1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default MO Trooper's partner denied benefits

    While this involves a LEO, it has potential ramifications on our profession and death benefits...

    Fallen Missouri Trooper's Benefits Denied to Same Sex Partner

    ST. LOUIS, MO (KTVI-FOX2now.com) - The recent death of a Missouri Highway Patrol trooper is putting the rights of same sex couples in Missouri under a microscope. The long-time partner of Corporal Dennis Engelhard believes he should receive death benefits.

    43 year old Kelly Glossip says he and Engelhard were together for nearly 15 years. Yet, he says he's being ignored when it comes to the agencies who normally reach out to the families of fallen law enforcement officers.

    "He was my true love and he always referred to me as his one and only true love and the man of his dreams," Glossip said. "We were hopelessly in love with each other."

    Engelhard was killed on Christmas day while waiting with the driver of a disabled car for a tow truck. He got out of his vehicle and was hit by a passing SUV. It happened on Interstate 44 in Eureka.

    Glossip now feels he's been left out in the cold when it comes to financial benefits normally paid to the families of officers killed in the line of duty. He says he has not been contacted by any of the groups that normally offer those benefits.

    Glossip believes that has at least something to do with Missouri's law forbidding same sex marriages. That's a law he thinks needs to be wiped out.

    "I should have the same rights as any other spouse, as heterosexuals would have. And I just don't understand why people are so bigoted."

    Backstoppers paid $5000 to Engelhard's parents. The group says it didn't know about Glossip's and Engelhard's relationship.

    The Masters, a group dedicated to helping the families of fallen Missouri Highway Patrol troopers, says they are still reviewing the case.

    And for their part, the Missouri Highway Patrol tells us some of Engelhard's benefits will be paid out according to beneficiaries he listed. But a spokesperson says Glossip is not eligible for any benefits through Engelhard's retirement pension because the two aren't legally married in Missouri.

    Glossip has a 17 year old son from a previous relationship who he says considered Dennis his step-father.

    Glossip is now worried about losing the home he and Engelhard lived in together and his car.

    He does say Engelhard's family is helping him pay bills.

    A memorial service for Engelhard is set for this Saturday at Christ Church Cathedral in Downtown St Louis.

    Copyright 2010, KTVI-TV

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Dickey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,112

    Default

    I agree.

    There should be some sort of "domestic partner" legislature to allow for this.
    Jason Knecht
    Assistant Chief
    Altoona Fire Dept.
    Altoona, WI

    IACOJ - Director of Cheese and Whine
    http://www.cheddarvision.tv/
    EAT CHEESE OR DIE!!

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,675

    Default

    The law says they can't be married. Therefore, he is not eligable for benefits generally given to his spouse.

    As cold as it may be, it's the way the law works.

    And yes, I oppose gay marriage.
    Last edited by LaFireEducator; 01-30-2010 at 08:48 AM.

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    Tried to get domestic partner benefits here, but given the aversion to a perceived homosexual agenda, the rest of us unmarried couples have to pay more in insurance and have issues like the above one. Oddly enough in the same time my girlfriend and I have been together, I have seen 8 of our guys get divorced, so I'm confused at why benefits are offered to some but not others? Why does the city care what type of relationship I have outside of work?

  5. #5
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Well if there are domestic partner benefits shouldn't they also extend to heterosexual couples as well?

    Marriage is a great institution - I'm just not ready top be institutionalized.

    Or

    Next time I think about getting married I'm going to find someone I don't like and give them a house.

    Authors unknown

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    477

    Default

    Where I work we have full same-sex domestic partner benefits.

    But when my then-fiance's health insurance ran out, there was no way to get her onto my plan. Guess heterosexual couples just aren't "diverse" enough.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by emt161 View Post
    Where I work we have full same-sex domestic partner benefits.

    But when my then-fiance's health insurance ran out, there was no way to get her onto my plan. Guess heterosexual couples just aren't "diverse" enough.
    Here in Massachusetts after homosexual marriage was approved numerous companies retracted their domestic partner benefits. The homosexual lobbying groups got ticked off.

    You want the benefits, then get married. Otherwise, your girlfriend or boyfriend should not get your benefits.

    You want homosexual marriage in your state, then put it before the people or the legislature.

