http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/list/2 EN Fri, 28 Nov 2003 19:56:28 +0000 Fri, 28 Nov 2003 19:56:28 +0000 Chatter Phorum 5.1.6 600 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17374#msg-17374 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Hilary) We can only hope that the new rights for gay couples will lead to wider rights for everyone, but meanwhile we should all keep up the pressure on the powers that be. Good luck evryone.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17374#msg-17374 Fri, 28 Nov 2003 19:56:28 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17373#msg-17373 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Jan Lane)
T.L.M.J.J. I never heard it, sounds good to me, all love is precious and far better than hate.....

]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17373#msg-17373 Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:26:36 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17370#msg-17370 forum@london-se1.co.uk (The Lady Miss Jo Jo) Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17370#msg-17370 Fri, 28 Nov 2003 00:08:21 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17325#msg-17325 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Hilary)
Sounds worrying.
It's not waffling - it's experiences like this - and those of gay couples & single people - that can help (we hope) get the rules changed.
All the best to you and Mr Jan.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17325#msg-17325 Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:02:04 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17323#msg-17323 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Big Dave) Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17323#msg-17323 Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:49:54 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17311#msg-17311 forum@london-se1.co.uk (jan)
My husband at that time was 'up and off with the fairies' as he had a water infection, was insulin treated diabetic and as they dose was worked out according to ward routine and not food input was very confused anyway. I had a few words with staff and informed them that as his next of kin I would very much like him to be in this world instead of in his box! they said it should not have been put there for me to see...I said I'm glad it was..

I agree with Hilary, the right to end your life if you feel wretched living is your own decision - one to be made feeling fit and compo mentis...
My husband is now in a nursing home, bright as button mentally, still has the MRSA that he contacted on the ward. But has made the choice that should he have heart attack etc. he is not to be revived and has informed the staff of his wishes. Sorry I seemed to have waffled on again...:-( the subject was next of kin now has ended up on voluntary euthanasia ( is that how it's spelt?)]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17311#msg-17311 Thu, 13 Nov 2003 05:30:56 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17309#msg-17309 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Hilary) straight unmarried people and single people without partners. I'm single and my only relative is my sister, who has her own family, lives miles away and whom I haven't seen for years, and who doesn't have the same religious or other views as I do. Why on earth should she have the power - and the responsibility - of possibly deciding whether I live or die?

I did take legal advice on this befotre I last went into hospital, and was told by a lawyer that I could name anyone I wanted. The NHS Trust's attitude seems to be totally unacceptable. Is it something for the Health Ombudsman? Or the Health Minister or local MP?

This is an important and worrying issue and that it why it should not be dismissed by superficial and discourteous answers.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17309#msg-17309 Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:16:58 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17296#msg-17296 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Big Dave)
This has been part of the reason that Gay Equality campaigners have been fighting for partnership rights. If a gay man is admitted into his intensive care, any decisions made by a long-term partner can be over-ridden by the patient's parents and it is their decision that the NHS Trust would adhere to.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17296#msg-17296 Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:15:02 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17280#msg-17280 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Hilary)
If other people know more, thatr's fine - but again as you said - there is no need for them to be rude.

Thanks and good luck - and to John as well.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17280#msg-17280 Sat, 08 Nov 2003 14:20:54 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17247#msg-17247 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Big Dave)
If you are calling a hospital for information on your partner, and you are not married to them, then you are not classed as family or next of kin an d will not be given any information. This actually happened to me.

If your partner is on life support, as an unmarried partner, you have no legal position. If your partner's family do not want you there, then there is nothing that you can do about that.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17247#msg-17247 Mon, 27 Oct 2003 10:29:29 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17246#msg-17246 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Hilary)
1) I asked a polite question, requesting further explanation. There was no need whatever to be patronising and compare me to a 'small child'. This sort of comment only puts people off asking questions or trying to assist others. (I did say at the start that I was not a lawyer.)

2)I did not say that anyone said that you have to give nearest relative as next of kin. As a single person who has been caused some embarrassment by this when going into hospital, however, I just wanted to emphasise the point. People shouldn't be made to feel awkward at times when they are vulnerable and may be feeling isolated anyway.

2)What happened in 1926 or whatever is doubtless fascinating, to lawyers at least, but the main point is that John has got the advice he needed. Nice of him to reply - and polite. OK?]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17246#msg-17246 Sun, 26 Oct 2003 20:42:04 +0000 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17234#msg-17234 forum@london-se1.co.uk (mapmaker)
Since 1926 there is no legal next of kin.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17234#msg-17234 Fri, 24 Oct 2003 11:03:45 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17225#msg-17225 forum@london-se1.co.uk (john) Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17225#msg-17225 Wed, 22 Oct 2003 19:22:18 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17223#msg-17223 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Big Dave)
This has long been a problem for gay couples and there have been cases where someone has been seriously ill in hospital and that person's parents have prevented his partner having access or involvement in decision making.

