混合的版本 ' 将是比气体气体更快的唯一的版本如好地有更多马力。不要自夸速度，但是我被吸引上轮流开车送行为 90，但是警察给我一次休息。
2。那不是很多气 体
将被节省 ... 只是通过在城市乘公交车往返我储蓄过来 $ 5000/yr 与我的以前的汽车，吉普车切诺基相比。超过 5 年，会是 $ 更不用说会进一步增强我的储蓄的最近的比率远足的 20K。这样除非你是在你的父母的地产上吸的一个浪费的儿子，你的声明是一束公牛。
3. 想象我的45 英里的上下班交通操纵（90 r/t）和
45mpg 每天是 2 加仑在我的旧车上>与 8 加>仑相>比。那每天是 6 >加仑的一笔>储蓄， 120 加仑每月， 1440 加仑每年或者 5040 美元（根据 3.5 美元/加仑） ... 加上它发表 1/10th CO2。多愚蠢是它不要骑一个，去算进今天和年龄。
4.缺少了解 ... 是真的，实际上我个人这样那样喜欢它我可能享受所有鼓励；税，合伙用车，免费停车米， prius 业主之间的秘密的信号，等等；这样自私地说那我真地在那里在享受在所有气体汽车业主上的所有权那没有一个想法多少我这辆汽车有的嬉戏。我 junked 我的 SL，郊区对我的 Prius ... 你应该也。
I found this site using [url=http://google.com]google.com[/url] And i want to thank you for your work. You have done really very good site. Great work, great site! Thank you!
Sorry for offtopic
Post a Comment
<< Home