    In the trooper's case, this is where life insurance comes in, as well as listing who the proper beneficiaries should be.

    Many of us work in dangerous fields where the prospect of death or significant disability is quite real. If you choose to not ensure that the people you love and care about are taken care of in the even that you die or are become disabled then you need your head examined.

    The Trooper's case, sad as it is, happens all too often. If you are dating a member of the opposite sex for 15 years, living together, and you die - then they are screwed because of the manner the law is written in, and your inaction to ensure that they are taken care of.

    Regardless of same-sex laws. You have to take care of the ones that you love.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    BEAUMONT,TX
    Posts
    19

    Thumbs down

    What next? If some man falls in love with fido the golden retreiver and unfortunately answers his last call,should the dog be made available these benefits?This is what I think is the problem with the world today!Im not bashing homosexuals im merely stating a my opinion,If they pay out to people in homosexual non binding marriage/relationships then it would seem that those involved in the wide array of freakish and perverted relationships would all qualify as well !

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaSharkie View Post
    You want the benefits, then get married. Otherwise, your girlfriend or boyfriend should not get your benefits.
    Why? What is the difference to you if a guy on your crew is married or shacking up with his girlfriend? Most domestic partnership rules require some for of proof of a continued relationship such as joint home ownership, shared bills for a period of time, etc. Why should someone be married to attain the same benefits? Just so lawyers can make money on a potential divorce or better yet, so the couple can actually pay less in taxes? I have yet to understand why anyone cares about my relationship from a legal standpoint? Short of working with a bunch of guys who wished they'd never gotten married!

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BOFD12 View Post
    What next? If some man falls in love with fido the golden retreiver and unfortunately answers his last call,should the dog be made available these benefits?This is what I think is the problem with the world today!Im not bashing homosexuals im merely stating a my opinion,If they pay out to people in homosexual non binding marriage/relationships then it would seem that those involved in the wide array of freakish and perverted relationships would all qualify as well !
    That opinion is so far out there, if it were hungry, you would need a slingshot to feed it.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  11. #11
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by emt161 View Post
    Where I work we have full same-sex domestic partner benefits.

    But when my then-fiance's health insurance ran out, there was no way to get her onto my plan. Guess heterosexual couples just aren't "diverse" enough.
    Yes, you could have gotten married.
    Last edited by owenscott; 01-30-2010 at 03:03 PM.

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    LVFD301's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,024

    Default

    One needs to remember - this is NOT about the pension, at least yet.

    Glossip's complaint is that Backstoppers and Masters, two private non-profit
    groups, that take no tax funds, are either not giving HIM the money, or they
    have not yet given any money.

    And to be blunt, they don't have to. They have rules, and none of the ones I find
    pay out to domestic partners, significant others, etc.

    The life insurance benefits are assigned by the deceased.

    The disability benefits are paid according to state law.

    The time for changing those laws was previous to the death.

    That said, Trooper Englehard was a hell of a medic, and i am sure a great trooper.

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    Pretty simple to me.

    If you want your sig. other to receive benifits in the event of your death, get married.

    If you are homosexual, and your state banns same sex marriage, you can't get married. That's life.

    The point is, girlfreinds, boyfreinds, "domestic partners", etc. should not receieve the benfits a spouse would, simply becuase they are not a spouse.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTRider245 View Post
    The point is, girlfreinds, boyfreinds, "domestic partners", etc. should not receieve the benfits a spouse would, simply becuase they are not a spouse.
    Why should this matter? If you're against same sex marriage fine, I can see the reasoning, don't care myself, but understand people have some issues. But, why should married couples get a benefits that unmarried do not. Again, for the sake of money I can understand requiring proof of a committed relationship such as co-ownership of cars/homes/etc. But when meting out benefits, why should a married firefighter get more than an unmarried firefighter? As it is now, married employees generally cost the employer more money due to the extended benefits. Are we all so happy with marriage that we want to require others follow suit and will reward them to do so?

    This has been an interesting issue for me. My GF and i are not religious at all and have seen no reason to prove our intentions to anyone but each other, yet we lose out on benefits because we choose this path in our personal life. I guess I'm trying to figure out why anyone would care if employers were to extend this benefit to unmarried folks. Currently my city allows employees to put "domestic partners" on their insurance after proving a two year commitment, but refuse to pay the added cost that they would if there was a marriage certificate.

