In 2007, Washington’s first domestic partnership law opened the door for domestic partners to have many of the same rights and obligations as spouses. Registered domestic partners (either same sex or heterosexual, if one is at least age 62) were allowed rights of visitation in hospitals, the right to participate as a spouse would in medical care decisions, and access to health care information. It also allowed one domestic partner to administer the other’s estate in the absence of a will; recognition of a partner on the deceased partner’s death certificate; the ability to sue for wrongful death of a partner; and the right to inherit property from a partner.
In 2008, the scope of the law was expanded to provide registered domestic partners with the same rights and obligations as spouses under Washington state laws regarding dissolutions, community property, estate planning, taxes, court process, service to indigent veterans and other public assistance, conflicts of interest for public officials and guardianships.
On this year’s November ballot, voters will face the decision to approve or not approve Referendum 71. If it is approved, the prior registered domestic partnership laws will be expanded to equate the rights and obligations of state-registered domestic partners with the rights and obligations of married people under the laws of the state of Washington.
What effect would approving referendum 71 have on registered domestic partners? Here are some of their stories.
Audrey and Marge have been a couple for 18 years and have a 9-year-old son and 6-year-old twins. For Audrey, “to be treated equally with a married couple in all ways is a matter of care and respect. Being treated the same also matters to our children. Each of our kids has expressed how important it is that our family be treated the same as families with legally married parents.” Marge added, “The new law would help to give legitimacy to our relationship. Our 9-year-old son picked up on us being treated differently right away. When he heard a story about racial minorities, he told me that he knows what it is like to feel like an outsider; that people are always asking him about it. I wouldn’t care as much if I didn’t have kids.”
Rae and her partner, Cheryl, live in Shoreline and have been together since 1998. They also registered as soon as the first law passed in 2007. Cheryl is 56, is disabled and has chronic health problems. Rae knows the fragility of having a partner who is not a legal spouse. “I remember what it was like when domestic partners were not recognized by hospitals even if they had the proper legal documents. They see the new law as a psychological boost,” she said. “I feel it would help to give us a deeper layer of responsibility to each other and a sense of security to our relationship.” Rae recounted that, recently, they were trying to buy a car and when the underwriter for the loan discovered that they were not married, their assets and debts were treated differently and it was more difficult for them to get the loan.
Curtis and Brad have two adopted boys, ages 5 and 3. They have been together since 1992 and had a commitment ceremony in 1997. Curtis is concerned that without the new law, people will not think of his partner and children as a “real family.”
“Our kids are so young that they have only been surrounded by loving, supportive people. They have never experienced anything other than us being a ‘real family,’ but what if that got into their brains? What effect would that have on them?” Curtis also described the financial impact of equal treatment with married couples. He and Brad are both self-employed and have their own health insurance plans. Curtis recently received a letter from his insurance company informing him that the insurer will cover domestic partners, which will save them $6,000 a year in premiums.
He also recalled a sad experience with some close married friends. The husband died unexpectedly, and the surviving wife and young child were immediately recognized as the beneficiaries of his life insurance and social security benefits.
Even though he recognizes that the approval of Referendum 71 will not affect federal rights like social security, the experience of his friends made Curtis wonder what would happen to his family if they experienced a similar catastrophe.
“There are many laws to protect [our friend’s] child. Would that happen for us? Is there a chance we would not be treated as well? The laws take care of them. Are we at risk?”
When we fill out our November ballots, we need to think about what impact approving Referendum 71 would have on the lives of registered domestic partners. Might it add to the responsibility, accountability and security of their relationships? Might it allow registered domestic partners to be treated equally under state law, grant them more care and respect, and assist them to feel less marginalized? Might their children feel more like a ‘real family’ and feel better protected? Are these values that we should encourage in our communities? The answer to all of these questions is clearly: Yes.
Remember, voting to approve Ref. 71 is voting to give registered domestic partners all of the rights and obligations of married couples under the laws of Washington state.
Islander and attorney Rob Morrison can be reached at (206) 223-3920 or rmorrison@scblaw.com.
