Intern outed by hospital

[docB]

An email mentioned in melb's thread reminded me of something that happened when I started internship. At the benefits portion of the orientation session the benefits people passed around a list of all the new interns with the instructions to check and see if all your information is correct. One part of the info we were looking at was who else was getting our benefits. Many people had no one listed, lots of people had "spouse" listed and one person had "domestic partner" listed. They essentially outed this one intern by letting everyone else know that they had filed for benefits for their domestic partner. I was pretty surprised that they did something so stupid.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[smackdaddy]

wow! stupid people are everywhere. i guess you can't assume privacy anymore, although if you are listing someone as a domestic partner, it probably would have come out sooner or later. still...

 

[The White Coat Investor]

Last I checked a domestic partner could be either gender. If you are close enough to your roommate to list them as a domestic partner, I would think you're open to your associates knowing which side of the plate you bat from. However, I suspect it was an innocent mistake, with unforeseen consequences. I'm sure the problem could be remedied easily by passing out individual papers.

 

[docB]

I'm sure they didn't do it on purpose. They just didn't think about it before they did it. It could be easily remidied but that's not the point. The point is that it happened.
As for the other gender domestic partner I don't think you can do that. When I filled out the paperwork to put my wife on my benefits it said something along the lines of "... you may enroll a spouse or a domestic partner of the same gender." I don't think they want unmarried heteros applying for coverage.

 

[hotbovie]

Passing around a list of personal information seems like a huge violation of privacy. I'd be worried about how the program administrators handle personal information if I had been in that situation. As another poster stated, they should have given each intern his/her own individual sheet to verify information.

 

[Celiac Plexus]

Why is this a violation of privacy? If the person entered the information in their forms, then it isn't necessarily provate. Unless there was a statement on the forms that the information is private, then I don't see why this is a violation.

By those same standards, you can argue that by listing someone as having a "spouse" then their privacy was also violated.

Just because someone is gay, does not confer special privacy privilleges on them. I challenge you to name a single state in which this would be a violation of privacy.

And, you are not considering that this person cares at all whether anyone knows that he/she is gay. It's not a crime to be gay you know. It's not something to be ashamed of either. And ultimately, it should make no difference if the administration, or colleagues know if an employee is gay, because they should be treated no differently from any other employee.

 

[TulaneKid24]

I have to agree with Celiac Plexus. It should not matter if the intern is gay or not. The intern probably also doesn't mind if others know that s/he is gay. He listed it on his from so I am sure he is happy and comfortable in her/his domestic partnership.

 

[suwanee]

my sister gets domestic partner benefits from her boyfriend's work- i think they had to submit a statement that they had lived together for more than a year. so to me, hearing that someone gets domestic partner benefits wouldnt necessarily mean that they are in a a same sex relationship.

 

[docB]

Oooooooh K. Let me try to break this down for you.

You?re right, it is not a crime to be gay. The intern that this happened to is in fact openly gay. Good thing too because if they weren?t they would have been afterward. I didn?t say that gays deserve any more privacy than anyone else.

My point is that the hospital made private information public. No one, particularly my coworkers needs to be told by my employer that I am married, single or whatever. I also had to tell them my medical history, my social security number, my checking account number and lots of other things I don?t want published. I?m surprised that you don?t consider these things private.

 

[The White Coat Investor]

I'm with DocB on the privacy stuff. I also think it would be wrong to offer "domestic partner" benefits on the basis of sexuality. If I can get them for the guy I'm living with (I'm male) why can't I get them for the girl I'm living with. Why should I have to get married to her to get the benefits? (All hypothetical) If we're going to give them for relationships other than marriage (a debate still open IMHO), the only way to choose which ones should be on the basis of time together (as Suwanee states.)