  15. #15
    Forum Member
    GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Why should this matter? If you're against same sex marriage fine, I can see the reasoning, don't care myself, but understand people have some issues. But, why should married couples get a benefits that unmarried do not. Again, for the sake of money I can understand requiring proof of a committed relationship such as co-ownership of cars/homes/etc. But when meting out benefits, why should a married firefighter get more than an unmarried firefighter? As it is now, married employees generally cost the employer more money due to the extended benefits. Are we all so happy with marriage that we want to require others follow suit and will reward them to do so?

    This has been an interesting issue for me. My GF and i are not religious at all and have seen no reason to prove our intentions to anyone but each other, yet we lose out on benefits because we choose this path in our personal life. I guess I'm trying to figure out why anyone would care if employers were to extend this benefit to unmarried folks. Currently my city allows employees to put "domestic partners" on their insurance after proving a two year commitment, but refuse to pay the added cost that they would if there was a marriage certificate.
    So if I am really close to the old man down the road, and I have a plan that allows my benifits to go to, say, a grandparent if I die, should he get the money my grandparents would just becuase I knew him and we were close?

    To me there is no difference. If you want the benifits of a spouse, get married. If not, dont get upset when you dont get them because youre NOT a spouse.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  16. #16
    makes good girls go bad
    BLSboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    On the beach, Fla/OCNJ
    Posts
    2,859

    Default

    I reckon the would have been married, should this country not be stuck in 1950s era bigoted fear.
    Give the man the benefits. There is a HUGE difference between all of the moronic examples given, and a couple (be it man or woman) who live peacefully together.
    I too, am against gay "marriage", but I see no reason at all that they can not be given the same benefits as hetrosexuals.

    My sympathies to the Troopers family, friends, partner, and the idiots who think that homosexuality is so abhorrent that those who partake be treated like second class citizens.
    AJ, MICP, FireMedic
    Member, IACOJ.
    FTM-PTB-EGH-DTRT-RFB-KTF
    This message has been made longer, in part from a grant from the You Are a Freaking Moron Foundation.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Where your employer decides to make a GIFT to you of any "fringe benefits". Benefits that in addition to the US$ which you earned in exchange for your time and labor, how should anyone be able to demand the employer make a similar GIFT to ANYONE? Wife, child, etc. The employer has no such duty. Provide for your own out of your PAY.

  18. #18
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,274

    Default

    I am not sure I understand the problem. If he had life insurance or was going to get the PSO death benefit he should have been able to name who ever he wanted to receive it. I am divorced and I named my current girlfriend and my sons to share my insurance, pension benefits and my LODD benefits. HR didn't bat an eye when I turned in the paperwork.

    Frankly, the idiocy displayed here towards same sex couples is disturbing and frankly sad at this point in time. What difference does it make to you who someone else decides to love and share their life with? If it were up to me the benefits from one partner should be available to another in a relationship regardless of sex or sexual orientation.

    To the poster who tried to equate same sex relationships with wanting to have your dog as a partner I can't even express in words how brutally pathetic you are as a human being. If that's the best you have to offer you should probably shut up because not only was your post incredibly ignorant and homophobic, it was also really hateful. Nice try pretending to say you were not bashing homosexuals, too bad it was pretty transparently a lie on your part.

    I simply don't have enough time in my life to waste it hating people who are happy in a relationship and who are not bothering me. Live and let live would be a good lesson for many of you here to learn.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 01-31-2010 at 02:36 AM.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  19. #19
    Forum Member
    DeputyChiefGonzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Somewhere between genius and insanity!
    Posts
    13,586

    Default

    In simply don't have enough time in my life to waste it hating people who are happy in a relationship and who are not bothering me. Live and let live would be a good lesson for many of you here to learn.
    Gays and lesbians have the same right to be as happy or as miserable as heterosexual couples.
    ‎"The education of a firefighter and the continued education of a firefighter is what makes "real" firefighters. Continuous skill development is the core of progressive firefighting. We learn by doing and doing it again and again, both on the training ground and the fireground."
    Lt. Ray McCormack, FDNY

  20. #20
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by neiowa View Post
    Where your employer decides to make a GIFT to you of any "fringe benefits". Benefits that in addition to the US$ which you earned in exchange for your time and labor, how should anyone be able to demand the employer make a similar GIFT to ANYONE? Wife, child, etc. The employer has no such duty. Provide for your own out of your PAY.
    Benefits are not "gifts" they are part of a compensation package. Today, most of us realize there are far more things to consider when taking employment than just the number of dollars on the check at the end of the pay period. Maybe if healthcare was affordable, we could just say, give me money and I'll work out the rest. Less hassles for the employer and your choice of how the money is spent. Of course the "choice plan" fails to work where people would rather blow their money and let the taxpayers pick up their healthcare, so maybe the compensation plan system is what works best right now?