As for straight couples, (if both partners are legible) there is an answer ... get married!]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17223#msg-17223 Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:47:32 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17220#msg-17220 forum@london-se1.co.uk (mapmaker)
Why are you wrong? Simple really. You sound like a small child who cannot understand why the teacher has marked the question as 'wrong' when they have written something similar - but wrong.

Firstly because you wrote 'Unless you make a will, the children will have first claim on your inheritance rather than your partner (and, if you leave a lot of assets, your parents after your children, then siblings).'

If you have children, then your parents or siblings do not get a look in, however large their assets. That is not what you wrote! Look at the flow chart:

1. Are you married? No

2. Do you have children? Yes

Answer: share estate equally between them irrespective of its value.

Secondly because you wrote 'the term 'next of kin' has no legal validity, except where wills are concerned'. No it does not have legal meaning in the context of wills! Then you wrote in your second posting 'I also said - as you did - that it has no legal definition.' No! you said that it does have a legal definition where wills are concerned, whereas since 1926 it has not!

As we are dealing with legal terminology here, it is very important that we get it right and do not indulge in confused thinking or loose terminology.

I trust you find this helpful.


Oh yes, and why do you write 'But surely this does not mean that you have to state nearest relative when asked for next of kin'? It doesn't. Who said that it did?]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17220#msg-17220 Wed, 22 Oct 2003 14:55:31 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17145#msg-17145 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Hilary) I've had a look at the site you named and it is indeed helpful, - thank you - but I don't see that it makes what I said wrong. It says that if someone is not married, their estate goes to children first,then parents, then siblings - which is what I told John, isn't it?

As far as 'next of kin' is concerned, I also said - as you did - that it has no legal definition. But surely this does not mean that you have to state nearest relative when asked for next of kin - you agreed in your reply that you can name anyone. I think this is important, as it would seem very wrong if a relative who, perhaps, had not seen someone for years, or who they didn't get on with, was automatically entitled to make a life or death decision about a paxtient, for example.

My reply to John was the first time I had used the site and I didn't realise that answers were printed under the question. If I had, I wouldn't have troubled to reply as yoir reply was - I thought - more or less exactly the same as mine. Now you say I'm not right. I'm puzzled - I can't see what I said that it diffeent from what you said.
Why or where am I wrong and you right? Sorry, but I don't get it.

Hilary]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17145#msg-17145 Sat, 11 Oct 2003 23:27:23 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17125#msg-17125 forum@london-se1.co.uk (mapmaker)
gives you the rules for inheritance in the event of intestacy in a convenient flow chart.

Pre 1926, next of kin was the expression generally used for person or persons who were entitled to the personal estate of an intestate person, under the Statute of Distributions. Currently there is no legal definition.

More recent legislation, the Mental Health Act 1983 s26 (1) defines 'nearest relatives'.

There is an interesting discussion in Nursing Standard - NOVEMBER 4/VOLUME 13/NUMBER 7/1998 on current procedures regarding next of kin.

]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17125#msg-17125 Mon, 06 Oct 2003 12:59:19 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17122#msg-17122 forum@london-se1.co.uk (Hilary Wines)
I'm not a lawyer, but I'll try tho help.

To the best of my knowledge, the term 'next of kin' has no legal validity, except where wills are concerned. For the purposes of things like going into hospital, you can name whoever you wish as your next of kin. The real problem about co-habitation when there are children of one partner is inheritance,(or possibly who stays in your home should you split up). Unless you make a will, the children will have first claim on your inheritance rather than your partner (and, if you leave a lot of assets, your parents after your children, then siblings). That's one reason why it's important to make a will - the other being to stop the Government getting anything they can get their hands on.

Hope this is some help

best wishes Hilary]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17122#msg-17122 Sun, 05 Oct 2003 09:02:47 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17095#msg-17095 forum@london-se1.co.uk (mapmaker)
In the event of intestacy (i.e. deth without a will), then LMJJ is absolutely spot on. Which is why it's essential to marry rather than merely cohabit if you want to leave your possessions to your wife. Even if you are married, you still need a will, as it makes life so much easier!

If you are merely looking for somebody's name to put down on a form when you go into hospital, then you can put down anybody's name you wish - it's the first person who will be told if it all goes horribly wrong.]]> Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17095#msg-17095 Tue, 09 Sep 2003 08:54:23 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17094#msg-17094 forum@london-se1.co.uk (john) Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17094#msg-17094 Mon, 08 Sep 2003 21:40:15 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17092#msg-17092 forum@london-se1.co.uk (The Lady Miss Jo Jo) Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17092#msg-17092 Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:10:19 +0100 http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17090#msg-17090 forum@london-se1.co.uk (john) Chatter http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/17090/17090#msg-17090 Sat, 06 Sep 2003 10:06:42 +0100