[M. Dodge Thomas]

I don’t have any problem understanding their position. I’m a man, married to a woman, and we can both be certain that were have the legal right to make binding arrangements insuring that we have the mutual authority to make decisions for each other should one of us become incapacitated, and that it would be very difficult for anyone else to interfere with this process.

But if this wasn’t the case, and my partner was a man, there is a good chance that such a decision might be made for me by a blood relative who I have no assurance would honor my wishes, and who I have good reason to suppose might attempt to thwart them.

Wanting to ban gay marriage is one thing.

Writing a law which may have the result of nullifying someone’s preference on matters such as the validity of medical directives is quite another, and to do seems to me at best careless and at worst mean-spirited.

[okie01]

Writing a law which may have the result of nullifying someone’s preference on matters such as the validity of medical directives is quite another, and to do seems to me at best careless and at worst mean-spirited.

Power Of Attorney is Power Of Attorney, whether it is wielded by one's spouse, friend or lover.

What we have just read is an elaborate exercise in gay propaganda.

[Smokin' Joe]

Conditional medical power of attorney should do the trick in the instance you cited and can be assigned to anyone.