    Nonetheless, please skip trying to answer my questions as it seems to be taking away from the OP's intent? Seems stupid to not allow marriage for a certain group then further deny them benefits as they're not married when they wanted to be. But we've not fully evolved yet.

  21. #21
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by emt161 View Post
    Where I work we have full same-sex domestic partner benefits.

    But when my then-fiance's health insurance ran out, there was no way to get her onto my plan. Guess heterosexual couples just aren't "diverse" enough.
    Exactly. Talk about falling through the cracks. Why wouldn't they apply the same rules of proving a "domestic partnership" to heterosexuals as well as same sex?

  22. #22
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    BEAUMONT,TX
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Hey Fyred up,I didnt attack or bash any one person in this post, sorry if I put things into perspective and made you feel uncomfortable,and as a side note my mother has chosen that lifestyle that you seem to think that I am BASHING. Though I dont agree with it I could care less. I feel that it was a valid point. When you make a decision to be homosexual you must put these things into consideration and not expect special treatment . In closing I'll say this-get over it or get married.If your state doesnt allow it then you shold pack and move to one that does.

  23. #23
    Forum Member
    ThNozzleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Jefferson City, TN
    Posts
    4,339

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    Exactly. Talk about falling through the cracks. Why wouldn't they apply the same rules of proving a "domestic partnership" to heterosexuals as well as same sex?
    Umm...they do; it's called "marriage." Gays and lesbians have been denied the right to be officially married for too long. Still being treated like second-class citizens, they are thrown the "domestic partnership" bone...if they're lucky. Heterosexual couples have the right to be married, something gay couples have struggled for years to obtain. And now you attempt to make the point that heterosexual couples are denied the right to have "domestic partnerships?" Talk about "falling through the cracks;" I think your reasoning skills just did.

  24. #24
    Forum Member
    GTRider245's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Augusta,GA
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThNozzleman View Post
    Umm...they do; it's called "marriage." Gays and lesbians have been denied the right to be officially married for too long. Still being treated like second-class citizens, they are thrown the "domestic partnership" bone...if they're lucky. Heterosexual couples have the right to be married, something gay couples have struggled for years to obtain. And now you attempt to make the point that heterosexual couples are denied the right to have "domestic partnerships?" Talk about "falling through the cracks;" I think your reasoning skills just did.
    Pretty much the same thing I was thinking.
    Career Firefighter
    Volunteer Captain

    -Professional in Either Role-

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I don't mind fire rolling over my head. I just don't like it rolling UNDER my a**.

  25. #25
    Early Adopter
    cozmosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    1,925

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GTRider245 View Post
    So if I am really close to the old man down the road, and I have a plan that allows my benifits to go to, say, a grandparent if I die, should he get the money my grandparents would just becuase I knew him and we were close?
    Did the man perform the same duties as your grandparents? Because if he did, I'd have no problem with you designating the money for him. A domestic partner -- homosexual, heterosexual or otherwise -- performs the same as a husband or wife. They share in the bills and responsibilities of the home... so they should be treated the same as a spouse.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. MSNBC.com: Safety officers denied on-duty death benefits
    By bdedman in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-21-2007, 09:23 PM
  2. Firefighters denied benefits they deserve
    By ninejp3 in forum News Center
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-22-2006, 10:49 AM
  3. Family denied benefits in LODD
    By NJFFSA16 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-31-2004, 02:49 PM
  4. Firefighter inmates' kids denied benefits
    By UTFFEMT in forum Fire Wire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-13-2002, 12:53 PM
  5. Widow denied federal benefits
    By amr33 in forum Line of Duty: In Memory Of
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-22-2002, 10:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register